question
dict | answers
list | id
stringlengths 1
6
| accepted_answer_id
stringlengths 2
6
⌀ | popular_answer_id
stringlengths 1
6
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77639",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "There is an example sentence:\n\n> お母さんになって初めて、母・お母さんの辛さが分かる。\n\nI was told that the first お母さん couldn’t be replaced with 母, because it must\nrefer to someone else's mother (one cannot be one's own mother), but that the\nsecond can be either 母(the speaker's own mother) or お母さん(someone else's\nmother).\n\nHowever, I'm not quite convinced.\n\nI feel that 母 not only can refer to the speaker's own mother, but can also\nrefer to herself as a mother or maybe mothers in general. Is it possible to\nsay 母になって初めて?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-27T04:56:38.800",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77636",
"last_activity_date": "2020-11-30T11:28:56.537",
"last_edit_date": "2020-11-30T11:28:56.537",
"last_editor_user_id": "18772",
"owner_user_id": "33235",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "母になる vs. お母さんになる",
"view_count": 124
}
|
[
{
"body": "This depends on the context. If you are saying this to a specific pregnant\nperson in front of you, it's usually better to say お母さん because it sounds\npolite yet friendly.\n\nHowever, if this sentence is presented without any further context, it looks\nlike a description of mothers in general, and keigo is not particularly\nrelevant. You can safely use both 母 or お母さん without being rude to someone.\nSimply, 母 sounds more formal or stiff, while お母さん sounds more casual. It's\nbetter to use the same word throughout the sentence to avoid confusion.\n\n * お母さんになって初めて、お母さんの辛さが分かる。\n * 母になって初めて、母の辛さが分かる。",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-27T06:35:50.813",
"id": "77639",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-27T06:35:50.813",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "77636",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
77636
|
77639
|
77639
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 『監視されているみたいだ』と不評の声も多い見回りだけど, 案外さっきみたいな事柄のためにやっているのかもしれないな。\n\nThe complete sentence is given above. As the title has said, can you omit the\naction when using と? From some sentences I've seen, an action verb often\naccompanies と when used with direct quotes. I am aware of って being used as a\ncasual quoting particle where we can omit other parts of the sentence but can\nthat also be applied for と when used with direct quotes?\n\nIf that is so then, would it go『監視されているみたいだ』という不評の声... and mean something like\n\n> \"The numerous watchmen are also like the (unpopular) voices saying 'It seems\n> like we're being watched' but/and...\"\n\nLike a simile/metaphor? My attempt at translation would then be (not that it\nmakes much sense)\n\n> \"The numerous watchmen are also like the (unpopular) voices saying 'It seems\n> like we're being watched' and It might be because of unexpected things like\n> earlier happening.\"\n\nMaybe I'm misinterpreting the と？ I haven't had much experience with sentences\nlike this and even with context I could barely understand the statement. This\nsentence is probably way above what my current abilities are capable of\nunderstanding and that any help pointing me in the right direction would be\nappreciated.\n\nFor some context, the previous scene was showing the student council doing\ntheir routine patrol when they stumbled upon an incident involving the speaker\nand the current scene is a narration.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-27T06:00:39.897",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77637",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-28T13:11:44.750",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38905",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"particle-と",
"parsing"
],
"title": "Can you omit the action when using と and help understanding/parsing this sentence",
"view_count": 89
}
|
[
{
"body": "I think your comprehension of 「と」 is correct.\n\n> 『監視されているみたいだ』と不評の声\n>\n> 『監視されているみたいだ』という不評の声\n\nThese 2 phrases are basically the same as you inferred.\n\nThe tree of this sentence is like below.\n\n> NPだけど, 案外さっきみたいな事柄のためにやっているのかもしれないな。\n>\n> (NP = Noun Phrase)\n\nHere, \"NPだけど\" means \"Regarding NP\", \"As for NP\", or something like that. To\nmake clear we often use \"NP **について** だけど、\", \"NP **に関して** だけど\" but sometimes\nthey are omitted. Thus you could translate this like \"Regarding NP, it might\nbe because of unexpected things like earlier happening.\"\n\nThe NP in this sentence is \"『監視されているみたいだ』と不評の声も多い見回り\". And the head of this NP\nis \"見回り\"(watchmen) as you assembled. But you missed another point!! 多い is\nmodifying \"不評の声\" here, not watchmen!! \"-の声も多い\" is kind of phrase meaning \"It\nis frequently said as -\".\n\nThus the whole translation is like this.\n\n> Regarding watchmen who are often blamed as \"It seems like we're being\n> watched\", it might be for the things like the earlier happening, against my\n> expect.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-28T13:11:44.750",
"id": "77679",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-28T13:11:44.750",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "38911",
"parent_id": "77637",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
77637
| null |
77679
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77644",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "A mother is telling her kid: 「お風呂わいたから入っちゃって」. From the context, I am guessing\nit means \"The water's heated up, come in (take the bath)!\".\n\nI don't understand how「入っちゃって」 could mean a request / command here. Is 「っちゃ」is\nshort for 「しまう」or 「ては」? Neither makes sense to me here. And what is the role\nof the final「って]?\n\nThanks!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-27T10:29:16.067",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77641",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-27T12:58:37.860",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10268",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"contractions"
],
"title": "How to interpret 入っちゃって as a command?",
"view_count": 482
}
|
[
{
"body": "First, yes, てしまう is commonly contracted to ちゃう (and でしまう to じゃう). They mean\nthe same, but ちゃう is more casual as a contracted form.\n\nSecond, as for the meaning of しまう・ちゃう here, I think the slightly less common\nusage of \"do completely\" fits, with ちゃって being itself the て-form of ちゃう,\nmaking it a casual/friendly request. This usage is very common, and is derived\n(I believe!) from just dropping the ください that you might expect to see there.\n\nSo, putting those together, you could translate 入っちゃって as \"get in completely\"\nor \"get in fully\". Perhaps more stylishly, you could translate the sentence as\n\"The bath's hot, so get right in\".",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-27T12:35:41.127",
"id": "77644",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-27T12:58:37.860",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-27T12:58:37.860",
"last_editor_user_id": "33435",
"owner_user_id": "33435",
"parent_id": "77641",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
77641
|
77644
|
77644
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I understand that both mean \"to be saved/receive help\" but that they have\nslightly different connotations. I can't find any explanation of the\ndifference, however, nor any pairs of example sentences to illustrate this\ndifference.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-27T10:54:57.063",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77642",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-27T20:32:31.500",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39154",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"passive-voice",
"giving-and-receiving"
],
"title": "助けられる vs 助けてもらう, what's the difference?",
"view_count": 141
}
|
[
{
"body": "By using てもらう, it is conveyed that the other is doing something **helpful or\nuseful** for the action recipient's sake, whereas using the passive られる there\nis no such nuance and it is more neutral. In the following example, though\nboth sentences are grammatical, the first seems more acceptable to me because\nthis feeling of helpfulness or usefulness is congruent with the context:\n\n> **〇 お巡りさんに住所を教えてもらった。The policeman told me the address** (helping me,\n> indeed).\n>\n> **△ お巡りさんに住所を教えられた。The policeman told me the address.** (A more literal\n> translation, in passive voice: I was told the address by the policeman).\n\nIn fact, in some cases the passive voice is used when something **harmful or\nnegative** for the recipient of the action is done, and therefore もらう can't be\nused in such cases:\n\n> **✕ ~~地下鉄で誰かに足を踏んでもらった。~~ Someone stepped on my foot in the subway\n> **(helping me). This is not correct, because it is naturally a bad or\n> negative action to you, _unless you are some foot fetishist that loves being\n> stepped on and are grateful than someone just did it_.\n>\n> **〇 地下鉄で誰かに足を踏まれた。Someone stepped on my foot in the subway** (bothering me).\n\n* * *\n\n助けられる / 助けてもらう\n\nWith the verb 助ける, it is already clear that the action is helpful for the\nrecipient, so I agree that the difference between both words is more subtle.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-27T18:48:35.723",
"id": "77654",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-27T20:32:31.500",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "32952",
"parent_id": "77642",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
77642
| null |
77654
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77650",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In the さしすせそ series, し is an exceptions to the pattern.\n\nIs ''she'' easier to pronounce than ''see'' or why does Japanese have this\nfeature?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-27T12:10:09.613",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77643",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-27T18:33:30.260",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-27T17:16:47.620",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "29665",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"pronunciation",
"phonetics",
"language-change"
],
"title": "Why did Japanese evolve to have a ''she'' mora instead of a ''see'' mora in さしすせそ?",
"view_count": 933
}
|
[
{
"body": "> In the さしすせそ series, し is an exceptions to the pattern.\n>\n> Is ''she'' easier to pronounce than ''see'' or why does Japanese have this\n> feature?\n\nThis comes down to the biomechanics of pronunciation. It's the same reason we\nsay things like \"tenshun\" in English for the word _tension_.\n\nThe specific phenomenon is called \"palatalization\". There are two articles\nabout this on Wikipedia, and both are relevant:\n\n * [Palatalization (sound change)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palatalization_\\(sound_change\\))\n * [Palatalization (phonetics)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palatalization_\\(phonetics\\))\n\nPut simply, when you have a so-called \"front vowel\" -- a vowel pronounced more\nin the front of the mouth -- that can gradually affect the preceding\nconsonant, eventually causing that consonant to change.\n\nA simple example in modern English is the phrase _\" did you?\"_ The ⟨ y ⟩ in _\"\nyou\"_ is sometimes called a \"palatal glide\", and it basically works as a front\nvowel. This affects the final ⟨ d ⟩ in _\" did\"_, and in fast, informal speech,\nthis shifts from _\" did you\"_ to something more like _\" didja\"_: that final ⟨\nd ⟩ becomes **palatalized** , and ultimately also shifts from a\n[stop](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_consonant) to an [**affricate\nconsonant**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affricate_consonant#Affrication)\n(it gets \"friction\").\n\nA similar process has happened in languages around the world. For instance,\nLatin had the word _\"[centum](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/centum#Latin)\"_\nfor \"hundred\", and it was pronounced like //kentum//, with a hard //k-// sound\nat the start. The following //e// is a front vowel, and over time, this caused\na shift in that hard initial //k-//, resulting in modern Italian\n_\"[cento](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/cento#Italian)\"_, pronounced instead\nlike //t͡ʃento// (where the //t͡ʃ// part is pronounced like ⟨ ch ⟩ in English\nwords like _\" chain\"_).\n\nIn Japanese, we see palatalization in a few places. し is one such example.\nHistorical linguists theorize that this may have originally been pronounced as\n//si// (like English _\" see\"_), and the front vowel //i// caused the initial\n//s-// to palatalize, shifting the pronunciation to //ɕi// (like English _\"\nshe\"_). Another example is ち, where again linguists theorize that this was\noriginally //ti// (like English _\" tea\"_), and the front vowel caused a shift\nto //t͡ɕi// (like in English _\" cheese\"_).\n\n### Historical wrinkle\n\nInterestingly, //e// is also a front vowel, although not quite as front as\n//i//. It turns out that せ was also previously subject to this same\npalatalization as し, and せ used to be pronounced as //ɕe// (like the first\nthree letters in English _\" shed\"_). We can tell that this used to be the case\naround four hundred years ago, thanks to a Portuguese-Japanese dictionary from\n1603, called the _Vocabvlario da Lingoa de Iapam_ in Portuguese and the [日葡辞書\n( _Nippo Jisho_ )](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nippo_Jisho) in Japanese. The\ncompilers of that dictionary always spelled せ as ⟨ xe ⟩ (as we can see [in\nthis scan on Google\nBooks](https://books.google.com/books?id=TFJAAQAAMAAJ&pg=PP585#v=onepage&q&f=false)),\nwhich was (and still is) pronounced as //ɕe// or //ʃe// in Portuguese.\n\nI'm not sure why this palatalization reversed. It might be that //e// in\nJapanese was pronounced more towards the front of the mouth in years past, and\ngradually moved further back in the mouth. Or it might be that speakers felt\nmore need to differentiate between し and せ. Or it might have been some social\nor political angle, where pronouncing せ as //ɕe// came to be seen as uncool or\nimpolite or something otherwise negative. The reasons are lost to time, from\nwhat little I can find.\n\n* * *\n\nPlease comment if the above does not answer your question, and I can edit to\nupdate.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-27T17:15:44.543",
"id": "77650",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-27T18:33:30.260",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "77643",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
}
] |
77643
|
77650
|
77650
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77646",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "A customer in a store is hesitating which of the two items to buy. A shop\nassistant or a friend encourages him:「どっちも買っちゃいましょう」.\n\nCould this mean \"You should buy both\"? Could this mean \"You should buy\neither\"?\n\nTo clearly say \"You should buy either\", how should this be reworded?\n\nThanks!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-27T12:47:09.290",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77645",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-27T13:27:25.610",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-27T13:06:55.920",
"last_editor_user_id": "10268",
"owner_user_id": "10268",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "どっちも meaning: both vs either",
"view_count": 335
}
|
[
{
"body": "If the customer's friend were to encourage him to buy both using the word どっち,\nit would be\n\n> どっちも買ったら？\n\nどっちも does not mean either. For that you need to use どっちか. In this situation,\nthe sentence would be something like\n\n> どっちか買った方がいいよ。\n\n(As an aside, no store clerk I have ever met would say such a thing. And I\ndon't mean because of the casualness of どっち. I don't think that kind of\npresumptuousness would go over well. But who knows? Times are changing. Maybe\nsome チャラい guy in Harajuku would say something like that.)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-27T13:27:25.610",
"id": "77646",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-27T13:27:25.610",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1761",
"parent_id": "77645",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
77645
|
77646
|
77646
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I've seen 彼 and even sometimes 彼氏 described in several dictionaries as a\npronoun that can refer to a person of any gender, while 彼女 is explicitly\nfemale. However in the wild ive never seen a woman referred to with 彼, but its\nalso possible i dont see it, just as a second-language speaker of English may\nnot realize \"his\" in \"Every man must choose his fate\" can refer to a person of\nany gender as it's a very subtle distinction.\n\nSo my question is this — when in modern day practice can 彼 refer to a person\nof either gender?",
"comment_count": 10,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-27T13:38:38.953",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77647",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-29T17:01:38.697",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-28T01:03:50.770",
"last_editor_user_id": "29327",
"owner_user_id": "39156",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"pronouns",
"gender"
],
"title": "When does 彼 refer to a person of indeterminate gender?",
"view_count": 354
}
|
[
{
"body": "The meaning of 彼 depends on the reading. If it's read かれ and is singular\n(i.e., not 彼ら), then it refers to a male.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-27T22:48:26.850",
"id": "77662",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-27T22:48:26.850",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39163",
"parent_id": "77647",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
},
{
"body": "彼{かれ} always refers to a male person in modern Japanese.\n\nHistorically, it was used to refer to something far away (like あれ in modern\nJapanese), and as a result was compatible with females as well, but that usage\nis no longer possible. Vestiges of that usage can be seen in 彼{か}の〜 (largely\nequivalent to あの) which is still used in modern Japanese.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-29T17:01:38.697",
"id": "77715",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-29T17:01:38.697",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "77647",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
77647
| null |
77715
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77707",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "時計の数字から影が漏れ出た瞬間、狂三の左目の時計が恐ろしい速さで正方向に回った気がしたのである。 だが、その疑問は、すぐ頭の中から追い出される\n**ことになった** 。 「な......」\n真那の怪訝そうな声が、士道の耳に届く。この位置からでは真那の表情は窺い知れないが、恐らく士道と似たような顔を作っているに違いなかった。\n狂三が、左手に握った短銃の銃口を、自分のあごに押し当てたのである。 「一体何をーー」\n真那の言葉の途中で、狂三はニヤリと笑うと、何も躊躇うことなく引き金を引いた。\nドン！という音が辺りに響き、狂三の頭部がぐわんと揺れる。どう見ても、自殺したとしか思えない光景だった。\nだが。士道と真那は一瞬あと、その感想を強制的に訂正させられる **こととなった** 。\n\nHi. Do the two bold parts indicate cause/reason? Are they the same usage as\nthe ことになった in this sentence そんなことをしたから二度と人前に出られない **ことになった** 。? It’s just that\nthe reason or cause is implied in the context in question. 1) is like “because\nof some reason, it caused the situation ‘this question was quickly driven out\nof his head’.” 2) is like “because of some reason, it caused the situation\n‘Shidou and Mana immediately corrected their way of thinking’.”\n\nAm I on the right track? If not, how should I understand the two ことになった? Thank\nyou.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-27T14:23:09.037",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77648",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-29T13:00:25.220",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "36662",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"sentence"
],
"title": "ことに(と)なった indicates reason/cause?",
"view_count": 71
}
|
[
{
"body": "The 3 examples of ことに（と）なった have the same function. However it doesn't\nindicate the reason/cause in these cases.\n\nLet's take the first example.\n\n> 疑問は頭の中から追い出された\n>\n> This question was driven out of his head.\n>\n> 疑問は頭の中から追い出されることになった\n>\n> The thing that this question was driven out of his head happened.\n\nこと originally means \"thing\", なる originally means \"become\", and \"ことに(と)なる\"\nmeans \"it happens\" something like that.\n\nAs you may noticed, \"ことに(と)なる\" has a function to describe the situation from\nthe neutral viewpoint. It's working like a narration or stuff like that. This\nis frequently seen in reading text but not so common in colloquial\nconversation.\n\n> この失敗が後に成功をよぶ **ことになる** とは、このとき誰も知るよしもなかった\n>\n> No one would known at that moment if this failure could make success later.\n\nIn this example, ことになる works as to happen later, which leads a meaning like\n\"destiny\". As you said I think it has the reason/cause meaning in this case.\n\nSimilarly,\n\n> あとで後悔することになるよ\n>\n> I'm sure that you're going to regret.\n\nIt's saying like \"Something will cause the destiny that you're to regret.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-29T13:00:25.220",
"id": "77707",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-29T13:00:25.220",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38911",
"parent_id": "77648",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
77648
|
77707
|
77707
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I recently found 言いあったり in one of my sentences, and I can't seem to find what\nit means.\n\n> お前らが誰かとあれこれ言いあったり",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-27T15:22:19.040",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77649",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-27T18:14:03.117",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-27T18:14:03.117",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "38996",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"word-choice",
"words",
"conjugations",
"compound-verbs"
],
"title": "What does 言いあったり mean and how is it conjugated?",
"view_count": 132
}
|
[
{
"body": "> What does 言いあったり mean?\n\nThis is a conjugated form of the verb 言【い】い合【あ】う.\n\n * 言【い】い is the stem or continuative or combining form of 言【い】う meaning \"to say\".\n * 合【あ】う on its own often means \"to meet, to come together\", and in compound verbs, it usually adds the meaning \"together, to/with each other\".\n\nSo 言【い】い + 合【あ】う + \"to say to each other\".\n\nAs for what 言【い】い合【あ】ったり means with the conjugation included, we look at the\nsecond part of your question:\n\n> ... and how is it conjugated?\n\n言いあったり has the ～たり conjugation, which is used to refer to a non-exhaustive\nlist of activities. This is often taught and encountered in the format:\n\n * ABCしたり、DEFしたりします。 \n→ [I] do ABC, and DEF (among other things).\n\nIt is also perfectly fine to use a single verb with the ～たり conjugation, as we\nsee in your sample sentence. This gives the sense that the subject does that\none verb, plus other things that are only implied but not mentioned.\n\nTo conjugate a verb into the non-exhaustive ～たりform, the basic rule is to take\nthe past tense of the dictionary form of the verb and stick り on the end. In\ncompound verbs, we only fully conjugate the last verb in the compound. In\n言【い】い合【あ】う, the last verb is 合【あ】う. The past tense of 合【あ】う is 合【あ】った, so we\ncan make the ～たり conjugation by adding the り, producing 言【い】い合【あ】ったり (\"saying\nto each other, and doing other things that aren't mentioned\").\n\n* * *\n\nPlease comment if the above does not fully address your question, and I can\nedit the post to update.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-27T18:05:48.220",
"id": "77653",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-27T18:05:48.220",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "77649",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
77649
| null |
77653
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I have two examples here where the particle の is used where I would've used が\nso I was hoping someone could explain if there's a difference in these\ninstances, or if either is acceptable.\n\n主人のいない侍\n\n顔のない男\n\nIs there a reason の is used in place of が/is the meaning the same if one is\nused over the other?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-27T17:18:15.637",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77651",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-28T20:29:02.840",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29707",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles"
],
"title": "Difference between using が and の in these sentences",
"view_count": 603
}
|
[
{
"body": "Both of の and が is OK to understand above two sentence. The reason is because\n侍 have 主人, and 男 have 顔(usually).\n\nBut sometimes の and が can't be used. 〇 Aさんが私に書いた地図 ✕ Aさんの私に書いた地図 →because 地図\ndoesn't belong to Ａさん\n\n〇 Bさんが私にくれた時計 ✕ Bさんの私にくれた時計 →because 時計 doesn't belong to B さん",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-28T02:16:55.497",
"id": "77666",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-28T02:16:55.497",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "37138",
"parent_id": "77651",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "In short, relative (adjectival) clauses (that is, short phrases modifying a\nnoun), の can replace が. There's really not much to say about it, other than\nthat it is only used in very short clauses (usually subject の verb-or-\nadjective, and that's it), and if it's ambiguous with a \"possessive\" の than\nyou either can't use it, or it has to \"work either way\".\n\nYou also wouldn't use it if there's any emphasis on the thing before が - the\nconstruction kind of makes the whole sub-phrase sound like a single adjective\n(I mean, that's what it is already, regardless of の vs が - but it sounds more\nflat with the の, I think)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-28T20:29:02.840",
"id": "77684",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-28T20:29:02.840",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39129",
"parent_id": "77651",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
77651
| null |
77684
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77656",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The sentences are : 本当に頭を使わない男だな もうチンコだけになってしまえばいいのに\n\nFirst sentence seems to say \"I'm a man who really doesn't use my head.\" But\nthe second sentence is where I get confused. It contains some grammar I'm less\nfamiliar with, and with my low level japanese skills it looks like something\nalong the lines of \"i'd be fine if i just become a penis\" but I'm pretty sure\nthat isn't right lol. Any help with the anatomy and meaning of this sentence\nis appreciated.\n\n(Edited after realizing this was two sentences, thanks Eiríkr Útlendi)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-27T17:57:11.757",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77652",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-27T20:31:43.023",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-27T18:41:19.187",
"last_editor_user_id": "39158",
"owner_user_id": "39158",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"sentence"
],
"title": "What does this mean? Second sentence confuses me",
"view_count": 148
}
|
[
{
"body": "It's probably referring to somebody else (rather than the speaker themselves).\nIt's not impossible that it's referring to the speaker themselves, but\nunlikely.\n\nAnyways:\n\n> 本当に頭を使わない男だな \n> You really don't use your brain (or he really doesn't use his brain)\n\nNow to:\n\n> もうチンコだけになってしまえばいいのに\n\n`〜ばいいのに` translates roughly to `I wish 〜 happens`. For example, you can say\n帰ればいいのに、もうずっと住めばいいのに and so on. It's often used to convey feelings/yearnings\n(rather than literally describing ones actual wishes). For example:\n明日から戦争のない世界になればいいのに、みんな億万長者になればいいのに\n\n`もう` translates roughly to \"given the situation\". When combined as `もう〜ばいいのに`,\nit roughly means \"Given the situation, they should give up and 〜\" or \"Given\nthe situation, they might as well as 〜\". It's hard to explain but basically\nimplies something has build-up which would justify 〜.\n\nFor example, if you say `退学になればいいのに` it simply means you wish they get\nexpelled. If you say `もう退学になればいいのに` you imply there was some kind of build-up\nthat justifies the expelling (for example, maybe they kept not showing up to\nclass etc.).\n\nBack to the original sentence, the speaker first points out the person really\ndon't use their brain (and thinks with their penis) habitually (\"You are those\ntypes who really don't use their brain!). Then they imply if you hardly ever\nuse your brain and instead listen to your penis all the time, you might as\nwell give everything else up and become a penis.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-27T20:31:43.023",
"id": "77656",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-27T20:31:43.023",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "499",
"parent_id": "77652",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
77652
|
77656
|
77656
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I was watching an anime and after B sold all his books and gave the money to A\nso that he could pay rent, A said:\n\n * 僕は死んだらあなたを守りますよ。\n\nwhich was translated as \"Even if I die, I'll protect you\". But I think that\nwhile 「僕が死んでもあなたを守りますよ」would mean \"Even if I die, I'll protect you\",\n「僕は死んだらあなたを守りますよ」means \"When I die, I'll protect you\".\n\nIs that correct? If not, I would appreciate an explanation.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-27T21:05:52.677",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77657",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-31T08:04:44.847",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-29T13:51:31.983",
"last_editor_user_id": "32264",
"owner_user_id": "32264",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"words",
"grammar"
],
"title": "僕は死んだら vs 僕は死んでも",
"view_count": 183
}
|
[
{
"body": "Your understanding is correct. I also feel the same question and expect what\nwill A do after his death.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-28T01:57:33.047",
"id": "77665",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-28T01:57:33.047",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "37138",
"parent_id": "77657",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "1.「僕は死んだらあなたを守りますよ。」is semantically bit difficult to understand. The literal\ntranslation should be \"When/If I die, I'll protect you\". Probably A would like\nto say they will protect B as a guardian angel even if they will not exist\nwithin this world since A is very thankful to B because of B's selfless\nattitude.\n\n2.「僕が死んでもあなたを守りますよ」would mean \"I'll protect you with my life\" or \"I will risk\nmy own life to protect you\". So, if something happens to B, A is probably\nready to throw their life away for B.\n\nAll in all, the 1st one sounds more spiritual sense, the 2nd one sounds more\nphysical sense. But since I have not watched the anime, it's very speculative.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-31T08:04:44.847",
"id": "77747",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-31T08:04:44.847",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "34735",
"parent_id": "77657",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
77657
| null |
77747
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "The sentence is as follows:\n\nこれが兄様がすべてを託した **わけ** なのですか？\n\nFrom the structure of the sentence this わけ doesn't appear to be a sentence\nending particle, and I'm struggling to interpret it. I find that dictionaries\nunfortunately do not actually explain this word in a way that is meaningful\nfor those who don't already understand how it is used.\n\nTo provide some context, the person currently speaking is watching the person\nthat their 兄様 entrusted something to before their death, where they were also\npresent at this time. The current time of the statement is as they are\nwatching the person commit, for lack of a better word, war atrocities in order\nto do what they were asked.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-27T21:16:16.643",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77658",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-27T22:49:34.707",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39161",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "What does わけ mean in this sentence",
"view_count": 164
}
|
[
{
"body": "わけ, 訳 is defined as\n\n> conclusion from reasoning, judgement or calculation based on something read\n> or heard; reason; cause; meaning; circumstances; situation\n\nWhen わけ comes at the end of a sentence you can think of it as translating to\n\"so that means...(the previous words in the sentence), etc\". In this case, \"So\nthis is why 兄様 left everything to you?\". The speaker is making a conclusion\nbased on something read or heard.\n\nIt has, what I call, continuous form as というわけで、そういうわけで、i.e. \"for that/this\nreason... blah blah\". You'll hear this a lot in Japanese.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-27T21:36:18.540",
"id": "77659",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-27T22:04:51.523",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-27T22:04:51.523",
"last_editor_user_id": "22363",
"owner_user_id": "22363",
"parent_id": "77658",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "\"the case\":\n\n____わけなのですか = is it the case that ___?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-27T22:40:27.970",
"id": "77661",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-27T22:49:34.707",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-27T22:49:34.707",
"last_editor_user_id": "39163",
"owner_user_id": "39163",
"parent_id": "77658",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
77658
| null |
77659
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77672",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was looking up the word \"出席\" (attendance) in a Japanese dictionary, and\nfound the following definition:\n\n> 学校の授業や会合などに出る **こと。**\n\nFrom my understanding, I assume こと is added as a normalizer is so that \"出る (to\nturn up/ to appear)\" becomes a noun \"出ること (the thing of turning up/showing\nup)\". Hence, the definition means \"The thing about turning up for the school's\nclass or meeting\".\n\nMy question is if this is done so that \"the thing of showing up\" which derives\nfrom adding こと to 出る to change the verb into a noun is so that \" **the thing**\n\" refers to the word, which I assume to be a noun, \"出席\".\n\nSo the sentence becomes something like \"Attendance(The thing = Attendance) is\nabout turning up/ being present for the school's class or meeting\". This is a\npoor intepretation but this is for the sake of expressing what I meant in my\nquestion.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-28T00:58:36.850",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77664",
"last_activity_date": "2020-12-28T16:55:44.350",
"last_edit_date": "2020-12-28T16:55:44.350",
"last_editor_user_id": "33435",
"owner_user_id": "38352",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-こと"
],
"title": "Use of こと in this dictionary entry",
"view_count": 104
}
|
[
{
"body": "This works just like any English dictionary would. My dictionary gives the\nreally helpful definition:\n\n> Attendance: the act of attending.\n\nThe こと in your definition simply corresponds to 'act', and so is a\nnominaliser, as you say. The whole phrase Xこと is then 'the act of doing X'.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-28T07:40:48.090",
"id": "77672",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-28T07:40:48.090",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"parent_id": "77664",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
77664
|
77672
|
77672
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77671",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I considered a situation where two modifying clauses are joined by a て\nconjunction and wondered if such a thing was too ambiguous to be commonly\nused. (Brackets show what is being used as a modifying clause in each\ninterpretation)\n\n私が食べて｛飲む｝人を迎える = I will eat, and welcome the person who will drink\n\n私が｛食べて飲む｝人を迎える = I will welcome the person who will eat and drink\n\n｛私が食べて飲む｝人を迎える = I will welcome the person who I will eat and drink / (with)\n\n 1. Are these interpretations correct?\n 2. Can two clauses joined by a て conjunction be used as a whole modifying clause-unit?\n 3. Would this always be technically ambiguous, with context and common sense being the only tools to disambiguate it?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-28T03:27:25.900",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77667",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-28T06:30:49.667",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39086",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"て-form",
"relative-clauses"
],
"title": "Can a て conjunction be used in a relative clause?",
"view_count": 115
}
|
[
{
"body": "I feel like the third case, without something like 一緒に, would be more like\n\"whom I will eat and drink\" (cannibalism), and that the second example is the\nnatural interpretation of the sentence, because a comma/pause would definitely\nbe inserted before 飲む, for the first one. ...But it'd still come across\nawkwardly, and I feel like 私が食べる、そして[...] would express that more clearly. But\nI may be wrong (not native speaker)\n\nIn general, though, you are absolutely correct about these sorts of\nconstructions being potentially ambiguous, and the usual way to handle it when\ncontext doesn't make it clear, is to break it into separate clauses or\nsentences, I believe.\n\nThere's an opening sentence that I like, to a book entitled 暗夜行路 that I think\nillustrates this (though it could well be that it's also a reflection of a\nparticular style of writing, more than an overall tendency in Japanese?):\n\n> 私が自分に祖父のあることを知ったのは、私の母が産後の病気で死に、そのご二月ほど経って、不意に祖父が私の前に現れて来た、その時であった。\n\nCan you imagine trying to say that kind of thing in Japanese in a more direct\nmanner, without breaking it up in a similar fashion?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-28T06:30:49.667",
"id": "77671",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-28T06:30:49.667",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39129",
"parent_id": "77667",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
77667
|
77671
|
77671
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77676",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I encountered にしたって\n[here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/2055/is-it-true-\nthat-%E3%81%AB%E3%81%97%E3%81%9F%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6-is-the-colloquial-form-\nof-%E3%81%AB%E3%81%97%E3%81%9F%E3%81%A8%E3%81%93%E3%82%8D%E3%81%A7/2056#2056).\n\n> 彼は日本語を20年も勉強しているが、その彼 **にしたって** 、まだ分からない文法に時々出くわすそうだ。\n\nIf the sentence is changed to\n\n> 彼は日本語を20年も勉強しているが、その彼 **だって** 、まだ分からない文法に時々出くわすそうだ。\n\ndoes it change the meaning of the sentence?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-28T05:28:04.557",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77669",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-28T11:02:27.757",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-28T09:53:55.900",
"last_editor_user_id": "29327",
"owner_user_id": "29327",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"word-choice"
],
"title": "What's the difference between だって vs にしたって",
"view_count": 312
}
|
[
{
"body": "にしたって is an informal version of にしたところで ([see examples\nhere](https://nihongonosensei.net/?p=18398)). \nだって is an informal version of でも.\n\nThe constructions にしたところで (にしたって) and でも (だって) mean the same thing in this\ncontext, so there is no semantic difference between your sentences. However,\nthey are not always completely interchangeable. As explained in 'A Dictionary\nof Advanced Japanese Grammar' (p425), にしたところで must be used as the subject,\nwhereas there are times when でも can be used even if it is not the subject. In\nother words, wherever you see にしたところで (にしたって), you can replace it with でも\n(だって). But the reverse is not true.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-28T11:02:27.757",
"id": "77676",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-28T11:02:27.757",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "77669",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
77669
|
77676
|
77676
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77691",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "While I was doing Anki I found つった and I don't know what this means, is it つって\nbut past tense? Here is the full sentence.\n\n> 俺もよくついてる 知ってるものを 知らないっつったって",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-28T09:59:45.243",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77674",
"last_activity_date": "2022-06-06T16:26:56.467",
"last_edit_date": "2022-06-06T16:26:56.467",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "38996",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"words",
"conjugations"
],
"title": "What does つった mean?",
"view_count": 1940
}
|
[
{
"body": "Yes, つった is the past-form of (っ)つう or (っ)つー, which is a slangy contraction of\nと言う or って言う. つう doesn't fully conjugate like a regular godan verb (we do not\nsay ついます, つえば, つわない, etc.), but it does have the te-form and the ta-form:\n\n * つう = と言う\n * つって = と言って \n * つってる = と言ってる = と言っている\n * つっとく = と言っとく = と言っておく\n * つっちゃう = と言っちゃう = と言ってしまう\n * つったる = と言ったる = と言ってやる\n * つった = と言った \n * つったり = と言ったり\n * つったら = と言ったら\n\nSome non-straightforward examples:\n\n * 見たっつったの？ = 見たって言ったの？ = D'you say you saw it?\n * 馬鹿っつったった = 馬鹿と言ってやった = I said to him (he was) an idiot.\n * 何つうか = 何というか = well; um; what can I say\n * つうことは = ということは = that is to say; which means\n * つうか = というか = っていうか = or rather; or perhaps; wait\n * つっても = と言っても = that said; but\n * なんつって! = just kidding! (probably from などと言っちゃって) \n\nRelated:\n\n * [What does っつの mean?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/1252/5010)\n * [How does 出てます here translate?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/66194/5010)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-29T03:05:46.530",
"id": "77691",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-29T03:49:41.390",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-29T03:49:41.390",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "77674",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
77674
|
77691
|
77691
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "here is the sentence i know と can have multiple functions\n\nごめんね 私さごめんね 人に合わせないと不安っていうか",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-28T10:46:09.620",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77675",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-29T03:19:07.883",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38996",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"word-choice",
"words",
"nuances"
],
"title": "in this sentence what function does と take",
"view_count": 57
}
|
[] |
77675
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77678",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I’m reading an article about the corona virus. They’re giving instructions to\nfollow in order to prevent reappearance of the virus.\n\n> 緊急事態宣言が終わっても、新しいコロナウイルスはなくなっていないので、気をつけなければなりません。\n>\n> 毎日の生活では、次のようなことに気をつける必要があります\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/m9VlG.jpg)\n\nThis is from Weblio. I scrolled through all of the definitions but they refer\nto emotions and mood.\n\nFrom my understanding of the article, they’re giving instructions to follow,\nwhy are they using 気? Why not 注意? I can’t find a definition for 気 which fits.\n\nSource:\n\n<https://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/easy/k10012444741000/k10012444741000.html>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-28T11:28:33.037",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77677",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-28T12:34:10.137",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "37089",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"words",
"kanji"
],
"title": "Can 気 be used for advice?",
"view_count": 113
}
|
[
{
"body": "気 is very common word so it has many meanings. I think you were close.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/n2JjH.png)\n\n気 exactly has the meaning of attention or care. 気をつける in the example context\nmeans \"to be careful\" or \"to take care\".\n\nBy the way, almost all the Japanese students start a class with a weird\ncommand 「起立。気をつけ。礼」 which means \"Stand up. Attention. Bow.\"",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-28T12:17:41.440",
"id": "77678",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-28T12:17:41.440",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38911",
"parent_id": "77677",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
77677
|
77678
|
77678
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was learning about how we can use 「という」to describe things and I saw the\nfollowing example:\n\n * 日本人{にほんじん}はお酒{さけ}に弱{よわ}い **という** のは本当{ほんとう}？\n\nAnd my question is, what is the use of 「という」when used to describe this type of\nthings? Wouldn't this phrase be equal to: 日本人{にほんじん}はお酒{さけ}に弱{よわ}い **こと**\nは本当{ほんとう}？ If so whats the benefit of using 「という」? I also saw the following\nexample:\n\n * リブート **という** のは、パソコンを再起動{さいきどう}する **という** ことです。\n\nAnd in this phrase, in the end, 「という」 is used with 「こと」. why is 「こと」there?\nWouldn't the sentence be correct like this: リブート **という** のは、パソコンを再起動{さいきどう}する\n**という** です.?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-28T16:18:16.093",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77680",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-29T02:49:49.877",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-29T02:46:40.050",
"last_editor_user_id": "33235",
"owner_user_id": "38617",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-こと"
],
"title": "Using 「という」to describe things",
"view_count": 252
}
|
[
{
"body": "One important note is that while you can use という to name things (e.g.,「ドラえもん」\n**という** 漫画【まんが】を見【み】る。), you can also use it to literally mean that something\nis said:\n\n * その漫画【まんが】が好【す】きじゃない **というのは** 本当【ほんとう】じゃないです。\n\nIn the phrase というの, there are three components. The particle と here marks a\nquotation; the verb 言【い】う, often just written in kana, means \"to say\"; and the\nparticle の nominalizes a preceding verb. (In other words, it turns a verb into\na gerund.) So the above sentence would translate as \"To say that I don't like\nthat manga would not be true.\"\n\nYou can also define things using というのは, as in your second example, which can\nbe translated as \"To 'reboot' is to restart a computer\".\n\nIncidentally, ということです is also a set phrase in some situations. It's a bit like\nthe phrase \"as it's said\"; you can usually replace it with です, but it gives a\nsofter tone to whatever you're saying. (Weblio translates it as \"The thing is,\n...\") It can also [mark something one has heard](https://jlptsensei.com/learn-\njapanese-grammar/%E3%81%A8%E3%81%84%E3%81%86%E3%81%93%E3%81%A8%E3%81%A0-to-iu-\nkoto-da-%E3%81%A8%E3%81%AE%E3%81%93%E3%81%A8%E3%81%A0-to-no-koto-da-meaning/).\nSimilarly, ということで can be translated as \"that is to say\" or \"in other words\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-28T17:30:45.797",
"id": "77681",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-29T02:49:49.877",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-29T02:49:49.877",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "39171",
"parent_id": "77680",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
77680
| null |
77681
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77683",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I keep on coming across the particle か at the end of sentences without it\nhaving a clear or necessary interrogative nuance.\n\nAn example. The 1st Angel in Neon Genesis Evangelion is regenerating itself\nafter the first raid: 予想通り、自己修復中か. Why would they introduce an interrogative\nnuance into what was already a predicted outcome?\n\nI get the impression that Japanese speech encourages the use of か without any\nspecific interrogative or grammatical purpose other than providing a strong\nphonetic closure to a sentence? Can anyone confirm or dispel this impression?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-28T18:03:44.683",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77682",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-29T09:24:11.157",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-28T19:00:28.503",
"last_editor_user_id": "11104",
"owner_user_id": "39172",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles",
"anime",
"particle-か",
"interrogatives"
],
"title": "Seemingly non-interrogative use of sentence-ending か",
"view_count": 617
}
|
[
{
"body": "This function of this か is not purely phonetic, but rather serves to make the\nsentence less of a outward statement and more of a self-directed or self-\nreflecting one.\n\nIt makes the information value of sentence primarily be “I had considered ~\npreviously but wasn’t sure, but in the end it indeed it is 〜, huh...”\n\nIt’s often is accompanied by やっぱり (or 予想通り playing a similar role in this\nsentence). Even when such an adverb isn’t present, you can imagine it being\nthere. E.g. そっか{HHL} can basically be expanded to やっぱりそうだったのか.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-28T20:13:35.557",
"id": "77683",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-28T20:13:35.557",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "77682",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 11
},
{
"body": "To take a more common example, you will often hear people responding to new\ninformation with そうですか。 This is not a question. It is more like \"Oh, I see.\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-29T09:24:11.157",
"id": "77703",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-29T09:24:11.157",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4754",
"parent_id": "77682",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
77682
|
77683
|
77683
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77686",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Is the middle \"n\" silent? Am I just not used to hearing it and can't identify\nit?\n\n * The duolingo pronunciation sounds like \"zein\" <https://www.duolingo.com/dictionary/Japanese/%E5%85%A8%E5%93%A1/46748a7b24925ca8284f992c47fdfa40>\n\n * The two femails pronounce it as \"zenin\" while the male and AI pronounce it \"zein\" - <https://forvo.com/word/%E5%85%A8%E5%93%A1/>\n\n * The hiragana spelling I got is from <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E5%85%A8%E5%93%A1>",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-28T21:34:14.817",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77685",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-28T21:41:01.713",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "37278",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"pronunciation",
"spelling"
],
"title": "Why does 全員 sound like zein but is written zenin (ぜんいん)?",
"view_count": 595
}
|
[
{
"body": "That intermediate ん is still there. Really. When pronounced between two\nvowels, ん often causes nasality, without the speaker fully closing the airway\n-- so it doesn't sound like an English //n// or //ŋ//. Also, if you listen\ncarefully and pay attention to the length of time it takes to say, ぜんいん is\ntruly four [morae](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_\\(Japanese_prosody\\))\n(four beats), while ぜいん is only three.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-28T21:41:01.713",
"id": "77686",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-28T21:41:01.713",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "77685",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
77685
|
77686
|
77686
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77688",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 僕の住まう差大角豆(ささげ)町の町並みは都会とは程遠く、木々が街道を飾り、町の至る所に雑木林があったりと、とても長閑(のどか)な町だ。\n\nIs the あったりと connected to the last part of the sentence through the 〜たりする\ngrammar? If so, what does \"と\" mean in \"あったりと\"?\n\nI know that in 〜たりする its last use can omit the する, but since in this case the\nsentence ends with だ, is it the same thing? I mean, is it possible to use this\ngrammar with the last part of the sentence being です or だ (which in this case\nthe する **has** to be omitted)?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-28T22:37:46.943",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77687",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-28T23:51:13.223",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-28T23:02:04.460",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "17384",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"particles",
"particle-と"
],
"title": "What does あったりと mean?",
"view_count": 395
}
|
[
{
"body": "This と is a kind of \"listing\" particle. Please see [Function of と when used\nwith 続く](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/68125/5010) for similar\nexamples. In this sentence, it is marking two reasons/examples regarding the\nstatement 長閑な町だ (ie, \"There are 木々 and there are 雑木林, so this is a 長閑な\ntown.\").\n\nSometimes a writer uses only one たり even when two items are explicitly\npresent. (I personally dislike it, though.) Here, the \"list\" consists of\n木々が街道を飾る and 雑木林がある. This sentence could have written like this:\n\n> 木々が街道を飾ってい **たり** 、町の至る所に雑木林があっ **たり** と、とても長閑な町だ。",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-28T23:24:20.507",
"id": "77688",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-28T23:51:13.223",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-28T23:51:13.223",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "77687",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
77687
|
77688
|
77688
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77690",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "So a random stroll through Wikipedia reveals that Tanuki or \"raccoon dogs\"\nhave a fascinating place in Japanese folklore. It seems Nintendo often\nincludes tanuki or tanuki aspects in its games. In particular, Tom Nook and\nhis adoptive children in the Animal Crossing games are tanuki!\n\nIn Japanese (at least, anglicized), Tom Nook's name is \"Tanukichi\". I\noriginally assumed that \"ichi\" must be a diminutive suffix indicating\ncuteness, however the closest thing I could find spelling wise is \"chichi\"\nwhich seems to be an informal term for father like \"dad\". However it's\nentirely possible that the anglicized spelling similarity is totally\ncoincidental.\n\n**Is there any obvious etymology of \"Tanukichi\" in the original Japanese?**",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-29T00:37:35.907",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77689",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-29T01:26:15.827",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39174",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"etymology"
],
"title": "Tom Nook \"Tanukichi\"",
"view_count": 1815
}
|
[
{
"body": "Names that end in \"kichi\" (written 吉 in kanji, meaning \"good fortune\") have an\n\"old-fashioned men's name\" feel to them. It's a name ending that gives the\nimpression that the person is probably an older guy. And perhaps from a rural\narea (though I'm less certain of that.)\n\nSome examples of names that real people have had include\n\n * 大吉 - Daikichi \n * 春吉 - Harukichi \n * 洸吉 - Koukichi \n * 政吉 - Masakichi \n * 佐吉 - Sakichi\n\nThere are far more than that as well.\n\nThe creators of Animal Crossing took advantage of the fact that tanuki ends\nwith \"ki,\" so it's very simple to make it Tanukichi and anyone can instantly\nunderstand that this is an older male tanuki character.\n\nAs an aside, Redd, the fox rival of Tom Nook, is called Tsunekichi in\nJapanese. The word for fox in Japanese is kitsune.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-29T01:26:15.827",
"id": "77690",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-29T01:26:15.827",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20479",
"parent_id": "77689",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 9
}
] |
77689
|
77690
|
77690
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Why is it が and not は for the bolded particle?:\n\n> お寺を見に行くつもりでしたが、天気 **が** よくなかったから、行きませんでした。 \n> We were planning to go to see a temple, but we didn't because the weather\n> was not good.\n\nIs it also OK to replace that section 天気がよくなかったから with よくなかった天気でしたから?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-29T04:28:27.497",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77693",
"last_activity_date": "2020-10-26T07:05:45.613",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-29T04:39:03.763",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "36838",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Why が instead of は here for reasoning clauses?",
"view_count": 133
}
|
[
{
"body": "In Japanese grammar, が is usually used with subjects in subordinate clauses\nand は is often used with subjects in main clauses.\n\nよくなかった天気でしたから is correct in grammar, I think, but it sounds weird. よくなかった and\nでした are both expressions of past tense, so it should become duplicate when\nappearing in one sentence.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-29T05:07:56.570",
"id": "77694",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-29T05:07:56.570",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38690",
"parent_id": "77693",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
77693
| null |
77694
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77700",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "For example, repairable, usable, etc.\n\nI tried a few in deepl and got a mixture of potential, 用, and 可能.\n\nMy first thought was that it would involve passive, but I guess not.\n\nIs there a single method that's acceptable for all verbs, or at least common?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-29T06:29:50.780",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77695",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-29T13:22:00.487",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38808",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"conjugations"
],
"title": "How to describe something as verb-able?",
"view_count": 134
}
|
[
{
"body": "One useful and common option is to use the potential form of godan and ichidan\nverbs, and できる for the noun+する constructions (できる is the potential form of\nする). For example:\n\n> usable 使える (potential form of 使う), 使用できる (potential form of する). This\n> translates as 'can use'.\n>\n> repairable 直せる (potential form of 直す), 修理できる (potential form of する). This\n> translates as 'can repair'.\n\nThis keeps the sentences in the active form, which is a common way of\nexpressing this concept in Japanese.",
"comment_count": 9,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-29T08:49:59.270",
"id": "77700",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-29T13:22:00.487",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "77695",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
77695
|
77700
|
77700
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77704",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've learned that the 1st to 10th day of the month is always read specially.\nHowever, when I converted these by using my computer typing\n\"いちにち、ににち、さんにち、よんにち、ごにち、ろくにち、ななにち、はちにち、きゅうにち、じゅうにち、じゅうよんにち、にじゅうにち、にじゅうよんにち\",\nthese converted correctly. Especially, one-letter day expression can only be\nfound when you convert correctly. For example, if you convert \"よっか\" or \"よんにち\",\nyou can get a letter \"㏣(IDEOGRAPHIC TELEGRAPH SYMBOL FOR DAY FOUR)\". But, if\nyou input \"しにち\" or \"よにち\", the letter is not shown within the candidates. I've\nlearned that when you use generic counter for 1 to 10, you can use either \"つ\"\nor \"こ\". But, when you refer to over 10, You cannot use \"つ\", only \"こ\" can be\nused.\n\ni) I wonder that the 1st to 10th, 14th, 20th and 24th day of the month also\ncan be read as both \"か\" as \"にち\".\n\nii) And I wonder if I use \"にち\", the meaning is changed.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-29T06:52:07.137",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77696",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-31T03:52:27.930",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-31T03:52:27.930",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "39179",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"numbers"
],
"title": "The day of the month",
"view_count": 249
}
|
[
{
"body": "First of all, \"にち\" is available for every case but \"か\" is not. \"か\" is\navailable only for 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,14,20,24 when you refer to a day.\n\n> i) I wonder that the 1st to 10th, 14th, 20th and 24th day of the month also\n> can be read as both \"か\" as \"にち\".\n\nYes! The both are possible. In my sense, when we call a date on calendar \"か\"\nsounds more popular than \"にち\" if it's available (i.e.\n2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,14,20,24). \nThe exception is 1日 which sounds \"ついたち\" or \"いちにち\". I think ついたち sounds popular\nwhen I say \"1st May\" for example.\n\nSimilarly, When we call period of days (e.g. for 2 days), my sense is the same\nas above. To call 2日間, 3日間, 4日間, ..., ふつかかん, みっかかん, よっかかん, ..., とおかかん,\nじゅうよっかかん, はつかかん, にじゅうよっかかん sounds more popular than \"にち\" pattern. \nWe will never say ついたちかん. Because ついたち especially means the 1st day of the\nmonth. It doesn't mean just one day. We call \"いちにちじゅう\" (1日中) to say \"all day\nlong\".\n\nFurthermore, when we call the Nth day of summer vacation, the both are\npossible and \"にち\" gets popular back compared to the former cases. For example,\n\"夏休み 8日目\" (The 8th day of summer vacation) can be called \"はちにちめ\" as well as\n\"ようかめ\". The both sound natural enough.",
"comment_count": 9,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-29T11:34:28.580",
"id": "77704",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-29T13:08:49.740",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-29T13:08:49.740",
"last_editor_user_id": "38911",
"owner_user_id": "38911",
"parent_id": "77696",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
77696
|
77704
|
77704
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "誰よりもあなたが好き\n\nThis can either mean \"I like you more than I like anyone else\", or \"I like you\nmore than anyone else who likes you\"\n\nHow would one differentiate this? No matter how I think about it, I can't see\nhow this sentence can be tweaked to disambiguate the meaning",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-29T07:27:26.640",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77698",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-11T10:15:44.780",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "31222",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"ambiguity"
],
"title": "Ambiguity in a sentence",
"view_count": 103
}
|
[
{
"body": "Interesting question! We have no clue to differentiate these meanings only\nwith this context! Probably Japanese tend not to make meanings clear. So you\ncan simply interpret this as \"I like you very very much.\"\n\nHowever, my personal opinion, I would choose the latter interpretation \"I like\nyou more than anyone else who likes you\", if I were to be asked this question\nfrom my girlfriend. That's because it tells I am the best lover of her. The\nformer one \"I like you more than I like anyone else\" sounds selfish a little\nbecause it could give impressions like 'I am making a decision of mate' or 'I\nhave another person who I like as much as you'. \"You're the best lovee by me\"\nsounds disgusting, right?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-11T10:06:50.020",
"id": "77950",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-11T10:15:44.780",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-11T10:15:44.780",
"last_editor_user_id": "38911",
"owner_user_id": "38911",
"parent_id": "77698",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
77698
| null |
77950
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77709",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Pretty sure there are more(nothing formal because it's a major pain), but\nthese are the only ones I can think of. What are the difference between these?\nThe all mean \"very\". Degree wise, how would you rank them or are they all the\nsame? Is there a word for the highest degree of \"very\" (casual)?\n\nAddendum: I get the feeling that some of them can be used for sarcasm (or only\nused for sarcasm). For example:\n\nものすごく: 俺あんぱん物凄く好き - literally\" I really love red bean buns\" but may feel like\nsarcasm. I.e: Implied meaning \"I actually hate/ don't like red bean buns\"\n\nOr is whatever I said in the addendum really just jibberish rubbish?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-29T07:52:06.020",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77699",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-30T06:19:01.387",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-29T07:59:52.670",
"last_editor_user_id": "31222",
"owner_user_id": "31222",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "とても、とってとても、超、めちゃ、めちゃくちゃ、物凄く、すごく、本当に、まじで differences in terms of degree and usages",
"view_count": 1131
}
|
[
{
"body": "とても and すごく are general words which mean \"very\". You can use them in any\nsituation. I think you want to say とっても、it is a casual way of saying とても. 物凄く\nis a word that emphasizes すごく. I don't think it is a sarcasm word.\n\nIn my opinion, I feel that 本当に and すごく are words for a higher degree of \"very\"\nthan とても.\n\n超、めちゃ、めちゃくちゃ、まじで are casual ways of saying \"very\", so you had better not use\nthem in formal situations. めちゃ has been more used recently than 超 among young\npeople.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-29T14:57:46.567",
"id": "77709",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-30T06:19:01.387",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-30T06:19:01.387",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "77699",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
77699
|
77709
|
77709
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I just learnt that Hemingway's \"Farewell to Arms\" in translated in Japanese as\n武器よさらば. Is that よ the sentence-end particle for emphasis? Or does it has any\nother meaning?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-29T09:11:52.823",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77701",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-29T14:58:34.750",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7003",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"particles"
],
"title": "What's the よ in 武器よさらば?",
"view_count": 62
}
|
[] |
77701
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I came along this sentence in the very begining of the story :\n\n「友達は中国のある資産家の息子で金に不自由のない男であったけれども、 _学校が学校なのと年が年なので_ 、生活の程度は私とそう変わりもしなかった。」\n\nHere's the translation I read : \"My friend was from a wealthy family in the\nCentral Provinces, and had no financial worries. But being a young student,\nhis standard of living was much the same as my own. I was therefore not\nobliged, when I found myself alone, to change my lodgings.\"\n\nBasically, I roughly understand what corresponds to what between the sentence\nand the translation, but I feel like 学校が学校なのと年が年なので is more of an expression,\nsomething that you can't really translate in english. Thus, I don't really get\nthe meaning of this sentence, probably because of なの. I think the part of the\ntranslation that correspond to it would be : \"But being a young student, his\nstandard of living was much the same as my own.\"\n\nHow does this sentence work and how did they come to translate it the way they\ndid ?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-29T09:15:46.483",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77702",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-29T11:50:04.647",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39183",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"translation"
],
"title": "How shall I understand this sentence (from こころ by 夏目漱石)?",
"view_count": 65
}
|
[] |
77702
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "どのように使って どう違いますか？\n\nI do not know how difference this meanings and how can i use in what\nsituations ?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-29T12:59:07.240",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77706",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-29T18:12:27.973",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-29T14:53:28.057",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "38502",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"words"
],
"title": "のんびり vs ゆっくり vs くつろぐ",
"view_count": 262
}
|
[
{
"body": "Let's look at how these words are different.\n\n### Parts of speech\n\n * のんびり -- adverb\n * ゆっくり -- adverb\n * くつろぐ -- verb\n\n### Meanings, and derivations for extra perspective\n\n * のんびり \nThe basic meaning is \"relaxedly, unstressedly, in an easygoing manner\". \nFirst cited to 1907, making this a relatively recent term. \nDerived from のびのび, in turn derived from verb のびる \"to stretch out\". \nThink of a cat **stretching out** and **relaxing**.\n\n * ゆっくり \nThe basic meaning is \"slowly, unhurriedly\". \nFirst cited to 1563. \nStructurally, would appear to be derived from ゆくゆく, but the meanings are\nalmost opposite. That doesn't necessarily indicate unrelatedness: consider\nEnglish _terrible_ and _terrific_ , ultimately from the same root, one with a\nvery negative meaning and the other a very positive meaning. But the\ndifference between ゆっくり and ゆくゆく is still puzzling. \nOne way to remember it might be to think of the word like 行【ゆ】く \"to go\", but\n**slower** , since you have that small-っ in the middle of ゆっくり.\n\n * くつろぐ \nThe basic meaning is \"to kick back, to relax\". \nFirst cited to the late 900s as a transitive verb, then cited in the _Genji\nMonogatari_ a few decades later with the intransitive sense. \nThe original meaning was \"to physically loosen something\", extending then to\n\"to loosen one's mood or mind\", and then shifting to the intransitive sense of\n\"to relax\". \nThe way I memorized this one was thinking about くつ as \"shoes\" from the way you\noften take off your shoes after getting home, and then **putting your feet\nup**.\n\n### Usage\n\nThe verb くつろぐ is, well, a verb, so you can use it that way.\n\nFor the two adverbs, のんびり and ゆっくり, there is a lot of overlap. Broadly\nspeaking, のんびり has more emphasis on \"fun\" or \"easygoing\", while ゆっくり has more\nemphasis on \"slowly\". You can say both のんびり歩【ある】く (\"to walk in an easygoing\nmanner\") and ゆっくり歩【ある】く (\"to walk unhurriedly\"), and the meaning differs\nmostly in subtleties of mood. However, while you can say ゆっくり言【い】う (\"to say\nsomething slowly\"), it sounds a bit weird to me to say のんびり言【い】う (\"to say\nsomething relaxedly\"?). Perhaps if you're talking about someone who is really\nsupremely laid back. :) Just make sure to use ゆっくり if you're asking someone to\nslow down when they're talking to you.\n\n* * *\n\nPlease comment if the above does not address your question.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-29T18:12:27.973",
"id": "77716",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-29T18:12:27.973",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "77706",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
77706
| null |
77716
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77744",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I've learned that お・ご＋語幹＋する is humble language, for example\n\n> よろしくお願いします。\n\nHowever, when asking others what they wished for, I see the question:\n\n> 李：小野さんは何をお願いしましたか。 小野：健康と恋愛です。\n\nBackground: Li and Ono went to 初詣 and made wishes at 神社。\n\nObviously, the subject is 小野さん, so it cannot be humble language.\n\nThen how to understand the sentence. Is that because everyone is humble before\ngods?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-29T15:12:38.753",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77710",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-31T07:10:31.220",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-30T04:23:12.210",
"last_editor_user_id": "33235",
"owner_user_id": "33235",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"politeness"
],
"title": "Politeness of 何をお願いしましたか",
"view_count": 245
}
|
[
{
"body": "お願いします is a standard, set phrase. It has nothing to do with politeness. It is\n\"I humbly request\" or \"please\". Or, it was at once polite, but has now since\njust become an average grammar phrase when you ask someone for something.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-29T20:18:02.293",
"id": "77717",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-29T20:18:02.293",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22363",
"parent_id": "77710",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "お伝えする, お伺いする, ご説明する and so on are humble expressions, but お願いする is not humble,\neven though it looks similar!\n\nThis お願い is more or less a fixed noun/suru-verb meaning \"(to make) a request\".\n願う is just \"to hope\" without an explicit target person. There are similar\nfixed nouns with fixed meanings in the form of `お + stem` (お握り, お絞り, お座り, お使い,\nお漏らし, ...). 願い is a noun that means \"wish (e.g., to god)\", but it's a\nrelatively stiff and solemn word used mainly in writings. We never say 願いする\nwithout お regardless of keigo.\n\nTherefore, 何をお願いしましたか is not humble nor honorific; it has at least polite ます,\nbut nothing more. Unless Ono is Li's boss, using ます is good enough. The\nhonorific version is 何をお願いされましたか or 何をお願いなさいましたか. The humble version of お願いする\nis お願い致す, and you should not say 何をお願い致しましたか to someone (you know why).\n\n(`お + stem + になる` has an honorific meaning (eg お聞きになる, お休みになる), but お願いになる\nsounds unnatural to me. 願う means (internally) wishing something, and it may\nnot play well with honorifics.)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-31T06:58:18.320",
"id": "77744",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-31T07:10:31.220",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-31T07:10:31.220",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "77710",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
77710
|
77744
|
77744
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Any suggestions on how to say and write Space Fox? As in a fox from outer\nspace? I've been using 宇宙狐 uchuu kitsune うちゅうきつね\n\nIs that correct or would you suggest something different?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-29T15:53:15.030",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77711",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-30T11:02:33.983",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39192",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "How to say Space Fox?",
"view_count": 97
}
|
[
{
"body": "宇宙のフォックス\n\nうちゅう means \"space\" and フォックス means \"fox\".\n\nWhy do you want to use this word？",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-30T08:07:23.733",
"id": "77719",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-30T11:02:33.983",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-30T11:02:33.983",
"last_editor_user_id": "33435",
"owner_user_id": "38502",
"parent_id": "77711",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
}
] |
77711
| null |
77719
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I should preface this by saying that I myself am fairly young (a teenager) and\nspeak primarily to other young people (while I may not know their exact age,\nit's safe to assume the other people I speak to are either teenagers\nthemselves or adults slightly older than me who have not stated their age). I\nuse Twitter as a platform to speak to Japanese people, and generally in\nreplying to their posts I am talking about media, art, etc. and am not trying\nto say anything particularly meaningful. That said, which is the proper way to\nspeak under these circumstances-- formally or informally? Most of these people\nare not ones with whom I'd spoken to privately before, but because of how\ncommunication online is facilitated I am a little shaky on whether speaking\nformally would come across as excessive or whether speaking informally would\ncome off as rude. I see replies to Tweets in Japanese in both formal and\ninformal form, so is it just a matter of choice?\n\nTl;dr use of formal/informal conjugation in online interactions in Japanese\nseems inconsistent to me, so I'm not sure which I should use.\n\nIn response to a post like \"最近僕は描くことを考えるときに悲しくてなる\", would it be better to\nreply \"[name]さんの絵が本当に大好きだよ！\" or \"[name]さんの絵が本当に好きです。\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-29T16:30:35.653",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77712",
"last_activity_date": "2023-07-16T04:05:35.657",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39194",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"politeness",
"formality"
],
"title": "What's the proper form (formal/informal) to use when speaking to others online?",
"view_count": 439
}
|
[
{
"body": "The poster has used 僕 (boku) which is a fairly informal way of referring to\noneself as a young person so I think \"[name]さんの絵が本当に大好きだよ！\" would be\nacceptable and the よ at the end makes you sound quite emphatic that you like\nthat picture. If you just want to be a bit more reserved in your praise then\n\"[name]さんの絵が本当に好きです。\" expresses that you like the picture but it's a bit less\nenthusiastic.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-30T12:57:16.630",
"id": "77725",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-30T12:57:16.630",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39037",
"parent_id": "77712",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
},
{
"body": "I don't think you can go wrong if you use the same formality as if you were\nspeaking them in person.\n\nIf it is someone you don't know, then match their politeness level (as they\nalso don't know you), or just stick to です・ます Japanese, which is also common.\n\n*Just because someone is younger than you (with the exception of kids), it is still common for adults to use polite Japanese until they are much better acquainted.\n\n*Many places online (for example YouTube comments) will have many people using informal Japanese, but it certainly isn't wrong to use polite Japanese either, as lots of people also do.\n\n*If it is high school age people, then informal is probably used a lot online.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2023-02-16T02:47:59.390",
"id": "98615",
"last_activity_date": "2023-02-16T02:47:59.390",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "55721",
"parent_id": "77712",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
77712
| null |
98615
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Example from Minna No Nihongo:\n\nLesson 4 : **あした** 6 時に起きます。\n\nLesson 9 : **きょう** **は** 早く 帰ります。\n\nWhy is は sometimes used with such a time words and sometimes not?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-29T16:47:45.103",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77714",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-30T15:49:15.287",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-30T10:52:29.037",
"last_editor_user_id": "29327",
"owner_user_id": "39191",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-は",
"word-usage"
],
"title": "When do i use は for きのう,きょう,あした?",
"view_count": 347
}
|
[
{
"body": "* As in many other situations 'は ha/wa' can denote a special significance this time. For example あした 6 時に起きます。plainly states that the subject of the sentence will wake up at 6 tomorrow. \n * For the other example, きょう は 早く 帰ります。 there is a 'は ha/wa' inserted so it would add a nuance that I am waking up early today AND that this is not common for me to do this, i.e. normally I would wake up later.\n\nIn spoken English you might accentuate the \"Today\" as in \"TODAY, I'm waking up\nearly.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-30T12:52:00.920",
"id": "77724",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-30T12:52:00.920",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39037",
"parent_id": "77714",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "は:\n\n 1. Denotes the topic.\n\n 2. For comparing, emphasis\n\nSo in your second example\n\n> きょう は 早く 帰ります。\n\nYou wanna emphasize **TODAY** , you may always go back home late, but not\ntoday.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-30T15:49:15.287",
"id": "77735",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-30T15:49:15.287",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11951",
"parent_id": "77714",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
77714
| null |
77724
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm trying to breakdown the tagline for the movie [火垂るの墓 in a movie\nposter](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CrUUt2GVUAAs0W5.jpg): \"4歳と14歳で、生きようと思った\"\n\n> 4歳と14歳で\n\nMy first guess was that the で here is the て-form of the copula だ, so it just\njoins that clause to the next.\n\nBut the whole sentence makes more sense if it's the particle で that expresses\na cause, as in, \"since they were (only) 4 and 14 years old, ...\", but it seems\nlike a strange place to put a comma.\n\n> 生きようと思った\n\nThe structure [volitional + と思う] here, as I understand from the [_Dictionary\nof Basic Japanese Grammar_ (p.569)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/fcb2Q.png),\nindicates the speaker's desire, or what the speaker intends to do.\n\nBut I'm not sure how to map that explanation to this sentence.\n\nMy best guess here is that the tagline means, \"Since they were (only) 4 and\n14, I thought that they would live\", but I feel like I've misunderstood this\nsentence.\n\nThere are a few other threads about ~おうと思う, but I don't think they answered my\nquestion.\n\nThanks for the help.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-30T05:03:47.167",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77718",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-30T10:43:38.503",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "15785",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Meaning of \"4歳と14歳で、生きようと思った\"",
"view_count": 381
}
|
[
{
"body": "で can mark a cause/reason (eg 戦争 **で** 多くの人が死んだ), but \"to think we will\nsurvive because we are 4 and 14\" doesn't make sense to me.\n\nI feel this で is the same で as in 1人で生きる (\"to live alone\"), 全員で考える (\"to think\ntogether\"), 個人で検討する (\"to investigate individually\"), etc. で marks the (number\nof) people involved in the action. Broadly speaking, it's referred to as an\namount marker [here](https://www.wasabi-jpn.com/japanese-grammar/particle-de-\nexpressing-supplementary-information/#6).\n\nNote that ～歳で usually means \"at the age of ～\" (eg 25歳で結婚する \"to marry at the\nage of 25\"). However 4歳と14歳で生きよう refuses this interpretation, and people would\nimagine something like 14歳(の少年)と4歳(の少女)の2人で生きよう when seeing it, and understand\nhow isolated they are. The catchphrase has been abbreviated aggressively\nbecause it's a catchphrase, so you don't have to think it is a common regular\nusage of 歳で.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-30T10:43:38.503",
"id": "77721",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-30T10:43:38.503",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "77718",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
77718
| null |
77721
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77723",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> もう一軒{いっけん}と参{まい}りましょう\n\nI understand 「もう」to mainly mean \"already\" or \"soon\" but its usage in this\nsentence confuses me. Could anyone explain to me why it's natural here?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-30T11:28:13.330",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77722",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-30T12:08:49.403",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-30T11:36:08.293",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "13923",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"word-usage"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of「もう」in this sentence?",
"view_count": 99
}
|
[
{
"body": "mou means \"more\" in this sentence. so you can say \" Lets visit more house (a\nhouse)\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-30T12:08:49.403",
"id": "77723",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-30T12:08:49.403",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38502",
"parent_id": "77722",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
77722
|
77723
|
77723
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77749",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/DRXCl.jpg)\n\nWhat does this って actually mean? I've got 2 translations in my head:\n\n 1. というのは \n\n 2. と(quotative) but I can't translate this. I only know that 「犬が驚いたらしくって」means the dog looked surprised. \n\nAnd why has it changed from らしい to らしく?\n\nThank you in advance.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-30T13:01:27.273",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77726",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-31T18:29:35.363",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-31T18:29:35.363",
"last_editor_user_id": "33435",
"owner_user_id": "38446",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"particle-って"
],
"title": "って at the end of sentence",
"view_count": 532
}
|
[
{
"body": "The link provided explains why it's らしくって but not らしくて (colloquial usage). The\noriginal post also asks why らしく is used in place of the original form らしい. I\nthink it's because of the unassertive tone that is common in spoken Japanese.\nThe て-form of adjective (and verb, too) allows linking to another element. For\nexample, 可愛くてビックリした. Using the て-form at the end of the sentence therefore\nseems to suggest that the sentence can go on, but maybe the speaker doesn't\nknow what to say, or doesn't want to say what s/he has in mind. This usage is\ncommonly heard in animation. Perhaps the mood is similar to saying \"I know,\nbut...\".",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-31T09:17:32.007",
"id": "77749",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-31T18:28:12.553",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-31T18:28:12.553",
"last_editor_user_id": "33435",
"owner_user_id": "38989",
"parent_id": "77726",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
77726
|
77749
|
77749
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77728",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "When I was sentence mining, I found the following sentence:\n\n> 自分の名前も顔も出さず ただ傷つけるためだけに\n\nCould someone explain how 出さず was conjugated from 出す?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-30T13:17:22.083",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77727",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-31T18:52:36.380",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-31T18:52:36.380",
"last_editor_user_id": "33435",
"owner_user_id": "38996",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"verbs",
"conjugations"
],
"title": "How was 出さず conjugated from 出す?",
"view_count": 168
}
|
[
{
"body": "The ず-form of a verb V is usually translated as \"without doing V\". In that\nsense, it has a similar meaning to Vないで.\n\nIt is formed by taking the ない-form stem, but instead of adding ない, you add ず.\n\nSo, here: 出す (dict.f.) → 出さない (nai-f.) → 出さ (nai-f. stem) → 出さず (zu-f.).\n\nFrom what I understand, it's a hangover of a negative form used more commonly\nin classical Japanese. In modern Japanese, it is mainly used in writing,\nrather than speech, where Vないで would be preferred.\n\nHope that helps!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-30T13:34:24.220",
"id": "77728",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-31T01:43:28.497",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-31T01:43:28.497",
"last_editor_user_id": "33435",
"owner_user_id": "33435",
"parent_id": "77727",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
77727
|
77728
|
77728
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "「日本語で話し相手が誰もいませんでした。」\n\n\"I didn't have anyone to speak Japanese with.\"\n\nI feel like 誰も is unnecessary. As far as I can tell, 「日本語で話し相手がいませんでした。」 has\nevery element needed to express the English above. What nuance is lost if you\ncut out 誰も?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-30T13:36:35.527",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77729",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-30T15:43:54.710",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38808",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"word-usage"
],
"title": "What does 誰も do in this sentence, and is it needed?",
"view_count": 141
}
|
[
{
"body": "I feel like it’s a difference between “I didn’t have a partner to speak\nJapanese with” and “I didn’t have anyone as partner to speak Japanese with”.\nSo 誰も and “anyone” emphasise the fact that there was really no-one.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-30T14:20:52.027",
"id": "77731",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-30T14:20:52.027",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38989",
"parent_id": "77729",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "Question words + も ＋ negative／positive expressions means \" **totally**\nnegative/positive\"\n\n> どちら も 正しいです\n\nBoth is right.( No matter which one, is right)\n\n> 誰 も 来なかったんです\n\nNo one came. ( No matter who, no came)",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-30T15:43:54.710",
"id": "77734",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-30T15:43:54.710",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "11951",
"parent_id": "77729",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
77729
| null |
77731
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "My textbook gives the expression ''Oh!'' as ''あっ!'''.\n\nI find this strange as little tsu makes the following consonant a double\nconsonant.\n\nWhat is it doing ''phonetically'' here?\n\nIf it is supposed to be extending the あ then should it not be ああ ?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-30T14:12:10.757",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77730",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-30T15:23:51.023",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-30T14:26:27.007",
"last_editor_user_id": "29665",
"owner_user_id": "29665",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"pronunciation"
],
"title": "Is the kana for ''Oh!'' ''あっ!''?",
"view_count": 144
}
|
[
{
"body": "Depending on which kind of “Oh”, it can express...\n\n[Surprised to find something: ヘェ] [Suddenly thought of something: あっ]\n[Figuring out something, finally: ああ] (to the best of my limited knowledge)\n\nJust like in English there can be different renditions of “Oh” depending on\nthe emotions.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-30T14:55:05.620",
"id": "77732",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-30T14:55:05.620",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38989",
"parent_id": "77730",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "The half-size tsu (っ) in this case is introducing a 'glottal stop' ([see\nhere](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_phonology#Glottal_stop_insertion)).\nYou are correct that the half-size tsu is usually a feature of sokuon (marking\ngeminate consonants) but it does have other functions too, as in this case.\n\nBasically, this sounds like a sudden stop in the word. It gives the phrase あっ！\na kind of immediacy which has the effect of inserting emotion into it. In that\nsense, it is similar to the English 'Oh!' in terms of effect (interjection),\neven though the phrases are not similar phonetically. It can sometimes express\nthings like 'Wow\" or \"Oh no!\", but it depends on the context.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-30T15:18:26.370",
"id": "77733",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-30T15:23:51.023",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "77730",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
77730
| null |
77733
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I came across this sentence in my textbook:\n\n> 便利になったとはいえ、問題も **残されている** 。\n\nI notice that the sentence use passive voice of \"残す\". Is there any reason why\nit doesn't use active form as follows?\n\n> 便利になったとはいえ、問題も **残している** 。\n\nThanks in advance",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-30T16:10:00.540",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77736",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-01T02:43:02.090",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-31T12:50:28.627",
"last_editor_user_id": "35732",
"owner_user_id": "35732",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Why use 受身形 in \"便利になったとはいえ、問題も残されて\"?",
"view_count": 115
}
|
[
{
"body": "First, let's check the basic difference of the following:\n\n * 残る is **intransitive**. \"to remain/stay\"\n * 残す is **transitive**. \"to leave [something]\"\n * 残される is **the passive-form of 残す**. \"to be left\".\n\nA 問題 is something that can remain, stay or be left, but we are not talking\nabout a 問題 which is leaving something else. Therefore 問題 **が** 残して(いる) is\nwrong. 問題 **も** 残している may not be wrong because this も may have replaced を\ninstead of が, but it depends on the context.\n\n 1. 問題 **が** 残っている = 問題 **が** 残されている = There is a remaining problem.\n 2. 問題 **も** 残っている = 問題 **も** 残されている = There is also a remaining problem.\n 3. 問題 **を** 残している = [Someone] has left a problem.\n 4. 問題 **が** 残している (wrong; \"a problem left something\"?)\n 5. 問題 **も** 残している = [Someone] has also left a problem.\n\nPractically, we don't say 3 or 5 that commonly unless you are intentionally\nfocusing on the person who left the problem.\n\nWhen the subject is an inanimate object like 問題, 残っている and 残されている are\ninterchangeable. When the subject is a human, 残っている sounds like they stayed\nintentionally, whereas 残されている sounds like they were left against their will.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-31T00:42:29.523",
"id": "77742",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-01T02:43:02.090",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-01T02:43:02.090",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "77736",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
77736
| null |
77742
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have a question about the specific usage of 見えます and 見られます.\n\nAs already explained on the net, 見えます is used when something is visible to the\nspeaker or comes into view. 見られます is used instead, when the speaker wants to\nexpress that he/she \"is able to see smth\", like a movie in a theater. I hope I\ndid get that correct?\n\nI'm now struggling with a small, but tricky sentence and I just can't wrap my\nhead around it. It is, translated from German into English:\n\nFrom the (train) station, the fireworks can be seen, but from my house, they\ncan not be seen.\n\nI have translated this into:\n\n駅からは花火が見られますが、家からは見られません｡\n\nI think this sentence is tricky, because the speaker both has the potential to\n\"be able to see\" them, when the time comes, but he/she will also be able to\nsee them directly once they happen, so I am unsure of which form to use. If\nthey were happening right now (which I don't get the feeling they are), I\nwould have gone for 見えます, but as you can see, I decided for 見られます. I hope\nsomeone can further explain why that is, or is not, the case and why the other\nform can't be used.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-30T22:10:58.603",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77738",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-30T23:45:47.553",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39203",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"potential-form"
],
"title": "About the specific difference between 見えます and 見られます",
"view_count": 1209
}
|
[
{
"body": "I don't think your assumption about 見えます/見られます is correct. They are usually\ninterchangeable, and they both describe the ability (\"to be able to see\") and\nthe visibility (\"to be visible\"). See also: [「星が見えない＝Stars can't be seen」 but\n「目が見えない＝Eyes can't see」,\nwhy?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/21516/5010)\n\nWhen in doubt, you can stick to 見える, because 見られる is long and tends to have a\npassive meaning today.\n\n * 駅からは花火が見られますが、家からは見られません。\n * 駅からは花火が見えますが、家からは見えません。\n\nThese two sentences are both perfectly correct, and mean the same thing.\nPersonally, I always say the latter. The\n[ら抜き](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/36120/5010) version, 見れる, is also\ncommon in casual settings, although it's nonstandard and must be avoided in\nformal settings:\n\n * 駅からは花火が見れますが、家からは見れません。",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-30T23:45:47.553",
"id": "77741",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-30T23:45:47.553",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "77738",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
77738
| null |
77741
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "If you convert \"ななにち\" or \"しちにち\", you can get a letter \"㏦(IDEOGRAPHIC TELEGRAPH\nSYMBOL FOR DAY SEVEN). Doing \"きゅうにち\" or \"くにち\", you can get a letter\n\"㏨(IDEOGRAPHIC TELEGRAPH SYMBOL FOR DAY NINE). When I say the 7th or 9th day\nof the month, instead of \"なのか\" or \"ここのか\", \"にち\" form is often used. Question is\nhere:\n\ni) You can also use \"にち\" form rather than \"なのか\" for the 7th. In this case, are\nboth \"ななにち\" and \"しちにち\" used?\n\nii) You can also use \"にち\" form rather than \"ここのか\" for the 9th. In this case,\nare both \"きゅうにち\" and \"くにち\" used?\n\nOne more: When we count 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, they will be\n\"じゅう、にじゅう、さんじゅう、 **よん** じゅう、ごじゅう、ろくじゅう、 **なな** じゅう、はちじゅう、 **きゅう** じゅう、ひゃく\".\nWhy are the expressions \" **し** じゅう for 40, **しち** じゅう for 70 and **く** じゅう\nfor 90\" wrong?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-30T22:22:16.927",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77739",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-31T03:56:18.487",
"last_edit_date": "2020-05-31T03:56:18.487",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "39179",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -3,
"tags": [
"numbers"
],
"title": "Regarding 7日, 9日, and counting 40, 70, 90",
"view_count": 160
}
|
[
{
"body": "Always say なのか and ここのか, and don't use ななにち/しちにち/くにち/きゅうにち. They are\nunderstandable, but wrong. They are as wrong as saying \"fiveth\" instead of\n\"fifth\". But we do say じゅうななにち/じゅうしちにち (17th), にじゅうきゅうにち/にじゅうくにち (29th), etc.\n\nThe IME I usually use (ATOK) does not recognize ななにち and くにち as a word, and of\ncourse it does not convert them to ㏦ or ㏨. It looks like MS-IME somehow\n\"knows\" ななにち and くにち, but I would say it's an idiosyncratic behavior.\nSometimes IMEs intentionally include a wrong reading of a word for the sake of\nconvenience, so you should not use them like authoritative dictionaries. For\nexample, ATOK \"knows\" ふいんき, which is a wrong reading of 雰囲気 (ふんいき;\n\"atmosphere\"). MS-IME does not know such a reading.\n\nOn the other hand, しじゅう, しちじゅう are not wrong, but it sounds old or dialectal.\nくじゅう is now rare except in certain proper nouns. よん and なな are more\ndistinctive than いち/しち/し, so they are preferred, especially in math and\nfinancial contexts.\n\n * [How to choose between \"よん\" (yon) vs \"し\" (shi) for \"四\" (4) and \"しち\" (shichi) vs \"なな\" (nana) for \"七\" (7)?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/328/5010)\n * [How do you do a countdown?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/2364/5010)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-30T23:25:18.123",
"id": "77740",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-30T23:25:18.123",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "77739",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
77739
| null |
77740
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77745",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Both these words seem to mean \"worry-free\" or optimistic. A quick\n[check](https://thesaurus.weblio.jp/content/%E6%A5%BD%E8%A6%B3%E7%9A%84%E3%81%AB%E8%A6%8B%E3%82%8B)\non Weblio somehow validates this. How do these words differ in terms of\nnuance? のんき is also said to mean\n[careless](https://tangorin.com/definition/%E3%81%AE%E3%82%93%E3%81%8D) and\nother things that have a negative connotation in English, but I cannot see\nsample sentences that support these negative qualities (unlike, say,\n[そそっかしい](https://tangorin.com/definition/%E3%81%9D%E3%81%9D%E3%81%A3%E3%81%8B%E3%81%97%E3%81%84)).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-31T04:30:29.980",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77743",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-01T05:22:46.337",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29327",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"word-choice",
"nuances"
],
"title": "What's the difference: 楽観的 vs のんき",
"view_count": 711
}
|
[
{
"body": "のんき is about temper. A のんきな人 is always calm (often to a fault), slow to start\ndoing something, and rarely gets serious/angry. The antonym is 短気 (short-\ntempered) or せわしい (restless).\n\n楽観的 is about one's way of thinking. A 楽観的な人 is an optimistic person who\nbelieves \"It's gonna be okay\". The antonym is 悲観的 (pessimistic). You can use\n楽観的 to describe your attitude about one specific issue. For example,\n私はこの件に関して楽観的です means \"I am optimistic about this issue\". 楽観的 does not\nnecessarily modify a person/personality. You can say 楽観的な予測 \"optimistic\nestimate\", for example.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-31T07:24:40.343",
"id": "77745",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-01T05:22:46.337",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-01T05:22:46.337",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "77743",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
77743
|
77745
|
77745
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77759",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In this wiki:\n[https://ja.wiktionary.org/wiki/うらめしい](https://ja.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E3%81%86%E3%82%89%E3%82%81%E3%81%97%E3%81%84),\nthe word \"恨めしい\" is simply explained as \"憎らしい\" in one of its items.\n\nAre there any differences?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-31T07:27:52.633",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77746",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-01T02:40:30.537",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35642",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "the difference between 恨めしい and 憎らしい",
"view_count": 122
}
|
[
{
"body": "You could have used a better dictionary. There are better free online ones\nlike デジタル大辞泉. But here's what 明鏡国語辞典 says:\n\n> ### 恨めしい\n>\n> ①ひどい仕打ち（をした相手）に、怒りや憎しみや不満などを感じる。恨みたくなる気持ちだ。「裏切られたことが━」「一方的な解雇を━・く思う」\n>\n> ②思い通りにならなくて、残念だ。「足が痛くて歩けないのが━」「己おのれの軽率さ［無情の雨］が━」「恨めしそうに雨天の空を仰ぐ」\n\nOne meaning of 恨めしい is like \"vengeful\". It's a strong word used after someone\nhas been badly affected by someone. Stereotypical Japanese ghosts\n([幽霊](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y%C5%ABrei)) use this word often. See\nalso: [Translation of うらめしや](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/54065/5010)\n\n憎らしい is like \"odious\" or \"hateful\", and is used in a wider variety of\nsituations. Basically it's an antonym of \"lovable\". You can safely say\n憎らしい笑い方だ when you saw someone for the first time on TV. You can jokingly\npraise someone like 憎らしいほどに強い \"He's so strong I almost hate him\".",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-01T02:40:30.537",
"id": "77759",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-01T02:40:30.537",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "77746",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
77746
|
77759
|
77759
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I recently found the following sentence:\n\n> 何もこんな所に立ち寄る必要もなかったのではないか。\n\nThe translation I can roughly make is:\n\n> There's absolutely no need _[for her, the character they're talking about]_\n> to stay in this place, is it?\n\n...but I'm having trouble parsing this use of 何も.\n\nFrom what I understand, grammatically this is formed by having 何も + noun +\nではないか, with \"noun\" being the noun-ified (not sure how to say that in English)\nーの version of こんな所に立ち寄る必要もなかった.\n\nSo, if my interpretation is correct, can 何も really be attached to larger\nsentence groups like this? How would you translate it?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-31T08:58:57.687",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77748",
"last_activity_date": "2020-05-31T12:15:46.937",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "14465",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Can 何も be used with large grammatical constructions?",
"view_count": 71
}
|
[] |
77748
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77778",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In [this\nquestion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/39508/i-couldnt-\nunderstand-this-\nstructure-%E4%BD%8F%E3%82%93%E3%81%A7%E3%81%84%E3%81%9F%E6%99%82), there is a\nsentence\n\n> 私はローマに住んでいた時に子供でした。\n\nMy question is: do we need to consider relative tense here?\n\nCan we say 住んでいる時 to mean that the event that I was living in Rome (A) and the\nthen fact that I was a child (B) happened simultaneously (at least living in\nRome didn't come before being a child)?\n\nIn this [link](https://www.learn-japanese-adventure.com/toki-in-\njapanese.html), I found two example sentences\n\n> ご飯を食べている時、山田さんがうちへ来ました。\n>\n> ゆうべ寝ている時、地震がありました。\n\nBoth use 〜ている時 instead of 〜ていた時 to mean \"was doing something\". So why do we\nuse 住んでいた時 rather than 住んでいる時 to mean \"was living\"?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-31T16:21:17.697",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77753",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-02T10:11:55.727",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "33235",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"tense",
"relative-tense"
],
"title": "住んでいた時 or 住んでいる時",
"view_count": 530
}
|
[
{
"body": "I am not a Japanese grammar expert but just a native Japanese speaker. \nI think you can say 「ローマに住んでいる時、子供でした。」.\n\n> ローマに住んでいた時、子供でした \n> ローマに住んでいる時、子供でした\n\nI personally think there is no difference between the meanings. \n\nHowever, as the comment of the [original\nquestion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/39508/i-couldnt-\nunderstand-this-\nstructure-%E4%BD%8F%E3%82%93%E3%81%A7%E3%81%84%E3%81%9F%E6%99%82) mentioned,\nthe sentence 「ローマに住んでいる時、子供でした。」is a little bit wired even though it is\ngrammatically correct. \n\n「子供の時、ローマに住んでいました」is I think most natural way to say it. \nOr if you want to put 「子供でした」at the end of the sentence, you can say\n「ローマに住んでいた(る)時は、子供でした。」\n\nThe reason why I feel the original sentence is wired is I think that\n\n 1. A part before \"、\" is much longer than the rest of the sentence(or sentence after \"、\" is too short compare with the former part).\n 2. Usually, the information \"you were a child at the time\" is less important than the information \"where you lived in your childhood\". So If you add \"は\" after \"時\", I can smoothly understand the information that \"You were child at the time\" is main theme of this sentence and I can feel the sentence more natural",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-02T08:11:19.903",
"id": "77777",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-02T08:11:19.903",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "34569",
"parent_id": "77753",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "Some key points to consider when analysing your sentences:\n\n**1.** Using the terminology of the Dictionary of Japanese Grammar series,\nyour sentences are of the format `S1 toki S2` (Sentence 1 とき Sentence 2). \n**2.** According to that dictionary's explanation (p493 of 'A Dictionary of\nBasic Japanese Grammar'), when S2 is past tense and S1 expresses a state, you\ncan use either past or nonpast in S1. \n**3.** The verb 'live' is usually considered to be a stative verb (a verb that\nexpresses state), at least in English [(here, for\nexample)](https://www.thoughtco.com/stative-verb-1692139). \n**4.** Therefore, since S2 is past (でした) and S1 expresses a state (住む), the\nverb in S1 can be either past (住んでいた) or nonpast (住んでいる). The meaning is\nidentical for the phrases, according to their definition.\n\n**5.** While your examples are grammatically correct, it would still be more\nnatural to use the sentence 子供の時、ローマに住んでいました, as pointed out by another user.\nThis construction emphasises that you are talking about a period of time in\nchildhood. The 'living in Rome' time period is a subset of the total\n'childhood' time period, not vice versa. As an analogy, consider how a similar\nrestructuring might sound in English:\n\n> (A) I lived in Rome and I was a child. \n> (B) I was a child when I lived in Rome.\n\nThese are not direct translations of your sentences but the point is that show\nthat while both are grammatically correct, Sentence A sounds strange because\nof the emphasis on living in Rome. Sentence B sounds natural because the\nrelationship between the elements is correct.\n\n**6.** The rules are different if the S1 expresses an action.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-02T10:11:55.727",
"id": "77778",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-02T10:11:55.727",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "77753",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
77753
|
77778
|
77777
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "Context: the speaker is a little worried about giving her real name during\nregistration, and says,「本名そのままって いうのもアレだし。どうしょうかな。」\n\nBecause of the context, I understand the meaning in this example. But what\ndoes 「アレだし」mean in general? When can one use it?\n\nA secondary question (not sure if it's related to the main question): why\n「いうのも」rather than 「いうのは」?\n\nThanks!",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-05-31T17:42:26.057",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77754",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-01T02:09:15.977",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "10268",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "What does アレだし mean?",
"view_count": 298
}
|
[] |
77754
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77758",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I check [trending words](https://www.weblio.jp/) in Weblio every so often, and\nI always see コロナ禍. I checked the reading of the relatively rare kanji and it\nsaid わざわい which reminded me of 災い (which I believe was the kanji of 2004 and\n2018). What's the difference between the two?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-01T00:59:05.030",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77755",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-01T15:35:08.917",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29327",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"kanji"
],
"title": "What's the difference between 災い and 禍",
"view_count": 512
}
|
[
{
"body": "According to 新明解漢和辞典\n\n災: 運が悪くてであうわざわい、自然のわざわいの意 「天ー」\n\n禍: X福。ふしあわせ、思いがけのないわざわいの意 「奇ー」\n\n災: unfortunate disaster, natural disaster\n\n禍: opposite of 福. unhappiness, unexpected disaster\n\nSee also:\n\n「災」は防ぎようのない天災\n\n「禍」は人為的な努力によって防ぐことができる事柄\n\n災い is for a natural disaster with no way of prevention.\n\n禍 is for circumstances which can be prevented through artificial (human)\neffort\n\n<https://docoic.com/55173#i-2>",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-01T01:09:21.227",
"id": "77756",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-01T01:52:10.960",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-01T01:52:10.960",
"last_editor_user_id": "7953",
"owner_user_id": "7953",
"parent_id": "77755",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "The common readings of 禍 are まが (as in 禍々しい) and カ. コロナ禍 is read ころな **か** ,\nwhere this 禍 is a kind of suffix which cannot be replaced by 災い.\n\nAccording to dictionaries, わざわい can be written both as 災い and 禍, but the\nlatter is a little-known reading used almost exclusively in aesthetic writing\n(usually with furigana). Some novelists like to use rare kanji just to add\nflavor, but most people can safely stick to 災い when they write something.\n\nStill, I personally feel a subtle difference in nuance between 災い and 禍. The\nkanji 禍 is often associated with supernatural ominous things like curse or\ndemonic creatures (try an image search for 禍々しい). At least in fiction, 禍 may\ntend to be chosen to emphasize such \"cursed\", \"dark\" or \"impure\" atmosphere.\n\nSimilar examples include 哭く【なく】, 嗤う【わらう】 and 斃れる【たおれる】. These rare kanji do\nhave subtle added nuance as compared to more mundane 泣く/笑う/倒れる, but most\nlaypeople should not use them unless they want to be frowned upon for showing\noff their knowledge.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-01T01:56:13.413",
"id": "77758",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-01T15:35:08.917",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-01T15:35:08.917",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "77755",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
}
] |
77755
|
77758
|
77758
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77762",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "How to read \"(x+y)^z\" in Japanese?\n\nIs this correct?\n\nかっこ ｘ たす ｙ かっこーとじ の ｚ じ\n\nKakko x tasu y kakko-toji no z jo",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-01T03:27:24.477",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77760",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-01T07:31:13.860",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-01T07:31:13.860",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "39210",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"mathematics"
],
"title": "How to read \"(x+y)^z\" in Japanese?",
"view_count": 1455
}
|
[
{
"body": "Please read this first: [Standard mathematical operations, expressed in\nJapanese](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/56962/5010)\n\nAs described in the question above, there are several approaches to read this.\nThe most simple approach is to read each symbol one by one. This `^` symbol\ncan be read ハット, キャレット or 累乗【るいじょう】.\n\n> かっこ エックス たす ワイ かっことじ るいじょう ゼット\n\nMore naturally, the expression xn can be read as \"xのn乗\" (エックス の エヌ じょう; \"x to\nthe power of n-th\"). With this, you can read it like this:\n\n> かっこ エックス たす ワイ かっことじ の ゼット じょう\n\nIf you omit かっこ/かっことじ and say it like this:\n\n> エックス たす ワイ の ゼット じょう\n\n...it may be taken as x + yz rather than (x + y)z. This may be okay if\neveryone is actually seeing the expression on a screen or a blackboard.\n\nYou can avoid this ambiguity by using 和【わ】:\n\n> エックス と ワイ の わ の ゼット じょう \n> (literally, \"x-and-y's sum, to the z-th power\")\n\nNote that にじょう is \"to the second\" or \"square\" (x2), not n-th power in general\n(xn).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-01T04:59:38.787",
"id": "77762",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-01T04:59:38.787",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "77760",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
77760
|
77762
|
77762
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I recently see this sentence:\n\n> 日本へ美術の勉強に行きます\n\nPrevious lesson, I learnt that to express \"to learn something\", we use the\npattern:\n\n> N (The subject to learn) + を + 勉強する\n\nBut the first sentence uses の instead.\n\nIs it a typo or is there anything wrong with my understanding here?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-01T04:58:45.187",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77761",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-01T05:04:50.757",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-01T05:02:54.560",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "38848",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles"
],
"title": "Which is correct: の or を + 勉強に",
"view_count": 85
}
|
[] |
77761
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77792",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Is \"A ディバイディッド・バイB イコールC\" the correct Katakana translation of \"A ÷ B = C\"?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-01T05:38:30.370",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77763",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-03T04:46:53.420",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-01T06:53:41.110",
"last_editor_user_id": "39210",
"owner_user_id": "39210",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -3,
"tags": [
"mathematics"
],
"title": "Is \"A ディバイディッド・バイB イコールC\" the correct Katakana translation of \"A ÷ B = C\"?",
"view_count": 141
}
|
[
{
"body": "This question is a little more interesting than it seems because convention vs\npronunciation is always an issue when discussing the choice for\ntransliteration of foreign words.\n\n\"Equals\", as in A+B _equals_ C, is pronounced with voiced s, so it should\nprobably transliterated as イコールズ. However plain イコール is sometimes used in\nJapanese language too, both in mathematics and in figurative usages. Both is\npossible, but イコールズ might indicate that you do care about the actual\npronunciation (ref. 原音主義).\n\nDivided is pronounced with -/id/, so it would most naturally be transliterated\nwith ディバイディッド. For this word there's no established convention either.\nHowever, we somehow tend to be tricked by the spelling --- one famous being\nmoney vs マネー --- and some people might choose ディバイデッド instead. Actually, the\ngame \"Deus Ex: Mankind Divided\" is sold under the label of [デウスエクス\nマンカインド・ディバイデッド](https://www.jp.square-enix.com/deusex/top.html).\n\nIn this case the choice is yours (I, for one, am eager to endorse the original\npronunciation: thus I'd use ディバイディッド and イコールズ). イコール might sound more natural\nas Japanese. Using イコールズ and ディバイデッド alongside can be inconsistent.\n\nEdit: I didn't recognize your comment in the question. For teaching English\nlearners how to read the equation, definitely use イコールズ and ディバイディッド. However\nit would be more beneficial for them to avoid katakana at all, because they'll\nsoon be stuck with multiple difficulties. Refer, for example, [the oxford\ndictionary](https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/divided?q=divided)\nfor a sensible style for expressing the pronunciation. If they're learning\nEnglish, let them learn in English, rather than having them mimick it.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-03T04:34:54.960",
"id": "77792",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-03T04:46:53.420",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-03T04:46:53.420",
"last_editor_user_id": "4223",
"owner_user_id": "4223",
"parent_id": "77763",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
77763
|
77792
|
77792
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "In Chinese the order is reversed such that:\n\nNE 东北\n\nNW 西北\n\nSE 东南\n\nSW 西南\n\nMy textbook says the Japanese order is the same as English which surprised me.\n\nWas it or is it ever said using the Chinese order?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-01T05:51:32.723",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77764",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-01T05:51:32.723",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29665",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "Are the directions NE, NW, SE and SW ever read the Chinese way?",
"view_count": 38
}
|
[] |
77764
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77767",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was looking for sample sentences for 面(おもて) when I saw these sentences in my\ndictionary.\n\n> 決める前にこの問題を、あらゆる面(おもて)から考えてみよう。 Let's consider the problem in all its\n> bearings before making a decision.\n>\n> 倫理の面(おもて)で、たくさんの人々が遺伝子治療に反対している In ethical terms, a great many people are\n> opposed to gene therapy.\n\nI would not be surprised if it were read as めん, but is おもて a valid reading in\nthis context?",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-01T09:08:37.277",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77765",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-02T02:19:06.817",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "29327",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"readings"
],
"title": "Proper reading of 面",
"view_count": 189
}
|
[
{
"body": "According to\n[goo辞書](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E9%9D%A2_%28%E3%81%8A%E3%82%82%E3%81%A6%29/),\n面{おもて} is explained in the header as\n\n《「おも（面）」に、方向・方面を表す「て」の付いたもの。 **正面のほう** 、の意》\n\nbefore the items in the section. So, the basic meaning is in the front of\nsomething if you pronounce it as 面{おもて} .\n\nI think the word : 面 has to be pronounced as 面{めん} in your sentences because\nit is close to \"facet/aspect\" in meaning. You might want to see something in\nany angles and not limited to the front of something.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-01T13:42:40.133",
"id": "77767",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-01T13:42:40.133",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "34735",
"parent_id": "77765",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
77765
|
77767
|
77767
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "According to the Demon Slayer wiki, this is how you write **\"Twelve Demon\nMoons\"** in Japanese but I'm not sure if this is correct.\n\nAlso according to the wiki, it's read as **\"Jūnikizuki\"**. I'm confused why\nit's not read as \"Jūni Onitsuki\".\n\n 1. Are there other ways to read or write Twelve Demon Moons in Japanese?\n 2. Is the wiki wrong?\n\nI understand \"zuki\" is the moon, but the word \"ki\" I'm not sure.\n\nI'm really interested on how this is read and the explanations behind it. I\nthink this will provide me and others some more understanding about how\nJapanese is written and read.\n\nThank you.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-01T10:43:56.330",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77766",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-01T17:02:46.317",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39214",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"translation",
"words"
],
"title": "How do you read and translate \"十二鬼月\" in Japanese and English?",
"view_count": 499
}
|
[
{
"body": "Japanese has two different types of readings for kanji: on-yomi and kun-yomi.\nThis has to do with the ancient history of how kanji was introduced into the\nJapanese writing system (which you could read more about\n[here](https://www.tofugu.com/japanese/onyomi-kunyomi/) if you wanted).\n\nWhen you look up a kanji in a dictionary, all the readings are listed. For\nexample, [this site](https://jisho.org/search/%E9%AC%BC%20%23kanji) lists the\nreadings for this kanji (鬼). And under the on-readings you see the reading キ\n(ki) which is the one that is used in this word.\n\nFor information about when each reading type is used you can see questions\nlike [this one](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/17696/how-are-\nthe-different-pronunciations-of-kanji-used-such-as-onyomi-and-kunyomi).\n\nIf you look up [月](https://jisho.org/search/%E6%9C%88%20%23kanji) you'll note\nthat づき (zuki) is not one of the readings, but つき (tsuki) is. The reason づき is\nused here is because of something called rendaku, where sometimes sounds are\nchanged based on the sounds that come before it. See more about rendaku\n[here](https://www.tofugu.com/japanese/rendaku/) if you're interested.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-01T17:02:46.317",
"id": "77769",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-01T17:02:46.317",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "31553",
"parent_id": "77766",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
77766
| null |
77769
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77771",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was reading the\n[news](https://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/html/20200531/k10012452431000.html) when I\nsaw the sentence with 上で (see the sentence with highlight).\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/KyTaj.png)\n\nI was thinking if it should be read as うえ or じょう。I am inclined to read this as\nじょう because it doesn't fit into the expression うえで which shows that something\nhappens _after_ one thing, but at the same time, I am not 100% sure because I\nhaven't seen じょう (which probably means \"being of the type of\" based on\nrikaikun add-on) in this context before.\n\nSure, I have seen じょう in contexts presented in\n[here](https://japanesetest4you.com/flashcard/learn-\njlpt-n2-grammar-%E3%81%98%E3%82%87%E3%81%86-jou/) where it means \"for the sake\nof, from the standpoint of\" but I don't think the sentence in question falls\nunder this category of じょう。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-02T01:05:32.010",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77770",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-02T02:04:50.620",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-02T02:04:50.620",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "29327",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"readings",
"parsing",
"suffixes"
],
"title": "Reading of 上 in the sentence:じょう or うえ",
"view_count": 214
}
|
[
{
"body": "You are of course correct to consider the various more grammatical usages of\n上, but in this case, its meaning happens to have a fairly direct\ncorrespondence to one of its simpler/normal translations into English, of\n\"on\".\n\nインターネット上（で） is an expression, where 「上」 is read 「じょう」, meaning \" **on** the\nInternet\". I have less commonly heard an equivalent expression インターネット **の**\n上（で） where the 「上」 read 「うえ」.\n\nThe relevant clause in the text「急きょ制作した動画をインターネット上で公開し」therefore simply says\nthat they made the rapidly-produced video available on the internet.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-02T01:25:31.940",
"id": "77771",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-02T01:51:52.490",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-02T01:51:52.490",
"last_editor_user_id": "33435",
"owner_user_id": "33435",
"parent_id": "77770",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
77770
|
77771
|
77771
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77775",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Generally, when we read or count, 4, 7 and 9 are read only as \"よん\", \"なな\",\n\"きゅう\", seperately. However, in some cases, 4 is read as \"よ\" rather than \"よん\",\n7 is read as \"しち\" rather than \"なな\", and 9 is read as \"く\" rather than \"きゅう\".\nTherefore, I would like to ask some question.\n\ni) When is 4 read as \"よ\", \"よん\", or both?\n\nii) When is 7 read as \"しち\", \"なな\", or both?\n\niii) When is 9 read as \"く\", \"きゅう\", or both?\n\niv) Why do we not say \"しじゅう\", \"しちじゅう\", and \"くじゅう\" when counting 1 to 100?",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-02T03:10:13.963",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77772",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-02T15:02:48.243",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-02T15:02:48.243",
"last_editor_user_id": "33435",
"owner_user_id": "39179",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"pronunciation"
],
"title": "Why do some numbers have two readings?",
"view_count": 319
}
|
[
{
"body": "When you say \"four\" or \"nine\" on its own, it's almost always よん and きゅう in\nmodern Japanese. しち is somehow relatively common as a standalone word, too,\nbut you can always stick to なな. (いち, に, さん and し are on-readings but よん is a\nkun-reading. However, よん took the place of し for the most part, because し was\naurally less distinctive and [し is associated to\ndeath](https://www.tofugu.com/japan/number-four-superstition/). なな are\npreferred especially in math or financial contexts because しち sounds a bit\nsimilar to いち.).\n\nHowever, し, しち and く are used in the following contexts.\n\n * In month names: 四月【しがつ】, 七月【しちがつ】, 九月【くがつ】 (なながつ is uncommon but acceptable. よんがつ and きゅうがつ sound very strange.)\n * In 七時【しちじ】 and 九時【くじ】 (4 o'clock is よじ, not しじ. ななじ is also acceptable. きゅうじ is always wrong.)\n * In fixed (usu. on-on) compounds: [四方【しほう】](https://jisho.org/word/%E5%9B%9B%E6%96%B9), [七五三【しちごさん】](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shichi-Go-San), [九九【くく】](https://jisho.org/word/%E4%B9%9D%E4%B9%9D)\n * In さんし, ろくしち, etc. (see: [What is the correct expression of 10/20, 20/30, 30/40 etc?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/68582/5010))\n * To describe an age without 歳/才: 十九【じゅうく】の春, 二十四【にじゅうし】で嫁に行く, 四十【しじゅう】からの健康法 (I don't know why, but this is probably a poetic/literary custom? Usually you can say 二十四歳【にじゅうよんさい】, etc.)\n * When you count **up** only using on-yomi (see: [How do you do a countdown?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/2364/5010))\n * As mnemonics to remember numbers (see: [Rules for slang of Japanese numbers](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/853/5010))\n * Old speakers of some dialects may say しじゅう/しちじゅう/くじゅう.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-02T05:37:47.217",
"id": "77775",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-02T05:37:47.217",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "77772",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
77772
|
77775
|
77775
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77774",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I’m my text book I have a statement that I couldn’t quite get my head around.\n美味しさに国境はない 。 I punched it into translate and it came up “there is no border in\ntaste.” But for this to mean that it would have to read 美味しさの中に国境はない。 I’d\nappreciate it if someone could explain :). Thanks.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-02T03:31:57.100",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77773",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-02T04:44:27.643",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38484",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"translation"
],
"title": "美味しさに国境はない correct meaning",
"view_count": 276
}
|
[
{
"body": "美味しさに国境はない means the concept of 美味しさ itself is universal. In plain words, it\nsimply means every language has a word that means \"delicious\", and everyone in\nthe world likes something yummy rather than something yucky. (Another possible\ninterpretation is \"what is delicious in one country is also delicious in other\ncountries\", but this is a controvertible statement. I don't think everyone in\nthe world understands the taste of _natto_. Still, the interpretation somewhat\ndepends on the context.)\n\nYou don't need 中に in a sentence like this. 中 rather explicitly means \"inside\",\nand 美味しさの中にある国境 doesn't make much sense to me.\n\n`～に(は)～{がある/はない}` typically takes a person as the subject (see examples\n[here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/75074/5010)), but it has broader\nusages. Similar phrases I came up with:\n\n * 君の可能性に限界はない。 Your possibility is limitless.\n * このゲームにエンディングはない。 This game has no ending.\n * 戦争に正義はない。 There is no justice in war (i.e., war is always wrong no matter what).\n * 戦争に悪はない。 There is no evil in war (i.e., everyone fights believing they are right).",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-02T04:38:46.510",
"id": "77774",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-02T04:44:27.643",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-02T04:44:27.643",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "77773",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
77773
|
77774
|
77774
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77780",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "旅行代金の請求書の控えを2枚目 **に** 送った This に here, what does it mean.\n\nHere's the context (The question doesn't appear in picture below)\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/onud3.jpg)\n\nThere's a context saying 枚数: 本状を含めて2枚 ,so I think the bill has 2 pages.\n\nI tried translating 旅行代金の請求書の控えを2枚目 **に** 送った and it was like \" sent travel\nbill duplicate **as** the second page\"\n\nPS. In this post I use \"Travel bill\" as 旅行代金の請求書, Duplicate as 控え because I'm\nnot good at English. Sorry for that.\n\nThank you in advance",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-02T10:47:51.563",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77779",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-02T11:27:52.750",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38446",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"particle-に"
],
"title": "に usage and meaning in 旅行代金の請求書の控えを2枚目に送った",
"view_count": 71
}
|
[
{
"body": "2枚目 **に** 'on the second page' or 'attached to the second page'. \nSeems like a standard usage of に to me. You could translate as follows:\n\n> 旅行代金の請求書の控えを2枚目に送った\n>\n> I sent a copy of the travel bill, attached to the second page.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-02T11:27:52.750",
"id": "77780",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-02T11:27:52.750",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "77779",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
77779
|
77780
|
77780
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77782",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Having figured out what to do, the protagonist says「これで決定」. Later, having\npicked one option out of several, she says 「これに決めた」.\n\nWhat's the difference in the meaning between these, and why are the particles\ndifferent (で / に)?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-02T13:05:31.343",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77781",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-03T07:17:30.847",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-03T07:17:30.847",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "10268",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"particles"
],
"title": "これで決定 vs これに決めた",
"view_count": 141
}
|
[
{
"body": "I think these two これs are referring to different things.\n\nIn **これで** 決定, これ is referring to the current situation (i.e. what just\nhappened) so a translation would be \"and with this/because of this, I have\ndecided\". This これ is not talking about **what** was decided. [See this\nlink](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/25698/what-is-\nthe-%E3%81%93%E3%82%8C%E3%81%A7-in-%E3%81%93%E3%82%8C%E3%81%A7%E5%A4%B1%E7%A4%BC%E3%81%97%E3%81%BE%E3%81%99).\n\nIn これ **に** 決めた, これ **is** talking about what was decided. \"I decided **on**\nthis\".",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-02T13:45:53.883",
"id": "77782",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-02T13:45:53.883",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"parent_id": "77781",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
77781
|
77782
|
77782
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77784",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 若い時にいい友達『を』作ることはとても大事だ。 \n> “It is very important to make friends when one is young.”\n\n“To make” is not a noun, it's an infinitive. It should be “making friends” no?\nI understand that it turns the verb into a gerund, but why is it in the\ninfinitive here? I don’t get it.\n\n(Sentence is from the basic grammar dictionary).\n\nP.s.: I know it says ことは but the example is listed under ことが in my dictionary.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-02T15:06:44.633",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77783",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-02T15:37:05.117",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-02T15:27:29.290",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "37089",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"particles",
"syntax",
"kana"
],
"title": "ことが as an infinitive?",
"view_count": 174
}
|
[
{
"body": "Firstly, classing Japanese verbs can't be done in the same way as with English\nverbs. The linguistic terminology is generally different because of the\nincongruities between the languages. While you can call the English verb \"to\nmake\" an infinitive, calling 作る or 作ること an infinitive is not quite correct. It\nis sometimes known as the Dictionary form, or Plain form, but Tsujimoto (1996)\nrefers to these as verbs where the nonpast tense 'ru' is attached to verbal\nroots. While this may sound somewhat abstract, the broad definition reflects\nthe wide range of usages observed in this verb category. It sometimes\nfunctions differently than infinitives function in English.\n\nSecondly, こと in this context is generally referred to as a 'nominalizer', in\nthat it turns the preceding phrase into a noun phrase which can then be\nmodified in the same way nouns are. See\n[this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/46565/%E3%81%93%E3%81%A8-vs-%E3%81%AE-\nin-this-sentence) thread for a more detailed explanation of nominalizers in\nJapanese.\n\nFinally, the は in this sentence seems to be a standard usage, as a topic\nmarker. If this sentence was preceded by some contrastive statement, you could\nargue that it is a contrastive usage of は. Either way, it seems to be a normal\nusage. I think you would benefit from reading [this\nthread](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/22/whats-the-difference-\nbetween-wa-%E3%81%AF-and-ga-%E3%81%8C) which discusses the difference between\nthe usages of は and が.\n\n_[An Introduction to Japanese Linguistics (Tsujimoto, 1996)]_",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-02T15:37:05.117",
"id": "77784",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-02T15:37:05.117",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "77783",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
77783
|
77784
|
77784
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "> 痛みを伴わない教訓には意味が無い・・・\n>\n> 人は何かの犠牲なしに何も得る事などできないのだから\n\nI usually see など used like \"etc. / things like / and others\", I was wondering\nif it's the same word here, though it sounds kind of odd if I put it this\nway.. I don't really understand what it adds to the sentence.\n\nSpeaking of humans, that is why without something as a sacrifice, nothing\netc.. is able to be obtained.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-02T15:56:22.990",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77785",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-03T02:08:06.477",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "38878",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"particle-など"
],
"title": "What is など in this sentence?",
"view_count": 156
}
|
[] |
77785
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "A Japanese friend, a woman in her seventies who comes from Sapporo and has\nlong resided in Tokyo, and who does not speak in a strong Hokkaido dialect,\nwrites several times in a letter to me the -て form of a verb followed by\nらっしせる. I've never seen this before. Examples in her letter: 近づけてらっしせる and\n出かけてらっしせる. Is this some unusual form of the auxiliary or suffix adjective らしい,\nwhich means \"like\" or \"appearing\" or \"seeming\"? Thank you!",
"comment_count": 12,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-02T18:57:58.937",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77786",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-02T19:53:39.763",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-02T19:53:39.763",
"last_editor_user_id": "39228",
"owner_user_id": "39228",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"suffixes"
],
"title": "What is the suffix らっしせる?",
"view_count": 112
}
|
[] |
77786
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77791",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "As I understood so far, 撮る is a transitive verb, so \"to take a photograph\" is\n写真 **を** 撮る in Japanese.\n\nHowever, I've just come across a sentence in my textbook that uses the\nexpression 写真に撮る, and I'm not sure if I understand it. Does it mean the same\nthan 写真を撮る, or does it actually mean something different?\n\nThe sentence is part of a typical fill-the-gap-with-a-suitable-particle (or\nleave it blank) exercise:\n\n> この公園では猿【さる】が子供を育てている（ ）ところ（ ）写真 **に** 撮ることが出来る。In this park, it is possible\n> to take a photo where the monkeys are feeding their children.\n\nI think that the answers to the parentheses are blank「 」and「で」 respectively. I\nam sure about the first one, but not so sure about the second:\n\n> この公園では猿【さる】が子供を育てているところで写真 **に** 撮ることが出来る。\n\nMaybe I'm just wrong and therefore it's getting me more confused. I would\nrather say:\n\n> この公園では猿【さる】が子供を育てているところで写真 **を** 撮ることが出来る。\n\nMeaning-wise, does it make a difference to replace に by を in this sentence?\nand more importantly, are they interchangeable in general when it comes to\n写真を/に撮る ?\n\nI suspect my doubt might be related to this [answer where they discuss\n写真に収める](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/50272/32952), but it concerns a\ndifferent verb so I'm not sure either.\n\nAny help is much appreciated.\n\nよろしくお願いします。",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-02T22:29:02.617",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77788",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-03T12:00:02.607",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-02T23:41:25.643",
"last_editor_user_id": "10045",
"owner_user_id": "32952",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"particles",
"particle-に",
"particle-を"
],
"title": "What is the difference between 写真を撮る and 写真に撮る?",
"view_count": 479
}
|
[
{
"body": "So, I'm grasping at straws a little, but I can see some sort of logic... I\nwould say that\n\n> この公園では猿が子供を育てている（x）ところ（を）写真に撮ることが出来る。\n\nis the right way to fill in the blanks. I feel like you _need_ the を somewhere\nif the 写真 isn't being 撮る’d. So why is the 猿が子供を育てているところ is being 撮る’d in my\nsuggestion?\n\nTo explain that, I think it's helpful to view the とる family of verbs (取る・撮る・捕る\netc.) as all having a sense of 'capturing' rather than ‘taking’ (however\nloosely!), so I'd rationalise it that instead of \"taking the photo\", you are\nactually \"capturing the moment that 〜\" i.e. 〜ところを撮る, within/onto a photo i.e.\n写真に.\n\nI would therefore posit that there is a slight change of emphasis away from\nthe actual action of taking a photo with 〜の写真を撮る, to a more whimsical notion\nof capturing a moment/memory using a photo with 〜ところを写真に撮る.\n\nI am, however, not particularly sure in this instance, so happy to be\ncorrected by a native speaker!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-03T00:46:45.627",
"id": "77791",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-03T12:00:02.607",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-03T12:00:02.607",
"last_editor_user_id": "33435",
"owner_user_id": "33435",
"parent_id": "77788",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
77788
|
77791
|
77791
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was looking for (I fell in love with you), but did find more than one\noption. Could you help?\n\nあなたに恋をした Anata ni koi o shita\n\n私はあなたと恋におちた Watashi wa anata to koi ni ochita\n\n私はあなたに恋を しました Watashi wa anata ni koi o shimashita\n\nWhat is the difference and which should I use?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-02T23:02:32.517",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77789",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-07T11:06:35.677",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-07T03:49:41.247",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "39229",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"word-choice",
"phrases"
],
"title": "What is the difference in koi o shita, ochita, shimashita?",
"view_count": 904
}
|
[
{
"body": "する in 恋をする means \"do\". So I sense activeness in this phrase. We use 恋をする for\nboth 片思い(one-way love) and 恋愛(relationship). Anyway since it has 'active'\nmeaning, I make images from the phrase 恋をする, such as writing a letter to tell\nhis/her the love, waiting for a response from him/her over smartphone, wasting\ntime by thinking about him/her and so on.\n\n恋に落ちる exactly means \"fall in love\". From the word 'fall' I sense\n'irresistability'. Sometimes I also feel 'astray' or 'off the track' meaning\nfrom it. So I think it's basically not suitable for relationship between\nadorable students. It smells more dangerous.\n\n私はあなたに恋をしました This is grammatically perfect but sounds too polite. To tell\nlove, excessive politeness sounds awkward in colloquial communication. It\nsounds like reading a story. But I think it's good in writing.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-07T10:12:07.157",
"id": "77868",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-07T10:12:07.157",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38911",
"parent_id": "77789",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
77789
| null |
77868
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I am well aware that が and の are interchangeable in cases like\n[this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/12825/how-does-\nthe-%E3%81%AE-work-\nin-%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AC%E4%BA%BA%E3%81%AE%E7%9F%A5%E3%82%89%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AC%E8%AA%9E)\nwhere there is a \"subordinate clause\" (forgive my imprecise language).\nHowever, as I was working through my N1 grammar reviews, I noticed that が is\nused in situations (other than the \"subordinate clause\" pattern) where の could\nhave worked just as fine.\n\nFor example,\n\n> 経済的にあまり恵まれていない地位 **が** ゆえに十分な教育を受けられない人がいる。\n\nI think I read somewhere that there is a shift somewhere in history that\ncaused の to take on some of が's functions, but I am not quite sure. Can anyone\nshed light or share reference on how this happened?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-03T00:17:48.557",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77790",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-03T01:28:42.233",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29327",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles",
"particle-の",
"particle-が"
],
"title": "が in ゆえに or んがため; が > の shift?",
"view_count": 49
}
|
[] |
77790
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77794",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I came across this sentence/fragment from a song:\n\n誰かの演技を真似してみて より自分が分かったり\n\nI'm having trouble what the function of the より before the noun is supposed to\nbe doing. Is より自分 a set phrase that doesn't appear in the dictionary? Is there\nanother function of より besides being a comparative particle and meaning \"more\"\nas an adverb in front of adjectives?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-03T05:13:14.940",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77793",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-03T05:26:45.720",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "33842",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-より"
],
"title": "Function of より before a noun in a phrase",
"view_count": 329
}
|
[
{
"body": "This より is an **adverb** , and it's modifying 分かる, not 自分. When you encounter\nan adverb you have to find the next adjective or verb. For example, in\nとても歌が上手い (\"One is very good at singing\"), とても is modifying the next\ni-adjective 上手い. より分かる means \"understand _better_ \" or \"know _more_ \".\nより自分が分かる (or 自分がより分かる) means \"to understand myself better\".\n\nSee also:\n\n * [Use of より in this sentence](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/48962/5010)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-03T05:21:34.417",
"id": "77794",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-03T05:26:45.720",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-03T05:26:45.720",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "77793",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
77793
|
77794
|
77794
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77802",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "何しろ買い物から帰ってきたら、出かける前に見ていた街とは別の光景が広がっていた **というのである**\n。その場にへたり込んでしまわないだけ、折紙はまだ幾分落ち着いているのかもしれなかった。\n\nHi. This quote is a flashback from a novel. When 折紙 returned home she found\nthe whole street was on fire and so was her home. What is the function/meaning\nof the というのである here? I know it can mean “they said”. But in this case it\nobviously doesn’t mean that. Thank you.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-03T06:45:34.783",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77795",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-03T14:00:40.243",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "36662",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"set-phrases"
],
"title": "What does というのである mean here?",
"view_count": 878
}
|
[
{
"body": "Interesting... I think it has 2 functions. \nOne is \"hearsay\". As you know, \"...というのである\" means \"they said ...\" as well as\n\"it is said that...\". So it implies that the writer didn't see this scene\ndirectly.\n\nThe other is, this may be more important though, to make \"surprising\" effect.\nPutting \"のだ\", \"のである\" at the last of sentence, the sentence sounds surprising.\nCoupled with \"何しろ\" the effect is emphasized.\n\n> 別の光景が広がっていた\n\nIt sounds like just describing the scene.\n\n> 別の光景が広がっていたという\n\nIt adds a meaning like \"I didn't see directly but...\"\n\n> 別の光景が広がっていたというのだ\n\nIt adds a meaning like \"surprisingly\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-03T14:00:40.243",
"id": "77802",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-03T14:00:40.243",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38911",
"parent_id": "77795",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
77795
|
77802
|
77802
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Once again I have been stumped over the usage of particles in a passage from\nmy textbook.\n\n> 先生: 最近、アメリカでも魚や豆腐を食べている人が増えてきたらしいです。\n>\n> 学生: はい。\n>\n> 先生: アメリカでも、ヘルシーな食べ物[が]{L}人気[が]{L}出てきたということです。\n\nThe paragraph continues but I don’t see the point in typing out the rest as it\nwon’t be relevant. In the fourth line the there are two が‘s. I asked my\njapanese friend why this is and if one could be a は, they said it’s definitely\nが but they couldn’t explain why. Please if someone could explain why it’s a\ndouble が and maybe a little additional work information that will help me to\nuse が and は correctly. Thank you !!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-03T07:39:24.097",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77797",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-07T15:04:27.107",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "38484",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 6,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles",
"は-and-が"
],
"title": "Usage of が in this paragraph",
"view_count": 220
}
|
[
{
"body": "In your sentence, 食べ物 is the subject, and 人気が出てきた is modifying, describing\n食べ物. It is what I would call an \"adjectival phrase\" in English (I don't know\nif the term is linguistically right in Japanese, but hopefully it helps to\nunderstand the function of the clause). Therefore, you are to parse the\nsentence like this:\n\n> (ヘルシーな食べ物) が (人気が出てきた) ということです。\n\nLet's compare some examples:\n\n> この食べ物が **美味しいです** 。\n>\n> この食べ物が **大好きです** 。\n>\n> この食べ物が **人気が出ている** 。\n\nAll of the three sentences above follow the same structure:\n\n> A が B\n\nwhere B is describing the noun A. All the three highlighted parts are\nmodifying the noun in the same way, but while the first two are pure\nadjectives, the third one is a clause, a sentence itself, and therefore there\nis an extra が.\n\nAnother way to look at it. Consider the sentence:\n\n> 部屋が **空いている** 。\n\nHere, despite having a verb instead of an adjective at the right side of the\nsentence, that verb is marking a _state_ because it is in progressive tense,\nand therefore it is effectively _describing_ the noun 部屋. The whole expression\n人気が出ている, also a verb clasue in progressive tense, could be thought of the same\nway if it helps.\n\nNote that despite jisho.org has an [entry for\n人気が出る](https://jisho.org/search/%E4%BA%BA%E6%B0%97%E3%81%8C%E5%87%BA%E3%82%8B)\nas an expression or set phrase as a whole, I think that this pattern can be\ngeneralised, i.e. it is perfectly fine to have subclauses using extra が that\nact as a noun modifier as a whole, even if they are not set phrases.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-03T20:06:50.523",
"id": "77803",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-03T20:13:44.477",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "32952",
"parent_id": "77797",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "There is a concept called [topic-\nprominent](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topic-prominent_language) in\nLinguistics field. I think this theory has the key to understand the\ndifference.\n\nIn many cases, you can translate “Nは” to “As for N”, “In case of N”, or “Now\nI’m going to talk about N”. It’s like setting a topic.\n\nWhen you introduce yourself you should use “は” because you have to set the\ntopic of you.\n\n> わたし **は** 東京出身です\n>\n> As for me, I’m from Tokyo.\n\nIf you use “が” in the former example, it sounds like you aren’t describing\nabout yourself (probably because of topic-less).\n\n> わたし **が** 東京出身です\n>\n> I (not him) am from Tokyo.\n\nThis sounds natural as long as answering for a question like “Who is from\nTokyo?” or “Mike is from Tokyo, isn’t he?” This is not to introduce “myself”\nbut to clarify a contrast, difference or misunderstanding.\n\nOne important point here. To understand the difference between は and が, we\nhave to clarify the difference between “introducing” and “describing (from 3rd\nparty’s view)”.\n\n> (1) マイク **は** 日本語を勉強している\n>\n> (1) (We’re going to talk about Mike,) he studies Japanese.\n>\n> (2) マイク **が** 日本語を勉強している\n>\n> (2) Mike studies English.\n\n(1) sounds like introducing Mike. So if you were asked “What did you see in\nthe library?”, _マイク **は** 日本語を勉強していた_ is bad because now the topic is “what\nyou saw” and not “Mike”. _わたしが見たの **は** マイク **が** 勉強しているところです_ is perfect\ninstead.\n\n(2) has no topic. It sounds like describing Mike from 3rd party’s view. So if\nyou were asked “What did Mike do yesterday?”, _マイク **が** 日本語を勉強していた_ is bad\nbecause it sounds like irrelevant story from “what Mike did”. Obviously\nstarted to talk about “Mike” so _マイク **は** 日本語を勉強していた_ is good.\n\n> (3) 人気 **が** 出てきた\n>\n> (3) It’s getting popular.\n>\n> (4) 人気 **は** 出てきた\n>\n> (4) As for popularity it’s getting better. (But sales is not good…)\n\n(3) is very common. we usually talk about “popular things”. When you want to\nset “healthy food” as a topic, you can say _ヘルシーな食べ物 **は** 人気 **が** ある_. You\ncan also say _ヘルシーな食べ物 **が** 人気 **が** ある_ it sounds more like describing\nhealthy food fairly.\n\nOn the other hand (4) is not common because we usually don’t specifically\nrefer to “the popularity of something”. So it has strong meaning like “As for\npopularity” or “In case of popularity”. Thus in this case (4) leads to\ncontrasting effect against the example of \"わたし **が** 東京出身です\".\n\nConclusion. In your example I don’t think _ヘルシーな食べ物 **は** 人気が出てきた_ is bad.\nBecause they have already talked about healthy food like fishes and tofu. So\nit’s natural to set “healthy food” as next topic by using “は”. \nHowever _ヘルシーな食べ物 **は** 人気 **は** 出てきた_ this is probably also possible but it\nsounds confusing because topic is multiple. If you want to emphasize the\ncontrast against ‘sales’ for example, you can say _ヘルシーな食べ物 **の** 人気 **は**\n出てきた_.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-07T14:49:36.583",
"id": "77874",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-07T15:04:27.107",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "38911",
"parent_id": "77797",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
77797
| null |
77874
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77804",
"answer_count": 3,
"body": "A related question: [What does さようなら (左様なら) have to do with\n\"left\"?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/4335/what-\ndoes-%e3%81%95%e3%82%88%e3%81%86%e3%81%aa%e3%82%89-%e5%b7%a6%e6%a7%98%e3%81%aa%e3%82%89-have-\nto-do-with-left)\n\nThe English-language A.Word.A.Day list this week is doing a \"Words borrowed\nfrom Japanese\" theme; today's word was\n[sayonara](https://wordsmith.org/words/sayonara.html). The etymology cited\nthere says:\n\n> From Japanese sayonara (goodbye), short for sayo naraba (if it is to be that\n> way), from sayo (thus) + naraba (if it be), ultimately from Chinese.\n> Earliest documented use: 1863.\n\nThis feels a bit off to me. I also happened upon [this\nsource](https://okwave.jp/qa/q6773033.html) cited in the other answer, and\n[another\nsource](https://eigobu.jp/magazine/sayou#:~:text=%E3%80%8C%E5%B7%A6%E6%A7%98%E3%80%8D%E3%81%AE%E8%AA%9E%E6%BA%90%E3%81%AF%E3%80%8C%E7%84%B6%E6%A7%98%E3%80%8D,-%E7%9B%B8%E6%89%8B%E3%81%AB%E8%82%AF%E5%AE%9A&text=%E5%85%83%E3%80%85%E3%80%8C%E5%B7%A6%E6%A7%98%E3%80%8D%E3%81%AF%E3%80%8C%E7%84%B6,%E3%82%88%E3%81%86%E3%81%AB%E3%81%AA%E3%82%8A%E3%81%BE%E3%81%97%E3%81%9F%E3%80%82)\nbriefly discussing the history of 左様; neither mentions anything specifically\nabout Chinese.\n\nMy instincts tell me that both さ and なら are \"native\" Japanese\nwords/constructions (よう feels more like an 音読み), which would completely remove\nChinese from the etymology as the characters would be a \"back-formation\"\nrather than a Chinese borrowing. I also didn't see anything in my Chinese\ndictionary for 左様 or 然様, though it's possible the word was borrowed to\nJapanese and then lost in Chinese.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-03T08:35:33.583",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77799",
"last_activity_date": "2020-09-28T18:19:46.090",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-04T00:04:05.063",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "9792",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 24,
"tags": [
"etymology",
"greetings"
],
"title": "Does 左様なら (sayōnara) have Chinese roots?",
"view_count": 4469
}
|
[
{
"body": "I also feel that only 様【よう】 could somehow be viewed as \"ultimately from\nChinese\", but the other parts, namely 然【さ】 (now usually written with _ateji_\n左) and なら, are of Japanese origin. Thus it would seem that the phrase さようなら is\n\"ultimately Japanese\".",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-03T09:17:17.343",
"id": "77800",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-03T09:17:17.343",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "77799",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 10
},
{
"body": "I agree with @MichaelChirico and @Earthliŋ♦. Let me add a different viewpoint.\n\nTo say goodbye we often use many variant versions of \"sayonara\" such as:\n\n * じゃーね\n * それじゃーね\n * それならね\n * さらば\n\nThese have basically the same original meaning of \"さようなら\". Direct meaning is\n\"Since that is the case, (let's call it a day)\" or something like that. I\nthink it's also similar to \"then\".\n\nI have been very interested in whether there are people other than Japanese\nwho use such \"then\"-like phrases to say goodbye. 再见, the Chinese goodbye, is\nexactly the same as \"See you again\".\n\nSo I'm not sure that 左様 is Chinese origin but the culture to use \"then\"-like\nphrase as goodbye is probably Japanese origin.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-03T13:36:53.443",
"id": "77801",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-03T13:36:53.443",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38911",
"parent_id": "77799",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 12
},
{
"body": "Let's dive into this etymology.\n\n_(My reference, unless otherwise stated, is Shogakukan's_ 国語大辞典. _I've got a\ndead-tree copy, and there's also a decent online version available for free\nvia[Kotobank](https://kotobank.jp/). Note that Kotobank's layout is a bit\nconfusing for terms spelled with kanji that have multiple readings.)_\n\n### Sense development\n\n * さようなら \nListed\n[here](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E3%81%95%E3%82%88%E3%81%86%E3%81%AA%E3%82%89-2043504)\nas first appearing in texts from around 1742. Derived as a shortening of\nさようならば.\n\n * さようならば \nListed\n[here](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E3%81%95%E3%82%88%E3%81%86%E3%81%AA%E3%82%89%E3%81%B0-2043505)\nas first appearing in texts from around the late 1500s, early 1600s, as a\nconjunction. The meaning was as expected from its parts: [さよう]{like that, that\nway} + [ならば]{if it be}. The \"goodbye\" sense appears later, cited to a text\nfrom 1791.\n\n→ We can surmise that the \"goodbye\" sense for either form probably showed up\nin the early 1700s.\n\n### Derivation of the parts\n\n * さよう \nFirst cited in the 伊勢【いせ】物語【ものがたり】 ([ _The Tales of\nIse_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tales_of_Ise)) of the early 900s. \nThis is a compound of さ (\"that\", medial distal marker, cognate with modern そ)\n+ よう (\"way, manner, appearance\").\n\n * さ \nFirst appears in the Nara period (710–794) with the form さて. The shorter さ\nthen appears from the Heian period (794–1185). Modern そう was formerly さう, and\nthis さ may be the first component of that. \nCommonly spelled 然 in references. While cognate with the そ in words like\nそこ・それ・そなた etc., the そ version was used for physical and concrete things, while\nさ was used for abstract and psychological things. \nNote that the character 然 is borrowed from Chinese, but the reading _sa_ is\npurely Japanese. 然 in Middle Chinese was read as something like //ȵiᴇn//\ninstead, resulting in the modern Japanese _on'yomi_ of _zen_.\n\n * よう \nCommonly spelled 様 in references. This is the only component of this phrase\nthat derives from Chinese, specifically from earlier glyph form 樣\n(\"appearance; form; look\"). \n[In]{ } Middle Chinese when this was first borrowed into Japanese, the\npronunciation was probably something like //jɨɐŋ// (the \"j\" here represents a\nsound like \"y\" in English; reconstructed based on linguistic research into\nsound changes and sound correspondences). The historical kana spelling in\nJapanese is やう, representing how it was probably first pronounced in Japanese:\n//jau//. (We see the same //au// → //oː// shift here as we saw above with さう.)\n\n * ならば \nThe term さよう is a 形容動詞【けいようどうし】 or \" _-na_ adjective\". The _-na_ modifier\nparticle in modern Japanese comes from older attributive (noun-modifying) なる,\nwhich comes from a contraction of even older に + ある. This なる developed some\ntime in the Heian period when 形容動詞【けいようどうし】 were first used. \n[The]{ } ならば in さようならば, the oldest form of this term, is this older なる for\n_-na_ adjectives, conjugated into the conditional or hypothetical form.\n\n * In modern Japanese, the conditional / hypoethetical is created by adding a ば onto the conditional / hypothetical verb stem, which ends in _-e_ (sometimes with an extra _-r-_ in the middle). Consider 行【い】く → 行けば, or 食【た】べる → 食【た】べれば. This _-e_ stem evolved from the ancient / classical 已然形【いぜんけい】 or \"realis conjugation\" which expressed something that is or could be real, used in subjunctive or suppositional constructions. \n * In ancient Japanese, the conditional / hypothetical could be formed using the _-e_ stem, or also by using the _-a_ stem -- also called the 未然形【みぜんけい】 or \"irrealis conjugation\" which expressed something that isn't real. This is the same as the modern _-a_ verb stem used for negatives. \n([There]{ } seems to have been some subtlety of meaning differentiating the\n_-eba_ usage from the _-aba_ usage, but I haven't yet read a fuller\nexploration of that topic.)\n\n### Conclusion\n\nThe only piece with any Chinese derivation is 様【よう】. The best interpretation\nof the etymology given in _A Word A Day_ is that it was somewhat scrambled,\nand the \"ultimately from Chinese\" portion wound up in the wrong place in the\nsentence.\n\n### Addendum\n\nPart of my family background is from Minnesota. When I was first learning\nJapanese and was taught the background meaning of さようなら, I realized it\nbasically parses out to \"well, if that's the way it's going to be\" -- which\nsomehow seems like a really Minnesotan way of saying \"goodbye\".\n\n* * *\n\nPlease comment if the above does not address your question, and I can edit to\nupdate.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-03T21:44:06.480",
"id": "77804",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-03T22:35:34.333",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-03T22:35:34.333",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "77799",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 34
}
] |
77799
|
77804
|
77804
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77807",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "How does one distinguish the three words? I checked several sites.\n\nFirst, I checked\n[Weblio](https://thesaurus.weblio.jp/content/%E8%AA%AC%E6%98%8E) which told me\nthat there's really a relationship among the three. Next, I checked HiNative\nlinks [here](https://hinative.com/ja/questions/4294132) and\n[here](https://hinative.com/ja/questions/4274350) which suggested that 解釈 is\nthe odd one out (which has a meaning close to interpretation), and that 説明 is\na more general term and gives a more objective explanation, while 解説 can\ninclude a more subjective (and/or expert) opinion.\n\nI would like to check if these statements are true.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-03T22:37:17.413",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77805",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-04T03:04:19.877",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29327",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 8,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"word-choice",
"nuances"
],
"title": "The difference between 解説 and 説明 (and 解釈)",
"view_count": 1607
}
|
[
{
"body": "I agree with nozomiiin's explanation, but not with mfuji's.\n\n解説 has a narrower meaning than 説明. 解説 refers to a logical and detailed\nexplanation/lecture/commentary about difficult concepts, problems, etc.,\nusually given by someone who is knowledgeable about that topic.\n\n * 教授に相対性理論についての解説をしていただいた。(相対性理論 = theory of relativity)\n * この内戦について、軍事評論家の○○さんが解説します。\n * この辞書には単語の解説が詳しく載っている。\n\nYou can usually replace 解説 to 説明, but 解説 is often preferred because it sounds\nmore detailed and authoritative.\n\nIn sports, a main play-by-play commentator is called a 実況 (who is usually a\nprofessional announcer), and a former athlete who sits next to the 実況 and\nprovides expert analysis is called a 解説(者). This is a fixed role name that\ncannot be replaced by 説明(者).\n\n説明 is explanation in general, and it doesn't have to be related to expert\nknowledge. You can only use 説明 in the following situations:\n\n * あなたの質問の意味が分かりません。文脈を説明してください。\n * なぜ宿題をしてこなかったのか説明しなさい。\n * 事件を目撃したので、やってきた警察官に状況を説明した。\n\nI don't think 解説 is more subjective and 説明 is more objective. Contrarily, 説明\ncan be more personal and subjective, whereas 解説 is at least supposed to be\nunopinionated and fair.\n\n解釈 is \"interpretation\" of something difficult or ambiguous. Basically it's an\ninternal process done only in one's head.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-04T02:51:45.560",
"id": "77807",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-04T03:04:19.877",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-04T03:04:19.877",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "77805",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 8
}
] |
77805
|
77807
|
77807
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77808",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": ">\n> 国{くに}が今年{ことし}の３[月]{がつ}に調{しら}べると、「[特定]{とくてい}[技能]{ぎのう}」で[働]{はたら}いている人{ひと}は３９８７[人]{にん}で、考{かんが}えていたよりずっと少{すく}ないことがわかりました。\n\nI’m having difficulty figuring out how と is used here. From past experience it\ncan be:\n\n> 1. conditional\n> 2. conjunctival (as in “and”)\n> 3. Quotation\n>\n\nI don’t think it can be used to link two phrases or clauses so that’s that out\nof the window.\n\nI would imagine the quotation と would be towards the end of the sentence to\nquote what precedes it.\n\nSo only the conditional remains but I doubt it fits here... unless it means\n調べると means: If the “country” looks up March of this year... they understand\nthat the number of special skill workers are constantly diminishing?\n\nBut my question: Is there a way to tell the と apart at a glance?\n\n**Source** \nThe sentence above is from this article:\n<https://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/easy/k10012450361000/k10012450361000.html>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-03T23:29:21.123",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77806",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-04T07:51:20.967",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-04T00:01:16.243",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "37089",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"words",
"particles",
"syntax"
],
"title": "How to tell the function of と at a glance?",
"view_count": 112
}
|
[
{
"body": "By the time I'd read as far as と I was over 99% certain this was a\nconditional. Why?\n\nIt couldn't be 'and' because that can only modify a noun/noun phrase and we\nhave a verb.\n\nIt could have been a quote, but \"X said that the state will investigate in\nMarch this year\" sounds oddly specific. Besides which, who is X? I don't think\nit could be the state itself. I would expect that to use 国は rather than 国が.\nAnd, there is no context for X to be anyone else. Though not mandatory, there\nis also no verb that you would associate with a quote. No 言う, 思う etc. There is\na 考える but that's way too far away in the sentence.\n\nThat leaves a conditional. Now if your trying to translate this as 'if' I can\nsee you confusion. That really wouldn't make a lot of sense. In a context like\nthis it is better translated as 'when' or 'upon' i.e. \"When the state\ninvestigated in March this year there were ...' or 'upon the state\ninvestigating in March this year there were ...'\n\nBut to be honest, the above is all nonsense. The real reason I know it's a\nconditional is simply from experience. I have seen 調べると so many times that\nit's just what I expect. The more you read the easier this will get.\n\nA couple of other points:\n\nThe 分かる in this sentence is better understood as realised/discovered.\n\nずっと here is an intensifier. It is 'much' rather than 'continuously'. so\n考えていたよりずっと少ない is 'much smaller than expected'.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-04T07:43:11.930",
"id": "77808",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-04T07:51:20.967",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-04T07:51:20.967",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"parent_id": "77806",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
77806
|
77808
|
77808
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "> 本年もまたお願いいたした **く** 、ご連絡申し上げました。\n>\n> 場所は昨年と同じ **く** 、たから市民会館ホールです。\n\nWhat is the use of く here?\n\nI think it is something like conjugating the verb to ます form then removing ます\nto connect sentences.\n\nFor example:\n\n> 交通ルールを守り、安全運転をしましょう. \n> Let's follow the rule and drive safely.\n\nBut, in the sentences I mentioned above, it's an い-adjective and a な-adjective\n(お願いいたしたい and 同じ). So, I would like to inquire about how this structure is\nformed.\n\nIs it:\n\nVerb = conjugate verb to ます form then remove ます\n\nい-adjective = conjugate to くて and remove て\n\nな-adjective/Noun = add く after\n\nPS. I got some great answers here [Removal of て in Japanese\nnovels](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/70321/removal-\nof-%e3%81%a6-in-japanese-novels/70324#70324) **but I'm not sure about this\n同じく.**",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-04T09:48:10.630",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77809",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-04T10:23:10.500",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-04T10:23:10.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "38446",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"sentence",
"grammar"
],
"title": "く usage in 場所は昨年と同じく、たから市民会館ホールです",
"view_count": 51
}
|
[] |
77809
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77867",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "同じで分かり合ってる is a sentence in a lyrics of this song\n<https://utaten.com/lyric/jb81104032/>\n\nSome sources translate this as “We understand each other the same”\n\nSome as “We understand each other because we are the same”\n\nWhich one is correct ?\n\nIn my opinion I think 2nd sentence is correct. Because I think that it has to\nbe 同じく to form 1st sentence.\n\nThank you in advance.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-04T11:17:37.497",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77810",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-07T09:32:11.333",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38446",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"translation",
"adverbs",
"particle-で"
],
"title": "Translation of 同じで in 同じで分かり合ってる",
"view_count": 109
}
|
[
{
"body": "Song lyrics has many ambiguous lines somewhat intensionally. So I think the\nboth could be right. However, let me add a 3rd interpretation on this.\n\nAfter checking the whole lyrics I have just thought a different meaning. That\nis like this.\n\n> いつだって同じで\n>\n> You always do like that.\n>\n> 分かり合ってる？・・とんだ勘違いだよ\n>\n> What a misunderstanding that you and me understand each other!!\n\nI separated the line to 2 parts as above. It's possible because the first 2\nlines of this lyrics sound like blaming someone. So it makes sense \"You always\ndo like that\" as a criticizing comment.\n\n\"いつも同じ\" (always the same) is common phrase and it often contains \"unsatisfied\"\nor \"boring\" meaning.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-07T09:32:11.333",
"id": "77867",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-07T09:32:11.333",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "38911",
"parent_id": "77810",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
77810
|
77867
|
77867
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "i was wondering how なりそう was conjugated i know it was made of なる and そう but i\ndon't know how \\ なる became なり",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-04T13:17:32.510",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77812",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-04T19:48:41.840",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38996",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"words",
"conjugations"
],
"title": "how was なりそうな conjugated?",
"view_count": 255
}
|
[
{
"body": "そう can be attached to a root verb or the continuative form of a verb. If そう is\nattached to the root like なる, it means it is second hand information, i.e. \"I\nheard that something will...\".\n\nIf そう is attached to the continuative form like なり, as in なりそう, it means there\nis primary evidence or sensation to make the statement, i.e. \"it appears that\nit will...\"\n\nSo なりそうだ would be the correct way to say \"it appears it will be(come)\", or よく\nなりそう な 時 would be \"(a time) when it seems to be getting better\" or something\nto that effect.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-04T19:28:36.943",
"id": "77816",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-04T19:48:41.840",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-04T19:48:41.840",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "38743",
"parent_id": "77812",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
77812
| null |
77816
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77815",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I came across this problem when I was studying, and I couldn't really\nunderstand the difference between using the passive form of 聞く or 見る and using\nthe verbs 聞こえる and 見える, considering that, in my point of view, their meanings\nbecome really similar.\n\nWhen should I use each one, and is using the passive forms of said verbs even\ncommon?",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-04T15:10:21.677",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77813",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-06T11:23:43.823",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22587",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"usage",
"verbs",
"conjugations",
"passive-voice"
],
"title": "Difference between 聞こえる and 聞かれる / 見える and 見られる",
"view_count": 627
}
|
[
{
"body": "**きこえる vs きかれる** \nThe verb `聞こえる` is used when sound is physically perceived by the ear. Think\nof it as a purely sonic phenomenon, i.e. sound waves reach the eardrum,\nresulting in the ability to hear something.\n\nOn the other hand, `聞かれる` is most often used to express the passive voice of\n聞く (to ask). This is used when someone has been asked something. For example,\n田中さんに質問を聞かれました (I was asked a question by Tanaka). One additional usage of\n聞かれる is as an honorific of 聞く, used when addressing a superior (in some\ndialects). This does not usually happen with the verb 聞こえる.\n\n**みえる vs みれる** \nAs with above, `見える` usually refers to the physical perceptions, i.e. the eye\nis in a position such that light hits the retina, resulting in the ability to\nsee something. There are some phrases which may contain a figurative use of\n見える but the standard meaning relates to being able to see something.\n\n`みられる` (or `みれる`) has several usages. One is to express the ability to\nview/watch - this is different than the ability to see. For example, if you\nonly have 1 hour of spare time and the movie you want to watch is 2 hours\nlong, you could say 時間がなくて今みられません (I can't watch it because I don' have enough\ntime right now). Another usage is to express the passive voice of 見る - i.e.\n田中さんに見られました (I was seen by Tanaka). It is possible to use 見られる as an honorific\nin some Japanese dialects (meaning 'view'), but it is probably more common to\nuse ご覧になる, a special honorific verb meaning 'view'.\n\nTo summarize, when physical perceptions allow for the ability to hear or see,\nuse 聞こえる and 見える. For the passive voice of 聞く(ask), use 聞かれる. For the ability\nto view/watch, use みられる. For the passive voice of 見る, use 見られる.\n\n_[Note: As pointed out in the comments, it is more common to use a different\nkanji for the 'view' meaning of みる. It is usually written as 観る.]_",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-04T15:55:28.903",
"id": "77815",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-06T11:23:43.823",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-06T11:23:43.823",
"last_editor_user_id": "25875",
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "77813",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
77813
|
77815
|
77815
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77826",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 国は「中止していた特定技能の試験を外国でいつ始めることができるか考えたいと思います」と話しています。\n\nSource:\n<https://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/easy/k10012450361000/k10012450361000.html>\n\nAt the end, the sentence says: 話しています but I don’t get why the continuous\naspect is necessary here. Shouldn’t it be simply: 話します as in: the state\n“says”?\n\nP.s.: Also, isn’t 考えたいと思います redundant? Unless it means “they thought about\nwanting to consider”? Because if the 考えたい which means “to want” + “to\nconsider”?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-04T15:26:16.887",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77814",
"last_activity_date": "2023-01-21T09:01:09.570",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-05T04:47:47.390",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "37089",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"verbs",
"aspect"
],
"title": "話します vs 話しています in a News Article",
"view_count": 314
}
|
[
{
"body": "I'll attempt the 話しています part. Japanese's present tense sometimes carries a\nhint of future. For example, saying 行きます usually means that the speaker is\nabout to do this action; 行っています on the other hand means that the action has\nstarted and is ongoing. In the article, 話しています refers to a quote, which in the\ncontext of a new report is likely something that has already started before\nthe news report was written. I believe this is why 話しています (ongoing) is used\ninstead of 話します (about to happen).",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-05T16:28:41.110",
"id": "77826",
"last_activity_date": "2023-01-21T09:01:09.570",
"last_edit_date": "2023-01-21T09:01:09.570",
"last_editor_user_id": "38989",
"owner_user_id": "38989",
"parent_id": "77814",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
77814
|
77826
|
77826
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77820",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I've heard native speakers use テープでいいです in stores when they don't want a bag\n(e.g. they're just buying one item) and prefer that the staff use tape\ninstead. Using it myself has not proved fruitful.\n\nIn my example scenario, the cashier has yet to reach for the tape or the bag,\nso I say 「テープでいいです」and he proceeds to bag my item. My friend has told me that\nhis wife (Japanese) explained to him that it depends not only on sentence\nstructure, but also tone. That is to say that it can be both positive (I would\nlike tape) and negative (no tape, please). So it appears that I must be saying\nit in such a way that it comes across as \"no tape, please\".\n\nHow can I correctly pronounce it so that it's understood to mean that I don't\nwant a bag and that I only want tape? Is there some gesture that Japanese\npeople use to make this clear?\n\nP.S. I'm already aware of 要らない but I've had mixed results with that one too.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-05T04:55:54.107",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77818",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-05T05:48:31.293",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "6830",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"pronunciation"
],
"title": "テープでいいです vs テープでいいです - how to use the correct tone to differentiate them?",
"view_count": 99
}
|
[
{
"body": "In a situation where the cashier has yet to reach for the tape or the bag\n\n> テープでお願いします。\n\nwould seem much more appropriate to me.\n\nIf they were already reaching for bag, then\n\n> あ、テープでいいです。\n\nmakes sense.\n\nObviously, the 「あ」is optional, but it can be very effective in alerting the\nperson that you have something to say about what they are doing, or because\nyou forgot, or whatever.\n\nHonestly, unless your intonation is just plain weird, I think timing would be\nmore important than how it's said for this phrase. Of course, you don't want\nto sound curt though.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-05T05:48:31.293",
"id": "77820",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-05T05:48:31.293",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1761",
"parent_id": "77818",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
77818
|
77820
|
77820
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "Why is **ジ** a soft **\"ji\"** in Asia (アジア), but in John (ジョン) - **ジ** is a\nhard **\"ji\"**?\n\nIs it just pronunciation or is there an actual discernable/readable\ndifference?",
"comment_count": 10,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-05T06:26:52.683",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77821",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-05T15:57:50.457",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-05T06:39:25.607",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "36267",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"pronunciation"
],
"title": "ジ in Asia (アジア) sounds different to ジ in John (ジョン)",
"view_count": 158
}
|
[] |
77821
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I have come across the two following sentences:\n\n> 遊 **ぶ** ことは犯罪です | Playing is a crime\n>\n> 遊 **び** は終わりだ。 | Fun and games are over (lit. playing is ending)\n\nWhy is `遊ぶ` in plain/dictionary form in the first, and then ます form in the\nsecond? Also what are the difference when they are in each of these forms?\n\nThis question goes with any verb.\n\nThanks.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-05T11:21:39.353",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77822",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-05T23:11:45.417",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "36633",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"verbs",
"form"
],
"title": "When to use verb ます vs plain form",
"view_count": 298
}
|
[
{
"body": "First, 遊び is actually a noun, not a verb. It is formed from the verbal root.\nThere is a group of nouns in Japanese which is derived from the root and uses\nthis form (continuative form) as a standalone noun. It seems more common in\nthe godan verb category. Some common examples are:\n\n> 休み (a rest) from 休む (rest) \n> 違い (a difference, a discrepancy) from 違う (differ) \n> 育ち (upbringing, growth) from 育つ (grow) \n> 狙い (an aim) from 狙う (aim) \n> 泳ぎ (swimming) from 泳ぐ (swim)\n\nAs for the difference between plain forms and masu forms, masu forms are\nusually used in situations which require a degree of politeness or formality.\nThey are typically used between people who do not know each either well or in\nsituations which require formality. This is not an exhaustive list of when to\nuse that form.\n\nExplaining the spectrum of uses for the plain form would require a very in-\ndepth answer, but in general, it is used in casual forms of Japanese, in\nrelative clauses, in modifying phrases, with nominalizers (as in your\nexample), among others.\n\nFinally, as to the question of the difference between using 遊び and 遊ぶこと, this\nis actually quite a philosophical question. In language, when do you use a\nverbal phrase instead of noun phrase if both are possible? One answer is that\nit is somewhat of a stylistic difference. You could argue that there may be\nsemantic differences between the two, but it's not always easy to distinguish.\nFor example, in English, would you say \"playing video games is fun\" or \"gaming\nis fun\"? Are they different? Why choose one over the other? Likewise, someone\nmight prefer to use 遊ぶこと if they want to emphasize the action of the verb, or\nvice versa if they want to stress the 'thing' that is 遊び. Having said that,\nthey are not interchangeable because of how they interact syntactically with\nother phrases. For example, the sentence 計算に違いがある is acceptable but 計算に違うことがある\nis unnatural (when intending the meaning \"there is a discrepancy in the\ncalculation\"). So, in my opinion, the choice between 遊ぶことor 遊び is based on\neither stylistic or syntactic considerations, possibly on semantic\nconsiderations if there are clear differences between the phrases.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-05T13:24:10.450",
"id": "77823",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-05T22:35:15.517",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-05T22:35:15.517",
"last_editor_user_id": "25875",
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "77822",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "As others have pointed out, please don't refer to 遊び as \"ます form\" - it's not\nthat if it doesn't actually end in ます.\n\nBoth 遊び and 遊ぶこと/遊ぶの are noun forms of 遊ぶ, and in most cases both can even be\ntranslated as \"playing\".\n\nI have never been taught this, but the \"feel\" I have for things like 遊び versus\n遊ぶこと, is that the former speaks more often to what results from playing - or\nthe \"thing you play\" - as opposed to the act itself. This idea may or not be\nuseful - it is definitely not always true.\n\nAccording to this heuristic, 考え is the thought(s) I have,\n\n * 考えること is \"to think\". 遊び is the games I play or the fun I have, while 遊ぶこと is \"to play\" or \"playing\".\n * 終わり and (お)しまい are ends or \"the end\"; 終わること and しまうこと are \"to end\" or \"ending\".\n * 感じ is \"my/your feeling\", 感じること is the act of \"feeling\".\n * 20キロ走り is \"a 20-kilo run\", 20キロ走ること is \"running 20 kilos\"\n\nAnother way of thinking about it is, \"can I put an article (a/an/the) before\nit\"? The masu-stem ones, generally you can; the こと ones, generally you don't.\n\nBut as I said, this idea also doesn't hold everywhere. 作り isn't \"a creation\".\nYou don't use 描き for \"a drawing\". Food isn't 食べ, 食べ物 is.\n\nAlso note that this stem form doesn't always indicate a noun. It's also used\nto combine verbs, like 走り回る, \"to run around\". And sometimes it just means\n\"and\" (mostly in the written language): 山本博士は、知恵があり, 素敵な人間なの. \"Professor\nYamamoto is a fine specimen of humanity, brimming with wisdom.\"",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-05T23:11:45.417",
"id": "77830",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-05T23:11:45.417",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39129",
"parent_id": "77822",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
77822
| null |
77823
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77833",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "They both translate to agreement, but I can't quite figure out what the\ndifference is. Based on the answer\n[here](https://hinative.com/ja/questions/7080945), 合意 implies that there was\nsome effort from both parties (e.g., negotiation, compromise) for an agreement\nto take place, but 同意 doesn't give that nuance.\n\nAlso, how did 合 and 同 contribute to the meaning of these 熟語? 同 means same, so\nit makes sense, but understanding 合 is a bit hard. Is it closer to 合う or to\n合わせる？",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-05T13:48:34.987",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77824",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-08T03:02:17.100",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29327",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"nuances"
],
"title": "What's the difference between 合意 and 同意？",
"view_count": 193
}
|
[
{
"body": "You pretty much answered it on your own, but let me spell it out for\ncompletness sake:\n\nThe easiest way to put it is probably the difference between \"coming to an\nagreement\" and \"being in agreement\".\n\n合意 is made up of 合う (match, meet) and 意 (opinion) which implies that there was\nsome effort put into making opinions match that were originally different. If\nI tell my friend that chocolate is the best ice cream flavour and they argue\nthat strawberry tastes better, and after some discussion we agree that both\ntaste great, we have come to an agreement (合意).\n\n同意 on the other hand literally means \"same(同) opinion(意)\". If I tell my frined\nthat choclate is the best ice cream flavour and they are like \"Yes, totally\",\nwe are in agreement (同意).\n\nIf you make an argument, I might tell you \"I agree\" either because you have\nconvinced me (合意する) or because I was thinking the same thing (同意する)\n\nBoth can be translated to \"Agreeing, Agreement\" but they give more insight in\nhow that agreement was reached.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-06T02:21:19.243",
"id": "77833",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-08T03:02:17.100",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-08T03:02:17.100",
"last_editor_user_id": "37151",
"owner_user_id": "37151",
"parent_id": "77824",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
77824
|
77833
|
77833
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am new to qualifying nouns.\n\nWhy is the adjective of `好きな` used here instead of just `好き` as a noun?\n\n> 猫が **好きな** 女の人は私の友達です\n\nDoes that means it is wrong to say:\n\n> 猫が **好き** あの女の人は私の友達です\n\nI am used to seeing `猫が好き`, which is why seeing the adjective is weird to me.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-05T17:15:32.233",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77828",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-05T21:45:39.720",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-05T18:24:47.363",
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "36633",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"adjectives",
"relative-clauses",
"nouns"
],
"title": "Noun or Adjective?",
"view_count": 96
}
|
[
{
"body": "好き is an adjectival noun. It is that, whether you see the な or not. The\ncorrect way to connect an adjectival noun to a noun it's modifying, is with a\nな. The correct way to connect _other_ kinds of nouns is most often with a の\n(or else である).\n\nYou can say 猫が好きあの女の人は私の友達です, but if you do so you've inserted the additional\nword あの (\"that woman\"), which may not be appropriate in all the same places\nthe original is, and has a slightly different meaning. This sentence is also\ntechnically grammatically wrong without the な, but I feel like it could be\nused this way in \"real\" Japanese. Reordering it to あの猫が好きな女の人は is more\ncorrect, though.\n\n猫が好きな女 = Woman who likes cats (or possibly: whom cats like) \n画家の女 = Woman who is a painter",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-05T21:45:39.720",
"id": "77829",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-05T21:45:39.720",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39129",
"parent_id": "77828",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
77828
| null |
77829
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I read a sentence\n\n> 彼女はわかっていた。あるいは、わかっていると思っていた。\n\nIt was translated as \"She knew, or she thought she knew/knows.\"\n\nPrior to seeing this translation, in my head, I interpreted it as \"I knew her,\nor so I thought.\"\n\nIs my interpretation valid or not? And if not, why?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-06T01:41:55.680",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77832",
"last_activity_date": "2023-06-21T18:08:11.140",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29327",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"parsing",
"reading-comprehension",
"interpretation"
],
"title": "Can this sentence be interpreted in more than one way?",
"view_count": 258
}
|
[
{
"body": "Your interpretation is incorrect.\n\nThe `は` in `彼女は` clearly indicates that she is the one doing the knowing. Your\ninterpretation would be written as `彼女**を**わかっていた。あるいは、わかっていると思っていた`\n\nHowever, I would translate it a bit differently. I would translate `わかる` as\n\"understanding\" as opposed to \"knowing\" which would be `知る(しる)`. So my\ntranslation would be `She had understood. Or she thought she had understood`.\nThe difference might be negligeable depending on the context, but it feels\nworth pointing out in this case since there would be a big difference between\n\"I knew her\" and \"I understood her\".",
"comment_count": 10,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-06T02:49:18.127",
"id": "77834",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-06T02:49:18.127",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "37151",
"parent_id": "77832",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "Caution 1: Actually, more senetnces like \"Someone understood her, or someone\nthought that someone understood her\" can be meant, but I don't refer to it\nbecause nothing would never end. \nCaution 2: Probably, \"understood\" there doesn't mean what \"understood\" mean in\nusual English. I just translated \"分かっていた\" into \"understood\".\n\n彼女は分かっていた。あるいは、分かっていると思っていた。 can mean these things. \nShe understood something, or she thought that she understood something. \nShe understood something, or I thought that she understood something. \nI understood her, or I thought I understood her.\n\nThe first pattern of sentence structure is used like タカシは浮気をしていないかもしれない。でも、\n**ミワはタカシが浮気をしたことを分かっていた、あるいは分かっていると（ミワは）思っていた** 。だからミワはタカシに別れ話をしたんだ。 \nThe second is like ミワはタカシに浮気を指摘しなかった。でも、\n**ミワはタカシが浮気をしたことを分かっていた、あるいは分かっていると（僕は）思っていた** 。だから僕はタカシに彼女を大切にしろと叱ったんだ。 \nThe third is like タカシの3人の浮気相手マコ、ユリ、カナのうちユリとカナが今どこにいるかをミワは知らなかった。でも、\n**マコは分かっていた。あるいは分かっていると思っていた** 。だからミワはマコの職場に向かったんだ。\n\nDepending on the situation, the three can be meant. But you know the first one\nis most impressive and beautiful when you read it in a novel or movie's\ncatchphrase even in English, right? \nSo others have little advantage of using the sentence regardless of its\ndifficulty to tell people the right meaning, and different easy sentences may\ntake place of it.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2023-01-22T17:19:18.003",
"id": "98269",
"last_activity_date": "2023-01-22T17:19:18.003",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "55517",
"parent_id": "77832",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
77832
| null |
77834
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "So I was trying to translate this song (full lyrics\n[here](https://vocaloidlyrics.fandom.com/wiki/%E3%82%AB%E3%83%8A%E3%83%AA%E3%83%A4%E3%83%A9%E3%83%A1%E3%83%B3%E3%83%88_%28Canary%27s_Lament%29))\nbut there's this one line that I can't make sense out of.\n\n> その餌で凍えて誂えて この折に巣食い尽くす この唄を 捧げます。\n>\n> With that bait, freeze and make to order. Completely building a nest in this\n> opportunity, I dedicate this song.\n\nI'm unsure what to do with 巣食い尽くす, for one thing. Should it be 巣(を)食い尽くす, or\nis it like that 尽くす is the ending on the verb stem 巣食い, as I have it\ntranslated above? I'm thinking this is probably a pun.\n\nAs for the first part... I'm unsure exactly what it means? Grammatically it\nworks but the で is throwing me off - if it were を, that would make sense,\nfreezing and ordering are both things one does with food. But I'm not sure how\nthe で would work here?\n\nThanks so much for your help!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-06T05:51:19.400",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77835",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-06T06:47:44.690",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500",
"last_editor_user_id": "-1",
"owner_user_id": "19870",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation",
"particles",
"particle-で",
"song",
"help"
],
"title": "Help with translation of song line - confusing use of particles, unsure how to deal with a pun",
"view_count": 76
}
|
[
{
"body": "There are various misses in your proposed translation.\n\n * 餌【え】 could also be just \"food for an animal\".\n * 凍【こご】える is an intransitive verb with a meaning more like \"to become frozen and numb from cold\".\n * 誂【あつら】える is not \"to make something to order\", but more like \"to request or order that something be done or made as one wants\". It's about getting someone else to do the doing / making.\n * すくいつくす might be a pun, depending on how we parse the sounds. 巣食い尽くす as written would equate to 巣【す】を食【く】い尽【つ】くす, or \"completely eat (a/the) nest\". \nThe sounds could also be spelled as 救い尽くす or 掬い尽くす. However, this would be a\nweird collocation, since 救【すく】う means \"to rescue\" and 掬【すく】う means \"to scoop\nup\", while 尽【つ】くす means \"to do something completely so nothing is left, to\nexhaust something\", which is a strange kind of collocation for \"rescue\", but I\nsuppose it could work for \"scoop\", with a meaning like \"to completely scoop\nsomething up (so nothing is left)\". \nI have no idea where you're getting the \"building\" part. The base meaning of\n食【く】う is \"to eat something; to bite into something\".\n\nReading briefly through the lyrics, I find it to be a bit of a weird song, and\nI can't claim to understand it very well. I also note what seem to be mistakes\nin the romanization, such as the sixth line in the third stanza:\n\n> せめて その目でその **肢** でその声で semete sono me de sono **shi** de sono koe de\n\nI could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure the bolded kanji there should be read as\n_e_ (\"limb of the body\"), not _shi_. A reading of _e_ would fit the meter and\nrhyme better. That said, I haven't listened to the song, so I'm unsure of\nwhat's actually in the audio.\n\n* * *\n\nAt any rate, I hope the above helps in some small way. Please comment with any\nfurther questions and I can edit the post.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-06T06:38:27.283",
"id": "77837",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-06T06:47:44.690",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-06T06:47:44.690",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "77835",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
77835
| null |
77837
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "1.リビングで眠ってしまった琴里をおぶって部屋に運ぶのは日常茶飯事であったし、女の子を背負うのには\n**慣れているつもりだったが**......やはり、少し感覚が異なった。琴里よりも少しだけ重たい体重が、女の子特有の柔らかな感触をはっきりと伝えてくる。\n\nContext: 士道 is carrying his classmate 折紙, who is in hospital, on his back. He\nisn’t having the same feeling as he does when he carries 琴里, his sister.\n\n2.折紙は、自分の判断が甘かったことを知った。 剣压の余波で、おおよその威力を **推し量っていたつもりだったが** ーー違う。明らかに、世界が、違う。\n\nContext: 折紙 is fighting a 精霊. The latter uses a sword that has tremendous\npower. 折紙 guessed the power wrongly previously.\n\nHi. Can we use ていたつもりだったが and ているつもりだったが interchangeably in both examples? If\nwe can, what is the difference between ていたつもりだったが and ているつもりだったが in both\nexamples? Is ているつもりだったが used only for durative verbs while ていたつもりだったが only for\npunctual verbs?\n\n(Both seem to mean “XX thought..., but......”).\n\nThank you.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-06T05:55:09.827",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77836",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-06T20:51:27.577",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "36662",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What is the difference between ていたつもりだったが and ているつもりだったが?",
"view_count": 215
}
|
[
{
"body": "The two expressions are same in meaning of \"wrong estimation\". But there are\ndifference in what their basis or criteria comes from.\n\n * \"ていたつもりだったが\"\n\nThis is expression of wrong estimation or confirmation and their basis come\nfrom one's past EXPERIENCE or ACTION.\n\n(e.g. 「太郎はドアに鍵をかけていたつもりだったが、泥棒に入られた」- \"Taro made locked the door, but robbed.\n\n * \"ているつもりだったが\"\n\nThis is expression of wrong estimation or confirmation and their basis come\nfrom one's present HABIT.\n\n(e.g. 「太郎は毎日一生懸命練習しているつもりだったが、試合に負けた。」- Taro practices hard every day, but he\nlost.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-06T20:51:27.577",
"id": "77856",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-06T20:51:27.577",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7575",
"parent_id": "77836",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
77836
| null |
77856
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77839",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I just learned that Ukraine can be written as 烏克蘭, rather than the typical\nkatakana ウクライナ. Why was this country important enough in japanese politics or\nculture to get kanji?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-06T09:09:12.960",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77838",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-06T09:26:43.830",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38628",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"kanji"
],
"title": "How did Ukraine get its own kanji?",
"view_count": 300
}
|
[
{
"body": "Oh, that's what you call [ateji](https://www.tofugu.com/japanese/weird-kanji-\nreadings/). Almost every country gets\n[that](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%9B%BD%E5%90%8D%E3%81%AE%E6%BC%A2%E5%AD%97%E8%A1%A8%E8%A8%98%E4%B8%80%E8%A6%A7).\nFor example, Philippines = 比律賓. The only places that have real kanji names are\nthe ones in the\n[漢字圏](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%BC%A2%E5%AD%97%E6%96%87%E5%8C%96%E5%9C%8F)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-06T09:26:43.830",
"id": "77839",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-06T09:26:43.830",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29327",
"parent_id": "77838",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
77838
|
77839
|
77839
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77947",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I was reading up on noun-related particles and came across\n[「の」](http://www.guidetojapanese.org/learn/grammar/nounparticles#The_particle_as_explanation)\nas an explanatory particle.\n\nFrom my understanding, firstly we need to add 「な」 to differentiate it from\nrelationship 「の」 particle (「ジムなのだ」 vs. 「ジムのだ」). Now, adding it to the end of\nthe sentences adds an explanatory tone that makes the sentence sound like \"It\nis like that ...\". e.g. 「学生なのだ」\n\nThen we have this table of combinations as shown. [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/no4x2.png)\n\nHere is what I think they mean\n\n * 学生なんだ: I am a student [with an explanatory tone]\n * 学生じゃないんだ: I am not a student [ditto.]\n * 学生だったんだ: I was a student [ditto.]\n * 学生じゃなかったんだ: I wasn't a student [ditto.]\n\nThe main problem is I don't understand the second table and this is what I\nguess are the translations:\n\n * 学生なんだ: I am a student [with an explanatory tone]\n * 学生なんじゃない: I am a student, am I not?\n * 学生なんだった: I was a student, wasn't I?\n * 学生なんじゃなかった: I wasn't a student, was I?\n\nCan someone explain what this particle actually means and what these two\ntables actually mean?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-06T10:56:05.010",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77840",
"last_activity_date": "2023-06-06T09:08:16.550",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-06T14:10:14.297",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "39267",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"particle-の"
],
"title": "How does state-of-being + んだ differ from んだ + state-of-being",
"view_count": 279
}
|
[
{
"body": "Similar to the phrases だったからだ and だからだった, the tense and polarity before the\nん/の is the tense and polarity of the state or the action, and the tense and\npolarity after the ん/の is the tense and polarity of it's relevance. Your\ntranslations are pretty accurate.\n\nA phrase like 学生だったんじゃない? would be close to \"isn't it (that/because) they were\nstudents?\" and 学生なんじゃなかった would be close to \"wasn't it (that/because) they are\nstudents?\". Note: The explanatory tone is probably too explicit in my English\ntranslations.\n\nPutting past tense to the right of んだ, especially in relation to a question or\nstatement about the past, could also show more certainty than if past tense is\nto the left, as in いいんじゃなかった being more certain than よかったんじゃない.\n\nI may be oversimplifying things, of course. As with most grammar paradigms\nlike this, not every possible combination is equally likely or even sounds\nnatural, and there may be other nuances.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-08T01:32:38.463",
"id": "77881",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-08T01:32:38.463",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38743",
"parent_id": "77840",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "The tables you shared explain things like differences of `don't seem to V` and\n`seem not to V` or `don't try to V` and `try not to V`. They sometimes cause\ndrastic meaning change.\n\nChecking that のだ and なのだ cause strong affirmation, or emphasis, let's start\nwith negation.\n\n**Negation**\n\nThink about the below negation patterns of \"He is a millionaire\".\n\n> (1) 彼はお金もちじゃないんだ\n>\n> (2) 彼はお金もちなんじゃない\n\n(1) is simple and easier. The affirmation(なのだ) of negation clause. This just\nemphasizes the negation clause. It sounds like \"He is **surely|actually** not\na millionaire.\" If the talker of this line was a gold digger, we could get the\n'disappointed' feeling.\n\n(2) is difficult. It has 2 major meanings. This is the negation of\naffirmation(なのだ). Let me show more examples to explain this case.\n\n> (2a) 彼はお金もちなんじゃないかと思っている\n>\n> (2a) I'm thinking he may be a millionaire.\n\nAs you may be surprised, the negative meaning disappeared completely in this\ncase. You could get this as the negation of emphasized affirmation(なのだ)\nbecomes 'guessing'!! なのだ is also used to show a confidence to tell a fact. We\ncould understand this form as negating the confidence.\n\n> (2b) 彼はお金もちなんじゃない。大富豪だ！\n>\n> (2b) He is not a millionaire but the billionaire!\n\nIn this case, the negation of strong affirmation(なのだ) becomes partial negation\nlike 'partially right but the point is wrong'. This is often used to excuse\nsomething. \n「わざとやったんじゃないよ」\"I didn't do it on purpose.\" It acknowledges 'I did' but he/she\nrather wants to say 'not on purpose'.\n\n**Past tense**\n\n> (3) 株を買ったんだ\n>\n> (4) 株を買うんだった\n\nLet's take examples \"株を買う\" \"buy stocks\". It was hard for me to parse out the\ndifference but finally I got the image below, which is the core model to\nwidely understand the difference.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/A9DCv.jpg)\n\n(3) is simple and easier. The affirmation(なのだ) of past tense clause. This just\nemphasizes the happening in the past while (4) is difficult because (4) has\nmultiple meanings.\n\n> (4a) 失敗した。あのとき株を買うんだった\n>\n> (4a) I missed. I should have bought those stocks.\n\nAlong with the image above, we could interpret this sentence like \"Once I\nthought I'm going to buy those stocks\". This often shows he/she didn't buy\nthem actually.\n\n> (4b) 忘れてた。明日までに株を買うんだった\n>\n> (4b) It reminded me to buy those stocks by tomorrow.\n\nThe fundamental model would be the same as (4a). \"Once I thought I'm going to\nbuy those stocks\" but in this time it leads to a different meaning like\n'forgot but reminded' according to the context.\n\n**Negation and Past tense**\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/o3wQZ.jpg)\n\n> (5) 彼は学生じゃなかったんだ\n>\n> (6) 彼は学生なんじゃなかった\n\n(5) is simple. Just emphasizing \"He was surely|actually not a student.\"\n\nIn the same way, (6) is 2 ways to interpret. One becomes 'guessing' similar to\n(2a) meaning like \"Once I thought he is a student, so he is a student,\nright?\". The other is 'against the expectation' similar to (4b) like \"Once I\nthought he is a student but actually not\".\n\n> (7) お酒を飲まなかったんだ\n>\n> (8) お酒を飲むんじゃなかった\n\n(7) is simple. Just emphasizing \"I surely|actually didn't drink alcohol.\"\n\nIn the same way, (8) is 2 ways to interpret. One is 'regretting' similar to\n(4a) meaning like \"Once I thought I should not drink alcohol but actually\ndid.\" i.e. \"I shouldn't have drunk alcohol\". The other becomes 'guessing' and\n'reminding' mostly with '?' like \"Once I thought I have to drink but I still\ndon't, right?\" i.e. \"I have to drink alcohol, right?\"\n\nThe each meaning of the second table you shared (negation of のだ, なのだ) highly\ndepends on the context. Japanese usually uses them separately especially by\nthe intonation.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-11T08:00:12.240",
"id": "77947",
"last_activity_date": "2023-06-06T09:08:16.550",
"last_edit_date": "2023-06-06T09:08:16.550",
"last_editor_user_id": "38911",
"owner_user_id": "38911",
"parent_id": "77840",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
77840
|
77947
|
77947
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "While I can understand the meaning of the word, I cannot wrap my head around\nthe logic behind it.\n\nIn all similar cases, the basis of the expression is the object of the action:\n\n * Aを食べる ⟶ A: 食べ物\n\n * Aを飲む ⟶ A: 飲み物\n\nBut:\n\n * A **を** 入れる ⟶ n/a\n\n * A **に** 入れる ⟶ A: 入れ物\n\nI have asked my native Japanese teacher, but she could only explain it by\nsaying that the container is still _involved_ in the action of putting things\ninside it, and is thus labeled by that action. But to me the object of an\naction is a quite distinct thing, and the \"direction\" of it all seems off in\nthe case of 入れ物.\n\nCould someone explain the logic behind this? Are there other A-物 expressions\nthat are not based on the object? Or is this just a unique exception?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-06T11:05:16.170",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77841",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-07T09:08:16.943",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-06T17:00:15.930",
"last_editor_user_id": "33435",
"owner_user_id": "33552",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"expressions",
"object"
],
"title": "Is 入れ物 different from other A-物 expressions?",
"view_count": 133
}
|
[
{
"body": "You may be right that most of the examples of nouns following the V連用形＋物\npattern usually describe the direct object of the verb. But that is far from\nalways the case.\n\nOne noteworthy exception that springs to mind is 生き物 (living thing). This\nwould notionally refer to the subject of the verb (e.g. the 私 in 私が生きる),\nrather than a direct object, which this verb only rarely uses (e.g. 瞬間を生きる\nmeaning 'to live in the moment').\n\nSlightly separately but possibly helpful to your understanding, I think it is\nworth noting here that there are also many words following this pattern that\nhave very specific interpretations (unlike the examples you gave). For\ninstance, 吸い物 doesn't refer to anything that uses the verb 吸う (e.g. a\ncigarette); rather, only a dish of a clear broth with ingredients/garnish\nfloating in/on it. **EDIT: It seems that I may have had an slightly overly\nnarrow view of the word 吸い物 myself. Please see comments below.**\n\n吹き出物, meaning a 'pimple' or a 'rash', is a good example of one noun which sits\nin the intersection of not being a direct object, and having a specific\nmeaning. A pimple is not a direct object (taking を) of the verb, as the verb\n吹き出る (meaning gush out, spout, break out) is intransitive. Similarly, 吹き出物\ndoesn't correspond to anything that is gushing out e.g. 水が吹き出る.\n\nSo, it's not worth, in my opinion, trying to find a strict rule here regarding\nit being a direct object of the verb, as opposed to some other part of speech.\nIt's rather just that the verb plays some role in the thing involved, and the\nexpression may convey a broad meaning (like 食べ物 or 飲み物) or a more specific one\n(like 吸い物).",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-06T16:36:41.143",
"id": "77850",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-07T01:55:43.257",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-07T01:55:43.257",
"last_editor_user_id": "33435",
"owner_user_id": "33435",
"parent_id": "77841",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "This is fairly interesting because I finally couldn't find any example as\n\"入れ物\". 乗る in 乗り物 take \"に\" but it won't take \"を\" as 入れる does. Verbs inside\n贈り物(gifts), 売り物(items for sale), 置き物(figurines), 届け物(deliveries) can take both\nに and を naturally but those indicate objects connected after \"を\" not \"に\". They\nNEVER indicate givees, importers, saucers, and mailboxes respectively. \nSo in my observation 入れ物 is an exclusive exception among the rule. \n(As @henreetee mentioned, as a different rule we have many samples assembled\nas attributive verbs like 生き物 living-thing, 光り物 glittering-thing, 回り物\ntransiting-thing as well as 書き物 written-thing, 編み物 knitted-thing, and 忘れ物\nforgotten-thing)\n\nI guess that's because we hardly need to mention something to **put** , but\nfrequently have to talk about something to **put in**. (In fact it's very easy\nto imagine a case that we need a bag) The practicality may have won the\ngrammatical rule in this case.\n\nSo I could suggest the rule below.\n\n(1) A thing used along with attributive verbs like 生き物, 光り物, 書き物 \n(2) A thing to achieve the purpose of its verb like 食べ物, 飲み物, 入れ物, 乗り物 \nBasically in the case(2) the most obvious object is supposed to be taken. If\nit's not obvious, the object connected after を is choosed basically, except\n入れ物.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-07T09:08:16.943",
"id": "77865",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-07T09:08:16.943",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38911",
"parent_id": "77841",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
77841
| null |
77850
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77846",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am reading よつばと！ On page 180 of volume 1, the character Janbo is telling\nYotsuba-chan that he is a \"pro\" when it comes to catching cicadas. In the\nballoon it says:\n\n> いいか よつば 俺はセミを取らせたらプロ級だぜ。 略してセミプロだ。\n\nI understand the meaning of the sentence overall. What I don't understand\nexactly is the actual \"grammar-like\" usage of the causative 取らせる.\n\nI tried to think grammatically\n\n取らせる: \n俺は取る。俺はセミを取る。 \n俺はセミを(よつばに)取らせる。 \nI'll allow (teach?) you to get cicadas.\n\n・・・取らせたらプロだぞ。 \nIf I \"teach\" you to catch cicadas, you'll be a \"pro\".\n\nI wonder if that thought of mine is correct.\n\nみなさん、教えてください。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-06T12:38:46.600",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77842",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-06T14:00:14.633",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-06T13:47:35.170",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "36542",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"causation"
],
"title": "取らせたら: doubts about the Japanese causative form",
"view_count": 209
}
|
[
{
"body": "You can think of it this way:\n\n> 俺は、［（誰かが/お前が）（俺に）セミを取らせたら、］プロ級だぜ。\n\nThe basic structure of this sentence is 俺はプロ級だ.\n\n取らせる, \"make someone catch\", is the causative form of 取る. \nThe subject of 取らせる can be \"(generic) you\". \nThe agent of the action 取る is 俺.\n\n（誰かが/お前が）（俺に）セミを取らせたら... \nLiterally means \"If someone/you make me catch cicadas, ...\"",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-06T14:00:14.633",
"id": "77846",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-06T14:00:14.633",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "77842",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
77842
|
77846
|
77846
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "話し方がちょっと速すぎて私には分かりません。\n\nFor some reason it feels strange to me to go right from すぎて to 私.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-06T12:39:40.813",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77843",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-06T16:01:43.673",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38808",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particles"
],
"title": "What does には do in this sentence, and which part is responsible for the \"for me\" nuance?",
"view_count": 95
}
|
[
{
"body": "Judging from your comment I think your main problem with understanding this\nsentence is in identifying the hidden pronoun/name. It sounds like you want it\nto say that the act of talking fast is difficult for you to understand, but\nthis is not the case.\n\nIn fact 話し方がちょっと速すぎて is an abbreviation for something like 彼の話し方がちょっと速すぎて\n(insert name/pronoun of your choice in place of 彼). As usual Japanese omits\nreference to the subject when it is obvious from context. So the whole\nsentence is\n\n> 話し方がちょっと速すぎて私には分かりません。 \n> His/her/Tanaka's way of talking is too fast, and it's incomprehensible\n> to/for me.\n\nSo the て form just joins the two clauses with 'and' in the usual way.\n\nI think the は acts as a contrast marker in this context. Most people can\nunderstand him but **to me** he is incomprehensible.\n\n**Edit:** Another thought on what may be confusing you is that に is often used\nwith すぎる. For example 私 **に** は高すぎる = It's too expensive **for** me. This に is\nnot the に used in your sentence. That に is associated with 分かる and not with\nすぎる. If you wanted to use this construct you could say something like\n話し方が私にはちょっと速すぎる, though I can't see a way to fit the verb 分かる into this\nconstruction.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-06T13:25:27.417",
"id": "77845",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-06T16:01:43.673",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-06T16:01:43.673",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "7944",
"parent_id": "77843",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
77843
| null |
77845
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77849",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I came across this sentence in the Genki2 textbook (pg. 282): 「時々、隣の人と話したりする。」\n\nI was under the impression that たり is used to list things that you have done/\nwill do. Is the semantics of たり different in this sentence?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-06T13:10:15.043",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77844",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-06T15:24:19.650",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35471",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Can たり be used in a sentence with only one verb?",
"view_count": 142
}
|
[
{
"body": "たり can be used with just one verb. It just means it's a non-exhaustive list of\nactions.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-06T15:24:19.650",
"id": "77849",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-06T15:24:19.650",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39163",
"parent_id": "77844",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
77844
|
77849
|
77849
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "What's the difference?\n\nFor example: 気付かない vs 気付かぬ",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-06T15:01:45.093",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77847",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-06T16:09:52.073",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-06T16:09:52.073",
"last_editor_user_id": "7944",
"owner_user_id": "38789",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"verbs"
],
"title": "Negative verb form vs Verb + ない stem + ぬ",
"view_count": 43
}
|
[] |
77847
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77853",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am reading a manga and found this:\n\n> A : あんなに吞んで大丈夫なの？\n>\n> B : **_らいじょぶ..._**\n\nThe character is drunk so is this a slurred **大丈夫** ？\n\n_It has been a long time since I posted here, the updates are awesome!_",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-06T18:27:40.430",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77852",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-06T18:33:05.643",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "31488",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"slang",
"manga",
"japanese-to-english"
],
"title": "Meaning of らいじょうぶ",
"view_count": 164
}
|
[
{
"body": "Yes,that’s right! It means だいじょうぶ.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-06T18:33:05.643",
"id": "77853",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-06T18:33:05.643",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": null,
"parent_id": "77852",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
77852
|
77853
|
77853
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the purpose of 「ん」in this sentence 「忙しいんだよ」?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-06T19:12:14.283",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77854",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-06T20:20:28.220",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "13923",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"usage"
],
"title": "What is the purpose of 「ん」in this sentence 「忙しいんだよ」?",
"view_count": 143
}
|
[
{
"body": "There are two differences in pronunciation and time tense.\n\nAt the points of pronunciation, 「いそがしいんだよ(isogashimdayo)」's pronunciation is\nsofter than 「いそがしい(isogashii)」, because many Japaneses image that streaks of\nconsonants make sentence more informal and softer.\n\n(Note: いそがしいんだ「よ」, last 「よ」makes so informal expression in Japanese.)\n\nAt the points of tense, 「いそがしいんだよ」 is seemed to be present perfect tense. In\nother words, 「いそがしいんだ」 translated in English, \"I have been busy.\" There are\nsome emphasis of CONTINUITY.\n\nBut 「いそがしい」is seemed to be present tense. In translated to English, \"I'm\nbusy.\" There are no emphasis of CONTINUITY.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-06T20:20:28.220",
"id": "77855",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-06T20:20:28.220",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7575",
"parent_id": "77854",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
77854
| null |
77855
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "They can mean \"stay\" as in \"I stayed in Tokyo the entire month.\" I would like\nto know the following:\n\n 1. Which is more common in spoken Japanese? In written Japanese? \n 2. Is there a slight difference in terms of length of stay? (That is, とどまる gives the impression that people would stay for a little while longer but 滞在する doesn't not.)\n\nThanks in advance for any input you'd give regarding this.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-07T02:08:41.590",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77858",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-07T03:43:27.740",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29327",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"word-choice",
"nuances"
],
"title": "What's the difference between 滞在する and とどまる",
"view_count": 181
}
|
[
{
"body": "滞在する is neutral, and it can be safely used in speech, although it is a little\nstiff or business-like. いる may be more common in very casual settings.\n\nOn the other hand, とどまる often (but not always) has an implication of \"to stay\n_longer_ (than initially expected)\". It goes well in sentences like\nあと数日ここにとどまることにした, これ以上ここにとどまる訳にはいかない and 会社の命令でもう1年この国にとどまる必要がある. Both 滞在する\nand とどまる can refer to a very long stay depending on the context, but とどまる may\ntend to refer to short ones because it is often related to an unexpected or\nundesirable extension.\n\nLastly, 滞在する only means \"to stay at/in a place\", whereas とどまる has broader\nmeanings such as \"to stay (in a social position)\", \"to remain (within certain\nrange)\", etc.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-07T03:43:27.740",
"id": "77859",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-07T03:43:27.740",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "77858",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
77858
| null |
77859
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77905",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "『……そこで、琴里のことをよく知るクルーたちを集めて、二日後のデートプランについて **話し合おうということになった**\nんだが、是非シンにも参加してもらいたいと思ってね』\n\nそういうことならば是非もない。士道は大きくうなずいた。\n\n「わかりました。役に立つかはわかりませんけど、是非協力させてください」\n\nContext: シン is 士道 and first speaker wanted 士道 to attend the discussion so that\nthey can help 琴里.\n\nHi. Does the bold ということになった mean “it’s been decided that...”? If so, why isn’t\nthe plain form 話し合う used there? According to grammar, shouldn’t we use plain\nform before ということになった when the expression means “it’s been decided that...”?\n\nThank you.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-07T05:16:26.897",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77860",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-09T06:46:33.677",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "36662",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Why is volitional form used before ということになった (decide?)?",
"view_count": 85
}
|
[
{
"body": "Yes, ～ようということになった is the combination of the volitional form (よ)う and the\nことになった construction. The difference is small, but with the volitional form, I\nfeel the focus is put more on the _will_ to do something.\n\n * 京都に旅行に行くことになった。 \n→ We decided to go on a trip to Kyoto.\n\n * 京都に旅行に行こうということになった。 \n→ We agreed on the will/plan to go on a trip to Kyoto (we may change our mind\nlater while trying to make a concrete plan).\n\nNote that this doesn't mean you always have to translate them differently.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-09T06:36:01.770",
"id": "77905",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-09T06:46:33.677",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-09T06:46:33.677",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "77860",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
77860
|
77905
|
77905
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "* ①この事故による死傷者は、女性3人、男性4人の合わせて7人ということになる。\n * ②この事故による死傷者は、女性3人、男性4人が合わせて7人ということになる。\n\nA Japanese friend of mine told me that ② is not wrong but ① is better than ②.\nCould any expert tell me why の is better than が in this sentence (and the\ninterchangeability of が合わせる and の合わせる)?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-07T06:25:07.037",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77861",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-07T14:39:03.560",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38439",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"particles"
],
"title": "が合わせて versus の合わせて",
"view_count": 103
}
|
[
{
"body": "I think ② is wrong. To clear the problem up, I change the details.\n死傷者は、女性3人と男性4人の、合わせて7人だ。 So you can realize 合わせて is just a kind of adverb.\n死傷者は、女性3人と男性4人の、7人だ。 Reading this sentence, you know that の is a part of\nadjective like の in 黒の服, 昔の話. 死傷者は、女性3人と男性4人が、7人だ。 I think this can't make\nsense though I can imagine what it means.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-07T13:50:03.843",
"id": "77872",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-07T13:50:03.843",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35021",
"parent_id": "77861",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "> the interchangeability of が合わせる and の合わせる\n\nYou don't seem to be parsing the sentence correctly, I'm afraid.\n\n> この事故による死傷者は、 **女性3人、男性4人の** （合わせて） **7人** ということになる。\n\nThe 合わせて is an adverbial phrase, meaning \"in total\". The の continues to 7人,\nnot to 合わせて.\n\n> 女性3人、男性4人 **の** 7人\n\nThe の is appositive. 「女性3人、男性4人」 is in apposition to 「7人」.\n\nA few examples of appositive の:\n\n> 「弟 **の** 次郎」\"my brother Jiro\" \n> 「羊 **の** ショーン」 \"Shaun the Sheep\" \n> 「リンゴ1箱とミカン1箱 **の** 計2箱」\"a box of apples and a box of oranges, two boxes in\n> total\"\n\nFor more on this, you may want to read:\n\n * <https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/62058/9831>\n * <https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/21464/9831>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-07T14:31:38.623",
"id": "77873",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-07T14:39:03.560",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-07T14:39:03.560",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "9831",
"parent_id": "77861",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
77861
| null |
77873
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "77863",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I was re-watching Dragon Maid and was wondering why Lucoa is using 僕 even\nthough she's female.\n\nLucoa: 僕にも演出やらせて、やらせて!",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-07T06:32:01.347",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "77862",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-07T14:12:50.693",
"last_edit_date": "2020-06-07T14:12:50.693",
"last_editor_user_id": "3097",
"owner_user_id": "39118",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"first-person-pronouns"
],
"title": "Why is Lucoa using 僕 when referring to herself?",
"view_count": 213
}
|
[
{
"body": "It's a tomboy sort of thing. Also, girls that hang around more often with boys\nsometimes pick that up as a matter of asserting their identity as one of the\nguys.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-06-07T06:52:39.860",
"id": "77863",
"last_activity_date": "2020-06-07T06:52:39.860",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20056",
"parent_id": "77862",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
77862
|
77863
|
77863
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.