question
dict | answers
list | id
stringlengths 1
6
| accepted_answer_id
stringlengths 2
6
⌀ | popular_answer_id
stringlengths 1
6
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "78876",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "the verb つく has a lot of vague definitions and, in this sentence, it's not\neven written in kanji so finding the meaning would be more difficult. I\nsearched in jisho.org and am confused to choose the most suitable meaning for\nthis sentence.\n\n<https://jisho.org/search/%E3%81%A4%E3%81%8F>\n\nThanks in advance.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-29T23:55:43.467",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "78874",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-30T03:17:15.337",
"last_edit_date": "2020-07-30T00:46:26.027",
"last_editor_user_id": "39768",
"owner_user_id": "39768",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "つく meaning in キズがつきやすい?",
"view_count": 161
}
|
[
{
"body": "Roughly speaking, つく is an intransitive verb that means one thing, \"to attach\n(to something)\". The subject can be a small physical object:\n\n * 窓に水滴がつく\n * グラスに指紋がつく\n * 地面に足跡がつく\n\n...or an intangible physical attribute:\n\n * 服に臭いがつく\n * 床に汚れがつく\n * 葉に色がつく\n * 車にスピードがつく\n * 木に火がつく\n\n...or a person:\n\n * 門に見張りがつく\n * 患者に看護婦がつく\n\n...or even a characteristic/trait:\n\n * 計画に文句がつく\n * 体に精力がつく\n * 結果に差がつく\n\nHow these are naturally translated to English is a different question, and you\nhave manage them on a case by case basis. You have to memorize common\nexpressions one by one.\n\n * あの木に火がついている。 That tree is on fire.\n * スピードがついた車 a car that is going fast\n\n体に傷がつく literally means \"a scar attaches to one's body\", which may seem\nstrange, but that's how Japanese people say \"to be scarred\" or \"to get a\nscratch\" naturally.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-30T03:17:15.337",
"id": "78876",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-30T03:17:15.337",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "78874",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
78874
|
78876
|
78876
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "78877",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Based on their kanjis, they all appear to have the meaning of attack, and I\nthink that is what makes them similar. How does one distinguish their uses? I\nwould also appreciate a (brief) explanation of how the component kanjis of 襲撃\ncontribute to the meaning of this 熟語.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-30T02:23:47.647",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "78875",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-30T03:32:19.163",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29327",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"word-choice"
],
"title": "What is the difference between 襲う、撃つ、and 襲撃?",
"view_count": 204
}
|
[
{
"body": "襲う and 襲撃(する) are a wago-kango pair ([wago-and-kango](/questions/tagged/wago-\nand-kango \"show questions tagged 'wago-and-kango'\")). They are often\ninterchangeable, but 襲撃 sounds more formal, and its usage is limited to\nviolent attacks by brute force. 襲う has a little broader usages, and we can say\n彼を不幸が襲う, (サッカー)選手がゴールを襲う and ウイルスが町を襲う, too.\n\n撃つ is just \"to shoot someone (with a gun, cannon, etc)\" or \"to shoot (a gun,\netc)\". There is also 討つ, which is an uncommon literary word meaning \"to hit\n(and kill, often under the name of justice)\".",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-30T03:32:19.163",
"id": "78877",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-30T03:32:19.163",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "78875",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
78875
|
78877
|
78877
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I have been trying to work on my Japanese particles for the past few days. I’m\nusing a workbook titled “Japanese particle workbook” and I’m on it’s second\nusage of より where it says it’s the “indication of a comparison”,however; one\nof the sentences used as example doesn’t seem like an comparison much at all,\nand I’m having trouble with the way the book is labeling and translating it.\nHere’s the sentence with the translation: **新しい車を買うより仕方がありません。 There’s no\nother way than to buy a new car.** To me it just seems that they took the\ndictionary definition of より “than” and just used that for their translation.\nIs this a nuanced sort of comparison that I’m not understanding that goes\nbeyond the English translation? I’m having trouble wrapping my head around how\nthis sentences より is used for comparison. Also I would like to note that that\nthe テレビを見るより... example using “Rather” in its translation may be throwing me\noff a bit. [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/bS8M2.jpg)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-30T05:58:31.197",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "78882",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-30T05:58:31.197",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "33524",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"sentence"
],
"title": "Is this 「より」used to make a comparison in this sentence",
"view_count": 75
}
|
[] |
78882
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I composed one sentence.\n\n一人の人魚は「彼は動いていない，死んだでしょう」と言いました。The mermaid said 'It seems he isn't moving,\nmaybe he is dead'\n\nIs it right to say 一人 about mermaids? If they are not humans, should I use\nspecial counting suffix? are there any another mistakes?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-30T08:48:00.573",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "78883",
"last_activity_date": "2021-08-24T12:03:55.667",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39653",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"words",
"suffixes",
"animals"
],
"title": "Is it right say 一人の人魚?",
"view_count": 213
}
|
[
{
"body": "According to the article cited below, the correct counter for mermaids is\nindeed 一人, 二人, etc. It says that because mermaids have a somewhat similar\nphysical form to humans and that they share the same basic emotions as humans,\nthe counter for people is used.\n\n * [https://chigai-allguide.com/%E4%BA%BA%E9%AD%9A%E3%81%AE%E6%95%B0%E3%81%88%E6%96%B9%E3%81%A8%E9%AC%BC%E3%81%AE%E6%95%B0%E3%81%88%E6%96%B9/#:~:text=%E4%BA%BA%E9%AD%9A%E3%81%AF%E3%80%8C%E4%B8%80%E4%BA%BA%E3%80%81%E4%BA%8C%E4%BA%BA,%E6%95%B0%E3%81%88%E3%82%89%E3%82%8C%E3%82%8B%E3%81%93%E3%81%A8%E3%81%8C%E3%81%82%E3%82%8B%E3%80%82](https://chigai-allguide.com/%E4%BA%BA%E9%AD%9A%E3%81%AE%E6%95%B0%E3%81%88%E6%96%B9%E3%81%A8%E9%AC%BC%E3%81%AE%E6%95%B0%E3%81%88%E6%96%B9/#:%7E:text=%E4%BA%BA%E9%AD%9A%E3%81%AF%E3%80%8C%E4%B8%80%E4%BA%BA%E3%80%81%E4%BA%8C%E4%BA%BA,%E6%95%B0%E3%81%88%E3%82%89%E3%82%8C%E3%82%8B%E3%81%93%E3%81%A8%E3%81%8C%E3%81%82%E3%82%8B%E3%80%82)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-30T09:41:58.500",
"id": "78887",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-30T09:41:58.500",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "78883",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
78883
| null |
78887
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "78889",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In an interview, a band member replied to a question about why they decided to\nrelease 2 songs at the same time. So she said that it was their manager who\ntold them that the band was contacted to write 2 songs for two different TV\nshows. So, the band was happy and then she said :\n\n「でも、そのドラマはいつから始まる？」っていうことで（ABCテレビ制作「パーフェクトクライム」。\n\nThere is an english translation of the interview, and there is one part that\nis confusing me.\n\n> I was like, “Wow! So happy! ... But, wait, when does this drama start\n> airing...? \" (\"Perfect Crime\" produced by ABC TV begins airing from January)\n\nっていうことで was translated as \" _I was like_ \". I know there is a grammar point\n\"ということです\" that means \" _I’ve heard that…; rumor has it that…; it appears as\nif; it means that_ \" but it doesn't look like it's this usage. I found this\nquestion [Meaning of\nということで?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/47731/meaning-\nof-%e3%81%a8%e3%81%84%e3%81%86%e3%81%93%e3%81%a8%e3%81%a7) and again, I'm not\nsure if it's the same usage or not.\n\nAny help is much appreciated.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-30T09:00:37.740",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "78884",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-30T16:47:49.443",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9223",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"casual"
],
"title": "Meaning of っていうことで",
"view_count": 493
}
|
[
{
"body": "「Xということ」literally means \"thing that says X\", but that's really a metaphor for\nhow we say \"thing that can be described as X\" in English.\n\nFrom this we can get various extended meanings, including:\n\n * A thing (こと) that can be described as X exists -> (This is known because) I've heard someone else describe an X こと -> Rumour has it that X.\n * A thing (こと) that can be described as X exists -> My reaction that can be described as X exists -> I was like X.\n\nSo both meanings are extensions from the same basic meaning. I guess you could\ncall them different usages though, because each meaning requires you to\nview「Xということ」from a different perspective.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-30T16:41:52.390",
"id": "78889",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-30T16:47:49.443",
"last_edit_date": "2020-07-30T16:47:49.443",
"last_editor_user_id": "39518",
"owner_user_id": "39518",
"parent_id": "78884",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
78884
|
78889
|
78889
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "78886",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "It must be weird for being blue or black ... but is it really green?\n\nAll usages of 青 I've read so far mean blue.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-30T09:08:02.417",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "78885",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-31T04:10:41.203",
"last_edit_date": "2020-07-31T04:10:41.203",
"last_editor_user_id": "29327",
"owner_user_id": "39841",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"meaning"
],
"title": "Does 青山 (aoyama) mean green or blue or black mountain?",
"view_count": 295
}
|
[
{
"body": "For the most part, 青 has come to express the colour blue and 緑 expresses\ngreen, but there are some words or phrases which use the older meaning of 青\nthat encompassed both shades.\n\n_[EDIT]_ As pointed out by Leebo in the comments, there is also the word 青毛\n(black horse coat colour) wherein the black sheen may have a blue tinge, but\nwords with such usages are interesting exceptions rather than the norm.\n\nThe distinction between blue and green in the Japanese language is relatively\nrecent, apparently\n([Wiki](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue%E2%80%93green_distinction_in_language#Japanese)).\nSo while there is a word for green (みどり) now, both colours used to be\nexpressed only with the word 青. That has led to an unusual situation whereby\noccasionally context and convention determine which colour is intended by\nusing 青. For example, 青りんご is obviously 'green apple' and not 'blue apple'.\nLikewise, 青森 could be literally translated as 'green forest' since trees are\ngreen and not blue. The traffic light 青信号 is called a green light in English\nbut in Japan the shade of green used in the actual light does seem to have a\nblue tinge, so that one is debatable. But the point remains that basically, 青\n= blue and 緑 = green, with some exceptions that have remained from older\ntimes.\n\nTherefore, 青山 would be 'green mountain', presumably referring to the mountain\nbeing covered in green trees.",
"comment_count": 10,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-30T09:34:52.753",
"id": "78886",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-30T09:50:24.087",
"last_edit_date": "2020-07-30T09:50:24.087",
"last_editor_user_id": "25875",
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "78885",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
78885
|
78886
|
78886
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "* * *\n\n* * *\n\nthe new version of\n\n# Question:\n\n1）What definition in [Dictionary](https://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%A6)\nimplies the '...ing' function of て,( as in 魚を食べている.)? \n2) What definition in [Dictionary](https://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%A6)\nimplies the 'present perfect' function of て,( as in お前はもう死んでいる.)?\n\n* * *\n\n* * *\n\nThe old version of\n\n# Question:\n\nCan 'verbABCている expressing the **PAST** '\n\nbe **CONSIDERED** as 'adverbialABC+いる'\n\nand be **UNDERSTOOD** as 'is/exists+ABCly/in a state of ABC'?\n\nYou can follow the examples to understand my question well:\n\n# 1)て verb as adverbial:\n\n> 映画を **見て** 食べる.\n>\n> I eat **watching** the movie.\n\nthe adverbial is 見て and the verb is 食べる.\n\n# 2)て-form for past events/states:\n\n> お前はもう **死んで** いる.\n>\n> You already (have) died.\n\n## My proposition is:\n\nCan we consider 死んで an adverbial in 2) of the verb いる and understand the\nsentence as:\n\n> お前はもう1( **死んで** )2(いる).\n>\n> You already 1(dyingly/in a state of dying/in a state of having\n> died)2(exist/are).\n\nand only consider it a particular case of the general rule 1) where the 'past\nsense' is contained/hidden in **死んで** being an adverbial?\n\n_Edit_\n\n> Here's where I started thinking about this idea: [て form and adverbial\n> meaning](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/38769/%e3%81%a6-form-\n> and-adverbial-meaning) \n> **Answer** \n> Yes it's adverbial in relation to the verb (predicate), but you can't say\n> it's simply an adverb (you can't use a te-form verb alone as an adverb).",
"comment_count": 16,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-30T20:30:46.873",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "78891",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-03T17:49:06.957",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-03T14:17:23.267",
"last_editor_user_id": "39768",
"owner_user_id": "39768",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"て-form"
],
"title": "Where do dictionaries imply the use of て as 'present perfect/past' and '...ing'?",
"view_count": 157
}
|
[
{
"body": "* * *\n\n* * *\n\n# Remark:\n\nI strrugled a bit to understand what ① and ⑧ speak about. And i'm not sure if\nmy choice of the definitions was correct, but my effort lead me to this\nanswer. \n \nAny additional explanations or corrections/improvements concerning my answer\nare appreciated.\n\n* * *\n\n* * *\n\n# Answer:\n\nて is a conjunctive and has several definitions according to the dictionary\n<https://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%A6>\n\n> \n> Concerning the pattern **1)映画を見て食べる.** I think it corresponds to the\n> definition ① in 一（ 接助 ）in the dictionary.\n\n> \n> Concerning the pattern **2)お前はもう死んでいる.** I think it corresponds to\n> definition ⑧ in 一（ 接助 ）in the dictionary.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-02T20:37:01.913",
"id": "79928",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-03T17:49:06.957",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-03T17:49:06.957",
"last_editor_user_id": "39768",
"owner_user_id": "39768",
"parent_id": "78891",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
}
] |
78891
| null |
79928
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I tried to find kanji for the name Aimi by looking at the readings of kanji on\njisho.org.\n\nDo the kanji 鴉靉魅 work for the name Aimi?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-30T21:49:35.683",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "78892",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-30T23:19:07.793",
"last_edit_date": "2020-07-30T23:19:07.793",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "39848",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"kanji",
"names"
],
"title": "Does 鴉靉魅 work for the name Aimi?",
"view_count": 147
}
|
[
{
"body": "Well, it sort of works, depending how you interpret \"works\".\n\nThe ENAMDICT database contains many rare names (and [over 100\nways](https://jisho.org/search/aimi%20%23names) of writing the name あいみ in\n_kanji_ — but not 鴉靉魅).\n\nThe database _does_ contain entries\n\n * あいか 【鴉嘩】\n\n * そうあ 【蒼鴉】\n\n * えいこ 【靉子】\n\nas well as several names using 魅 for the (common) ending, such as\n\n * あさみ 【亜佐魅】\n\nas \"female given name\" suggesting that all characters might be used in a name.\n\nReading 鴉 and 靉 as _a_ and _i_ is \"theoretically\" possible, but almost\nimpossible to guess. Note also that these two are _hyōgai_ _kanji_ , so they\ncould not be used in a given name for a baby girl (or boy) born in Japan now.\n\nAlso, the choice of _kanji_ does looks a bit like someone wanted a name with\nas many _kanji_ and as many strokes as possible.\n\nIf you wanted a more \"realistic\" name you could keep 魅 as _mi_ and put either\n\n 1. two _kanji_ for _ai_ , such as 安意 for 安意魅, say, or\n 2. a single _kanji_ for _ai_ , such as 愛 or 和 or 想 or 藍 for 愛魅 etc.\n\nI think this way you can get a pretty name, which isn't too eccentric.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-30T22:34:04.967",
"id": "78893",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-30T23:13:59.650",
"last_edit_date": "2020-07-30T23:13:59.650",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "78892",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
78892
| null |
78893
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "Is ちょっと待って。 grammatically correct? Since 待って is an adverbial and must be\nattached to another verb (as far as i heard/know).",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-30T22:54:49.050",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "78894",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-30T22:54:49.050",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39768",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"て-form",
"adverbial"
],
"title": "Is ちょっと待って。 grammatically correct? Since 待って is an adverbial and must be attached to another verb (as far as i heard/know)",
"view_count": 73
}
|
[] |
78894
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "79897",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Now i know that 元気を出せよ。=Cheer up. But i have no clue what's going on in the\nexpression.\n\nHere's my attempt to literally translate it with the help of Jisho.org:\n\n元気を出せよ。=You can reveal/show full spirit/livelyhood, you know. Supposing that\n出す is in potential.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-30T23:17:16.490",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "78895",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-31T02:44:36.733",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39768",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"expressions",
"conjugations"
],
"title": "What conjugation does出す/出せる take in this expression;元気を出せよ。?",
"view_count": 198
}
|
[
{
"body": "This is not the potential form, it's the imperative / command form of 出す. The\nform for issuing commands. For a godan verb like 出す, you change the final mora\nto the equivalent え column character.\n\nだす > だせ \nきく > きけ \nのむ > のめ \nはしる > はしれ \nさそう > さそえ\n\nThe final よ is the sentence-ending emphasis particle よ.\n\nJisho actually shows inflections of verbs. If you go to the entry for 出す and\nclick \"show inflections\" you'll see the imperative form at the bottom.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-30T23:57:30.757",
"id": "78896",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-30T23:57:30.757",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "20479",
"parent_id": "78895",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "The **出す** is in it's imperative form(command form). according to [this\nsite](https://www.japanistry.com/the-imperative/) the **よ** at the end of the\nsentence is helping to soften the use of the imperative.A bit more info can be\nfound on the site; I recommend checking it out as it goes over the basics of\nimperative verbs quite extensively.\n\nHere are two example sentences I pulled from Tangorin I hope this helps show\nimperative vs. potential. [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/h6yt3.jpg)\n\nI hope I was able to help even just a little bit.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-31T02:44:36.733",
"id": "79897",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-31T02:44:36.733",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "33524",
"parent_id": "78895",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
78895
|
79897
|
78896
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I was watching a Japanese movie and incidentally it is mentioned that Ichi is\na common name given to a blind person. Why would that be?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-31T01:47:01.543",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79896",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-31T01:47:01.543",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9514",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"names"
],
"title": "Why is Ichi a common name for a blind person?",
"view_count": 504
}
|
[] |
79896
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Is it possible that there just may be a verb that is being implied? The\nphrases are as follows (these are extracts of a song, so I've bolded the\nphrases in question and left the continuing lyrics as they are in case they\nmight be of any importance):\n\n> **白く 白く 吹雪のような** そう出逢う前から解ってた この想い\n\n> **強く 強く 願いは強く** 繋ぐよ その手を\n\nHowever when I look for translations, none of them ever present the く form as\nan adverb. In fact, one of the translations even go so far as to interpret the\nく forms as comparative adjectives:\n\n> Whiter and whiter, like a blizzard\n\n> Stronger and stronger, my wishes get stronger\n\nI'm not sure why it's translated as a comparative adjective, and if it does\nmean something like \"White, white, like a blizzard,\" could the phrase have\nbeen written as \"白い 白い 吹雪のような\" instead?\n\nAnd the second line says \"My wishes **get stronger** \", but the \"get\" part is\nmissing. Could it be that there is actually a になる phrase that is only implied?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-31T14:18:32.780",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79899",
"last_activity_date": "2021-08-26T08:06:30.577",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39853",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"adverbs"
],
"title": "Using a く form of an い adjective with a noun",
"view_count": 282
}
|
[
{
"body": "In your first phrase, yes there is an implied verb. That verb is だ. Some\npeople don't even think of an implied だ, but actually say that の is a form of\nだ, like だった and な. But both views boil down to the same thing.\n\n> Whiter and whiter, like a blizzard\n\nsounds natural in English, but it's not a literal translation. Closer would\nbe:\n\n> Like a blizzard that is whiter and whiter\n\nOr, even closer:\n\n> Like a blizzard that is whitely, whitely\n\nYou can probably see why none of the translations ever present the く form as\nan adverb. \"Whitely\" isn't even a word in English, much less a natural\nsounding translation.\n\nNow for the unintuitive translation:\n\n> Whiter and whiter, like a blizzard\n\nWhat's being said is that is that the blizzard is becoming whiter over time.\nIn English this is expressed using the comparative form of \"white\", as the\nblizzard is being compared to its past self. The blizzard now is whiter that\nis was a second ago.\n\nSince there is no comparative form of adjectives in Japanese, it's impossible\nto express the idea of a blizzard getting whiter over time concisely using a\ncomparison. Instead, it's expressed by the repetition of 白く.\n\nKeep in mind, this is just one translation. Another interpretation could just\nbe that the blizzard is very white.\n\n\n\nI'm not totally sure about the difference between「白く 白く 吹雪のような」and「白い 白い\n吹雪のような」. I'm no native.\n\nMy guess is that, since く is the connective form of 白い, it may sound more\nnatural to repeat 白く instead of 白い. 白く may also may more easily imply the\n\"whiter and whiter\" interpretation. This is because 白い just describes the\nstate of the blizzard \"a white white blizzard\", while 白く, being an adverb,\nimplies an action. Specifically, _being_ white, so it more easily implies\n_becoming_ more white.\n\n\n\nYour second sentence makes sense for basically the same reasons as the first\none, but without the added confusion of an implied だ.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-31T19:00:49.633",
"id": "79903",
"last_activity_date": "2020-07-31T19:31:02.207",
"last_edit_date": "2020-07-31T19:31:02.207",
"last_editor_user_id": "39518",
"owner_user_id": "39518",
"parent_id": "79899",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "### Background: problematic circumstances for understanding\n\nPoetry is a really difficult format for trying to learn any language,\nprecisely because poetry uses different structures and omits various things.\n\nIn addition, translation is a _**terrible**_ way to try to understand the\nmechanics of any source language, precisely because the process of translation\nunavoidably results in different grammar and mechanics in the target language.\n\n### Looking more closely at the text\n\nIn your sample, the 白く is adverbial, applying not to the noun, but rather to\nthe overall line / sentence. Note too that whitespace is not a common feature\nin written Japanese -- so if someone is adding spaces, it's meant more like\npunctuation.\n\nLet's break it down, word by word.\n\n> [白く]{whitely } [白く]{whitely } [吹雪]{blizzard }[の]{[POSS] }[よう]{likeness\n> }[な]{[MOD] } [そう]{that way }[出逢う]{encounter }[前]{before }[から]{from\n> }[解って]{understanding/knowing }[た]{was } [この]{this }[想い]{thought/feeling } \n> ↑ \n> whitely, whitely, like a blizzard, knowing it from before meeting like\n> that, this feeling\n\nThe _whitely_ here isn't necessarily limited in scope to just the blizzard,\nbut instead kind of sets the mood or scenery for the whole line.\n\nYour second line:\n\n> [強く]{strongly } [強く]{strongly } [願い]{wish/desire }[は]{[TOPIC] }[強く]{strongly\n> } [繋ぐ]{tie together }[よ]{[EMPH]} [その]{that/those }[手]{hand(s) }[を]{[OBJ]} \n> ↑ \n> strongly, strongly, the wishes/desires (are strong / strongly)*, [I?] tie\n> [them] together! those hands\n\nHere again, the _strongly_ isn't necessarily limited in scope. Also, we have\nsome poetic license, deliberately mixing things to allow for additional\nallusions and associations.\n\nThe asterisk here points out this key phrase. Sometimes an adverbial form is\nused conjunctively. In teaching materials for English-language readers, we are\noften taught that the conjunctive (\"this _and_ [something else]\") form for\n\"-i\" adjectives needs to be ～くて, but in reality, folks sometimes use just ～く.\n\nIn the line of the poem, this phrase about the \"wishes\" or \"desires\" could be\ninterpreted two ways -- as a separate statement using the conjunctive\nadverbial, wherein the speaker / poet is stating that their \"wish/desire\"\nsimply is \"strong, and...\", or mixed into the rest of the line, wherein\nsomehow the \"wish/desire\" is being strongly tied together with the hands,\nperhaps alluding to getting married. I suspect that both interpretations are\nintended, and that the ambiguity is deliberate.\n\n### Initial questions\n\nLet's loop back to what you specifically asked.\n\n> Is it possible that there just may be a verb that is being implied?\n\nAbsolutely, that is possible. As poetry, though, that may have been\ndeliberately omitted. Sometimes too, an adverb is used to establish the \"mood\"\nor \"scene\" for the current context. Consider English adverbial phrases used to\nstart a sentence, such as _\" like the dawning of the day,...\"_ or even just _\"\nsurprisedly,...\"_ I suspect that is how the adverbs are being used here.\n\n> I'm not sure why it's translated as a comparative adjective\n\nI'm not either. I suspect the translator was taking a few liberties to try to\ncreate the target-language text. There's nothing here that implies any\ncomparison, or any change in degree of adjectiveness.\n\n> ... and if it does mean something like \"White, white, like a blizzard,\"\n> could the phrase have been written as \"白い 白い 吹雪のような\" instead?\n\nIt _could_ , but the meaning does shift in doing so -- the scope of meaning\nfor 白い would be limited to the 吹雪. Again, 白く 白く is not necessarily describing\nthe blizzard, and appears to be coloring the entire scene and context. Even\nthe 想い, implying a blankness or emptiness.\n\n> And the second line says \"My wishes get stronger\", but the \"get\" part is\n> missing. Could it be that there is actually a になる phrase that is only\n> implied?\n\nNo, the translation here is off. There's nothing at all in the source text\nabout getting or becoming stronger. The 強く is describing either 1) the 願い\nthemselves, 2) the manner in which その手 should be 繋ぐ-ed, or 3) both.\n\n### Notes\n\nI'd like to comment again that poetry is difficult to interpret even in one's\nmother tongue, and poetry in translation is, unfortunately, an awful way to\ntry to learn another language. If you're looking at this as a way of\nunderstanding the process of translating poetry, this is great exercise! :) If\nyou're trying to understand the Japanese by looking at the translation, I'd\nrecommend avoiding poetry altogether. If you're trying to understand\ntechniques of expression in Japanese by looking at Japanese poetry, that's\ndifficult, but potentially rewarding advanced stuff -- just don't get caught\nup in the translation.\n\n* * *\n\nPlease comment if the above does not address your question.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-01T00:57:42.667",
"id": "79910",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-01T04:01:49.947",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-01T04:01:49.947",
"last_editor_user_id": "5229",
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "79899",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
79899
| null |
79910
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "79902",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Imagine you have a list of small square representing different languages where\neach symbol is using the language itself that it represents. For roman\nlanguages it is mostly language codes in roman letters like \"DE\" for German,\n\"EN\" for English and \"ES\" for Spanish as they do well fit into square boxes.\nBut if you have to use just one symbol to represent the _Japanese_ language\n(in Japanese), which would you choose so a Japanese person recognizes their\nown language as fast and distinctly as possible?\n\nI think fitting 2 or more Kanji into the small square symbol is not a good\noption. Here are some options I thought about (though, I am only at a\nbeginner's level of learning the language and don't have much experience using\nit):\n\n * I thought about \"和\" but to my understanding it represents the country, not the language.\n * Another option I thought abhout was simply \"あ\" because there is no other language than Japanese where Hiragana exist and therefore it can only represent Japanese, but then again it is not meaningfull in Japanese on its own.\n * Lastly I thought about \"語\", which could be missinterpreted as selecting \"language\" but just in Japanese.\n\nAny suggestions and especially experiences are welcome!",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-31T15:20:50.070",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79901",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-25T20:24:16.983",
"last_edit_date": "2020-07-31T15:35:20.560",
"last_editor_user_id": "6985",
"owner_user_id": "6985",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"abbreviations",
"symbols"
],
"title": "Japanese symbol for \"Japanese language\"",
"view_count": 1243
}
|
[
{
"body": "ES, DE, EN are all ISO codes -- \"ISO\" as in \"International Standards\nOrganization\" (technically, it's the [\"International Organization for\nStandardization\"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Organization_for_Standardization)).\nThese codes are used worldwide, particularly in programming and other\ntechnical contexts. In localization engineering, I've dealt with these codes\nfor years. There's no particular value in developing a competing standard—the\npoint of a standard is that, well, it's the **standard**.\n\nThat said, Japanese already has a convention for abbreviating country names in\ntext -- usually the first kanji of the country's full name.\n\n * 英【えい】 for the UK / English, from 英【い】吉【ぎ】利【り】[ ]{す} ( _Igirisu_ , probably from Portuguese _Inglês_ , with the spelling from Chinese)\n * 露【ろ】 for Russia / Russian, from 露【ろ】西【し】亜【あ】 ( _Roshia_ , from Russian Росси́я ( _Rossíja_ ), with the spelling probably partly from Chinese)\n * 仏【ふ】 for France / French, from 仏【ふ】蘭【らん】西【す】 ( _Furansu_ , ultimately from French _France_ , spelling derivation unknown)\n * [独]{ど or どく} for Germany / German, from 独【ど】逸【いつ】 ( _Doitsu_ , from Dutch _Duits_ //dœy̯ts//)\n * 中【ちゅう】 for China / Chinese, from 中国【ちゅうごく】 ( _Chūgoku_ , from Chinese 中國)\n * 日【にち】 for Japan / Japanese, from 日【に】本【ほん】 ( _Nihon_ )\n\nAnd so on and so forth. Pretty much every country that has a kanji-based name\ncan be abbreviated in this way. However, there are exceptions, so be sure to\nlook things up:\n\n * 蘭 for the Netherlands / Dutch, from 阿【お】 **蘭【らん】** 陀【だ】 ( _Oranda_ , from Portuguese _Holanda_ with a silent \"H\", meaning \"Holland\" -- which historically was the leading province of the Dutch Republic and roughly corresponds to the provinces North Holland and South Holland, two of the twelve provinces that make up the present country of the Netherlands)\n\n* * *\n\n### Update\n\nAs pointed out by Earthliŋ in the comments, sometimes Japan and Japanese are\nreferred to by the abbreviation 和. This stretches back over a thousand years\nto the initial textual references to any country referred to as \"Japan\", when\nChinese-language sources describe the country of \"Wa\" or 倭 ( _wa_ , literally\n\"dwarf\" in Chinese). See [the 和 entry at\nWiktionary](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E5%92%8C#Etymology_1) for more\ndetail. (Full disclosure: I edited that entry.)\n\nOne example of modern usage of this 和 to mean \"Japanese\" is [this German-\nJapanese dictionary over on\nAmazon](https://www.amazon.co.uk/%E7%8B%AC%E5%92%8C%E4%B8%AD%E8%BE%9E%E5%85%B8/dp/4767440203),\nusing 独和【どくわ】 to refer to \"German\" and \"Japanese\". It's also the component\nused in the term 和文【わぶん】 \"Japanese text\", in contrast to 漢文【かんぶん】 or \"Chinese\ntext\". Or in 和語【わご】 \"Japanese language\" in contrast to 漢語【かんご】 or \"Chinese\nlanguage\".\n\nMeanwhile, there is also a dictionary from the early 1600s that has been very\nimportant in discovering how Japanese sounds have changed over the centuries,\ncalled [the 日葡辞書【にっぽじしょ】](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nippo_Jisho), using 日\nto refer to \"Japanese\" instead.\n\nSo I think both 和 and 日 would work as one-character abbreviations for\n\"Japanese\". My subjective sense is that the two might be used in different\ncontexts, but I do not understand the difference well enough to explain it\nhere.\n\n* * *\n\nPlease comment if the above does not address your question.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-31T16:50:13.103",
"id": "79902",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-25T20:24:16.983",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-25T20:24:16.983",
"last_editor_user_id": "1628",
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "79901",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 14
}
] |
79901
|
79902
|
79902
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80039",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "When I say I’m now busy, it’s\n\n今は忙しい\n\nBut what I don’t understand is that 今 is being used as the topic. I’m this\nsentence, the real person that’s busy is me, so if I choose to not omit the\nperson, but still want to use 今 as the topic, can I use multiple は？\n\n今は、私は忙しい (is this even correct?)\n\nIf not what’s the right way of not omitting the subject yet using 今 as the\ntopic?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-31T19:22:59.903",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79904",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-09T00:18:38.610",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39855",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"usage",
"particles",
"particle-は"
],
"title": "Multiple subject?",
"view_count": 359
}
|
[
{
"body": "You can use multiple は grammatically, although consecutive use of it sounds\nweird a little. But basically in Japanese sentence we have only one subject,\nas well as in English sentence.\n\nBecause \"は\" is not \"to be\" verb, but an adverbial (or binding) particles which\nstrengthens the meaning of the preceding word, the word followed by は is not\nnecessarily a subject, and whether it becomes a subject or not depends on the\nword and the context.\n\nLet's say,\n\n今、私は忙しい - strengthens _I_ \n今は、私(が)忙しい - strengthens _Now_\n\n今は、私は忙しい - strengthens both _I_ and _Now_\n\nThe last example leads one word to cancel out the importance of another word.\nThat's why multiple consecutive use of は sounds weird.\n\nAnd in all 3 examples, 私 is always a subject and 今 is not. Theoretically 今 can\nbe a subject, but I don't come up with a good example right now.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-09T00:18:38.610",
"id": "80039",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-09T00:18:38.610",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39932",
"parent_id": "79904",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
79904
|
80039
|
80039
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "79909",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Here's a small thing I never thought about for too long as I always kinda\ndismissed it due to the context usually being clear enough, but now I've\ngotten curious and I figured I'd ask away:\n\nLet's take the example from the thread title「酒を飲ませる人」: Can this generally be\nunderstood as both \"the person, who makes/lets somebody else drink alcohol\"\nand \"the person, who's being made/let to drink alcohol\"? Same question\nwith「命令する人」: \"The person who gives orders\" and \"the person who receives\norders\"?\n\nI'm not really sure how I'd go about googling this particular question so I\napologize if this is a very simple one.\n\nThank you very much in advance!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-31T21:58:06.090",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79905",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-04T02:08:58.340",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-04T02:08:58.340",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "35224",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"relative-clauses",
"ambiguous-relative-clauses"
],
"title": "Ambiguity when describing with verbs, e.g. 酒を飲ませる人",
"view_count": 197
}
|
[
{
"body": "Yes, 酒を飲ませる人 is ambiguous. In general, this ambiguity can happen in Japanese\nrelative clauses typically when a verb takes two or more human arguments (～が,\n～に, ～を, etc). Here are similar questions:\n\n * [Clarification about how 惚れた should be translated](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/60895/5010)\n * [が in subordinate clauses](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/30171/5010)\n * [How does the passive form work here?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/38739/5010)\n * [The meaning of ”あれは魔術師に与えられた祝福”](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/76392/5010)\n * [Relative Clause Ambiguous](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/60385/5010)\n * [Parsing the sentence 書く人物の顔が頭に入っていないと効果はない](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/64621/5010)\n\nUsually the surrounding context can tell the intended interpretation. To\ndisambiguate this without any further context, you can simply fill one of the\nmissing arguments.\n\n * 彼女 **が** 酒を飲ませる人: the person who she gives alcohol to\n * 彼女 **に** 酒を飲ませる人: the person who makes her drink alcohol",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-01T00:17:40.707",
"id": "79909",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-01T00:22:46.570",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-01T00:22:46.570",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "79905",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] |
79905
|
79909
|
79909
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I've started to notice this, and I'm not sure whether my eyes are deceiving me\nor not, but it seems as if several, but not all loans have a high statistical\nprobability of vowels being reduced/devoiced in contexts where they would be\nvery unlikely to in a native Japanese word, that place being fill-vowels being\nintroduced purely to fit with Japanese phonotactics.\n\nAs an example, in the loan “dórama” [accute accent used to indicate accented\nmora] from English “drama”; the /o/ seems to be almost universally , somewhat,\ndevoiced by many speakers, which would be highly unlikely for an /o/ in\nbetween two voiced sounds, in an accented mora in a native word.\n\nI did a spectrographical analysis and it should be clear which of both\nspectrograms is from “dórama” and which from “dóreka”, by the same speaker:\n\n[\n\nDark bands at the bottom indicate vowels or vowel-like sounds in spectrograms,\nfor those not in the know of this. It is clear that the dark band in the\nbottom of the first mora in the first picture takes a far less prominent\nexistence than in the second one, indicating a reduction of vowel-like\nqualities, as is common for Japanese reduced vowels — it should also be clear\nthat the /m/ in “dórama” has some vowel like qualities, whereas the /k/ in\n“dóreka” does not.\n\nI have used the speaker Skent from [this\nlist](https://forvo.com/word/%E3%83%89%E3%83%A9%E3%83%9E/#ja), which I also\nused for “dóreka”, as he was conveniently in both. One may listen to all the\nexamples of “dórama” there and investigate whether one agrees with me that\nthe “do” mora is uncharacteristically reduced with all speakers, and compare\nit with [these readings](https://forvo.com/word/%E3%81%A9%E3%82%8C/).\n\nI could find no research that investigated this matter — do any Japanese\nnative speakers have any input on the matter whether they feel that not\nreducing the “do” in “dórama” would sound unnatural or something else?",
"comment_count": 11,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-07-31T23:16:42.377",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79908",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-03T14:07:25.780",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-03T14:07:25.780",
"last_editor_user_id": "35937",
"owner_user_id": "35937",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 10,
"tags": [
"loanwords",
"phonetics"
],
"title": "Do loanwords have quasi-phonemic vowel reduction?",
"view_count": 318
}
|
[] |
79908
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "79915",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm not completely sure on how to write cho, chu, che and cha in Japanese\n(using hiragana). I have a rough idea that includes having the ち (chi)\ncharacter followed by any of the 'y' characters (yo, yu, ya). For example: ちゃ\nto make a cha sound.\n\nIs this correct? and would you be able to do the same thing with one a, e, o,\nu and i? For example: ちぉ to make a cho sound.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-01T08:46:14.970",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79914",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-01T15:42:13.840",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-01T10:19:25.980",
"last_editor_user_id": "32952",
"owner_user_id": "39861",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"hiragana"
],
"title": "How do you write cho, chu, che and cha in Japanese using hiragana?",
"view_count": 2843
}
|
[
{
"body": "You can write them using a combination of ち and the small characters for 'y'\nas you already stated for cho, chu and cha:\n\n * ちゃ (cha) as in おちゃ (tea)\n\n * ちょ (cho) as in ちょっと (a little bit)\n\n * ちゅ (chu) as in ちゅうがく (junior high school)\n\nAs for che, you can write it using a small え:\n\n * che ちぇ\n\nI can't come up with any example word where ちぇ is used in hiragana. But the\nsound is used (and spelled in katakana) in some words, for example:\n\n * チェック (check), where チ (chi) is used in combination with a small エ (e).\n\n> Would you be able to do the same thing with one of a, e, o, u, i. for\n> example: ちぉ to make a cho sound.\n\nAs for your second question, this is what I think:\n\n 1. ちぁ,ちぅ and ちぉ are not correct, since the same sounds are already conveyed by using ちゃ, ちゅ and ちょ.\n\n 2. ちぃ does not make sense, because ち (chi) alone already includes the sound 'i'.\n\n 3. ちぇ is the only acceptable one. The reason for this is that there is no single hiragana character for 'ye', whereas there is one for 'ya', 'yu' and 'yo'.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-01T10:03:36.857",
"id": "79915",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-01T15:42:13.840",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-01T15:42:13.840",
"last_editor_user_id": "32952",
"owner_user_id": "32952",
"parent_id": "79914",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
79914
|
79915
|
79915
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have had a conversation with a Japanese person and I asked the question\n\n> 幸せですか？\n\nThe reply was:\n\n> 幸せ **なほう** だと思います\n\nI have seen ほう used in the same context as より when comparing two things but\nI've not seen it attached to a な type adjective top describe a state of being.\nCould anyone help me with this grammar point please?\n\nThanks.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-01T13:37:12.317",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79916",
"last_activity_date": "2021-01-16T22:00:50.053",
"last_edit_date": "2020-12-17T19:32:22.740",
"last_editor_user_id": "33435",
"owner_user_id": "39863",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"adjectives"
],
"title": "What is the meaning of な＋ほう",
"view_count": 201
}
|
[
{
"body": "ほう means \"direction\" in this context, and can use the kanji 方.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-12-17T21:11:05.360",
"id": "83142",
"last_activity_date": "2020-12-17T21:11:05.360",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "34142",
"parent_id": "79916",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
}
] |
79916
| null |
83142
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "79919",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I found this sentence, of which I understand the general meaning, but can't\nreally grasp the role and implication of the last part:\n\n> 呼ばれてやってきた電気屋が調べたところ、故障の原因は室外機の基板が壊れていること **にあるとのことだった**\n\nAs far as I understand:\n\n呼ばれてやってきた電気屋が調べたところ: After the technician I called checked\n\n故障の原因室外機の基板が壊れている: The cause of the failure was the substrate of the outside\nunit was broken\n\nThe 「こと」 after that nominalize the sentences, like \"The thing that the\nsubstrate of the outside unit was broken was the cause of the failure\", but I\ncan't understand the 「にあるとのことだった」 part; I tried searching a bit on Google, but\nI'm not even sure how to parse it and how the single part works together, like\nI don't know what the 「と」 after 「にある」 is supposed to mean.\n\nIt seems like it means something \"[The technician] said that\", like a formal\nversione of 「と言った」, and a native Japanese confirmed that it means something\nlike that, but I wasn't really able to grasp the meaning of the whole\nstructure.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-01T13:54:15.960",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79917",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-01T15:03:54.137",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35362",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Meaning of にあるとのことだった",
"view_count": 144
}
|
[
{
"body": "If you're thinking in terms of English alone, the following might seem\nsufficient.\n\n> 呼ばれてやってきた電気屋が調べたところ、故障の原因は室外機の基板が壊れていることにある\n\nBut not in Japanese. That's because you're explaining something. You're\nexplaining the source of the problem. When you provide an explanation for\nsomething in Japanese, to sound natural, you make that explicitly clear by\nadding one of the following to the end of the explanation:\n\n> からだ\n>\n> のだ\n>\n> んだ\n\nor as in this case:\n\n> ことだ\n\nFrom your posted question, it seems you think that the ことにある is unnecessary.\nBut let's look at what you would have left if you omitted that:\n\n> 故障の原因は基板が壊れている\n\nwhich kind of sounds like you're trying to say\n\n> \"The cause/source of the problem broke the circuit board\"\n\nI suppose that could be possible. More likely, you want to say,\n\n> \"The cause/source of the problem was that the circuit board was broken\"\n\nTo make this clear, you need to nominalize 基板が壊れている which is achieved by\nadding こと. So, you could conceivably say\n\n> 故障の原因は基板が壊れていることだ\n\nBut this sounds a bit abrupt. Per what I said above, since this is an\nexplanation, it would be better to say something like\n\n> 故障の原因は基板が壊れていることなのだ\n\nHowever, this is clearly not what the author is trying to say. If we look at\nthe original sentence, I would render ことにある into English as \"lies in\". Thus\nthe last portion of the sentence could be rendered into English as\n\n> \"The source of the problem lay in a broken circuit board\"",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-01T14:48:55.900",
"id": "79919",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-01T15:03:54.137",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-01T15:03:54.137",
"last_editor_user_id": "4875",
"owner_user_id": "4875",
"parent_id": "79917",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
79917
|
79919
|
79919
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80054",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "* * *\n\n* * *\n\nThe original title of\n\n# Question:\n\n## Sentences with strange/Incorrect(from English point of view) [Time\nconjunctive][Conclusive verb form] combinations and aspects/nuances reflected?\n\n* * *\n\nI read this thread:\n\n> [How can this sentence using 次 be in the past\n> tense?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/16158/how-can-this-\n> sentence-using-%e6%ac%a1-be-in-the-past-\n> tense/16159?noredirect=1#comment130246_16159)\n>\n> ### Answer\n>\n> As such, it's grammatically possible to say things in Japanese like\n> 昨日起きるところで \"yesterday just before I wake up\" (the context is yesterday, and\n> the speaker, at the point being described, has not yet woken), or\n> 明日あの本を読みきれた後で \"tomorrow after I finished reading that book\" (the context is\n> tomorrow, and the speaker, at the point being described, will have finished\n> reading). English doesn't work this way, so just translating word-for-word\n> might get you confused. It took me a while to wrap my head around this\n> difference.\n\n* * *\n\n* * *\n\nConsidering the thread above, does any of these patterns exist? What\naspect/nuance does each one reflect?:\n\n 1. > [Future time conjunctive][Past tense conclusive verb]: \n> Tomorrow I woke up. \n> Does something like 明日食べた. exist? \n> +[ **遅く寝るより** ]、早く[ **寝た** ]方がいいですよ。 \n> +彼と結婚しようかするまいか **悩むく** らいなら、 **やめた** ほうがいいと思う。 \n> + その会合は勉強に[ **ならない** ]。要するに時間の無駄[ **だった** ]。\n\n 2. > [Past time conjunctive][Future/Present tense conclusive verb]: \n> Yesterday I wake/will wake up. \n> Does something like 昨日食べる. exist? \n> I found these examples:+ [ **困った時は** ]お互いに助け合って[ **いこうではありません** ]か。 \n> + **意見を求められたが、昨日** の会議の内容が全然 **わからない** ので、 **答えようがない** 。\n\n 3. > [Past time conjunctive][Command form verb]: \n> Yesterday, wake up! \n> Does something like 昨日食べろ. exist?\n\nwhat aspect(or nuance) does each of the three cases reflect? Real example\nsentences are appreciated.\n\nFor example i don't know if: \n(I) [遅く寝るより、 **早く寝た** 方がいいですよ。]= (II) [遅く寝るより、 **早く寝る** 方がいいですよ。] . \nIf they are the same then they have the same aspect(right?) \nbut in (I) i feel the nuance added is something like:'every time you go late\nto bed, in that time if you went early to bed it would be better'(right?).",
"comment_count": 10,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-01T14:25:14.247",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79918",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-10T20:55:33.507",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-10T17:41:23.943",
"last_editor_user_id": "39768",
"owner_user_id": "39768",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"nuances",
"tense",
"aspect"
],
"title": "How can I combine time markers with different verb tenses?",
"view_count": 278
}
|
[
{
"body": "Correct me if I'm wrong, but I feel like this question arose from a\nmisunderstanding of tenses in the example sentence\n\n> 昨日起きるところで (Link example)\n\nfrom your link's answer.\n\nThe key is noticing that 起きる is a relative clause characterising ところで. Thus,\nthis tense is unrelated with the overall sentence tense (which since 昨日 was\nused, has to be past).\n\nSo, do your patterns exist? Well, they do appear together but not in the way\nyou're probably thinking. Let's see how.\n\n 1. (Changed from 食べる to 買う since I couldn't find a meaningful example with the former) 明日買った makes no sense on its own. \nHowever, if I put it like 明日買った本を読みます it is perfectly fine. Why? Because 明日 is\nin accordance with 読みます while 買った is a relative clause characterising 本. \nOverall, I'm saying that \"I'll read the book, which I bought yesterday,\ntomorrow.\"\n\n 2. (I'm assuming you meant 昨日, not 今日. Also, changed the verb for the same reason as above) Again, if I use 昨日出かける on its own it makes no sense. \nBut in 昨日出かける時、鍵を忘れてしまいました all is fine. 出かける is characterising 時, and\n忘れてしまいました is in accordance with 昨日 so there is no incompatibility in the\noverall sentence. \nOverall, I'm saying that \"When I left yesterday, I forgot my keys\". \nNotice how there is no direct translation here. In English, you use \"left\",\nbut in Japanese you use \"出かける\" since leaving takes place after forgetting the\nkeys.\n\n 3. Couldn't actually figure out what you meant with this one =(\n\nFinally, regarding I and II, let me start by telling you that II is actually\nincorrect. According to the Genki textbook, when giving advice in the form\n～ほうがいいですよ(normally written in かな) the tense of the advice is a bit peculiar.\n\nWhen giving affirmative advice, like 早く寝る, the verb must come in the past\nshort form. So, 早く寝たほうがいいですよ is the correct spelling.\n\nConversely, when advice are in the negative, negative short form is used\ninstead. In your case, this would be 早く寝ないほうがいいですよ。\n\nHope this helps ^^\n\nEdit:\n\nRegarding the 昨日出かける時、鍵を忘れてしまいました sentence. Originally, I intended to include\nan explanation of the tense usage, but was a bit long and not entirely\nrelevant. In any case, detailed information can be found in the Genki II\ntextbook.\n\nTo summarise it briefly, in a sentence of the form A 時、B, the tense in A\nindicates the time at which A took place relative to B. Here are two examples\nfrom the book.\n\n> チベットに行く時、ビザを取ります。 \n> I will get the visa issued when I go to Tibet.\n\nWhen the action in A occurs after the action in B, A is in the dictionary\nform. In this case, you first take the visa and then go to Tibet.\n\n> 中国に行った時、ウーロン茶を買います。 \n> I will buy oolong tea when I go to China.\n\nConversely, you use A in the short past when A happens before B. In this case,\nyou first go to China, and then buy the tea.\n\nNote that in both cases, the \"overall\" tense is given by the verb at the end,\nwhich both indicate future in this case. Both sentences can be put in the past\n(if you've already gone to China/Tibet) by simply changing 取ります into 取りました and\n買います into 買いました. However, the relative order between events remains the same,\nso the tense in A is unchanged.\n\nRegarding the advice, let's break it down fundamentally. First, you identify\nthe particles: in this case, が marks the subject and よ merely adds emphasis at\nthe end. Now, you need a noun before が, in this case ほう. 早く寝た is just a\nrelative clause characterising ほう.\n\nGenerally speaking, relative clauses can be in any tense. Japanese writing\nusually employs really long clauses just to qualify a noun. Simple examples\nfollow:\n\n> これは私が買った本です。 \n> This is a book that I bought.\n\n> 眼鏡を掛けている人があそこにいます。 \n> There is a person wearing glasses over there.\n\nSo, to put it bluntly, 寝た and いいです are not in the same clause. 寝た makes part\nof a relative clause that adds extra information, but is not necessary. Of\ncourse, if I just say ほうがいいですよ this is correct, but you'll probably ask me\n何がほうがいいですか？ To which I would respond, 早く寝たほうです.\n\nAs to why you only use the short past for affirmative advice with ほうがいいですよ,\nI'm afraid I don't have an explanation. Sometimes, it's just how things are.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-10T03:02:33.050",
"id": "80054",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-10T20:55:33.507",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-10T20:55:33.507",
"last_editor_user_id": "32479",
"owner_user_id": "32479",
"parent_id": "79918",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
79918
|
80054
|
80054
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I am trying to translate the sentence: what are you willing to do to survive?\n\nI ended up translating it as: 生き残るために何を喜んでするの？\n\nIs this correct? Or have I botched my translation? The other way I translated\nit was: 生きていくために何を喜んでするだろう？\n\nI'm trying to translate it into casual Japanese for a story I am making but I\nam not very confident in my own translations... Is there a difference between\n生きていくために and 生き残るために? In addition, should I use the particle の or だろう in this\nquestion?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-01T21:49:18.987",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79921",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-04T02:05:13.500",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35998",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"english-to-japanese",
"questions"
],
"title": "In order to survive: 生きていくために or 生き残るために? what is the diffence?",
"view_count": 130
}
|
[
{
"body": "生き残るために which is the nuance of \"in order to survive\" is used in a more\ncompetitive situation than 生きていくために which is the nuance of \"to continue\nliving\".\n\nHowever it can be almost the same depends on how you use it. I think 生き残る is\nmore concrete and sounds more demographic-conscious than 生きていく which can be\nyour personal opinion.\n\nの here sounds more of requesting you to choose what you want to/should do than\nだろう sounding asking you to give an opinion.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-02T00:51:20.840",
"id": "79922",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-02T00:51:20.840",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "34735",
"parent_id": "79921",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "* 喜んで～する is more like \"to be delighted/honored to do ～\". It might be okay if the subject were \"I\", but you should not use 喜んで when the subject is \"you\". Instead, you can say 何ができるの or 何をしてくれるの (if the implication is \"what can you do _for me/us_ \").\n * 生き残る is \"to survive\" and 生きていく is \"to live on\" or \"to live from now on\". The former focuses on the current hardship at hand, whereas the latter focuses on the future after you have survived.\n * だろう is basically \"I wonder\"; it forms a question addressed to yourself. If this question is directly addressed to a person in front of you, don't use だろう. See: [だろう in question context?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/62238/5010)\n\nIt's hard to give a correct translation without enough context, but\n生き残るために何ができるの is a possible question if they are alone and in danger, although\nit sounds a bit arrogant.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-04T02:05:13.500",
"id": "79960",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-04T02:05:13.500",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "79921",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
79921
| null |
79960
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I encountered this sentence with を directly after て:\n\nバックヤードの小包も減っては増えてを繰り返していたが、今日あたりから減る一方になっていた。\n\nIs this a proper usage of を? I normally see を after either a noun or の. Here's\nhow I think what the sentence could have been:\n\nバックヤードの小包も減っては増えるのを繰り返していたが、今日あたりから減る一方になっていた。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-02T11:58:58.510",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79923",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-02T11:58:58.510",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39871",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"て-form",
"particle-を"
],
"title": "てを form grammar",
"view_count": 43
}
|
[] |
79923
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "[Kim Tae](http://www.guidetojapanese.org/learn/grammar/causepass) tries to\nexplain the difference between the \"make\" and \"let\" usage of causative verbs.\nI need a bit of help translating the various possibilities into English.\n\nWhat would be the best translations in English for each of these sentences?\n\n 1. 私は 僕が 食べさせる (tabesaseru)\n 2. 私は 僕が 食べさせてくれる (tabesasetekureru)\n 3. 私は 僕が 食べさせてあげる (tabesaseteageru)\n 4. 私は 僕が 食べさせた (tabesaseta)\n 5. 私は 僕が 食べさせてくれた (tabesasetekureta)\n 6. 私は 僕が 食べさせてあげた (tabesaseteageta)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-02T14:39:57.203",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79925",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-03T17:39:12.703",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39873",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"verbs",
"causation"
],
"title": "Translating causative forms of 食べる (taberu)",
"view_count": 271
}
|
[
{
"body": "As A.Ellet pointed out in a\n[comment](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/79925/translating-\ncausative-forms-\nof-%e9%a3%9f%e3%81%b9%e3%82%8b-taberu/79926#comment130304_79925), 「私は僕が」\ndoesn't make sense, so I modified some of the pronouns (or replaced them by\nnouns) in your question to make the sentences valid. Also, note that I placed\npronouns that would be usually omitted in a natural conversation between\nbrackets [ ] . Finally, I also added some complements 野菜【やさい】/ アイスクリーム to make\nthe context clear, those complements wouldn't be necessary in a conversation\nto figure out whether it's \"make\" or \"let\", as long as we could tell the\ndifference from other elements in the context. I added them just for clarity.\n\n* * *\n\n①[私が]子供【こども】に野菜【やさい】を食べさせる。\n\n\"I **make** the child eat vegetables\" (context: children usually do not like\nvegetables, so you \"force\" them to eat) .\n\n②[私が]子供【こども】にアイスクリームを食べさせる。\n\n\"I **let** the child eat an ice cream\" (context: children usually want to make\nan ice cream, even if it's not so healthy, so you let them eat).\n\nNote how ① and ② share the same structure, and even the same verb (食べる) and\nthe same person (子供【こども】) so whether it's \"make\" or \"let\", it has to be\ndetermined purely by context. Therefore, if you don't add anything to your\noriginal sentence, like the kind of food, etc., it can be either case\ndepending on the context.\n\n* * *\n\n③父【ちち】が[私に]アイスクリームを食べさせてくれる。\n\nAt ③, it can only be \"my father **lets me** eat ice cream\", because the\ntermination くれる means that someone else is doing something good, positive for\nmyself, for my own sake. It wouldn't make sense to use くれる if my father is\nactually \"forcing\" me to eat vegetables.\n\nAlso note that くれる always means that someone does a favor to oneself (or your\nown group), not to others. That's why you can **not** say\n彼【かれ】に子供がアイスクリームを食べさせてくれる。(incorrect).\n\n* * *\n\n④[私が]子供【こども】にアイスクリームを食べさせてあげる。\n\nAt ④, it can only be \"I **let** the children eat an ice cream\", because あげる\nmeans that _me_ (or someone in _my group_ ) is doing a favour or something\ngood for someone else's sake. Since it's a favor, it's \"let\" and it can not be\n\"make\".\n\nThe difference with ③ is that in this case, it's me who does the favor to\nanother person.\n\n* * *\n\n⑤[私が]子供【こども】に食べさせ **た** 。 \"I **made/let** the child eat.\"\n\n⑥父【ちち】が[私に]アイスクリームを食べさせてくれ **た** 。 \"My father **let (past)** me eat an ice\ncream.\"\n\n⑦[私が]子供【こども】にアイスクリームを食べさせてあげ **た** 。 \"I **let (past)** the child eat an ice\ncream.\"\n\nRegarding the dicotomy make/let,\n\n * ⑤ is the same case than ① or ②\n * ⑥ is the same than ③\n * ⑦ is the same case than ④\n\nbut whereas ①, ②, ③ and ④ are in present/future tense, ⑥, ⑦, and ⑧ describe\npast actions.\n\n* * *\n\nMy suggestion is that you try to tackle the くれる/あげる dicotomy first without\ncausatives, and once you've mastered them, and only after that, then try to\nsee how the causative works with each of those terminations. Divide & conquer.\n\n* * *\n\nBONUS: させてもらう\n\nBesides くれる and あげる, there's still another option to convey that someone does\nsomething positive, for the sake of someone else: もらう. Therefore, using\nさせてもらう, will always be a \"let\" case of the causative form as well. The\ndifference between くれる/あげる and もらう is that the latter does not restrict the\ndoer and the receiver of the favor, they can be myself (or someone in my\ngroup) or they can be someone else. It's more flexible:\n\n * ③(B) [私が]父【ちち】にアイスクリームを食べさせてもらう。\"My father **lets me** eat ice cream.\"\n\n * ④(B) 私に子供【こども】がアイスクリームを食べさせてもらう。\"I **let** the child eat an ice cream.\"\n\nNote that the actors in ③(B) and ④(B) are the same than in ③ and ④\nrespectively. When using もらう, the doer of the favor is marked with に, and the\nrecipient of the favour is marked with が, so the particles に and が are swapped\nbetween the sentences ④ and ④(B).\n\n * ⑨ お父【とう】さんに息子【むすこ】がアイスクリームを食べさせてもらう。\"The father **lets** the son eat an ice cream.\"\n\nAs for ⑨, there is no intervention from you (or someone of your group), so\nくれる/あげる are not valid options here. It could be seen as the same case than ②,\nwhere the addition of もらう desambiguates the causative and gives a clue that\nit's a \"let\" causative. Again, note that the particles between ② and ⑨ would\nbe swapped.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-02T17:32:13.600",
"id": "79926",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-03T05:46:32.203",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-03T05:46:32.203",
"last_editor_user_id": "32952",
"owner_user_id": "32952",
"parent_id": "79925",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "In the Japanese language, there isn't the difference between the \"make\" and\n\"let\" usage of causative verbs. We only judge it depending on the context.\n\nFor, example, 私は、無理やり子供に野菜をたべさせた is translated as \"I made my child eat\nvegetables (forcibly).\", 私は、自由に子供にお菓子を食べさせた is translated as \"I let my child\neat sweets (freely).\"\n\nさせてくれる and させてあげる usually means \"let\" such as 彼は、いつも私に彼の車を運転させてくれる(He always\nlet me drive his car).\", 私は、いつも彼に私の車を運転させてあげる(I always let him drive my car).\"\n\n食べさせる has also the meaning of \"feed\", so 食べさせてくれる(あげる) means \"feed\" rather\nthan \"let someone eat\". For example, 母は、病弱な祖母に、毎日食事を食べさせてあげる is translated as\n\"My mother feeds my sickly grandmother meals every day.\"",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-03T09:00:06.183",
"id": "79944",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-03T17:39:12.703",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-03T17:39:12.703",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "79925",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
79925
| null |
79926
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "79933",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The word 超自然的 seems to have a somewhat mysterious pitch accent.\n\nIn [WaniKani's\naudio](https://www.wanikani.com/vocabulary/%E8%B6%85%E8%87%AA%E7%84%B6%E7%9A%84)\n(click the speaker icons) as well as in [this random YouTube\nvideo](https://youtu.be/mOA7PvNfNtk?t=19) it sounds like the accent is\nちょうしぜんてき{HHLLHHHH}. Also [Forvo for\n超自然](https://forvo.com/word/%E8%B6%85%E8%87%AA%E7%84%B6/) sounds like\nちょうしぜん{HHLLHH}. As far as I know, this pitch accent shape is unusual for 標準語.\n\nMy thinking is that, as far as accent is concerned, the word is split into 超\nand 自然的, which are then pronounced atamadaka and heiban respectively: ちょう{HHL}\n+ しぜんてき{LHHHH}. Is that a reasonable analysis? Does this sort of thing occur\nmore often than I think it does?\n\nWould I be wrong to read it with a heiban accent like ちょうしぜん{LLHHHH}(てき{HH})?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-02T20:09:56.890",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79927",
"last_activity_date": "2020-11-30T16:03:43.537",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "16052",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 7,
"tags": [
"pitch-accent"
],
"title": "Pitch accent of 超自然的",
"view_count": 723
}
|
[
{
"body": "Yes, your analysis is correct. In fact the し can drop even lower than the う\nbefore it if you choose to really enunciate it. This sort of splitting is\nfairly common, for example with the prefix 非 or the prefix 被.\n\nI consider it wrong to read that word in heiban, it'd sound like 調子・全的(??) or\nsomething like that.\n\nHowever, there are sometimes cases where words get reanalyzed, like\n\n> 無期懲役（むきちょ↓うえき） → 無期懲役（む↓き・ちょうえき）\n\nor\n\n> 故事成語（こ↓じ・せいご）→ 故事成語（こじせ↓いご）\n\nThis tends to happen as the compound becomes more common and non-experts come\nto say it more IMO. I don't think there is any chance of this happening with\n超自然的 because it isn't a single concept, though, 的 is a suffix.\n\nThere are also other cases like 興味本位（きょうみほ↓んい） where it's _not_ valid to\npronounced split (×きょ↓うみ・ほ↓んい), because 本位 is not a valid concept on its own,\nit only serves as a suffix so it makes no sense to have it split.\n\n大辞林 tends to list such split pronunciations as number-number, like 切磋琢磨:\n\n> せっさたくま ［1］━［1］ 【切磋▼琢▼磨】\n\nWhich indicates it's a two-part word which drops after the first mora of each\npart. However, it doesn't indicate where the break is so you sort of need to\nknow that yourself.\n\nIn addition, in the case the second part of the word is heiban, it seems to\nomit the -[0] (like with 春夏秋冬), which is not good IMO because [1]-[0] does\npermit a slightly different pronunciation from just [1].\n\nFor these reasons I recommend using the NHK accent dictionary, which does show\nwhere things split and their respective downstep locations. Of course the word\nyou ask about isn't a dictionary word so it wouldn't be helpful there.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-02T23:58:24.757",
"id": "79933",
"last_activity_date": "2020-11-30T16:03:43.537",
"last_edit_date": "2020-11-30T16:03:43.537",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "79927",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 12
}
] |
79927
|
79933
|
79933
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "There is this sentence in my textbook that I don't quite understand the\nstructure of: スイスのクレーマーさんですか、ドイツのクレーマーさんですか． So if I understood it correctly\nit's asking if that person is from Switzerland or from Germany but can you\njust connect those 2 things with a comma? The whole sentence sounds weird to\nme. Also, is there another and maybe better way of saying this question?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-02T21:37:36.240",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79929",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-03T09:10:54.243",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-02T21:55:34.067",
"last_editor_user_id": "39876",
"owner_user_id": "39876",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"katakana"
],
"title": "What is the exact translation of this sentence?",
"view_count": 67
}
|
[
{
"body": "The question literally translates as:\n\n```\n\n Is it (the) swiss Mr. Kremer or is it the german Mr. Kremer?\n \n```\n\n(It could could be also Mrs. instead of Mr. depending on context.) You might\nbe confused by the literal translation since it implies that there are 2 Mr.\nKremers, one from Germany and one from Switzerland.\n\nBut despite this somewhat strange phrasing (which might be, however, clear\nfrom context) the\n\n```\n\n ...ですか、...ですか。\n \n```\n\nis a perfectly valid way to ask a 2-way question: see e.g.:\n\n[first example here](https://www.learn-japanese-adventure.com/ka-dou-ka.html),\n\n[example 5 here](http://www.japaneseammo.com/all-about-%E3%81%8B-its-not-only-\na-question-marker/)\n\n[Choice Questions (no. 3)](https://crunchynihongo.com/particle-ka-and-\nquestions/)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-03T09:10:54.243",
"id": "79945",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-03T09:10:54.243",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18895",
"parent_id": "79929",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
79929
| null |
79945
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80482",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "The sentence in question is\n\n> 「いずれにしても、強大な力を秘めていたことは間違いない」\n\nFor me, this would mean something like\n\n> \"In any case, there is no doubt it was hiding its mighty power.\" (a)\n\nHowever, Google translate gives the following sentence:\n\n> \"In any case, there is no doubt that he had a great power.\" (b)\n\nNow, normally, I don't take stuff from Google translate at face value but in\nthis case, I've seen other people translating this sentence both ways (both\n(a) and (b)).\n\nContext-wise, the sentence appears as part of the following dialogue,\n\n> 「ミュウです」 \n> 発掘隊員が石版を指すと、博士は感嘆の表情を浮かべた。 \n> 「神秘の力を持ち、大洪水を引き起こしたとか••••••荒地に作物を実らせ、人々に分け与えたとか••••••」 \n> 「天使か悪魔か」 \n> 「気まぐれなだけか」 \n> 研究員たちが後に続くと、博士は笑みを浮かべた。 \n> 「いずれにしても、強大な力を秘めていたことは間違いない」\n\nand it translation (b) can fit too. According to\n[Jisho](https://jisho.org/search/%E7%A7%98%E3%82%81%E3%81%A6%E3%81%84%E3%82%8B)\nthough, 秘める only has the meaning \"to hide\".\n\nThat being said, is (a) the correct translation? Is (b) possible as well?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-02T21:51:49.693",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79931",
"last_activity_date": "2020-09-04T01:02:05.453",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32479",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"nuances"
],
"title": "Can 秘める mean to have?",
"view_count": 156
}
|
[
{
"body": "To me, both (a) and (b) are correct though I feel (a) sounds more accurate as\nthe letter 秘 itself means a secret so with める it sort of becomes a verb\nmeaning \"to secretly possess\" or \"to have something (that usually refers to\nsomething spiritual or a special power) without anyone's knowledge\" so \"to\nhide\" in this instance and in my opinion is more accurate.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-04T05:43:39.967",
"id": "79964",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-04T05:43:39.967",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39892",
"parent_id": "79931",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Three monolingual dictionaries I checked have both of the following\ndefinitions:\n\n 1. to conceal, to hide\n 2. to have within itself, to possess (if not showily)\n\nSo how secretive it is depends on the context, but it's somewhere between\n強大な力を宿している and 強大な力を隠している. I think \"had a great power\" is a reasonable\ntranslation in many cases.\n\nReference: <https://kotobank.jp/word/%E7%A7%98%E3%82%81%E3%82%8B-612565>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-09-04T01:02:05.453",
"id": "80482",
"last_activity_date": "2020-09-04T01:02:05.453",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "79931",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
79931
|
80482
|
80482
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Is the 出し -which I believe to be 出す- in the following text a relative clause,\nas the 行動 is a noun?\n\n> 「ここにじっとしていてもしょうがない………か」\n>\n> 自分を奮い立たせるために、わざと自分の考えを声に **出し行動** を始めた。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-03T01:49:40.640",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79936",
"last_activity_date": "2021-08-28T07:04:45.420",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-03T05:05:53.157",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "26406",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"relative-clauses"
],
"title": "Is the 出し in the following sentence a relative clause?",
"view_count": 164
}
|
[
{
"body": "No. 出し is a [**連用形**](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/65953/5010), which\nmeans it **never** modifies a noun as a relative clause. 連用形 literally roughly\nmeans \"continue- **verb** -form\". That 出し modifies nothing. Just because a\nverb comes before a noun doesn't mean it's a relative clause.\n\nCompare the following two sentences.\n\n> 1. グラウンドを **走り** 先生を呼んだ。 \n> I ran across the ground and called my teacher.\n>\n> 2. グラウンドを **走る** 先生を呼んだ。 \n> I called my teacher who was running across the ground.\n>\n>\n\n走り is a 連用形, so it does not form a relative clause. This 走り is interchangeable\nwith 走って. On the other hand, 走る is a 連体形 (≒dictionary form), so it forms a\nrelative clause that modifies 先生. Please review the basic grammar of relative\nclauses.\n\n * [Do I have a good grasp on the basics of what the continuative form is?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/65936/5010)\n\n* * *\n\nPerhaps you need some exercise. Only two of the following six sentences\ncontain a relative clause. Can you tell which?\n\n 1. 彼はイチゴを食べ鳥を捕まえた。\n 2. 彼はイチゴを食べて鳥を捕まえた。\n 3. 彼はイチゴを食べる鳥を捕まえた。\n 4. 彼女は山に登るシカを見た。\n 5. 彼女は山に登りシカを見た。\n 6. 彼女は山に登ってシカを見た。",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-03T02:57:28.147",
"id": "79939",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-03T03:12:27.133",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-03T03:12:27.133",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "79936",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
79936
| null |
79939
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "79938",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I'm fairly certain the と particle here is the conditional form. But I could be\ntotally wrong.\n\nそれが真実であると仮定しよう。\n\nThe translation I have for it is, \"Let's suppose it is true\". But it seems odd\nto me that と is being used conditionally. Wouldn't it transliterate to\nsomething like, \"If it is true, let's suppose\"?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-03T02:11:23.507",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79937",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-03T12:18:05.153",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "33755",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"particle-と"
],
"title": "Can someone help me understand what the と particle is doing in this sentence?",
"view_count": 92
}
|
[
{
"body": "This と is a _quotative_ -と, not conditional.\n\n> それが真実であると仮定しよう。 \n> Let's assume that it is true.\n\nA conditional-と cannot be used with (し)よう in the first place. Something like\n雨が降ると家にいよう is already ungrammatical.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-03T02:34:08.237",
"id": "79938",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-03T02:34:08.237",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "79937",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "The と used here is not conditional form. The usage here is defined as follows:\n\n⑥（発話・思考を表す動詞とともに使って） **発話・思考の内容を示す** 。（明鏡国語辞典） と is used to indicate the\ncontent of one's thought or speech when used with a verb like think,\nspeak,etc.\n\nそれが真実であると仮定しよう。Here, と means 「それが真実である」is the content of 「仮定する」. Namely, Let's\nassume that [that is true].",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-03T12:18:05.153",
"id": "79949",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-03T12:18:05.153",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39880",
"parent_id": "79937",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
79937
|
79938
|
79938
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "To my knowledge the expression「私なんか」is approximately translated as \"Oh, not\nme!\" and used to sound humble.\n\nThe questions are:\n\n * Is it gender neutral?\n * Are there other situations where it can be used?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-03T05:02:37.940",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79940",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-03T10:10:43.707",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3371",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"casual",
"informal"
],
"title": "How to use expression「私なんか」?",
"view_count": 133
}
|
[
{
"body": "1.Yes, it's a gender-neutral expression. When used by a man, you can change\nthe first person to mean the same thing, as in \"俺なんか\" or \"僕なんか\".\n\n2.Depending on the sentence that follows it, it can sound pessimistic. When\nyou use \"私なんかダメな人間だ\" you are saying that you can't see yourself as a good\nperson.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-03T10:10:43.707",
"id": "79948",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-03T10:10:43.707",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "37138",
"parent_id": "79940",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
79940
| null |
79948
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The subject and predicate are main parts of a sentence. A subject can be\nomitted and easily deduced from the context, but when a predicate is omitted\nit is quite a challenge (at least for a foreign language learner) to guess\nwhat it should be. In Japanese I often encounter sentences without a\npredicate, which can be probably qualified as \"phrases\", but I always have a\nfeeling that a predicate is implied but have difficulty to guess. A typical\nexample from a female targeted website:\n\n**MERY [メリー]｜女の子の毎日をかわいく。**\n\nIn the above phrase **毎日** is apparently and object and **かわいく** must be an\nadverbial modifier, but what is the predicate? する? なる? Something else?\n\nIs there a general guidance how to guess an implied predicate in scenarios\nlike this?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-03T05:33:17.780",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79941",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-03T10:02:19.550",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3371",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"syntax"
],
"title": "How to guess an implied predicate?",
"view_count": 53
}
|
[
{
"body": "**MERY [Mary] ｜女の子の毎日をかわいく。**\n\nWhat is omitted in this sentence is \"する\" or \"しましょう\". Most of the time, these\nsentences are some kind of copy-write and appear in the headline of an ad\narticle or in a set of ad images. You can infer this from what the ad article\nis trying to convey.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-03T10:02:19.550",
"id": "79947",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-03T10:02:19.550",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "37138",
"parent_id": "79941",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
79941
| null |
79947
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "79943",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "In my text book I have the sentence 「どうして神様や仏様を同時に祭ることができるのか不思議に思うかもしれない」 Does\nthis translate to “how can they worship both Buddha and other gods at the same\ntime, they will think strangely”. When I typed in 不思議 to my online dictionary\nit gave me a bunch of answers which to me some were completely different from\nthe rest. When I google translated it i was told it means “to wonder”. Can\nsomeone shed a little light on this for me . Thanks!",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-03T07:52:24.347",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79942",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-03T10:33:42.357",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38484",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"translation"
],
"title": "不思議に思う meaning/grammar",
"view_count": 516
}
|
[
{
"body": "While 不思議 itself has a few different usages, the set phrase 不思議に思う generally\nmeans 'to wonder' or 'to wonder why' (when どうして is included). You could say\nthat the literal meaning is 'to think of as being strange', but that can sound\na little strong.\n\nSo the elements of your translation are intact but instead of 'think\nstrangely', I would use 'wonder why'. More context about who is doing the\nwondering would be helpful, but I would translate as follows:\n\n> どうして神様や仏様を同時に祭ることができるのか不思議に思うかもしれない。 \n> (Somebody) might wonder how they are able to worship both God and Buddha at\n> the same time.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-03T08:07:32.687",
"id": "79943",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-03T10:33:42.357",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-03T10:33:42.357",
"last_editor_user_id": "25875",
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "79942",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
79942
|
79943
|
79943
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In my text book I have a sentence I’m struggling with. The paragraph reads\n「日本人の生活を見ると、神棚と仏壇を祭る他にも、もっと色々な宗教的習慣や行事があることに気がつくだろう。まず、お正月には「初詣」といって、人々は神社やお寺にお参りに行き、お守りやお札をもらう。\nThe part that gets me is how after 初詣 there’s no というの or something I would\nhave expected. Instead といって is written. Can someone explain please! Thanks",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-03T09:12:30.563",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79946",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-04T01:43:58.940",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38484",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"translation"
],
"title": "お正月には「初詣」といって…grammar",
"view_count": 114
}
|
[
{
"body": "In this context, I would think of ...といって as expressing the idea \"we could\ntalk about New Years Day Observances\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-03T13:31:14.387",
"id": "79950",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-03T13:31:14.387",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4875",
"parent_id": "79946",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "\"お正月には「初詣」という\" doesn't make sense. On the other hand, the sentence in question\nwould make perfect sense if it were not for `「初詣」といって`:\n\n> お正月には、人々は神社やお寺にお参りに行き、お守りやお札をもらう。\n\nSo I think this `「初詣」といって` should be parsed like a [parenthetical\naside](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/68193/5010). This type of ～といって is\nrelatively common and it works like English \"..., _known as ～_ , ...\".\n\n> お正月には（「初詣」といって）人々は神社やお寺にお参りに行き… \n> In _oshogatsu_ , people visit shrines or temples... (we call this _hatsu-\n> mode_ )",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-04T01:43:58.940",
"id": "79959",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-04T01:43:58.940",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "79946",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
79946
| null |
79959
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "79958",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "So I've seen this usage of 為 pop up twice now and I still can't figure out\nwhat its exact meaning is supposed to be, here's the two cases in question:\n\n 1. I found this one in a videogame, where the information filtration system of a facility is explained: 「多様性学習の為のエラー許容率は７．２１％」 _The accepted diversity-learning error rate is 7.21%._ Disregarding whatever this sentence is supposed to mean, could I replace「の為の」with just「の」or even「による」and retain the same meaning? What would the difference be?\n\n 2. This one's from a scene in the Jojo manga where the protagonist is fighting somebody underwater - he's charging his attack to launch it at the enemy and as is customary for Japanese media, announces and shouts his attack while doing so, exclamating: 「水中のための青緑波紋疾走（たーコイズブルーオーバードライブ）」 _Underwater turquoise ripple dash_ (or somesuch, where does the 'blue' part come from anyway?) Now I'm really unsure what the「のための」here is supposed to insinuate exactly. Could I just leave that part out and still end up with the same meaning?\n\nAny help is greatly appreciated!\n\nEdit: For reference, I'll add the full transcript I found the first sentence\nin question in:\n\n> 『塔』システム概略 \"本『塔』は射出装置を中心に資源回収ユニットから送られた各資源を処理・情報化する為の施設である\n> 256階層から成る構造体は情報濁度2300以 下の情報物質を濾過処理・圧縮から射出体への記 録まで27分32秒で行う(※)\n> アンドロイド達を分解消化する為のルートについては詳細を別途記載する ※多様性学習の為のエラー許容率は7.21%\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-03T13:38:17.347",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79951",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-06T02:59:12.070",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-05T20:18:11.040",
"last_editor_user_id": "35224",
"owner_user_id": "35224",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "「の為の」 in certain contexts",
"view_count": 131
}
|
[
{
"body": "～のための just means \"for (the sake of) ～\" or \"(in order) to ～\".\n\n 1. This phrase sounds puzzling to me because エラー許容率 does not seem to be something that will benefit 多様性学習. But if this エラー許容率 is something that has to be _high_ enough to achieve 多様性学習, it would make sense (i.e., \"the 'accepted error rate' value _for_ achieving diversity-learning\"). Without understanding the detailed study design, I cannot say if it's correct to use のための here or if it's safe to replace this のための to の.\n\n 2. 水中のための波紋疾走 just means \"波紋疾走 _for_ 水中\", or a customized version of 波紋疾走 that can be used in water. Admittedly this のための sounds verbose and descriptive, but according to [this](https://dic.pixiv.net/a/%E6%B3%A2%E7%B4%8B%E7%96%BE%E8%B5%B0), 青緑波紋疾走 is the real name of this attack, and 水中のための波紋疾走 is supposed to be a verbose description. Usually, you can use 用 instead of のための after a kango word (e.g, 水中用カメラ \"underwater camera\", 実験用器具 \"laboratory-use equipment\", 家庭用ゲーム機 \"home video game console\").\n\n* * *\n\n**EDIT:** I read the whole context about the 塔. So this 塔 is something like an\ninformation processor, and its input (androids) must be \"clean\" enough\n(情報濁度2300以下). So the sentence should be \"The _maximum_ error rate to perform\nthe diversity learning is 7.21%\" (i.e., if the input androids have more\nerror/noise than this, the tower cannot perform the diversity learning).",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-04T01:34:12.887",
"id": "79958",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-06T02:59:12.070",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-06T02:59:12.070",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "79951",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
79951
|
79958
|
79958
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "hi i found ごと through immersion and when i looked it up it says it is a\nnormalizing suffix can anyone clear this out for me i am still confused of how\nto use this word.\n\nexample sentence if it helps\n\nえらい他人事だな",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-03T15:48:25.483",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79952",
"last_activity_date": "2020-09-04T10:04:55.547",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-04T19:27:17.057",
"last_editor_user_id": "38996",
"owner_user_id": "38996",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"word-choice"
],
"title": "how do you use ごと",
"view_count": 477
}
|
[
{
"body": "事【こと】 is used to **nominalize** (not normalize) verbs, in other words turn a\nverb like \"to eat\" 食べる into \"eating\" 食べること as in 食べることが好き \"I like eating\".\n\n事 can basically be translated as \"thing / matter\" and in the case of 他人事 it\nmeans \"the things concerning other people\" / \"other peoples affairs\". Note\nthat it can also occur in words such as \"human resources\" 人事【じんじ】.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-05T09:17:23.247",
"id": "79981",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-05T09:17:23.247",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39903",
"parent_id": "79952",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
79952
| null |
79981
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80022",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Are all sandals called geta? Or are geta a subset of sandals. How about flip-\nflops? How are these types of footware distinguished in Japanese?\n\nMy dictionary says sandal is just せんだる.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-03T20:00:41.817",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79954",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-07T07:40:51.410",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "34142",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"word-usage"
],
"title": "Sandals vs. geta",
"view_count": 132
}
|
[
{
"body": "げた refer to traditional wooden sandals similar to how きもの refers specifically\nto traditional Japanese clothing. Sandals (サンダル）to me just mean open foot\nshoes and so Geta would be a type of sandals.\n\nI think most flip-flops (slippers) would just be called スリッパ.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-03T20:45:11.113",
"id": "79955",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-03T20:45:11.113",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "34345",
"parent_id": "79954",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "Most traditional style footwears in Japan would fall under the definition of\n_sandal_ in English (which is no wonder considering the climate), but we have\ndifferent names for each. If I had to name an umbrella term, it'd be just はきもの\n\"footwear\".\n\nげた is the name for traditional wooden platform sandals for town walk. Because\nof its typical usage, we still call _shoebox_ げたばこ \"geta box\" as a custom, but\nit does not mean げた is the hypernym of shoes and sandals and that like.\n\nサンダル is the general term for all non-Japanese (outdoor) sandals and almost\nidentical to what you imagine from _sandals_ in this extent. Flip-flops\n(plastic sandals with thongs) is usually called\n[ビーチサンダル](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%93%E3%83%BC%E3%83%81%E3%82%B5%E3%83%B3%E3%83%80%E3%83%AB)\nin Japan.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-07T07:40:51.410",
"id": "80022",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-07T07:40:51.410",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "79954",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
79954
|
80022
|
79955
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I know that nowdays 先生 is used as the honorific for medical doctors (among\nothers), but I'm curious what honorific was used in older periods, Edo and\nSengoku specifically.\n\nAlso if this usage of 先生 is entirely modern, when and why did it become such?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-03T22:44:39.590",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79956",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-03T22:44:39.590",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39405",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"history",
"honorifics"
],
"title": "Form of address for a medical doctor in Edo and Sengoku eras",
"view_count": 67
}
|
[] |
79956
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "79965",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I have the following from [a tourism article](https://matcha-jp.com/jp/6267):\n\n> ただ、2018年｛ねん｝に築地｛つきじ｝から豊洲｛とよす｝に市場｛いちば｝機能｛きのう｝が移転｛いてん｝したことをご存知｛ぞんじ｝の\n> **方｛かた｝もいらっしゃる**\n> でしょう。「築地｛つきじ｝は今｛いま｝も観光｛かんこう｝に値｛あたい｝するスポットなの？」。そんな疑問｛ぎもん｝を持｛も｝つ **方｛かた｝もいる**\n> かもしれません。\n\nIn the first case, it uses いらっしゃる, a respectful version of the second case's\nいる.\n\nYet, both uses 方{かた} as a respectful way to refer to a person, so I assume\nthat the general nuance of the sentences is respectful. If that's the case,\nwhy doesn't the second case use いらっしゃる also?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-04T05:01:04.373",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79963",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-05T01:13:53.907",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-04T05:34:42.823",
"last_editor_user_id": "27005",
"owner_user_id": "27005",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"keigo"
],
"title": "Using いらっしゃる vs いる when referring to 方",
"view_count": 184
}
|
[
{
"body": "USUALLY you'd have to stick to either 丁寧語 (polite word) or 普通語 (casual word)\nin the whole context. I say USUALLY because sometimes even Japanese people\nignore this rule. So yeah you are absolutely right, it should have been\n\"そんな疑問を持つ方もいらっしゃるかもしれません。\" if whoever wrote these sentences had followed the\nrule. In saying that, I don't think そんな疑問ぎもんを持もつ方かたもいるかもしれません。 is totally\nincorrect either.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-04T06:28:57.043",
"id": "79965",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-04T06:28:57.043",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39892",
"parent_id": "79963",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
},
{
"body": "There is no important reason. This is not a formal business letter, and the\nwriter does not have to be very polite to their readers. The use of いらっしゃる is\npurely optional in this context. Maybe the writer thought repeating いらっしゃる\nwould look monotonous or an overkill, but probably the writer was totally\nunaware of the \"inconsistency\".\n\nRelated: [What is the difference between 「しております」and\n「しています」?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/45234/5010)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-05T01:13:53.907",
"id": "79975",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-05T01:13:53.907",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "79963",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
79963
|
79965
|
79965
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "79970",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I have looked up the '～ないことはない' grammar and it says it means either 'can' or\n'is not impossible to' [Link to grammar site](https://jlptsensei.com/learn-\njapanese-\ngrammar/%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84%E3%81%93%E3%81%A8%E3%81%AF%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84-nai-\nkoto-wa-nai-meaning/). I see that it's a double negative.\n\nHowever, I have this sentence that I've had trouble fitting it to.\n\nまあ アイデア出した俺にも責任はないことはないか\n\nI understand the parts. He came up with the idea, and he feels ... that he\n'can' be responsible? In English, it seems like it might be 'should' be\nresponsible, or at least 'it's not the case that I shouldn't be responsible'.\nBut then 'nai koto ha nai' starts to become 'isn't the case that', and that\nstarts to feel more like 'wake ja nai'. I suppose the first step would be to\nhave a good translation of this line, which I don't have.\n\nSo, in short, I'm having trouble understanding this question. And if it does\ntranslate to 'isn't the case that', then I would appreciate someone explaining\nthe main differences between 'nai koto ha nai' and 'wake ja nai'.\n\nThanks!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-04T13:12:41.117",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79967",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-06T04:15:30.807",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-04T16:11:53.837",
"last_editor_user_id": "25875",
"owner_user_id": "39899",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "What does ～ないことはない mean?",
"view_count": 193
}
|
[
{
"body": "'～ないことはない' is a kind of softener which indicates that the speaker believes\nsomething has a lower probability of possibility or a smaller degree than in\nother phrases like たぶん or かもしれない, for example.\n\nWith ～ないことはない, the first ない is softened by the second ない. So 責任はないこと ('I have\nno responsibility') is softened with the additional ない (literally 'it's not\nthat I have no responsibility'). This produces a phrase where the speaker is\nstill expressing low probability but is also admitting that it isn't out of\nthe question or might be partly true at least. More context on what the\nspeaker is talking about in your examples would be helpful, but anyway I would\ntranslate it as something like this (depending on the context):\n\n> まあアイデア出した俺にも責任はないことはないか.\n>\n\n>> I guess I'm the one who suggested the idea, so I suppose it could partly be\nmy fault too.\n\nHe's allowing for the possibility that he is responsible, but is also\ndistancing himself from it somewhat by using ～ないことはない to reduce the degree of\nresponsibility that can be assigned to him.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-04T16:09:36.760",
"id": "79970",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-04T16:09:36.760",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "79967",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
},
{
"body": "ないことはない is definitely putting some distance between the cause/effect, or the\npossibility of something happening. It's similar to \"(You) can't say it will\nnever happen, but...\" or \"It's not impossible that...\"\n\nI would say that the use of this phrase in this case can be shown in the\ndifference between these two English sentences.\n\nBecause I mentioned the idea, it's my responsibility. vs. Because I mentioned\nthe idea, I can't say I bear no responsibility.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-06T04:15:30.807",
"id": "79998",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-06T04:15:30.807",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39054",
"parent_id": "79967",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
79967
|
79970
|
79970
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "It seems that など and とか mean \"such as\" or etc.\n\nwhat is the difference? can someone give an example sentence?\n\nThank you!",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-04T15:03:17.347",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79968",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-05T01:14:32.033",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-05T01:14:32.033",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "39902",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"word-choice"
],
"title": "Difference between など and とか",
"view_count": 50
}
|
[] |
79968
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "79976",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have the following from [here](https://matcha-jp.com/jp/6267):\n\n> 本記事｛ほんきじ｝では、最新｛さいしん｝の **築地｛つきじ｝情報｛じょうほう｝を写真｛しゃしん｝を交｛か｝えつつ**\n> 、築地｛つきじ｝でオススメの寿司｛すし｝レストラン、軽食｛けいしょく｝や朝｛あさ｝ごはんが食｛た｝べられる店｛みせ｝、また訪日｛ほうにち｝客｛きゃく｝向｛む｝けツアーやアクセス情報｛じょうほう｝などをご紹介｛しょうかい｝します。\n\nBy context, I understood it as\n\n> In this article, while providing the most recent pictures and information\n> about Tsukiji market, ...\n\nbut I'm not too sure how the grammar works. I've referred to [another post on\ndouble を](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/16288/two-%E3%82%92-in-\na-single-sentence-how-to-understand-it), which suggests that I might parse the\nphrase as\n\n> 築地情報を[ 写真を[して] ]交えつつ\n\nYet, I would think that if 交えつつ refers to two nouns, it would be through the と\nparticle instead, so\n\n> 築地情報 **と** 写真を交えつつ\n\nIs this another common double-を pattern that's different from what was listed\nin the linked post?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-04T15:19:24.467",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79969",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-07T15:17:07.647",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-07T15:17:07.647",
"last_editor_user_id": "27005",
"owner_user_id": "27005",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"particles"
],
"title": "Double を of the form [noun] を [noun] を [verb-stem] つつ",
"view_count": 209
}
|
[
{
"body": "This 交えつつ is not かえつつ but\n[まじえ](https://jisho.org/word/%E4%BA%A4%E3%81%88%E3%82%8B)つつ. まじえる means\nsomething like \"to mix/intersperse\", and you can say 冗談を交えながら話す (\"to talk with\njokes\"), 雑談を交えつつ会議は進んだ, etc. Here 写真を交えつつ means \"using some pictures as well\"\non its own, and it adverbially modifies 紹介します.\n\nThe rest of the sentence is _broken_. 紹介します somehow has two を-marked objects,\nnamely \"最新の築地情報\" and \"築地でオススメの寿司レストラン、軽食や朝ごはんが食べられる店、また訪日客向けツアーやアクセス情報\", but\nthis is ungrammatical in standard formal sentences, just as リンゴをバナナを食べる is\nwrong. I guess this sentence was initially 最新の築地情報を(写真を交えつつ)ご紹介します, which was\nperfectly fine, but the writer messed it up while trying to augment it.\n\n最新の築地情報 **と** 写真を交えつつ doesn't make sense, either, because that would make the\nsentence like 築地情報を交えつつ築地情報をご紹介します, which is nonsense. The AをBに construction\nis not relevant either because there is no に.\n\nThe corrected version would be:\n\n * 本記事では、写真を交えつつ、築地でオススメの寿司レストラン、軽食や朝ごはんが食べられる店、また訪日客向けツアーやアクセス情報などの最新の築地情報をご紹介します。\n * 本記事では、最新の築地の写真を交えつつ、築地でオススメの寿司レストラン、軽食や朝ごはんが食べられる店、また訪日客向けツアーやアクセス情報などをご紹介します。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-05T01:39:37.423",
"id": "79976",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-05T01:52:41.220",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-05T01:52:41.220",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "79969",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
79969
|
79976
|
79976
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "79972",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I am thinking of moving to Japan in the future, and I know that I will have to\npass JLPT exams in order to get a job. So how should I start learning?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-04T16:25:18.077",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79971",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-04T18:59:17.883",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-04T18:59:17.883",
"last_editor_user_id": "25875",
"owner_user_id": "39314",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -1,
"tags": [
"culture"
],
"title": "How should I start learning Japanese as a total beginner and a native English speaker?",
"view_count": 102
}
|
[
{
"body": "The best option is to get lessons, either in a class or from a private tutor.\nIt would be a good investment since a skilled teacher will be able to guide\nyou through the early stages in the learning process.\n\nIf you cannot take a class or private lessons, I recommend buying a good\ntextbook for self-study. The ['Genki'\nseries](http://genki.japantimes.co.jp/about_en) is considered a good option\nfor self-study because it covers a variety of grammar structures and has\nsupplementary workbooks to test your progress. In general, beginners learn the\n'kana' scripts called Hiragana and Katakana first. These allow you to read and\nwrite Japanese phonetically while you are learning grammar and syntax. Focus\non learning pronunciation properly by referring to sites such as\n[Forvo](https://ja.forvo.com/languages/ja/). From there, you can begin to\nstart learning 'kanji', the more complex script. Your study should include a\nrange of audio-visual materials, reading materials, quizzes and tests, and\nyour coursework from the textbook. If possible, you should practice your\nspeaking with a Japanese person. I also recommend using spaced repetition\nprograms (such as Anki) to review the material you have learned.\n\nI suggest postponing the JLPT study until you have first completed the basics\nabove. When you are more comfortable with Japanese, there are many sites and\nresources which are dedicated to the JLPT specifically.\n\nUseful links:\n\n * <http://www.guidetojapanese.org/learn/>\n * <https://www.tofugu.com/learn-japanese/>\n * <https://www.nhk.or.jp/lesson/english/>\n * <https://www.fluentu.com/blog/japanese/teach-japanese-beginners-guide/>",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-04T17:59:56.700",
"id": "79972",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-04T18:05:48.877",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-04T18:05:48.877",
"last_editor_user_id": "25875",
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "79971",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": -1
}
] |
79971
|
79972
|
79972
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "79980",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "When a verb in the passive voice is used in the ている form, what nuance does\nthat carry?\n\nSome examples:\n\n> 図書館はいろいろな情報が集められています。 \n> 米は特にアジアで食べられています。 \n> 漢字は中国や日本などで使われています。 \n> 中国からお茶が輸入されています。 \n>\n\nMy interpretation is that ている is used because these are recurrent actions,\nthings that happen all the time, such as customs or established practices.\n\nBut this is just an intuition, so to paraphrase my question, how would\n\"図書館はいろいろな情報が集められています\" be different from \"図書館はいろいろな情報が集められます\"?\n\nThanks in advance!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-04T19:36:59.057",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79973",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-05T07:59:21.927",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35229",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"passive-voice"
],
"title": "Passive voice with ている",
"view_count": 478
}
|
[
{
"body": "Unlike English \"to be -ing\" form, Japanese ている-form can describe a habitual\naction or something that is always true.\n\n * [Habitual aspect](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/11925/5010)\n\n * [When is Vている the continuation of action and when is it the continuation of state?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/3122/5010)\n\n> > 古くなった細胞は毎日 **死んでいる** 。 Old cells **die** every day. (not _are dying_ or\n> _have died_ )\n>>\n\n>> 毎週大阪に **行っている** 。 I **go** to Osaka every week. (not _am going_ or _have\ngone_ )\n\n>\n> This could be interpreted as a use of progressive aspect, but translating it\n> into English with an _-ing_ verb form doesn't work grammatically.\n\nThis is an independent function of ている in general. Your example sentences are\nsimple combinations of the passive voice and this \"habitual -ている\". Thus, it's\nmore natural to translate this 使われている as \"is used\" rather than \"is being\nused\". Please read the first link above for the difference between 集められます and\n集められています. The first sentence can be rephrased as 図書館はいろいろな情報を集めています.\n\nDepending on the context, (ら)れている can also be passive-progressive (\"to be\nbeing -ed\"). For example:\n\n> シマウマがライオンに食べられています。 \n> A zebra **is being eaten** by a lion.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-05T07:28:57.817",
"id": "79980",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-05T07:59:21.927",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-05T07:59:21.927",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "79973",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
79973
|
79980
|
79980
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "79978",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "So, I've come across this sentence\n\n> そのとき、陽が当たった石版に何かの影がサッと横切った。\n\nwhich I'm fairly sure it means something like\n\n> At that time, something's shadow quickly crossed the sunlit lithograph.\n\nNow, what surprised me was the word サッと. I know that カタカナ is sometimes used to\nemphasise the word (much like an italic or bold font). What I didn't know is\nthat there are words written in a mix of ひらがな and カタカナ.\n\nA quick search revealed\n[this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/15199/are-there-words-\nwhich-consist-of-katakana-and-hiragana-letters-together) answer. From what I\ncould surmise, three groups of words were mentioned:\n\n 1. When the final word is made of two other words (e.g. あんパン is made from joining あん and パン)\n\n 2. Foreign words made into verbs (e.g. ググる from ググル, ダブる from ダブル), in which a final る is written in ひらがな\n\n 3. The same concept as 2. but for adjectives (e.g. セクしい from セクシー)\n\nNow, サッと doesn't match neither group. From the context of the sentence, I've\nconnected it with 颯っと which is usually written in kana alone, according to\n[Jisho](https://jisho.org/search/%E9%A2%AF).\n\nIn summary, why the mix of ひらがな and カタカナ in this case?",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-04T21:28:35.370",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79974",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-05T02:36:02.290",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32479",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"etymology",
"katakana",
"hiragana"
],
"title": "サッと: Mix of ひらがな and カタカナ in the same word?",
"view_count": 178
}
|
[
{
"body": "Onomatopoeic words can generally function adverbially with or without と.\nHowever, for onomatopoeias ending in 〜っ, と is usually added.\n\nOnomatopoeias can be written either in _hiragana_ or in _katakana_ , but as is\ncommon for grammatical particles the と will usually be written in _hiragana_.\n\nSee also\n\n * [What is the purpose of adding と?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/24943/1628)\n * [What does \"fūtsu\" mean?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/28525/1628)\n * [Does anyone knows the meaning of \"モゾリと\"?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/59771/1628)\n * [What does どぼり mean?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/59632/1628)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-05T02:36:02.290",
"id": "79978",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-05T02:36:02.290",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "1628",
"parent_id": "79974",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
79974
|
79978
|
79978
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "79979",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Overheard something that sounds like \"うれるど親戚 {しんせき} かくれる\"(must be mistakes\nsomewhere since there's no search result for the phrase). Kind of a\nsarcastic/joking idiom, saying that as a person gets famous, they will appear\nto have more distant relatives (because people want to be related to the\nfamous person). What might be the correct form of this idiom/is such idioms\nwidely used/accepted? Thanks!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-05T02:18:58.490",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79977",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-05T05:21:58.197",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-05T02:24:17.713",
"last_editor_user_id": "19487",
"owner_user_id": "19487",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"idioms"
],
"title": "idiom along the lines of \"you get more relatives as you get famous\"",
"view_count": 580
}
|
[
{
"body": "Perhaps you heard 売れると親戚が増える?\n[売れる](https://jisho.org/word/%E5%A3%B2%E3%82%8C%E3%82%8B) means \"(for a\ncelebrity/artist/etc) to be popular/successful\" and\n[増える](https://jisho.org/word/%E5%A2%97%E3%81%88%E3%82%8B) means \"to increase\".\nThis is **not** a traditional idiom at all, but I've heard jokes along the\nlines of this several times. There are many variations since this is not a\nfixed idiom like \"when in Rome\", but you can search with 売れると親戚が増える or\n[有名になると親戚が増える](https://www.google.com/search?q=%E6%9C%89%E5%90%8D%E3%81%AB%E3%81%AA%E3%82%8B%E3%81%A8%E8%A6%AA%E6%88%9A%E3%81%8C%E5%A2%97%E3%81%88%E3%82%8B)\nand find many relevant results.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-05T05:21:58.197",
"id": "79979",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-05T05:21:58.197",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "79977",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 6
}
] |
79977
|
79979
|
79979
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80004",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "琴里がいるのは、士道たちのいる天宮アリーナから縦方向に距離を **隔てること一万五〇〇〇メートル**\n、夜闇の中に浮遊する空中艦<フラクシナス>の艦橋だった。\n\nHi. What is the function of the こと here? I have never seen the construction\n“verb+こと+数量”. Is it a fixed pattern? Thank you.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-05T13:23:58.773",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79982",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-07T06:07:03.457",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "36662",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"clause-pattern"
],
"title": "Is “verb+こと+数量” a fixed pattern?",
"view_count": 107
}
|
[
{
"body": "It is a fixed and rather bookish expression. It originated from\n[漢文訓読](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanbun) tradition, a translation method\nto read Chinese text word-by-word in Japanese. Japanese needs all elements\nbefore the main verb, but Chinese put some\n[adjuncts](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adjunct_\\(grammar\\)) after the verb\nand the object, like English. In this case, it is customary to parse it as if\nthe verb is an outer subject to the adjunct.\n\n> 不絶如縷 \"as protracted as a thread\" → 絶えざること縷のごとし \n> 処門下三年 \"be a follower for three years\" → 門下に処ること三年 \n> 君美甚 \"you are handsome, very much\" → 君の美しきこと甚だし\n\nThis becomes a fixed pattern to focus on the adverbial element, emphasizing\nhow much the degree or amount is, not limited to numbers.\n\n> 感動すること[しきり](https://jisho.org/search/%E9%A0%BB%E3%82%8A)だった \"deeply I was\n> grateful\" \n>\n> 心強いこと[この上ない](https://jisho.org/search/%E3%81%93%E3%81%AE%E4%B8%8A%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84)\n> \"more than ever it is reassuring\" \n> 世話になったこと数知れず \"countless times one owes to somebody\" \n> 悪戦苦闘すること半日 \"a half day of hard struggle\"\n\nNote that the style itself is a part of idiom, so no particle follows こと.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-06T11:45:45.163",
"id": "80004",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-07T06:07:03.457",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-07T06:07:03.457",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "79982",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
79982
|
80004
|
80004
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm not interested in translateling just the literal meaning of FYI. I'm\ninterested in if there is a phrase that fits the same nuance.\n\nSome English examples.\n\nTo Spouse: \"Oh, FYI, Jill is bringing the wine\".\n\nTo Co-Worker: \"FYI, that meeting has been moved to 4pm\"\n\nTo A Friend: \"FYI, the Toyoko-Line is closed for repairs so you should\nprobably take the Meguro-Line\"\n\n\"FYI\" is a very casual phrase in the situations above. Maybe \"ところで。。。。”?\nAlthough I don't know if you can use \"ところで。。。” at the start of the\nconversation. Every example I've been taught is always in the middle of a\nconversation when wanting to suddenly switch topics.\n\nI came here because I typed \"FYI\" into Google translate and it said \"ご参考までに”\nwas the \"community verified\" translation but that seems not to fit the same\nnuance as FYI.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-05T15:21:30.957",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79983",
"last_activity_date": "2020-09-05T11:02:00.180",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "17423",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "How to translate FYI into Japanese",
"view_count": 468
}
|
[
{
"body": "You could also use `ちなみに` aka \"by the way\" in the same context as FYI in a\ncasual setting.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-05T16:01:19.733",
"id": "79987",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-06T10:52:14.197",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-06T10:52:14.197",
"last_editor_user_id": "39906",
"owner_user_id": "39906",
"parent_id": "79983",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
79983
| null |
79987
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "79985",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "So I have been watching this Japanese TV Series called _**Mare**_ and I've\nbeen wondering most of the time on their sentence structures. It's something\nlike this:\n\n> しょうがないですね？ とるーさんは。\n\nCan someone explain the structure above? ^~^",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-05T15:41:32.490",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79984",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-05T15:50:39.393",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39438",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"syntax"
],
"title": "A reverse sentence structure?",
"view_count": 255
}
|
[
{
"body": "This is something that you will commonly find in colloquial spoken Japanese,\nbut it is rarely found in written Japanese. The major exception to this is, of\ncourse, when an author is writing dialogue between two or more individuals.\n\nHere's what's happening, the speaker says:\n\n> しょうがないですね？\n\nThen, realizing that the topic of the sentence is unclear, the speaker adds\non:\n\n> とるーさんは。\n\nThis happens because Japanese is a highly contextual language, so if the\ncontext is clear, the supporting details are frequently left off. In real time\nconversation, the speaker occasionally assumes too much about the mutually\nunderstood context, and adds it on after the fact in the manner you see here.\n\nSometimes you see this to add emphasis in spoken colloquial conversations, but\nit is _highly_ unlikely (I'm willing to even say probability < 0.01%) that you\nwill find this method of emphasis in formal, written Japanese.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-05T15:50:39.393",
"id": "79985",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-05T15:50:39.393",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "22352",
"parent_id": "79984",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
79984
|
79985
|
79985
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80000",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Taken from the first episode of Steins;GATE\n\n> 「宇宙に始まりはあるが終わりはない。 —無限\n>\n> 星にもまた始まりはあるが、自らの **力をもって滅び逝く** 。 —有限」\n\nWhat I am wondering about is whether the part in bold could be rephrased as:\n\n「 **自らの力で滅び逝く** 」\n\nIf that is possible, how exactly do these phrases differ in nuance or even\nmeaning from each other? My first impression was that phrases with 「 **力で**\n」may imply some sort of willingness and deliberation, (here:) as if stars\nwould die out on their own will. When I looked for similar phrases for\n「自らの力をもって滅び逝く」I found this:\n\nも・つ ［1］【持つ】\n\n⑪ 負担する。「責任は私が－・ちます」\n\n(from: <https://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%82%82%E3%81%A4>)\n\nTherefore, I got the impression that this construction rather stresses a minor\nunwillingness, or at least does not imply any sort of deliberation to actually\nholding a certain power here.\n\nIn short, my questions are:\n\nCan 「自らの力をもって滅び逝く」 be rephrased as 「自らの力で滅び逝く」 ?\n\nIf yes, do both phrases carry different nuances (as described above)?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-05T15:55:51.207",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79986",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-06T08:10:59.460",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35673",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"nuances",
"particles"
],
"title": "「力で」 and 「力をもって」",
"view_count": 96
}
|
[
{
"body": "The word is certainly related to 持つ, but usually deemed as an independent case\nparticle\n[～を以て](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E4%BB%A5%E3%81%A6_%28%E3%82%82%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6%29/),\nwhich is a formal expression.\n\n> ㋑原因・理由を示す。「過失の故を以て責めを負う」\n\nYou are right that 自分の力で would be read as if with its own will and effort,\nwhich the writer tried to avoid for stars which only die because of their\ngravity. If you want to reword it, you should use\n[～によって](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%AB%E5%9B%A0%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6/#jn-168566)\ninstead of で.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-06T08:10:59.460",
"id": "80000",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-06T08:10:59.460",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "79986",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
79986
|
80000
|
80000
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I'm interested in the ways in which words that can be prefixed with _mi_ -\nmight vary in accent. For instance, both _mi-kokoro_ and _mi-gokoro_ are\nattested (albeit rare and highly archaic), but _mi-kokoro_ is L-H-H-H whereas\n_mi-gokoro_ is L-H-L-L. My questions are as follows:\n\n * Are there other pairs that show this sort of alternation (i.e., deaccenting without sequential voicing vs. accent-preserving with sequential voicing)?\n * In general, _o_ -prefixation is deaccenting. Is this the case with _o-kokoro_ (again, rare but attested), in which it would become L-H-H-H?\n * In exceptional cases, we see nonstandard forms like _o-mi-gokoro_. Do these become L-H-H-H-H again?",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-05T17:20:14.870",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79988",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-05T17:20:14.870",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39908",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"honorifics",
"pitch-accent",
"rendaku"
],
"title": "Interaction between pitch accent and mi-prefixation",
"view_count": 62
}
|
[] |
79988
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Here's a spectogram of a speaker's rendition of “プロトタイプ” from English\n“prototype”, collected from\n[_Forvo_](https://forvo.com/word/%E3%83%97%E3%83%AD%E3%83%88%E3%82%BF%E3%82%A4%E3%83%97/#ja)\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/89GsM.jpg)\n\nIt should be clear from this spectogram that the _pu_ -mora is pronounced in\nhalf a mora; the mora-length in this segment is about 0.16 ms and _pu_ takes\nabout 0.08 ms; the entire _tai_ is also pronounced in about 1.5 moræ.\n\nI've definitely encountered this multiple times in speech, and it wasn't hard\nto find examples on _Forvo_ at all. I couldn't find any published research on\nthe matter; is this normal? I've heard “ナイス” from English “nice” pronounced\nwith _nai_ as seemingly one mora, and it again wasn't hard to find examples of\nthis on _Forvo_ and confirm it with acoustic analysis.",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-05T17:21:15.843",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79989",
"last_activity_date": "2020-12-31T15:42:53.243",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35937",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"pronunciation",
"loanwords",
"morae"
],
"title": "Loanwords not being pronounced in a normal moraic rhythm?",
"view_count": 155
}
|
[
{
"body": "Not an expert, so I cannot cite any research, but I think what you are\nobserving is the vowels not getting pronounced. English does this all the\ntime, and \"prototype\" is a case in point where \"p\" is not followed by a vowel,\nbut there are plenty of examples of this in Japanese native words. See\n[母音の無声化](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AC%E8%AA%9E%E3%81%AE%E9%9F%B3%E9%9F%BB#%E6%AF%8D%E9%9F%B3%E3%81%AE%E7%84%A1%E5%A3%B0%E5%8C%96)\nin Wikipedia that describes some rules along with examples. Consider くつ vs\nくうき.\n\nAs @naruto points out in a comment, [What are the rules regarding \"mute\nvowels\" (\"u\" after \"s\" and \"i\" after\n\"sh\")?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/1095/what-are-the-rules-\nregarding-mute-vowels-u-after-s-and-i-after-sh) covers this in much more\ndepth.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-12-31T15:42:53.243",
"id": "83384",
"last_activity_date": "2020-12-31T15:42:53.243",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "3059",
"parent_id": "79989",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
79989
| null |
83384
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "Sorry if I'm asking too many questions here (I do wonder, is there a place\nwhere one could ask simple questions like these without having to open a new\nthread everytime? - I feel kinda stupid ;)\n\nTo give a little background: This sentence comes from the videogame 龍が如く. The\ngame involves several clans, though important here are, in order of importance\nand hierarchy:\n\n> 東城会、東城会直系堂島組、東城会直系堂島組内風間組\n\nAs you can see, Tojokai is at the very top, Dojimagumi a direct affiliate and\nKazamagumi (headed by 風間新太郎) answers directly to the Dojimagumi. Now in the\nstory, the leader of the Dojimagumi (Sohei Dojima) is killed and the kumi\ndisbanded with the Kazamagumi absorbing all of its former members and becoming\na direct affiliate to the Tojokai instead, thus becoming 東城会直系風間組.\n\nNow later on you stumble upon a picture of Kazama Shintaro (several important\nclan/group leaders are depicted here) with the main character stating:\n\n>\n> １９９６年・直系風間組／初代・風間新太郎。親っさんか・・・１９９６年に風間組を襲名って事は、堂島組長が死んでから、直ぐって事か。俺も刑務所に入ってなかったら、風間組で生きていたって事になるな\n\nNow to the issue at hand: From what I could gather, 襲名 means \"to success to\nanother's professional name\". What I don't understand is, in the game Kazama\ndoesn't change position or anything, all that happened was that his kumi got\npromoted so to speak and became a direct affiliate to the Tojokai as opposed\nto working for somebody else. How can you success to your own name?\nInterestingly the official English translation translates this sentence as \"he\nbecame a direct patriarch after Dojima died\".\n\nSo what gives?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-05T20:46:21.777",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79990",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-05T21:00:59.570",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-05T21:00:59.570",
"last_editor_user_id": "35224",
"owner_user_id": "35224",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"words"
],
"title": "襲名 - Successing to your own name?",
"view_count": 84
}
|
[] |
79990
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80002",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "When should I use\n[どちら](https://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%A9%E3%81%A1%E3%82%89) and when\nshould I use\n[どちらの](https://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%A9%E3%81%A1%E3%82%89%E3%81%AE)\nfor asking a which-question?\n\nMy intuitive understanding is that どちらの is used when one wants to ask \"which\n[noun] ...\" (e. g. どちらの色が好きですか) but I'm not sure why the の particle is used\nhere.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-05T21:38:02.093",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79991",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-09T16:35:47.317",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-09T16:35:47.317",
"last_editor_user_id": "39405",
"owner_user_id": "39405",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"word-choice",
"pronouns"
],
"title": "どちら vs どちらの for \"which\"",
"view_count": 121
}
|
[
{
"body": "This question is all but same with the following one except the word itself.\n\n * [どのｖｓどれ- can I use them interchangeably?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/44575/7810)\n\nの is a case particle which lets a noun modify another noun. Unlike English\nwhere you can directly attach a noun to another ( _summer vacation_ , _Disney\nmovie_ ), Japanese always needs の between them. Only personal pronouns retain\nthe rigid distinction in English, so you can simply know which to use by\nreplacing it with a grammatically equivalent personal pronouns.\n\n * **どちらの** 色が好きですか \n_Which_ (↔ _my, your, their, whose_ ) _color do you like?_\n\n * **どちら** が好きですか \n_Which_ (↔ _me, you, them, who_ ) _do you like?_\n\n * cf. **どちらの** が好きですか \n_[Of] which_ (↔ _mine, yours, theirs, whose_ ) _do you like?_\n\nThe same applies to all question words, pronouns, and nouns. Beware that\nJapanese has many common noun suffixes in use, which translated to a full word\nin English, but is only an attachment to a free-standing noun.\n\n> **どちら** 用ですか (用 = \"—'s purpose\") \n> _For which purpose / whose usage?_\n>\n> **どちら** 行きですか (行き = \"bound for —\") \n> _Where is (it) going?_",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-06T09:07:36.377",
"id": "80002",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-06T09:13:12.867",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-06T09:13:12.867",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "79991",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
79991
|
80002
|
80002
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the reading from this brief line from Final Fantasy 5?\n\nばっつ！ 立てっ！\n\n> Bartz! Standup!\n\nIs the kanji read ta? That would make it たてっ, or is the kanji read tachi? How\nwould I know to drop the ち if I was writing this?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-05T21:49:36.423",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79992",
"last_activity_date": "2020-09-05T04:05:35.437",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "34142",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"kanji"
],
"title": "How do I know when kana are included in the kanji or inflected?",
"view_count": 96
}
|
[
{
"body": "In this case it's \"ta\". This goes to the fundamental difficulty of kanji -- it\ntakes a lot of practice, memorization and experience to know how to read them.\n\nThere are two aspects to reading kanji. One is how particular verb, adjective\netc. takes different forms based on hiragana after the kanji. So in this case\n(She) stands --> 立ちます Stand (up)! --> 立て (She) is standing --> 立っています The form\nof the verb dictates the hiragana following the kanji, which is just read \"ta\"\nin all above cases. To a large degree, this can be reduced to knowing how a\nverb that ends in a particular hiragana, \"tsu\" for example in this case,\nbehaves. Those rules can be found in a first year textbook.\n\nThe second part of the question is knowing how many of a word's hiragana are\nrepresented by the kanji or not. So for the word \"short\", is it 短い or 短かい\n(it's the first one). This is a trickier issue because these are case by case.\nYou can often make a good guess, but there are no rules you can always apply\nand be sure to be correct.\n\nQuestions like this form a significant part of kanji tests in Japanese\nschools, and there's a lot of memorization involved.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-06T03:57:48.567",
"id": "79996",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-06T03:57:48.567",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39054",
"parent_id": "79992",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
79992
| null |
79996
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "79995",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "先生 **に** 教えていただいてはじめて、プログラミングの面白さが分かりました。 =I didn’t realize how interesting\nprogramming was until my teacher taught me. \n教える is a transitive verb. So why is に used over が?\n\nI didn't find my issue in [Q: Distinction of using を/に instead of\nが](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/61825/distinction-of-\nusing-%e3%82%92-%e3%81%ab-instead-of-%e3%81%8c?r=SearchResults&s=2%7C30.6577)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-06T01:00:31.497",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79994",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-06T02:06:32.720",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39768",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"particle-に",
"particle-が"
],
"title": "[subject][に instead of が] before transitive verb",
"view_count": 67
}
|
[
{
"body": "教えていただく means to have someone teach you. It is the honorific equivalent to\nおしえてもらう.\n\nもらう means to receive something from somebody, and the person who gives it to\nyou is marked by に.\n\ne.g. お母さんにリンゴをもらった I got an apple from mum\n\nWhen an action/favour is received, the same concept applies and the person\nfrom whom you receive the favour is marked with に\n\ne.g. お母さんにリンゴを買ってもらった I got mum to buy an apple for me\n\nいただく works the same way in your example, except that it is honorific\n（尊敬語）because it is speaking about the teacher doing something for you.\n\nIf you use the verb くれる (or くださる in honorific speech) instead, then it means\nsomeone gives you something, rather than you receive something from someone.\nWhen expressing favours in Japanese, くれる usually means that the person did\nthis without being asked whereas もらう means that you asked them as a favour.\nTherefore, that person becomes the agent marked by が\n\ne.g. お母さんがリンゴを買ってくれた Mum bought me an apple",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-06T02:06:32.720",
"id": "79995",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-06T02:06:32.720",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7953",
"parent_id": "79994",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
79994
|
79995
|
79995
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80030",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In one exercise I'm doing, it has the following sentence:\n\n> _世界で一番木の古い建物は法隆寺です。_\n\nIn this case, the position of the adjective 古い looks odd to me. I normally\nfind it appear before noun or noun phrase, so I think it should be:\n\n> _世界で一番古い木の建物は法隆寺です。_\n\nIs there a mistake with printing or something I should know about here?\n\nBased on the content of that exercise, the sentence has the English\ntranslation as follows:\n\n_The oldest wooden building in the world._",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-06T07:48:29.640",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "79999",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-11T02:24:07.377",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-11T02:24:07.377",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "38848",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"adjectives",
"grammar"
],
"title": "Odd position of adjective",
"view_count": 247
}
|
[
{
"body": "This appears to be the が to の conversion which happens in relative clauses and\nattributive clauses. The usual 木 **が** 古い gets converted to 木 **の** 古い because\nit is embedded in the clause and is modifying a noun. See below for a similar\ndiscussion on this topic:\n\n * [How does the の work in 「日本人の知らない日本語」?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/12825/how-does-the-%e3%81%ae-work-in-%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)\n\nAs for using 木が古い instead 古い木, this is not uncommon when describing some kind\nof attribute or a personality trait. The format is `NounがAdjective` where the\nadjective describes one particular attribute of the noun (but implies there\nare others).",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-06T08:57:29.687",
"id": "80001",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-06T11:49:07.770",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-06T11:49:07.770",
"last_editor_user_id": "25875",
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "79999",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "The two phrases are not identical. The difference is as follows:\n\n 1. 世界で一番木の古い建物 = the building whose wood is oldest in the world\n 2. 世界で一番古い木の建物 = the oldest wooden building in the world\n\nThe latter simply refers to the oldest building made of wood, which is 法隆寺.\nThe former refers to a building which uses very old tree. Strictly speaking,\nthe building itself does not necessarily have to be old. Yes, if you have\n10000-year-old trees, you can use them and start building a 世界で一番木の古い建物 today.\n(Well, this is a nit-picky discussion; practically speaking, they refer to\nalmost the same thing...)\n\n木の古い建物 is the same as 木が古い建物, which has a relative clause that modifies 建物. If\nyou know how to parse 鼻の長いゾウ, 心が綺麗な人, 背の高い男 and so on, you can parse 木の古い建物\nthe same way. (See [this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/53581/5010) if\nyou are unsure.)",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-08T02:30:24.117",
"id": "80030",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-08T02:42:29.433",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-08T02:42:29.433",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "79999",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 7
}
] |
79999
|
80030
|
80030
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 日本で最も有名な小説家は？ と問われれば、多くの人が「太宰 治」と答えるでしょう。\n\nIF [と+ verb(1)] asked, many \" **would answer** \" [と+verb(2)] Osamu.\n\nOR translated as\n\nIF [と+verb(1)] asked, many answer \" **with** \" [と+ after noun] Osamu.\n\n 1. Since the first と seems unnecessary, since the IF is already expressed in the conditional verb conjugation, I ask is it a literary style to begin this type of sentence with と or is it linked to the second と+verb as a standard grammatical construct?\n\n 2. What is the function of the second と, either [with] the noun, or why the second [と+verb]?",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-06T11:10:18.563",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80003",
"last_activity_date": "2022-05-29T19:04:50.493",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-30T18:12:26.263",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "39793",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"particle-と"
],
"title": "double use of と as grammatical construct or choice of literary style?",
"view_count": 291
}
|
[
{
"body": "The ambiguity may come from the fact that there are, in fact, 2 quotes here\nand the author is using 2 different, yet equally legitimate methods.\nAdditionally, the logic of an idiom-based translation must not focus on the\ntarget language (see end of item 2). The differences are explained in item 3\nbelow, but would only constitute a choice of literary style if the parentheses\nwere at issue.\n\n 1. The first quote does not use parenthesis, but simply uses と, as in the question's example: 日本で最も有名な小説家は？ と (...) . Therefore, the first と does not introduce the verbal phrase as \"IF\", but the conditional tense does convey this on its own: 問われれば、\n\n 2. The second use of と is to put the reply 太宰 治 in quotes, this time using parentheses 「太宰 治」と. Therefore, the second と does not mean \"WITH\", as in the incorrect understanding of と as \"reply WITH Osamu Dazai\".\n\n 3. The parentheses are used in conjunction with standard usage of と, when quoting the specific, direct response uttered by 多くの人, or presumably uttered by them (in this case), whereas the question itself, \"Who is Japan's most famous novelist?\" is not a direct utterance. Therefore, parentheses were not used in the first use of と.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-07T07:09:16.367",
"id": "80021",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-07T07:09:16.367",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39793",
"parent_id": "80003",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
80003
| null |
80021
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "please explain what this means its a line by Ojousama character from an\nanime「[お慕い申しております！どうしても、この気持ちをお伝えしたくて！もしよかったら、わたくしと永遠の契りを あぁー私 (わたくし)\nったら、もう何を言ってるんでしょうか？]。",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-06T11:54:59.250",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80005",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-06T18:48:49.237",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "37253",
"post_type": "question",
"score": -2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"translation",
"anime"
],
"title": "What does this line all mean?",
"view_count": 343
}
|
[
{
"body": "Aside from vocabulary, an analysis of the quote evokes a number of literary\nconventions, which find their source in traditional Japanese culture.\n\n 1. This seems to be a standard manga or dorama style declaration of the speaker's feelings for another person お慕い申しております (the sentiment) and 気持ちをお伝えしたくて (the confirmation of the speaker's desire to convey said sentiment)\n\n 2. Request -- if the other person would agree もしよかったら -- for \"the person's hand in marriage\", since official documents are traditionally exchanged, as in a contract or, at least, here, a formal vow, an \"eternal promise\", i.e. 永遠の契り (which in a different context may connote a more spiritual, even religious commitment).\n\n 3. This declaration/request/\"confession\" (depending on context) is followed by another standard leitmotif found in manga/dorama, whereby the declaration itself is considered (by the possibly embarrassed speaker -- and perhaps in light of social norms) as an impulsive, or even premature, unexpected revelation of the speaker's private sentiments, even a betrayal of the speaker's own sense of dignity. [Abrupt interruption of declaration/request] あぁー 私 (わたくし)ったら、もう何を言ってるんでしょうか？",
"comment_count": 9,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-06T18:48:49.237",
"id": "80010",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-06T18:48:49.237",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39793",
"parent_id": "80005",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
80005
| null |
80010
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80016",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "長い髪をゆったりと一つに纏めた少女である。光 **に** 透けて紫紺に輝く、色素の薄い髪。\n\nHi. What is the function of the に in bold? See through the light? Thank you.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-06T13:37:21.053",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80006",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-07T02:09:37.430",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "36662",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"particle-に"
],
"title": "Function of the に (光に透けて)?",
"view_count": 191
}
|
[
{
"body": "As [#7 in this entry](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E3%81%AB/#jn-166083)\nsays, it indicates cause of effect, i.e. how the light makes the hair\ntransparent. (Since the verb is 透ける or 輝く, it can't be locative.)",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-07T02:09:37.430",
"id": "80016",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-07T02:09:37.430",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4092",
"parent_id": "80006",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
80006
|
80016
|
80016
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The use of loan words such as プレゼント are used much more just like カメラ is and\nsuch. So should i just disregard [贈]{おく}り物 and focus my memory on something\nelse or do you know if [贈]{おく}り物 is still used and is important till this day?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-06T16:16:47.650",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80007",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-06T19:13:52.133",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-06T19:13:52.133",
"last_editor_user_id": "25875",
"owner_user_id": "39914",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"word-choice",
"usage",
"loanwords"
],
"title": "Do [贈]{おく}り物 and プレゼント mean the same thing?",
"view_count": 225
}
|
[
{
"body": "I did a quick search for both headwords in two well-known corpora. The results\nare below:\n\n**BCCWJ: (Balanced Corpus of Contemporary Written Japanese)**\n\n * 贈り物 668 entries\n\n * プレゼント 3268 entries\n\n**Tsukuba Web Corpus**\n\n * 贈り物 5672 entries\n * プレゼント 21974 entries\n\nIt seems that プレゼント is indeed more common than 贈り物. Having said that, 贈り物\nshouldn't be considered a rare word and it appears to be in regular use,\nalbeit less so than プレゼント. I would say that 贈り物 is probably a slightly more\nformal word perhaps, and so might be preferred in writing or formal styles. I\nwouldn't advise disregarding it as you may encounter it in some situations.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-06T19:13:13.273",
"id": "80011",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-06T19:13:13.273",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "80007",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
80007
| null |
80011
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "Due to my dictionary `来られる` would be the passive as well as potential form.\nPotential form is clear: `来られる? -> Can you come? `\n\nBut I have great trouble imagining a sentence of 来られる in the passive version.\nI suppose the entry in my dictionary or at [じしょ see under the link to the left\n\"show inflections\"](https://jisho.org/search/%E6%9D%A5%E3%82%8B#), was\ngenerated in a generic way or relates to compund verbs (see the end of my\npost), without considering whether or not the inflection is logically\npossible.\n\nAt least I am unable to come up with a passive form \"to come\" in English (and\nGerman and Slovak).\n\nFurthermore, as discussed here: [What forms of verbs (potential or passive)\nare more frequent in\nJapanese?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/6757/what-forms-of-\nverbs-potential-or-passive-are-more-frequent-in-japanese/6761#6761) English\nseems to use passive voice more often than Japanese.\n\nNevertheless, I even googled for a possible passive voice sentence in English,\nand found [this explanation by Martin Brilliant](https://www.quora.com/What-\nis-the-passive-voice-of-I-am-coming), which is to me, a non-linguist, totally\nplausible:\n\n_What is the passive voice of \"I am coming\"?_\n\n_It doesn’t have one. What? You say it does? Then “am” must be a transitive\nverb, and “coming” must be a noun acting as its object. I have trouble\nthinking about that, so I’m going to replace those words with words that I\nrecognize as a transitive verb and a noun. The passive voice of “I see water”\nis “Water is seen,” or “Water is seen by me.” So the passive voice of “I am\ncoming” must be “Coming is been,” or “Coming is been by me.” If you think\nthat’s nonsense, then rethink your idea that there’s a passive voice of “I am\ncoming.”_\n\nBut I would like to make sure that every time I come across 来られる or 来れる I can\nautomatically consider it to be the potential form.\n\nI am explicitly not considering compund verbs such as 連れて来る or 持って来る. Because\neven though they end with 来る they have an object and are thus transitive, so\nthe passive voice of them in Japanese should not be grammatically impossible\n(even though they might sound weird, but I have not yet progressed so far as\nto be able to discern that.)\n\nThanks a lot!",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-06T22:28:20.493",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80013",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-06T22:28:20.493",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18895",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"passive-voice",
"transitivity",
"potential-form"
],
"title": "Does/Can the \"standalone\" 来る have a passive form in Japanese?",
"view_count": 89
}
|
[] |
80013
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80019",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "So I am learning uses of the particle も, and one of my methods is to make\nexample sentences to solidify its use. I was wondering if the sentence 少し\n**も** その映画を見られなかった correctly means “I couldn’t **even** see a little bit of\nthat movie.”",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-06T23:40:46.553",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80014",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-07T06:14:23.413",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39920",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"particle-も"
],
"title": "Is this usage of も and sentence correct?",
"view_count": 70
}
|
[
{
"body": "The translation of the example above is correct. However, there are other uses\nof も particle than the example you should be aware of such as\n[this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/14132/use-of-%e3%82%82-in-\nthis-\nsentence-%e3%83%91%e3%83%96%e3%82%82%e3%82%b7%e3%83%86%e3%82%a3%e3%83%bc%e3%82%bb%e3%83%b3%e3%82%bf%e3%83%bc%e3%82%82%e9%9d%99%e3%81%8b%e3%81%ab%e3%81%aa%e3%82%8a%e3%81%be%e3%81%99),\n[this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/58433/%ef%bd%9e%e3%81%ae%e3%82%82%e5%bd%93%e7%84%b6%e3%81%a0-use-\nof-%e3%82%82-to-soften),\n[this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/58411/%e3%82%82-particle-\nexclamation-special-usage-%e3%82%82-%e3%81%a8-nuance-distinction),\n[this](https://m.japanesemeow.com/japanese-grammar-lessons/adding-nouns-\ntogether-mo-to-and-ya/), [this](https://bondlingo.tv/blog/japanese-\nparticles-%E3%82%82-mo-and-%E3%81%A8-to/),\n[this](https://www.punipunijapan.com/mo/) and\n[this](http://selftaughtjapanese.com/2014/01/21/the-wonders-of-japanese-\nparticle-%E3%82%82mo-different-ways-to-say-also-intermediate/).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-07T06:14:23.413",
"id": "80019",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-07T06:14:23.413",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39892",
"parent_id": "80014",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
80014
|
80019
|
80019
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In the following sentence, 最近、宿題をしてこない生徒が多いです which means \"Many students come\nto school without doing homework.\" why doesn't this mean \"Many students don't\ncome to school or do homework.\" or even \"Many students do homework and don't\ncome to school\"?",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-07T01:17:54.550",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80015",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-08T16:42:24.770",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39920",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"て-form"
],
"title": "question on ていく and てくる?",
"view_count": 163
}
|
[
{
"body": "The negative in the sentence ない is used for the noun 宿題 homework hence the\ntranslation \"Many students come to school without doing homework.\" is correct,\nnot the other two.\n\nIf you are asking about the difference between \"...ていく\" and \"...てくる\", they are\nusually used as suffixes meaning \"to go and do ...\" and \"to come and do ...\".\nYou should see\n[this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/676/difference-\nbetween-%E3%81%A6%E3%81%84%E3%81%8F-and-%E3%81%A6%E3%81%8F%E3%82%8B),\n[this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/42347/what-is-the-\ndifference-\nbetween-%E3%81%A6%E3%81%8F%E3%82%8B-%E3%81%A6%E3%81%84%E3%81%8F-and-%E5%A7%8B%E3%82%81%E3%82%8B-%E7%B6%9A%E3%81%91%E3%82%8B)\nand also [this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/1204/am-i-coming-\nor-\ngoing-%E6%88%BB%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6%E3%81%8F%E3%82%8B-vs-%E6%88%BB%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6%E3%81%84%E3%81%8F)\nto understand it better.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-07T06:34:50.197",
"id": "80020",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-07T06:34:50.197",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39892",
"parent_id": "80015",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "It never means \"Many students don't come to school or do homework.\", which\nwould be something like 宿題をしなかったり来なかったりする学生が多いです.\n\n> 1. \"Many students come to school without doing homework\"\n> 2. \"Many students do homework and don't come to school\"\n>\n\nFor these two, there are possible ambiguity, which is usually disambiguated by\ncontext and stressing (くる will be considerably weaker if in an idiom). Context\nalways matters, because:\n\n> 3. 宿題をしてこない学生が多いです\n> 4. 風邪をひいてこない学生が多いです\n>\n\n#3 would be more likely understood as #1, but #4 as \"be sick and don't come\".\nAmbiguity in parsing is common in every language, like in a classic example\n\"time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana\", where the reader is\nexpected to solve it with common sense.\n\nIn writing, a conscientious writer would feel putting a comma (宿題をして、こない) or\nmaking it kanji (宿題をして来ない) if they really mean #2, but this is totally\noptional.\n\n* * *\n\nFYI sometimes I think that Vてくる pattern is more appropriate to be translated\n\"one has V-ed by (the time) one gets here\", in terms of where the actual focus\nlies.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-08T16:42:24.770",
"id": "80036",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-08T16:42:24.770",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "80015",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
80015
| null |
80020
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80025",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I just can't quite wrap my head around how would you express the existent of\nsomething is for a specific purpose. Like, if I want to say \"I have an account\nfor Skype\" do I say \"Skypeのためにアカウントはある\" which in my mind just sound like \"I\nhave an account for the sake of 'using' Skype\"? On that same line of thought,\nsays, I want to tell my friend to get an account for Skype, do I just say\n\"Skypeのために君のアカウントを生み出す\". If you guys can give me some explanations and\nexamples on the whole \"express the existent of something is for a specific\npurpose\" or \"something for something\" (specially on various ways to express\nthem) that'd help me out a a lot.\n\nAnd please excuse me if my Japanese examples are bad/broken, that's all I\ncould muster with my current knowledge. Thanks in advance.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-07T13:41:06.220",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80024",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-07T16:51:52.787",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38413",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"syntax"
],
"title": "How do you express something is for something",
"view_count": 261
}
|
[
{
"body": "First of all, you are correct that ため can be used to express that something is\n'for the benefit' or just 'for' depending on the context. For example,\n\n> 試験 **のために** 勉強する to study (in preparation) for an exam \n> 外国人 **のための** 教科書 a textbook for (the benefit of) foreigners\n\nHowever, I don't think your examples are natural because even in English \"an\naccount for Skype\" sounds unnatural (to me). It might be possible but most\npeople would simply say \"a Skype account\", as in \"I have a Skype account\". The\npurpose of having a Skype account is already understood so you don't need\n'for'. Likewise, in Japanese, it sounds somewhat strange to say スカイプのためのアカウント\nwhen you could just say スカイプのアカウント. It's certainly possible to say\nスカイプのためのアカウント if you are deliberately drawing attention to the purpose of it\n(it's not grammatically incorrect), but that would be a very specific usage.\nUsually, the function and purpose is already understood. So you could suggest\nto your friend:\n\n> スカイプのアカウントを作ったらどうですか。How about making a Skype account?\n\nAs for \"the existence of something is for a specific purpose\", I'm not sure\nquite what you mean. Maybe you're thinking of objects which are designed to\nhave a very specific purpose, such as tools, for example. You could certainly\ndescribe such objects by referring to their functions, but then you are simply\nstating what they do. For example, Japanese dictionaries define 金槌 (hammer) as\n鉄で作ったもの。釘などを打ち込むのに使う \"an iron tool used to hammer nails (and such)\".\n\nI'm not sure if I answered your question but I hope that helps.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-07T16:06:03.640",
"id": "80025",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-07T16:51:52.787",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-07T16:51:52.787",
"last_editor_user_id": "25875",
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "80024",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
80024
|
80025
|
80025
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80027",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I came across this entry in wwwjdic: 九百, くひゃく (arch) (derog) fool; idiot Is\nthere a fun story explaining how \"900\" = \"fool\"?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-07T17:13:19.213",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80026",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-07T20:37:25.003",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "31150",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"etymology"
],
"title": "九百, くひゃく (arch) (derog) fool; idiot",
"view_count": 154
}
|
[
{
"body": "First you need a little background on old Japanese currency. Back in the Edo\nperiod, a 文{もん} was the lowest denominator of currency. A 貫{かん} is a weight\nmeasurement (3.75 kg), but is also the weight of 1000 文, which were stringed\ntogether to make 10 rolls of 100 coins and those rolls themselves would be\nused in payment.\n\n九百 comes from 九百文, which is 100 文 short of a 貫. So it is inferring that the\nperson is lacking intelligence, though from my research I can't tell if the\nphrase is literal (cannot properly count and therefore a fool) or metaphorical\n(likening the person to a 貫short 100 文).\n\nIncidentally, there is a similar saying in English: \"a few cents short of a\ndollar.\" This one is definitely used metaphorically, meaning the person is not\n\"all there\".",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-07T20:37:25.003",
"id": "80027",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-07T20:37:25.003",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "9508",
"parent_id": "80026",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
80026
|
80027
|
80027
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80029",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "[goo辞書 entry for\n本土](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E6%9C%AC%E5%9C%9F/#jn-206290)\n\n> １ その国の主な国土。属国・離島などに対していう。\n\n_The country's main territory; the country proper. Used in contrast to vassal\nstates, outlying islands, etc._\n\nI know about the different kinds of usages for ～に対して (対象、対比、割合) and its\nvarious forms, but this sentence kind of threw me for a loop. From the\ndescription, it is obvious that it must be the usage of 対比 here, contrasting\nthe 'mainland' with 'vassal states' and 'outlying islands'. But I've never\nseen the 対比 usage used in the form of ～に対して～ but rather N＋であるのに対して／N＋なの対して. Is\nthe form as it is given in the dictionary entry above a commonly used one and\nif yes, one could only guess from the context itself which usage is intended,\nright?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-08T00:24:30.903",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80028",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-08T00:58:54.600",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35224",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "～に対して～ Usage for contrasting?",
"view_count": 97
}
|
[
{
"body": "As you said, without the context, ～に対していう is likely to be taken as \"to say\n[something] to ～\" or \"to call ～ [something]\". However, in this context, this\nsentence clearly means 属国・離島などと対比していう. ～に対して usually takes これ/それ or a\nnominalizer, but it can also take an ordinary noun.\n\n> Is the form as it is given in the dictionary entry above a commonly used one\n\nIt's not wrong nor difficult, but it's not very common, either. Even a native\nspeaker may feel puzzled and think for a second at first sight.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-08T00:58:54.600",
"id": "80029",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-08T00:58:54.600",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "80028",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
80028
|
80029
|
80029
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80034",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/VHnr9.png)\n\nDo the two blurbs of text detailed below say something like:\n\n-\"Pitiful and lost serene soul(s)\" \n-\"Jailer of Chains\"\n\nI've tried to zoom in on this image to decipher the text to the right of the\ncenter of the mask. It's unfortunately not high resolution enough to easily\nmake sense of it, but my best guess based on the context of the character this\nart is tied to is:\n\n晴朗なさまよう哀れな魂よ\n\nI'm guessing from some research that this is the translation they made for a\nvoice line where the character says \"Poor lost souls.\" But it seems like in\nthat case they have added some meaning through localization or whatever the\nprocess may have been.\n\nI'm reasonably sure there's probably not much else it could be, but due to the\nfact that Riot Games/League of Legends is not a Japanese company/game and the\nJapanese stuff they have put out here and there before has generally just been\ncharacter names, I'm unsure if the Japanese they've used is odd or not and so\ntherefore could be something else due to strange translation of the source\nEnglish material.\n\nOn the front of the jacket it also says:\n\n縛鎖の看守\n\nFrom what I've been able to find, the first two characters are not a real\ncompound word and are probably a made up thing for the purposes of the game\nand its fantasy themes and vocabulary; how would it be read? ばくさ? It's most\nlikely a translation of the character's title, \"The Chain Warden.\"\n\nI guess as a follow-up question, assuming that the source English I found is\nindeed what the Japanese blurbs are translations of, is this accurate/natural\nsounding?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-08T02:51:05.683",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80031",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-08T09:55:39.770",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-08T04:05:13.230",
"last_editor_user_id": "17915",
"owner_user_id": "17915",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"translation",
"words",
"sentence"
],
"title": "What does the text on this jacket say?",
"view_count": 425
}
|
[
{
"body": "晴朗 doesn't seem to fit the atmosphere of this image. The tiny text is probably\n**暗闇を** さまよう哀れな魂よ (\"O the wretched souls wandering **in the darkness** \"), but\nI'm not 100% certain about the 暗闇 part.\n\nI don't know the game, but I think 縛鎖の看守 is a good possible translation of\n\"The Chain Warden.\" This 縛鎖 is just another \"cool fantasy term\" used by\nseveral fictional works. It doesn't have a strict definition, but it does\nsound somewhat deep or mysterious than simple 鎖. It's almost certainly read\nばくさ if there is no furigana.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-08T09:55:39.770",
"id": "80034",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-08T09:55:39.770",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "80031",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
80031
|
80034
|
80034
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80038",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "What is the effect of putting よ after an infinitive verb form?\n\nExample:\n\n> **世界一のパティシエになりよ!**\n\nThanks in advance! ありがとうございます！ ^^",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-08T19:30:37.123",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80037",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-08T23:04:50.940",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39438",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"verbs"
],
"title": "infinitive verb form + よ",
"view_count": 177
}
|
[
{
"body": "Generally よ is a kind of intensifiers so \"a infinitive verb + よ\" will\nstrengthen the meaning of the verb.\n\nIn your example なる (なり isn't an infinitive though) means \"to become\", so なるよ!\nwill be \"surely become ... !\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-08T23:04:50.940",
"id": "80038",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-08T23:04:50.940",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39932",
"parent_id": "80037",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
80037
|
80038
|
80038
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80041",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Hi I came across this sentence in a light novel:\n地元から一番近いショッピングモールまで出て、本屋で買い物して昼飯を食べてくるぐらいの余裕は持てる懐具合。 I need help with\ntranslating this and I do not understand the purpose of the noun at the end of\nthe sentence.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-09T05:06:14.733",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80040",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-13T08:09:35.697",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39936",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "Help with translation",
"view_count": 96
}
|
[
{
"body": "The translation will be like this?\n\n> I can afford to go out to the nearest shopping mall from my hometown, to\n> shop at a bookstore and to have a lunch.\n\nAbout The purpose of the noun, 懐具合, it's a technique that can draw attention\nto the text that follows. It is called as 体言止め in Japanese.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-09T06:47:14.173",
"id": "80041",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-13T08:09:35.697",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-13T08:09:35.697",
"last_editor_user_id": "37138",
"owner_user_id": "37138",
"parent_id": "80040",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
80040
|
80041
|
80041
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80043",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "The second opening for 四月は君の嘘 starts with these two lines:\n\n> 忘れようとすることで傷が癒えないのは \n> 忘れようとすることで思い出されるから。\n\nI get the feeling that something is missing after から, like だ or です. Is this\nsentence still grammatically valid? Also, are the reasons for this omission as\nI suspect them that ending a sentence in plain だ is unusual and that a formal\nです would be out of place in such a song?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-09T08:18:45.420",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80042",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-09T09:53:34.870",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35297",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"particle-から",
"cleft-sentences"
],
"title": "～のは～から。 sentence structure",
"view_count": 124
}
|
[
{
"body": "Yes, だ/です at the end of a sentence is often omitted. Do you know a rhetoric\ndevice called [体言止め](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/14524/5010) (\"noun-\nstop\")? The omission of だ after から has the same basic effect (making the\nsentence compact yet vivid and dramatic).\n\nThis AのはBから(だ) is a [cleft\nsentence](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/19208/5010) formed from BからA.\n(\"A because B\" → \"It is because B that A\")\n\n> 忘れようとすることで傷が癒えないのは忘れようとすることで思い出されるから(だ)。\n>\n> Trying to forget doesn't heal wounds because trying to forget reminds us of\n> them.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-09T08:33:53.280",
"id": "80043",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-09T09:53:34.870",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-09T09:53:34.870",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "80042",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
}
] |
80042
|
80043
|
80043
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Two instances where I noticed an \"inanimate\" object being the agent that I\ncan't quite make sense of - I hope both sentences are related to the question:\n\n[goo dictionary entry for\n侍る](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E4%BE%8D%E3%82%8B/#jn-179139)\n\n> ［動ラ五（四）］《「はべ（侍）り」が「侍 (じ) す」 **の意に意識されて**\n> 意味の変化したもの》身分の高い人のそばに付き従っている。かしこまってその席などにいる。「芸妓を―・らせる」\n\nI'm not a 100% sure how I would put the bracketed part into good English but I\nbelieve it's essentially saying that the meaning of「侍 (じ) す」influenced the\nmeaning of 侍る, i.e. people consciously had the meaning of じす in their head\nwhen thinking of 侍る? What I don't understand is why it's 意に意識される instead of\nsomething like じすの意を意識して. Why is the word the agent of the passive form here?\n\nWhich made me think of this sentence I've seen before but couldn't quite\nfigure out either (the description of a rather small sword in a game):\n\n> とある戦士が百獣の王をモチーフに作らせた剣。その様相はまるで **人々からの視線に気づかないか** のように狭く短い。\n\n_It's as if its shape is deliberately short and narrow so as to go unnoticed\nby people._ is what I can come up with on the spot. Why not 気づかれない? Why is the\nsword's shape \"not noticing the people\"? How does that make sense? Could that\njust simply be a typo or is this a legit way of expressing that idea?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-09T13:32:10.180",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80045",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-09T17:16:28.873",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-09T13:39:06.967",
"last_editor_user_id": "35224",
"owner_user_id": "35224",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "An inanimate object being the agent?",
"view_count": 173
}
|
[
{
"body": "> 「はべ（侍）り」が「侍 (じ) す」の意に意識されて意味の変化したもの\n\nIn this sentence, に does not stand for the demoted subject in passive, but an\noriginal に argument.\n\n> 「はべり」を「じす」の意に意識する \n> (\"conceive はべり as the meaning of じす\")\n>\n> →「はべり」が「じす」の意に意識される\n\nFor more advanced discussion, this is not a \"passive\" (受身) but \"spontaneous\"\n(自発) sense of -れる. This usage is typically seen with mental verbs to mean that\nsome idea \"naturally\" _occurs to_ someone. In this context we can translate it\nlike:\n\n> Into which _haberi_ 's meaning changed, having been susceptible to\n> association with _jisu_\n\n* * *\n\n> とある戦士が百獣の王をモチーフに作らせた剣。その様相はまるで人々からの視線に気づかないかのように狭く短い。\n\nThe passage is almost apparent to me as an instance of personification (or\nlion-ification; 百獣の王 is a fixed epithet for lions). Isn't the weapon decorated\nwith a lion's face or something? Then the description treats this sword as a\nreal lion, which is animate.\n\n**Edit** : Okay, I overlooked a question in the last paragraph...\n\n> その様相はまるで人々からの視線に気づかないかのように狭く短い。\n\nshould be understood\n\n> Its profile is short and narrow as though it took little notice of people's\n> gaze.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-09T15:13:56.513",
"id": "80046",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-09T17:16:28.873",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-09T17:16:28.873",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "80045",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
80045
| null |
80046
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "A lot of times, endings to sentences are omitted for some reason. For example,\n\"konna ni ooki na tatemono no naka ni ita to wa\" may be completed by something\nlike \"omowanakatta\". I can't fully remember other ones but there are times\nsentences end in \"wo\" that would be completed by ending something like\n\"inorimasu\" or \"[...]te kudasai\". I know the endings should be obvious in most\ncases but is this kind of a thing more formal speech or casual speech, and is\nit more common in speech than in written Japanese? Is there a linguistic term\nfor this?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-09T16:27:11.327",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80047",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-09T16:27:11.327",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39944",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"syntax",
"spoken-language"
],
"title": "Leaving out endings to sentences",
"view_count": 74
}
|
[] |
80047
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80052",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 白い彫像が落ちているのだと思った. \n> プールの守り神みたいなものが、鎮座しているんだと\n\nWould I be correct in interpreting this と as something along the lines as\nというように? So the sentence would mean something like \"In a way to suggest\nsomething like a god of the pool is enshrined.\"",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-09T19:35:24.760",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80048",
"last_activity_date": "2022-04-01T00:36:07.330",
"last_edit_date": "2022-04-01T00:36:07.330",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "22648",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"usage",
"particles",
"particle-と"
],
"title": "Use of と at end of a sentence",
"view_count": 248
}
|
[
{
"body": "It's easy:\n\n> プールの守り神みたいなものが、鎮座しているんだと（思った）\n\nSo the second appearance of 思った is omitted, because it is obvious.\n\nOr if you like,\n\n> \"白い彫像が落ちているのだ\", I thought, \"プールの守り神みたいなものが、鎮座しているんだ\"\n\nBecause the rhetorical vibe is somewhat alike.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-10T02:16:09.820",
"id": "80052",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-10T02:16:09.820",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "80048",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
80048
|
80052
|
80052
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80053",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "Here is a sentence that I have trouble translating\n\n> 満たされないと泣いているのはきっと満たされたいと願うから。\n\nbecause I have difficulty understanding the role of the と located in the first\npart of it\n\n> 満たされない **と** 泣いているのは ...\n\nThe only reason I can think of for using the と is that it is there to indicate\na condition. And if indeed と can be used for the conditional, it seems to me\nthat for that, the sentence in the conditional must indicate something always\ntrue (obvious). However, at first glance this does not appear to be the case\nto me. So if I could have some clarification, that would be perfect!\n\nOh and sorry if my English isn't the most fantastic, it's not my everyday\nlanguage.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-09T20:14:21.880",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80049",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-10T03:32:20.113",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-10T02:50:50.417",
"last_editor_user_id": "11792",
"owner_user_id": "39946",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"usage",
"particles",
"particle-と"
],
"title": "Role of と in a particular sentence 満たされないと泣いているのは",
"view_count": 140
}
|
[
{
"body": "と can be translated as \"once, when\" and is used in sentences like:\n暖かくなると、桜の花が咲きます。(When it gets warm, cherry blossoms come into bloom.)\n\nBUT! Wrong sentence: 春になると、山に遊びに行きましょう。(When spring comes, let's go play in\nthe mountains.) It's wrong, because speaker's volition or request does not\nfollow と.\n\nBUT! Exception - speaker's volitional actions can be used for HABITUAL\nactions. Example: 私はおなかがすくと、いつもラーメンを作って食べます。(When I am hungry, I always make\nand eat ramen.)\n\nSo, in your case: 満たされないと- when/if speaker is not satisfied - 泣いている - he is\n[usually/always/used to/...habitual] crying.\n\nAnd second part: ...のは - and this is what speaker is doing (crying) -\nきっと満たされたいと願うから。- because he certainly/100% wants to be satisfied.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-10T01:11:25.673",
"id": "80050",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-10T01:11:25.673",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39949",
"parent_id": "80049",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "No, this is a quotative と.\n\n> why I'm crying that I feel empty\n\nI think this question is along the line with:\n\n * [と in the first sentence + た in the second sentence](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/69812/7810)\n * [Function of と in Xと人気になる](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/68147/7810)\n * [What does からと mean in this passage](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/62406/7810)\n * [What does 入らなくなるからと mean in this sentence?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/46684/7810)\n * [Can 気づく be used with quotation と?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/41946/7810)\n * [Use of quote marker と before unusual verbs](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/24583/7810)\n\nI do think \"quotative\" is as problematic a name as \"past participle\", because\nwhat it actually does is letting a verbalized idea embedded as an adverb (that\ndescribes cause, aim, manner, background, concurrent action..., and of course,\nemotion) in a sentence.",
"comment_count": 8,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-10T02:48:59.340",
"id": "80053",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-10T03:32:20.113",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-10T03:32:20.113",
"last_editor_user_id": "9971",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "80049",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
80049
|
80053
|
80053
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "this is a sentence in Natsume Sōseki's novel 門\n\n「おい、好い天気だな」と話しかけた. 細君は、「ええ」と云ったなりであった。\n\nmy question is what is this なり here ?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-10T03:19:58.987",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80055",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-10T04:46:58.460",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "35822",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning"
],
"title": "on the meaning of と云ったなり",
"view_count": 99
}
|
[
{
"body": "This なり is similar to [まま](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/13551/5010)\nthat adds the nuance of \"remain unchanged\" or \"followed by nothing\". The wife\nsaid ええ, and nothing followed. ～たなりだ is not as common as ～たままだ in modern\nJapanese. From 明鏡国語辞典:\n\n> 接助\n>\n>\n> ①《動詞などの連体形に付いて》ある動作の成立とほとんど同時に次の動作・作用が起こるときの、先行の動作を表す。「帰るなり部屋へ閉じこもってしまった」「一目見るなり病気だと分かった」\n>\n>\n> **②《過去の助動詞「た」の連体形に付いて》ある動作の成立後に次の動作に移らずにそのままの状態が続くときの、先行の動作を表す。…まま。「坐りこんだなり動かない」「服を着たなり寝てしまった」**",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-10T04:46:58.460",
"id": "80056",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-10T04:46:58.460",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "80055",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
80055
| null |
80056
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "「......てめえ、覚えてろよ」\n\n「女の子はそんな言葉遣いしちゃ駄目よ。そうそう、 **仕上げに** これをつけてちょうだい」\n\n「あ？」\n\n士道は眉をひそめながら、琴里から絆創膏のようなものを受け取った。\n\n「それをのどに貼り付けてみて」\n\nContext: the first speaker is the brother (士道) and the second speaker the\nsister (琴里). The sister forced her brother to dress as a girl. And she gave\nhim a device for him to stick to his throat, so that the brother’s voice could\nchange into a girl’s voice.\n\nHi. What is the function of the に in 仕上げに? Is the に the same as として? Or does\nthe に indicate purpose? Thank you.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-10T07:51:56.750",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80057",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-10T12:02:45.347",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "36662",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"particle-に"
],
"title": "What is the function of the に in 仕上げに?",
"view_count": 113
}
|
[
{
"body": "This に is a role/function marker (\"as\" or \"for\" in English). 仕上げにこれをつける means\n\"to put/use this as a finishing touch\". 仕上げに is indeed interchangeable with\n仕上げとして (although I feel the latter is a bit verbose in a casual sentence like\nthis).\n\nSimilar examples can be found here:\n\n * [に to indicate the role you want something to play?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/65432/5010)\n * [I really can't understand the use of に + と USED TOGETHER in this clause](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/76801/5010)\n * [Meaning of にと思って in a sentence](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/55453/5010)",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-10T11:55:50.740",
"id": "80059",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-10T12:02:45.347",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-10T12:02:45.347",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "80057",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
80057
| null |
80059
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I'm asking about a grammar patern found in Tobira, that is :\n〜だけ{でなく(て)/じゃなく(て)}、〜も (not only 〜, but also 〜). In the grammar point, I can\nunderstand the given examples.\n\nFor more information, one can see this page that gives more details\n[here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/28678/%E3%81%A0%E3%81%91%E3%81%A7%E3%81%AA%E3%81%8F-and-%E3%81%A0%E3%81%91%E3%81%98%E3%82%83%E3%81%AA%E3%81%8F%E3%81%A6)\nabout this patern.\n\nI was talking about Netflix and Amazon Prime (two video on demande services),\ntelling to my conversation partner that Netflix is already enough for me and I\ndon't have more time to suscribe to Amazon Prime. To give me an example using\nthe patern mentioned above, she told me this :\n\n**「Netflixだけじゃなくて、Amazonプライムも というのは好きじゃありません。」**\n\nBut I don't understand this sentence, especialy with the patern\n〜けど{でなく(て)/じゃなく(て)}、〜も, that cannot be translated here by \"not only 〜, but\nalso 〜\".\n\nThe sentence give me more the impression to say \"Not only I don't like\nNetflix, but I don't like Amazon neither.\", while my conversation partner told\nme that she would say 「Nexflixだけでなく、Amazon Primもきらいです。」\n\nDo you have any keys for me to understand the first bolded sentence she told\nme?\n\nThank you in advance.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-10T13:26:00.157",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80060",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-11T10:11:43.850",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-11T10:11:43.850",
"last_editor_user_id": "39952",
"owner_user_id": "39952",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation"
],
"title": "Example with 〜だけでなくて、〜も patern that I don't understand",
"view_count": 70
}
|
[] |
80060
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I am trying to learn about pitch accent, and I have heard that there are rules\nfor suffixes regarding pitch accent. Are there any resources where I could\nlearn about those rules ?\n\nI am not yet able able to really understand all in Japanese sources, which may\nbe why I have been unlucky with finding out more about it.\n\nI know about [ojad](http://www.gavo.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp/ojad/eng/pages/home),\n[weblio](https://www.weblio.jp/) and [u-biq](https://accent.u-biq.org/) which\ncan be useful for looking up individual words of even counters in the case of\nthe last one ; however I have yet to come across a place where I can learn\nabout rules and suffixes. I'd be grateful if anyone could tell me how or where\nI can learn them !\n\nby suffixes I mean things like 方、屋、的 or even counters such as 日、つ、or 個.\n\n_ps : if you have any other useful resource for pitch accent than the ones I\nhave cited, even unrelated to suffixes, please feel free to share them as well\n!_",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-10T16:30:24.570",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80063",
"last_activity_date": "2021-07-08T19:26:48.657",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-10T18:10:58.613",
"last_editor_user_id": "39955",
"owner_user_id": "39955",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"suffixes",
"pitch-accent",
"resources"
],
"title": "pitch accent for suffixes",
"view_count": 685
}
|
[
{
"body": "The NHK Accent Dictionary contains a section on compound words, which has\nentries such as 〜体、〜生、〜力 etc. that explains the pattern they use for\nconnecting to the previous word. It also has a very detailed appendix of how\ncompound words work in general.\n\nIt doesn't have any compound entries for things like 〜ぽい or 〜さ, but there are\nmany full entries like 荒っぽい、安っぽい etc. that you can use to determine the\npattern yourself.\n\nIf you are asking about 助動詞 like たら、たい、し etc, then the appendix covers that.\n\nAs for counters, there is a separate section of the dictionary for them, which\nfor each counter, covers all accents from 1 to 100, as well as 1000 and 10000.\n\nThe NHK Accent Dictionary is available in print and on iOS via the MONOKAKIDO\nDictionaries app.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-10T16:57:07.907",
"id": "80064",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-10T18:11:02.310",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-10T18:11:02.310",
"last_editor_user_id": "3097",
"owner_user_id": "3097",
"parent_id": "80063",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 5
},
{
"body": "Regarding counters there are no rules in general. But some kinds of counters\nare more or less predictable.\n\n 1. One mora counters\n\nOne mora counters are preaccented in general: 個,里,羽 etc (一個 [Ikko],一羽\n[ICHIwa]...). One useful exception is 度 [do] when used as 'times', though it's\nalso preaccented when used as 'degrees'\n\n 2. Three or more mora counters\n\nThree or more mora counters of western origin adhere to -3 rule most of the\ntime: 一センチ [ISSEnchi],一グラム [ICHIGUramu], 一メートル [ICHIMEetoru].\n\nThree or more mora compound counters can have different pitch patterns, but\nthey are usually consistent regardless of preceding number. Thus, ~番線 is\nalways unaccented, ~時間 always has a pitch drop right before [kan] etc.\n\n 3. Two mora counters\n\nTwo mora one kanji counters of western or Japanese origin are mostly\npreaccented: キロ,ミリ,組,皿 ([ICHIkiro],[HITOsara]...).\n\nTwo mora one kanji counters of Chinese origin are the most unpredictable. I\ncounted about 17 different patterns. Keep in mind, that they might have\ndifferent pitch accent with different numbers and different variations of\nnumbers (二台 is accented, but 五台 is not; [nin] in 八人[HACHInin] is preaccented ,\nbut is accented in 九人 [KUNIn] (though it becomes 頭高 when pronounced as\n[KYUunin])). The only more or less predictable situation is when the counter\nconsists of two short syllables (no moraic ん, no long vowel, no あい diphtong),\nand there's a gemination between the number and first mora of counter (一曲\n[ikkyoku], 八冊 [hassatsu] etc) - in this case the whole word tend to be post-\naccented (尾高 pattern).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-07-08T19:26:48.657",
"id": "87400",
"last_activity_date": "2021-07-08T19:26:48.657",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39646",
"parent_id": "80063",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
80063
| null |
80064
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80066",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "When translating [named entities](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Named_entity)\n(for example, a person name), phonetical translation (known as\n[transliteration](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transliteration)) is used to\nmake Katakana characters sound like its roman characters equivalent. This\nallows Japanese speakers who cannot read roman characters, to pronounce\ncorrectly named entities.\n\nWhat is the best way to deal with acronyms? For example:\n\n[O.J. Simpson](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O._J._Simpson):\n\nVersion 1 (leave acronym in roman characters): O.J. シンプソン\n\nVersion 2 (transliterate everything): オジェ・シンプソン",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-10T17:31:51.527",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80065",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-10T20:15:34.777",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39957",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation",
"katakana",
"phonetics"
],
"title": "Which character set are typically used to transliterate \"roman abbreviations\" in named entity?",
"view_count": 100
}
|
[
{
"body": "You mention acronyms but give examples of abbreviations in names. My answer\nassumes you mean abbreviations.\n\nIt's standard to use romaji for the initials in people's names\n(abbreviations). For example,\n\n * OJ Simpson = [O・J・シンプソン](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/O%E3%83%BBJ%E3%83%BB%E3%82%B7%E3%83%B3%E3%83%97%E3%82%BD%E3%83%B3)\n * T.S Eliot = [T・S・エリオット](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%E3%83%BBS%E3%83%BB%E3%82%A8%E3%83%AA%E3%82%AA%E3%83%83%E3%83%88)\n * George W Bush = [ジョージ・W・ブッシュ](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%B8%E3%83%A7%E3%83%BC%E3%82%B8%E3%83%BBW%E3%83%BB%E3%83%96%E3%83%83%E3%82%B7%E3%83%A5)\n\nAs for acronyms, it seems to be a mixture. Well-known acronyms can be used in\nphonetic forms, but very often they have a more official Japanese version\nsince Japanese people might not understand the meaning of the letters in many\nEnglish acronyms. Here are some well known English acronyms and their Japanese\ncounterparts:\n\n * CDC アメリカ疾病予防管理センター\n * NATO 北大西洋条約機構 or ネイトー\n * WHO 世界保健機関\n * UN 国際連合\n * NHK エヌエイチケイ or 日本放送協会\n\nOf course, there are also acronym loanwords which retained the phonetic\nrendering, such as UFO (ユーフォー), DVD (ディーブイディー), etc.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-10T17:47:42.693",
"id": "80066",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-10T20:15:34.777",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-10T20:15:34.777",
"last_editor_user_id": "25875",
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "80065",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
80065
|
80066
|
80066
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "「……そんな危険な大学出身者どもを、ありがたく受け入れるのが塾講師業界 **ってんだから** 」\n\nHi. The speaker is a 塾講師 and he is talking with a stranger in a bar.\n\nHi. I have some problems with the bold part. I know it equals 業界というのだから. But\nI’m not sure if the という is 伝聞 here.\n\n 1. Grammatically speaking, can we insert a だ between 業界 and って? And can we say 業界なのだから here?\n 2. If we can, are the three versions (業界だってんだから、業界なのだから、業界ってんだから) the same in meaning and nuance?\n\nA previous related thread addressed the pattern というのだから, where という was\ninterpreted as “they say”. But as far as I know, there are many cases where\nthe という in というのだから is just for emphasis without having a concrete meaning.\n[https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/11046/what-are-the-usages-of-\nのだから](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/11046/what-are-the-usages-\nof-%E3%81%AE%E3%81%A0%E3%81%8B%E3%82%89)\n\nI ask this question because the topic sentence reminds me of another sentence\nthat I have come across before. Here goes it,\n\nだがそれも無理からぬことなのかもしれない。 ただでさえ、女子の手作りクッキーをいただくなんてのは、他の男子たちの嫉妬の的だ。\nしかもそれが、転入直後から、彼女にしたい女子ランキングを駆け上がった(と噂の)あの夜刀神十香のもの **だというのである。**\n\nThe context is that the girl 十香 made some cookies for the protagonist, of whom\nthe other boys were envious.\n\nI was told the という in the bold part above meant “they say” but now that I read\nit again, I think the という could also just be an emphasis without any meaning.\nAnd unlike the first example, there is a だ between もの and という.\n\nSo let me summarize my question.\n\nIf the construction is A が B(B is a noun)+のだ/のである, as in the two sample\nsentences, when is a だ immediately after B necessary and when is the だ\noptional?\n\nWhen is a って/という immediately before のだ/のである necessary? If the って/という is\nunnecessary, なのだ works as well in the construction, I think.\n\nThank you.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-10T18:03:56.217",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80067",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-31T04:05:22.493",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-11T00:32:14.973",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "36662",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"cleft-sentences",
"construction"
],
"title": "Questions about the construction A が B(B is a noun)+のだ/のである?",
"view_count": 229
}
|
[
{
"body": "# small \"つ\"\n\n> If we can, are the three versions (業界だってんだから、業界なのだから、業界ってんだから) the same in\n> meaning and nuance?\n\nIn this case, a small \"つ\" is very Spoken language. You won't see a small \"つ\"\nin usage like this one in a serious written sentence. In fact, the sentence\nyou illustrated is also a situation where people are talking.\n\nAt least, as a Japanese, my guess is that\n「そんな危険な大学出身者どもを、ありがたく受け入れるのが塾講師業界ってんだから」 is a middle-aged man talking.\n\nAs a Japanese person, when I'm reading a novel, I can judge who is speaking by\nlooking at \"how they are talking\"(Of course, I don't always know.).\n\nYou write that they are talking in a bar, which is exactly the spoken language\nthat was in the bar.\n\n# 業界だってんだから vs 業界ってんだから\n\n業界だってんだから and 業界ってんだから are similar, but to explain, 業界だってんだから is more of an\nexpression that emphasizes the word \"業界\".\n\n# という（ってん）\n\n> ありがたく受け入れるのが塾講師業界ってんだから\n\nIn this case, \"という（ってん）\" is not that they said so. This meaning indicates that\nit is commonly referred to as such.\n\n（英語が下手なので、日本語で説明すると「一般的にそう言われている」という意味で使われています。少なくとも「塾業界」ではそう言われていると読み取れます）\n\n> あの夜刀神十香のものだというのである\n\nIn this case, the sentence seems to be valid without the \"という\".\n\nIn other words, \"あの夜刀神十香のものである\" is OK.\n\nI don't know the grammatical usage. But from the mood of the text, it feels\nmore natural to have an \"という\".\n\nIf you leave out the \"という\", you can also change the previous sentence to make\nit more natural.\n\n```\n\n だがそれも無理からぬことだ。 \n （略）\n あの夜刀神十香のものである。\n \n```\n\n（つまり作者が断定を避けて表現したいか、断定して表現したいかの違いだと考えます。もとものの文は「らしい」や「という」を使って、ぼかした表現となっていますが、このような小説?では自然に使われる表現と思います。）",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-12T00:04:14.250",
"id": "80091",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-12T04:49:55.553",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-12T04:49:55.553",
"last_editor_user_id": "10086",
"owner_user_id": "10086",
"parent_id": "80067",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "The most complete form is 塾講師業界だというのだから, which can be contracted to\n塾講師業界だってんだから, which in turn can be further contracted to 塾講師業界ってんだから.\n\nThe result of “reverse transformation” from the last one, 塾講師業界というのだから, is\nalso good, although I personally feel something is missing in it. (This is\nprecisely the reason I see 塾講師業界ってんだから more as a second-level contraction of\n塾講師業界だというのだから than as a first-level contraction of 塾講師業界というのだから, at least in\nthis context.)\n\nという in 塾講師業界だというのだから carries a sense of unexpectedness or surprise, as\nsuggested in [one](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/14400/43676) of the\nanswers to the earlier question. It’s like saying “the industry that willingly\naccepts such rogue graduates is, of all industries, the cram school industry.”\n\nI think the reason 塾講師業界 **だ** というのだから sounds more natural (at least to me)\nthan 塾講師業界というのだから is that the final だ or である is essential in stating the fact\nwhose unexpectedness is to be emphasized: そんな危険な大学出身者どもを、ありがたく受け入れるのが塾講師業界\n**だ**.\n\nGiven enough context, 塾講師業界なのだから could also be interpreted the same way, but\nit’s quite ambiguous as it can be easily interpreted as saying “since it’s the\ncram school industry that …,” which sounds neutral and lacks emphasis.\n\nという in あの夜刀神十香のものだというのである can also be understood the same way. The character\nreceived the cookies from, of all girls in the school, _that_ Yatogami Toka.\n\nあの夜刀神十香のものというのである, without だ, sounds even less natural than 塾講師業界というのだから. I\nthink this is because 「〜が塾講師業界」 could still be interpreted as something people\nare saying, permitting という to immediately follow it, whereas this possibility\nis ruled out with あの夜刀神十香のもの, which is a known fact for the narrator, not\nhearsay.\n\nStill, the contracted あの夜刀神十香のものってんだ sounds acceptable in casual speech. I\nwould suppose the speaker to be an 江戸っ子, though.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-05-09T09:52:37.203",
"id": "86551",
"last_activity_date": "2021-12-31T04:05:22.493",
"last_edit_date": "2021-12-31T04:05:22.493",
"last_editor_user_id": "43676",
"owner_user_id": "43676",
"parent_id": "80067",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
80067
| null |
86551
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "After hearing the pronunciation of the word _ブラジン_ , I'm very confused about\nthe sound for ジ, is it [d͡ʑ] or [ʑ] followed by [i]?\n\nAlso, I did some research and found this sentence on\n[wikipedia.org](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_phonology):\n\n> Before /i/, /s, t/ are alveolo-palatal [ɕ, t͡ɕ], and /z, d/ are either\n> neutralized as free variation between [ʑ] and [d͡ʑ] or distinct as [ʑ, d͡ʑ].\n> Before /u/, /t/ is [t͡s], and /d/ is either merged with /z/ as free\n> variation between [z] and [d͡z] or always [d͡z] distinct from /z/. When\n> geminated, however, /z/ is always [d͡z].[3]\n\nBut totally don't understand what it means here. Does \"before\" here mean _in\nthe past_ or it means to put [ɕ, t͡ɕ] **before** /i/, /s, t/. The later is\nweird though. Also what's the point of grouping /s/ and /t/ inside a single\npair of slashes /s, t/.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-11T01:26:42.003",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80069",
"last_activity_date": "2021-06-09T02:03:05.353",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38848",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"pronunciation"
],
"title": "Pronunciation of [d͡ʑ] vs [ʑ]",
"view_count": 599
}
|
[
{
"body": "Lets focus on \"t\". In Japanese, \"t\" is a phoneme. No matter what vowel you put\nafter it, Japanese speakers consider it the same \"t\". (Morphologically it is\nas well.) Phonemes are written between slashes. However, when the vowel /i/ or\n/u/ (also phonemes) comes before /t/ (hence, /ti/ or /tu/), the phonetic\nrealization of /t/ changes. Actual phonetic sounds are written in brackets [].\nMultiple phonetic realizations of the same phoneme are called allophones. So\n/ta/, /te/ and /to/ are [ta], [te], and [to] respectively. However, /ti/ is\n[t͡ɕi] and /tu/ is [t͡sɯ], rather than [ti] and [tu]. If you do not have\nphonetic training, then you can simply think of /ti/ as \"chi\" and /tu/ as\n\"tsu\", which is the common romanization for these sounds. Similar things\nhappen for the voiced form of \"t\" /d/ before the vowels /i/ and /u/.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-11T04:55:00.317",
"id": "80070",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-11T04:55:00.317",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "34789",
"parent_id": "80069",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "I'm not an expert in Japanese, but I am familiar with phonology.\n\n> Does \"before\" here mean in the past or it means to put [ɕ, t͡ɕ] before /i/,\n> /s, t/.\n\nIt is definitely not referring to time here. It's the latter option, \"put\n[those sounds] before [the other sounds]\".\n\n> Also what's the point of grouping /s/ and /t/ inside a single pair of\n> slashes /s, t/.\n\nThis is for the sake of convenience and brevity. In academic writing, if you\ncan save some ink in one place, you can use more elsewhere, I guess.\n\nAnd for the main question:\n\n> I'm very confused about the sound for ジ, is it [d͡ʑ] or [ʑ] followed by [i]?\n\nThe answer is in the Wikipedia article quotation, it seems. People will either\nalways randomly choose one or the other (called \"free variation\"), or they\nalways won't. That's not very helpful, unfortunately, because there is no way\nto distinguish them in writing.\n\nOne potential solution to this problem is to not worry about it by declaring\nyourself to be one of those \"free variation\" people. As a second language\nlearner, this is probably the most prudent way, as there are more important\nquestions to answer when it comes to your progress with the language. Time and\nexperience with the language will help you decide which words people tend to\nuse one or the other with, though.\n\nThe good news is that like Atsutane said, these sounds are allophones, so not\nknowing which one to say yourself won't impact your understanding of others\nbecause no words will be distinguished with just those sounds alone.\n\n> > When geminated, however, /z/ is always [d͡z].\n\nAt least this is clear. If geminated (\"making the consonant longer\", as in\nwith little っ), there's only one choice.\n\n## Note about phonemes and allophones\n\nPhonemes are sound units that have meaning. That means if you have a word and\nswap one of the phonemes for another one, it will change the meaning of the\nword (or make a nonsense word). For example, in English, /b/ and /p/ are\nphonemes (sounds that mean something in English), and we know this because if\nwe exchange them in a word, it changes the word, like this:\n\n\"Bat\" /bæt/ becomes \"pat\" /pæt/\n\nNote that phonemes are written between / / (forward slashes).\n\nLikewise, if two sounds are allophones, they are two sounds that mean the same\nthing. Think of them as variations of a sound. If you exchange allophones\nwithin a word, it doesn't change the meaning. This is why we can have accents\nand still understand each other — we say different sounds but they mean the\nsame thing. There are lots of examples, but take the word \"butter\" for\nexample. Some people say the /t/ very clearly, but others will say it almost\nlike a /d/, with a sound called a tap:\n\nButter /bʌtər/ and [bʌɾər]\n\nAllophones are written between brackets [ ].\n\nIf I say both of these, an English speaker would only hear one word, \"butter\",\neven though I said two different sounds. There are tons more examples,\nespecially with vowels, but in Japanese, there's one very famous example of\nallophones: [l] and [r]. To them, if you switch them out in a word, it sounds\nlike the same word. This is why they have difficulty differentiating words\nlike \"light\" and \"right\" when they learn English.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-09-11T23:42:21.177",
"id": "80612",
"last_activity_date": "2020-09-11T23:42:21.177",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "34190",
"parent_id": "80069",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
80069
| null |
80612
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80073",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Studying for the JLPT N2, I came across the following question in the\nShinkansen Master Grammar book.\n\n> ( ) 際は、こちらのテーブルをお使いいただけます。\n>\n> a) お食事の\n>\n> b) ご飯を食べる\n>\n> c) お一人様の\n\nI thought that a) and b) are good enough as an answer but according to the\nanswer sheet, the correct one is a). I was wondering if there is a particular\nreason for it. My hypothesis is that お食事 is on formal style, therefore, more\nappropriate for a sentence using 際, but aside from that, both sound logical to\nme.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-11T09:22:57.740",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80072",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-11T11:52:50.580",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-11T11:52:50.580",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "25817",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"usage",
"jlpt",
"keigo",
"grammar"
],
"title": "Question about 際 usage in Shinkansen Master N2",
"view_count": 182
}
|
[
{
"body": "Your hypothesis is correct. 際 is generally used as a more formal version of 時.\n\nAlthough ご飯を食べる際 is grammatically correct, the level of formality does not\nmatch the rest of the sentence. When you see humble language like\nこちらのテーブルをお使いいただけます, you know that the person speaking is implying that you are\nin a superior position and that they are in an inferior position. Therefore,\nthey would not use 食べる際 as it is not polite enough when referring to your\nactions. That is why お食事の際 is correct.\n\n * <https://jlptsensei.com/learn-japanese-grammar/%E9%9A%9B%E3%81%AB-sai-ni-meaning/>",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-11T09:44:35.353",
"id": "80073",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-11T09:44:35.353",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "80072",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
80072
|
80073
|
80073
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 0,
"body": "I would like to know which is the difference between the structure いかに～か\nand｛どんなに／いくら／どれだけ／どれほど／なんと｝～か?\n\nI know that いかに is the old version of どんなに, but what about the rest of words?\n\nCould I say the next sentence with all the words?\n\n\"Right now, I can't express with words **how happy** I am.\"\n\n> 今のところ、自分が (いかに／どんなに／いくら／どれだけ／どれほど／なんと) 幸せか言葉で表現することはできません。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-11T09:59:12.267",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80074",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-11T15:51:48.043",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-11T15:51:48.043",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "29677",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"words",
"grammar"
],
"title": "Difference in words for saying \"how + adjective\"",
"view_count": 121
}
|
[] |
80074
| null | null |
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80084",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I am watching a [series](https://tezukaosamu.net/jp/about/story.html) of\nvideos about the life of 手塚【てづか】治虫【おさむ】. In the video number 8, the word アタマ\nin 「子供のアタマ」 is spelled in katakana:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/JZvYD.jpg)\n\nIs this a way to emphazise or highlight something? or what am I missing?\n\nAlso note that in the same slide, just some sentences before, あたま in 「頭のかたい」\nis spelled in kanji, which makes it all the more intriguing. Why is the writer\nspelling あたま in katakana only for one occurrence of the word, an not for the\nothers?\n\nThank you in advance!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-11T10:27:50.943",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80075",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-11T16:01:13.343",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "32952",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"words",
"katakana",
"spelling"
],
"title": "Why is アタマ written in katakana in the following passage?",
"view_count": 255
}
|
[
{
"body": "Purely speculative though, I think it's somewhat condescending description of\nchildren's head because the kanji :「頭」is normally used to describe an\nimportant person.\n\n * [頭{かしら}](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E9%A0%AD_%28%E3%81%8B%E3%81%97%E3%82%89%29/#jn-40824) is the head of the group of carpenters.\n * [頭{とう}取{どり}](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%A0%AD%E5%8F%96) is the CEO of bank.\n * [船頭{せんどう}](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E8%88%B9%E9%A0%AD_%28%E3%81%9B%E3%82%93%E3%81%A9%E3%81%86%29/#jn-127066) is the captain of the ship.\n\nSo, the author wants to used「アタマ」for children's brain/mind/head in somewhat\nself-humiliating way. I think it is similar nuance that parents calling one's\nkid [愚息{ぐそく}](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E6%84%9A%E6%81%AF/#jn-61700)\nor [豚児{とんじ}](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E8%B1%9A%E5%85%90/) in\nJapanese culture.",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-11T14:21:24.877",
"id": "80081",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-11T14:21:24.877",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "34735",
"parent_id": "80075",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "It's exactly the same reason why マンガ is commonly written in katakana. For some\nwords, katakana makes them look \"soft\", \"casual\", \"catchy\", \"friendly\"...or\nwhatever. This is why アタマ is often used in product names and catchphrases, as\nshown below:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/5CTKi.png)\n\nAs you can see, this has nothing to do with respect or humbleness. You can\nsafely use アタマ referring to the brains of your (potential) customers.\n\nWhich word is commonly katakanized is fairly arbitrary, but アタマ, カラダ and ココロ\nare all common. Similar examples include ヘタ (下手), クソ (糞), カンタン (簡単), ベンリ (便利),\nオモテとウラ (表と裏), ミライ (未来), ワナ (罠) and タダ (只).\n\nThere are many other reasons to use katakana.\n\n * To add an international flavor: [ニンジャ, ニッポン, ヒキコモリ](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/17799/5010)\n * To add a \"high-tech\" flavor: [トヨタ, ホンダ](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/31078/5010)\n * To imply a derivative meaning is used: [オタク, ノド](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/46870/5010)\n * Simply the kanji is difficult and/or non-intuitive: [メチャクチャ, ツジツマ](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/15102/5010)\n * Plain emphasis (akin to all-caps): ゼッタイ",
"comment_count": 7,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-11T15:54:00.840",
"id": "80084",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-11T16:01:13.343",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-11T16:01:13.343",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "80075",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
80075
|
80084
|
80084
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80079",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I need help with the grammar of this sentence from a light novel:\n\n> 短い黒髪に、高くも低くもない平均的な身長。\n\n 1. What is the purpose of に after 黒髪? Is it a conjunction particle?\n\n 2. Does the く after 高 and 低 make them adverbs? If so how does it affect the verb です (which I assume is the implied verb)\n\n 3. I don't understand the use of もない in the sentence",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-11T11:30:55.997",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80076",
"last_activity_date": "2021-10-11T23:39:29.280",
"last_edit_date": "2021-10-11T23:39:29.280",
"last_editor_user_id": "30454",
"owner_user_id": "39936",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "短い黒髪に、高くも低くもない平均的な身長。",
"view_count": 65
}
|
[
{
"body": "This に is a listing particle. See: [Particle に to enumerate\nthings?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/12188/5010)\n\n高くも低くもない平均的な身長 is the same as 高くもなくて低くもない平均的な身長, or \"an average stature which\nis neither big nor small\". See: [What is the correct grammar for \"neither x\nnor y\"?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/37021/5010) / [How would you say\n\"Something isn't X, but isn't Y as\nwell.\"](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/48324/5010)\n\n * 高い身長: \"big stature\" (\"tall height\" is more literal but this is probably unnatural in English, so please bear with this)\n * 高くない身長: \"stature that is not big\"\n * 高くも低くもない身長: \"stature that is not big nor small\"\n\nThe omitted verb after 身長 is indeed だ/です (or\n[をしている](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/11360/5010)), but it has little\nto do with the grammar above.\n\n> 短い黒髪に、高くも低くもない平均的な身長(だ/をしている)。 \n> [He/She] has short black hair, and an average stature that is neither big\n> nor small. \n> [He/She] has short black hair, and is neither tall nor short.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-11T13:50:54.347",
"id": "80079",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-11T13:56:59.903",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-11T13:56:59.903",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "80076",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
80076
|
80079
|
80079
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "When using the structures ようだ and らしい, when do you conjugate the verb or\nadjective before ようだ and らしい in negative or in past or both, and when do you\nconjugate NOT that verb or adjective, but instead the ようだ and らしい and say, for\nexample, ようだった or ようではない or らしくない.\n\nSometimes I feel I don't know if, for saying the negative form or the past\ntense of ようだ and らしい, I should modify the verb or adjective before them or\nmodify ようだ and らしい.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-11T12:07:22.873",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80077",
"last_activity_date": "2023-05-24T00:04:15.463",
"last_edit_date": "2022-04-28T21:38:39.747",
"last_editor_user_id": "45489",
"owner_user_id": "29677",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"conjugations",
"negation"
],
"title": "Negative and past forms of ようだ and らしい",
"view_count": 302
}
|
[
{
"body": "> _\" when do you congujate the verb or adjective before ようだ and らしい in\n> negative or in past or both, and when do you conjugate NOT that verb or\n> adjective, but instead the ようだ and らしい\"_\n\nThe crux of this is similar to in English -- what do you want to say?\n\nLet's look at the past tense first.\n\n 1. _It seems he is going._\n 2. _It seems he went._\n 3. _It seemed he was going._\n 4. _It seemed he went._\n\nFor 1 and 2, the \"seeming\" is in the present tense, so we know that whoever is\nthinking about this is thinking about it \"now\" in the present (relative to the\ntemporal context of the utterance or text).\n\nFor 3 and 4, the \"seeming\" is in the past tense, so we know that whoever is\nthinking about this is thinking about it \"then\" in the past (relative to the\ntemporal context of the utterance or text).\n\nFor 1 and 3, the \"going\" is in the present tense (specifically present\nprogressive), so we know that \"he\" appeared to be going at the time that the\n\"seeming\" occurred (at that point in time that the person thinking about this,\nwas thinking about this).\n\nFor 2 and 4, the \"going\" is in the past tense, so we know that \"he\" appeared\nto have already gone, some time before the \"seeming\" occurred (before that\npoint in time that the person thinking about this, was thinking about this).\n\nIn Japanese, these four might be rendered as:\n\n 1. 彼は行くようだ。\n 2. 彼は行ったようだ。\n 3. 彼は行くようだった。\n 4. 彼は行ったようだった。\n\nThis is simplified somewhat for purposes of illustration -- Japanese tense is\nsometimes used slightly differently than in English, so strictly speaking,\nusage patterns will not match up one-to-one as cleanly as above, but this\nshould give you a general idea.\n\nThis works out similarly for negative -- did something \"not seem like X\"\n(Xのようじゃない), or \"seem like not X\" (Xじゃないよう), etc.? Figure out the sense you're\ntrying to convey, and phrase your Japanese accordingly.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2022-01-25T01:34:22.370",
"id": "93123",
"last_activity_date": "2022-01-25T01:34:22.370",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5229",
"parent_id": "80077",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
80077
| null |
93123
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80080",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm a totally newbie in learning Japanese and I'm struggling to understand\nthat sentence:\n\n> おじいさんはないをやらせてもだめなんだもの。\n\nI know おじいさん is \"grandfather\" and it seems like はない means \"is not present\",\nbut if so I don't understand the role of the particle を.\n\nThe following part is quite dark to me: maybe だもの could indicate a reason, but\nI'm not sure about it.\n\nThank you.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-11T13:10:57.393",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80078",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-11T14:17:35.133",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-11T14:00:26.103",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "39965",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 4,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"sentence"
],
"title": "I need help to understand this sentence: おじいさんはないをやらせてもだめなんだもの",
"view_count": 1427
}
|
[
{
"body": "This ない is clearly a typo for なに.\n\n> おじいさんは **なに** をやらせてもだめなんだもの。\n>\n> * Grandpa is no-good whatever we have him to do.\n> * I can't get my grandpa to do anything!\n>\n\n * **おじいさんは** : You got this part right. \"as for Grandpa\"\n * **なにをやらせても** : やらせる is the causative-form of やる, or \"make/let him do\". を simply marks the object of やる. \"何/どこ/誰 + ても\" is a grammar pattern that means \"whatever\" etc. See: [Meaning of volitional passive form](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/32949/5010) / [Maggie Sensei: Wh-ever/No matter wh/how: ても/でも ( = temo/demo)](http://maggiesensei.com/2016/10/12/wh-everno-matter-whhow-%E3%81%A6%E3%82%82%E3%81%A7%E3%82%82-temodemo/)\n * **だめなんだ** : だめ means \"no good\", \"useless\", etc.\n * **もの** : もの is a little old-fashioned sentence-end particle used to present a reason and convince someone. See: [〜ものだから 〜もの ～もん What are the differences?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/5648/5010) / [JLPT N2 Grammar もの/もん](https://jlptsensei.com/learn-japanese-grammar/%E3%82%82%E3%81%AE-mono-%E3%82%82%E3%82%93-mon-meaning/)",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-11T14:17:35.133",
"id": "80080",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-11T14:17:35.133",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "80078",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 13
}
] |
80078
|
80080
|
80080
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80085",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I saw sometimes と indicating a topic. Like in the sentence:\nそんな既視感に戸惑いを感じていると、こちらを見つめる視線に気が付いた ( My attempt of tranlation is \"I felt\nconfused by that deja vu feeling by noticing the line of sight looking in this\ndirection\"). I think it have the 「そんな既視感に戸惑いを感じている」as the topic of the\nsentence, and then say that the person had that feeling of deja vu by noticing\na line of sight. Is that it or did I got all wrong?\n\nAnothe exemple sentence is: 僕らの存在こんなにも単純だと 笑いに来たんだ (beggining of the opening\n\"UNINSTALL\" of the anime ぼくらの). My teatcher said it means \"Came laughing of\nthe fact that our existence is simple this way\" (tried to make a more literal\ntranslation)\n\nIn this last case, it seems that the と have the same role as the particle に,\nindicanting the element of which someone is laughing.",
"comment_count": 3,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-11T15:25:23.600",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80083",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-12T02:22:05.800",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-11T16:33:17.700",
"last_editor_user_id": "32588",
"owner_user_id": "32588",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"particle-と",
"object",
"topic"
],
"title": "Can と indicante the object or the topict too as well as the を and は particles do?",
"view_count": 88
}
|
[
{
"body": "No, と is not a topic marker. The と in the first sentence just means\n\"when/while ～\" or \"～ and (then)\". (See: [What is the function of と in verb-\nていると form](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/23727/5010)) This 既視感 refers\nto something mentioned in the previous sentence (because there is そんな), and 視線\nrefers to a different event that is probably unrelated to the cause of the\n既視感.\n\n> I felt confused by that déjà vu feeling, when I (suddenly) noticed someone's\n> eyes staring at me.\n\n* * *\n\nYour second \"sentence\" contains a typo, and is actually a **part** of a\nsentence. The full sentence is:\n\n> 《あの時最高のリアルが向こうから会いに来たの》 **は** 、「僕らの存在はこんなにも単純だ」と笑いに来たんだ。 \n> (punctuation added by me)\n\nThe topic of this sentence is a long nominalized clause (parentheses) and is\nexplicitly marked with the topic marker は (bold). The と after 単純だ is just a\nquotative-と used with 笑う. The quote is enclosed in the brackets. Xと笑う means\n\"to laugh saying/thinking X\".\n\nA very literal translation is:\n\n> As for (the fact) that \"the best real\" came over to see me at that time,\n> (it) was that he (\"the best real\") came to laugh at me saying our existence\n> is simple like this.\n\nTaking [the whole context](http://j-lyric.net/artist/a04d013/l00aa41.html)\ninto consideration, this sentence can be interpreted like so:\n\n> I remember the day \"the ultimate reality\" came over to see me; he came to\n> laugh at me and teach me how trivial our existence is.\n\n(Note that 最高の is a sarcasm here. Clearly, he does not want to accept the\nruthless reality that he is just a piece of dust in this universe.)",
"comment_count": 4,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-11T17:23:14.160",
"id": "80085",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-12T02:22:05.800",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-12T02:22:05.800",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "80083",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
80083
|
80085
|
80085
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80087",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "たった三十分のあいだに、高木の変わり様といったらなかった。\n\nI'm not at all clear on the translation or nuance here. Source is a [NLPT N1\ngrammar question](https://japanesetest4you.com/japanese-language-proficiency-\ntest-jlpt-n1-grammar-exercise-3/).\n\nConfusion #1: The use of に in 「たった三十分のあいだに」. If the translation is \"in only\nthirty minutes\", で seems more appropriate, or having no particle at all, based\non [Difference between 間 and\n間に](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/12539/difference-\nbetween-%e9%96%93-and-%e9%96%93%e3%81%ab). All answers there indicate that に\nis NOT optional, and that it indicates a point in time rather than a long\nperiod. But the translation \"at a point in only thirty minutes\" seems like\ngibberish.\n\nConfusion #2: I'm not clear on the nuance of 「高木の変わり様といったらなかった」. ~といったらなかった\nimplies \"very\" or \"incredibly\", but with no other context, how do tall trees\n\"incredibly change\"? Their colors changing in the autumn? Their positions\nmoving in a strong wind? I am not sure.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-11T17:29:48.313",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80086",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-11T18:15:49.827",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4382",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 3,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"translation",
"particle-に",
"jlpt",
"time"
],
"title": "Understanding 「たった三十分のあいだに、高木の変わり様といったらなかった。」",
"view_count": 143
}
|
[
{
"body": "First of all, 高木【たかぎ】 is \"Takagi\", a common surname. (There is a word 高木【こうぼく】\ntoo, but it's irrelevant now.) ～といったらない (or ～といったらありはしない, ～ったらありゃしない, etc) is\nan idiom meaning \"I cannot emphasize ～ too much\" or \"～ is beyond words\". I\nknow it looks strange at first, but it's an idiom. So 高木の変わり様といったらなかった means\n\"The way Takagi had changed was incredible\". Maybe Takagi tried cosplaying, or\nheard very sad news?\n\nたった30分の間に変わった indeed indicates that the drastic change happened somewhere\nwithin the 30-minutes period but the speaker doesn't know any more details.\nNote that 変わる is basically an instant state-change verb, so 30分の間変わった makes\nlittle sense. 30分の間で変わった is interchangeable with 30分の間に変わった.\n\nLastly, it's also perfectly fine to say:\n\n> たった三十分のあいだ **での** 高木の変わり様といったらなかった。",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-11T18:08:29.573",
"id": "80087",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-11T18:15:49.827",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-11T18:15:49.827",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "80086",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
80086
|
80087
|
80087
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "> 私の進む先に輝く 希望あふれる未来\n\nThis sentence is separated like this in subtitles, with 私の進む先に輝く being above,\nand 希望あふれる未来 being below (somehow I think it might be relevant when it comes\nto my confusion in parsing it). At first I believed 輝く was modifying 希望.\n\nI was told, however, it should be parsed like this: [私の進む先に輝く][希望あふれる]未来, as\nin both verbs are equally affecting the noun 未来. But what sort of structure is\nthis in which 輝く can simply be in dictionary-form, before another noun, and\nstill affect 未来 as a relative clause?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-11T19:32:55.960",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80088",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-11T20:01:41.380",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39528",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "How can these two verbs affect 未来 at the same time?",
"view_count": 72
}
|
[
{
"body": "More exactly the sentence should be parsed either as 1.(私の進む先に(輝く希望)あふれる)未来 or\n2.((私の進む先に輝く)希望あふれる)未来.\n\nIn case 1, this is _the future filled with sparkling hopes that is waiting for\nyou_ ; in case 2, this is _the future filled with hopes which are sparkling\nbefore you_.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-11T20:01:41.380",
"id": "80089",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-11T20:01:41.380",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "4216",
"parent_id": "80088",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
80088
| null |
80089
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80092",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I came across a song (琥珀ト瑠璃ノ輪舞曲) where there's a line\n\n> \"時の函に横たわっていた\".\n\nI know the meaning of the words individually ,\n\n> \"時の\" = of a certain time, \n> \"函\" = box, \n> \"横たわる\" = lying down /stretching out.\n\nBut putting them to together in the sentence makes no sense to me. The most\nliteral way I can translate it is \"Lying in a box of a certain time\" But the\nmeaning seems incomplete to me. Is there any other meaning behind it? Thank\nyou!\n\nFor context, these are the song lines before it :\n\n> 煤けた硝子玉 淡い月と碧い夜 \n> それだけを映して時の函に横たわっていた",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-11T21:59:03.803",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80090",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-12T03:19:46.983",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-11T22:31:35.613",
"last_editor_user_id": "4216",
"owner_user_id": "27788",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"meaning",
"song-lyrics",
"song"
],
"title": "What is the specific meaning of 時の函 in this song lyric?",
"view_count": 140
}
|
[
{
"body": "The literal translation is:\n\n> 時の函に横たわっていた \n> [I] was lying in the box of time\n\nJudging from [the broader context](https://utaten.com/lyric/mi18112254/), this\nis the author's own poetic way of saying \"(I) have spent a long time lying in\nthis box\". This 函 primarily refers to the \"frame of time\", but I guess it's\nalso a reference to a physical storage box. Note that the character (\"I\") in\nthis song is a half-forgotten and half-broken windup doll who has been waiting\nfor a new owner for a long time. 煤けた硝子玉 refers to his own glass eyes.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-12T02:37:58.040",
"id": "80092",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-12T03:19:46.983",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-12T03:19:46.983",
"last_editor_user_id": "5010",
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "80090",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
80090
|
80092
|
80092
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80095",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "For the below sentence:\n\n> When you have no money who would you borrow from?\n\nI think the Japanese translation would be:\n\n> お金がないとき、誰に借りてもらいますか？\n\nAnd using Google Translate, it translates to:\n\n> Who would you borrow when you have no money?\n\nWhich matches with the expected sentence at the top.\n\nHowever, the textbook chooses this sentence instead:\n\n> お金がないとき、誰に貸してもらいますか？\n\nBut 貸します means _to lend_ and the sentence without もらいます, I think, would be:\n\n> お金がないとき、誰にお金を貸しますか？\n\nWhich means:\n\n> When you have no money, who do you lend money to.\n\nAnd it doesn't match with the expected sentence.\n\nAlso with the above sentence (in textbook), Google Translate translates to:\n\n> Who do you want to lend when you have no money?\n\nWhich is odd, isn't it?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-12T04:10:23.337",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80093",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-12T09:03:33.087",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "38848",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar"
],
"title": "Confusion between 貸して vs. 借ります for Vて-form もらいます structure",
"view_count": 873
}
|
[
{
"body": "First of all, ～してもらう means \"have something done\".\n\n\"Who would you borrow from?\" is translated as \"誰から借りますか?\". \"誰に借りてもらいますか?\"\nmeans \"Who would you ask for borrowing money (from someone)?\" For example, A\nsaid \"誰にお金を借りてもらいますか?\", B answered \"母に借りてもらいます\". The answer doesn't mean \"I\nwill borrow money from my mother\" but \"I will ask my mother for borrowing\nmoney (from someone).\"\n\nお金がないとき、誰にお金を貸しますか？ is unnatural because you can't lend money when you don't\nhave money. お金がないとき、誰に貸してもらいますか？ make sense and it means \"Who do you ask for\nlending money (to you)?\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-12T06:47:03.970",
"id": "80095",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-12T09:03:33.087",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-12T09:03:33.087",
"last_editor_user_id": "7320",
"owner_user_id": "7320",
"parent_id": "80093",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
80093
|
80095
|
80095
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80097",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I know that [**熱が出る (netsu ga deru)** means to have a\nfever](https://ejje.weblio.jp/sentence/content/%E7%86%B1%E3%81%8C%E5%87%BA%E3%82%8B).\n\nExample:\n\n> 風邪を引いたら、39℃の熱が出た。\n>\n> Kaze wo hiitara, 39C no netsu ga deta\n>\n> When I caught a cold, I had a fever of 39C.\n\n**What does 熱を出す (netsu wo dasu) mean?**\n\nThese are the examples I have:\n\n> 1. でも熱出して寂しいって言ってた。\n>\n\n>\n> Demo netsu dashite sabishii tte itte ta\n>\n> 2. 彼女は体が弱いので、何かあるとすぐに熱を出す。\n>\n\n>\n> Kanojo wa karada ga yowai no de, nanika aru to sugu ni netsu wo dasu",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-12T06:42:49.270",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80094",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-13T11:47:08.110",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-12T14:49:30.967",
"last_editor_user_id": "9831",
"owner_user_id": "39695",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"phrases",
"transitivity"
],
"title": "What is difference between 熱を出す and 熱が出る",
"view_count": 669
}
|
[
{
"body": "The difference relates to the more general difference between transitive and\nintransitive verbs, with transitive verbs being accompanied by an active agent\nwhich is a causal factor.\n\nIn your examples, the intransitive verb 出る is used to state a fact that the\nheat/fever is happening of its own accord, i.e. 熱が出た = I have a fever. By\nusing the transitive verb 出す, there is more emphasis on the active agent. This\nis sometimes used when referring to things like chemical reactions, where the\nreaction 'gives off heat', i.e. there is something which is actively causing\nthe release of heat. For example,\n[高い熱を出す性質](https://ejje.weblio.jp/sentence/content/%E7%86%B1%E3%82%92%E5%87%BA%E3%81%99)\n(the property of giving off heat). In your example, 体が弱いのですぐに熱を出す is\nemphasizing the causal factor of her weak constitution as being responsible\nfor the fever. It's a subtle nuance, but with 熱が出る it's simply stating a fact\nand with 熱を出す it's pointing to the active agent which is causing the fever.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-12T11:46:07.537",
"id": "80097",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-12T11:46:07.537",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "80094",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
},
{
"body": "Let's change the example.\n\n> 私は骨を折った。 _I broke a bone._ \n> 私は骨が折れた。 _A bone of mine broke._\n\nThe former sounds like that the bone fracture as such is a remarkable event\nthat happens to the person. The latter is more like mentioning it as a\nconsequence of another event (like car accident) or something.\n\nSimilarly, 熱が出る is more like told as a part of a disease's symptom or that\nlike, while 熱を出す is itself a life event. In English you usually only say\n\"have/run a fever\", but I might consider translating 熱が出る \"fever develops\" if\nI really need to disambiguate.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-13T07:58:37.167",
"id": "80108",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-13T11:47:08.110",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-13T11:47:08.110",
"last_editor_user_id": "7810",
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "80094",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
80094
|
80097
|
80097
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I'm writing a book called The Other Side\n\nI was curious what the Japanese translation for the title would be. I tried\nGoogle Translate and got two different answers:\n\nThe Other Side - 向こう側 / Mukō-gawa\n\nThe other side - 反対側 / Hantaisoku\n\nWhich is correct? Are either of them correct?\n\nThanks in advance. :) I have no prior experience with Japanese, I'm just\ncurious.",
"comment_count": 6,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-12T11:06:08.327",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80096",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-12T23:58:24.537",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39973",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 0,
"tags": [
"english-to-japanese"
],
"title": "Translation for book title \"The Other Side\", differences between capitalization",
"view_count": 129
}
|
[
{
"body": "Basically...\n\n * 向こう側 refers to a distant place over a big thing (e.g., \"the other side of this building\", \"the country over the sea\", \"somewhere over the rainbow\", \"the person over the phone\")\n * 反対側 and 逆側 refer to the opposite side of something (e.g, \"the other side of a dining table\", \"the other side of a stick\", \"the other lane of a road\") 反対/逆 means \"opposite\".\n * 裏側 refers to the other side of a sheet-like structure, which is often hidden (e.g., \"the other side of a coin\", \"inside a shirt\", \"behind the wall\", \"under the veil\")\n\nNow, \"a (person's) life\" is 人生, and \"X of (my) life\" is 人生のX. 人生の向こう側 sounds\nlike somewhere you reach after you have finished your life, or some sort of\nspiritual world beyond the concept of life. 人生の裏側 sounds like the hidden,\ndarker side of one's life. These are probably not what you want. 人生の反対側 or\n人生の逆側 usually makes little sense and is hard to describe, but if you indeed\nwant to refer to something poetic like \"the other (happier) side of my life\",\nthis may be a valid option. We do say 正反対の人生 or 真逆の人生 referring to a\ncompletely different and contrasting life path (e.g., gang vs police, happy vs\nmiserable, athlete vs scientist).\n\nA human translator might interpret the concept of your book and choose other\ntitles like あちら側 (literally \"that side\"), もう一つの人生 (\"another life\"), ありえた人生\n(\"life that had been possible\") and so on.\n\nAnyway, you should not rely on machine translations because they usually do\nnot understand nuances and contexts. In this case, even a human cannot say\nwhich is correct unless you provide enough context.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-12T23:58:24.537",
"id": "80103",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-12T23:58:24.537",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "5010",
"parent_id": "80096",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 3
}
] |
80096
| null |
80103
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I can't seem to find any information on this. You know how people in the west\nhave names like James Smith IV, is there something along that line for the\nJapanese?",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-12T11:50:16.030",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80098",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-12T11:58:28.020",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39976",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"names"
],
"title": "Number Suffixes in names?",
"view_count": 52
}
|
[
{
"body": "The counter `～世` is used after the person's name. For example,\n\n> King George **IV** = ジョージ **4世** ([see\n> here](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%B8%E3%83%A7%E3%83%BC%E3%82%B84%E4%B8%96_\\(%E3%82%A4%E3%82%AE%E3%83%AA%E3%82%B9%E7%8E%8B\\))).",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-12T11:58:28.020",
"id": "80099",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-12T11:58:28.020",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "80098",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
}
] |
80098
| null |
80099
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80107",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Could the word いかに always be replaced by どんなに／いくら／どれだけ／どれほど／なんと in structures\nlike\n\n 1. いかに～か\n 2. いかに～ても／でも\n 3. いかに～とも\n 4. いかに～ことか\n\nBasically, what I would like to know is if いかに and どんなに／いくら／どれだけ／どれほど／なんと are\nconsidered synonyms or there is any difference.\n\nThank you so much in advance for your help!",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-12T13:36:34.257",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80100",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-13T07:04:28.820",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "29677",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"words",
"synonyms"
],
"title": "Synonyms of いかに",
"view_count": 212
}
|
[
{
"body": "1. * いかに [adj.] か \"How [adj.] (it) is!\" (exclamatory) \n= どんなに／どれだけ／どれほど／なんと\n\n * いかに [V] か \"how to V\" \n= どう／どのように／どうやって\n\n 2. * いかに [adj.] ても／でも \"no matter how [adj.]\" \n= どんなに／いくら／どれだけ／どれほど／どれくらい\n\n * いかに [V] ても \"no matter how [V]\" \n= どんなに／いくら／どれだけ／どれほど／どれくらい (how much) \n= どう／どのように／どうやって (in what manner)\n\n 3. = #2 except verbs' conjugation (also often become volitional form \"no matter how (it) _would/should_ [V]\")\n 4. * いかに [adj./V] ことか \"How [adj./V-ing] (it) is!\" (explicitly exclamatory) \n= どんなに／どれだけ／どれほど／なんと \n(only such verbs that is semantically stative could be used)\n\nBasically いか is an older word that has double face of \"how much\" and \"what\nmanner/type\". To make things more complex, it is often involved in idiomatic\nor largely fixed expressions, which you have asked. There are only limited\nforms how いか is employed today:\n\n * いかに: (degree) どんなに／いくら etc.; (manner) どう／どのように etc.\n * いかなる: どんな／どのような \"what kind of\"\n * いかが: どう \"how about; what about; what like\"\n * [いかん](https://japanesetest4you.com/flashcard/learn-jlpt-n1-grammar-%E3%81%84%E3%81%8B%E3%82%93%E3%81%A7%E3%81%AF-ikan-dewa/) (almost a particle; better see the link)\n * [いかんせん](https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/%E5%A6%82%E4%BD%95%E3%81%9B%E3%82%93/) \"unfortunately\"",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-13T07:04:28.820",
"id": "80107",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-13T07:04:28.820",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "80100",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
}
] |
80100
|
80107
|
80107
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80102",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Found in the book for JLPT N2 and can't understand the sentence. I have\nhighlighted the text I cant understand, rest of the text no need to translate,\nadded just for clarifying context.\n\nGoogle translates this as \"Because the person who said it has no choice but to\nlose.\"\n\n> 文句を言うことはとても大切です。文句を言う力をつけることも必要です。\n> ただ、いまは、言う「ちから」そのものが若い人から奪われている。なぜか。文句を言うことで、言った人自身は損をしてしまうと\n> **思わざるを得なくなっているからです**\n> 。言ったらもっと状況が悪くなる。職場で[疎]{うと}んじられて、クビを切られるかもしれない。[藪蛇]{やぶへび}だろう、ってことなんです。",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-12T14:24:18.740",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80101",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-13T08:07:24.413",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-12T19:18:44.063",
"last_editor_user_id": "78",
"owner_user_id": "36087",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 1,
"tags": [
"translation"
],
"title": "How to get this form and how to translate it 思わざるを得なくなる",
"view_count": 109
}
|
[
{
"body": "theres a lot of these 「・・・ざるを得なくなる」type sentences, and like what you got from\nGoogle Translate it pretty much does mean \"No choice but to\". It can ALSO mean\n\"cannot help but...\" In the context of that block you pasted, what that\nsentence is saying \"By complaining, the individual cannot help but think by\ndoing so he/she will be at a disadvantage\"\n\nso like couple examples is like (looked up these sentences via google search):\n\n悪天候のため、今日の遠足は中止せざるを得ない。-Because of the bad weather, we have no choice but to\ncancel the trip.\n\nその映画は予告だけで面白いので、期待せざるを得ない。-The movie trailer alone was so good, can't help but\nbe excited\n\nnot exact translations, but hopefully you get the idea",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-12T19:45:05.633",
"id": "80102",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-13T08:07:24.413",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-13T08:07:24.413",
"last_editor_user_id": "39982",
"owner_user_id": "39982",
"parent_id": "80101",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
80101
|
80102
|
80102
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "I've been singing on a karaoke app recently and I wanted to comment on a\nperson's voice. How would I go about saying \"You sound like a rockstar!\"\n\nI was thinking 「Aさん、ロックスターみたいなぁ～」",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-13T01:54:40.773",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80104",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-13T12:12:35.943",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39984",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"grammar",
"meaning",
"translation",
"word-choice",
"expressions"
],
"title": "How do you say \"You sound like a ___?\"",
"view_count": 462
}
|
[
{
"body": "How about this あなたはロックスターのように聞こえます。 It seems pretty reasonable.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-13T05:18:51.883",
"id": "80106",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-13T05:18:51.883",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39987",
"parent_id": "80104",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 0
},
{
"body": "We have a post there [How to express “X sounds like\nY”](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/17973/7810), which, however, not very\nuseful for your case.\n\n> Aさん、ロックスターみたいなぁ～\n\nThis is actually very very close, but no cigar. I'd say:\n\n> Aさん、（まるで）ロックスターみたい（／みたいだ／みたいだなあ／みたいだね／みたいだよ）！\n\nAs you may know, it is most natural not to translate \"sound\" as is. Best using\nみたい whenever it is \"sound\" or \"look\" or \"smell\" or such.\n\nBut you can specify the origin of sensation, too. In this case, \"sound\" has no\ncall either, because we would go one more step finer.\n\n> Aさん、声がロックスターみたい！ (quality of voice) \n> Aさん、歌い方がロックスターみたい！ (technique) \n> Aさん、うますぎてロックスターみたい！ (good singer) \n> etc.\n\nOf course you can elongate the ending a bit, like how you put ～ at the end.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-13T12:12:35.943",
"id": "80111",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-13T12:12:35.943",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "7810",
"parent_id": "80104",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 4
}
] |
80104
| null |
80111
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": null,
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "Been thinking about these for a while. I see that we already have [Difference\nbetween 光る, 輝く, and 光り輝く?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/23728/78), but\nI'm including a lot more. What are the differences in meaning (ignoring\nconjugations) of the following words:\n\n * 光る・ピカピカ\n * 輝く・輝かす\n * 光り輝く\n * [閃]{ひらめ}く\n * [煌]{きらめ}く・キラキラ・ギラつく\n * 瞬く\n * てかる・テカテカ\n * ちらつく・ちらちら\n * 照る・照らす\n\nWhich ones are interchangeable? Which ones imply a definite \"brightness\", and\nwhich ones don't ( _I'd say even in English, \"glimmer\" and \"flash\" do not\nnecessarily imply brightness—even a dim light could glimmer (as its intensity\ngrows and fades) or flash (off and on)_ )?",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-13T05:03:03.277",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80105",
"last_activity_date": "2021-07-19T14:22:08.847",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "78",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 5,
"tags": [
"words",
"nuances",
"definitions",
"synonyms"
],
"title": "Fun with synonyms - \"shine/sparkle/glitter/glimmer/glisten/gleam/twinkle/flash\"",
"view_count": 234
}
|
[
{
"body": "* 光る probably is the most neutral and can replace others in most cases. \n * ピカピカ光る implies the light is on and off alternately.\n * 輝く sounds brighter light, but not necessarily physically. It indicates that the speaker positively values the light. \n * キラキラ輝く implies the changes in the intensity of the light, like ピカピカ光る. キラキラ光る is also possible.\n * 光り輝く is used more in a figurative sense: 彼の業績は歴史上に光り輝いている = His achievements stand gloriously in history. Like this usage, 輝く sometimes has the connotation of glory.\n * 閃く, again used mostly figuratively: アイディアがひらめく = An idea flashed in my mind. Dictionaries list examples like 雷光がひらめく = Lightning flashes, but normally we say 雷が鳴る\n * 星が煌めく/星が瞬く: To me, the former invokes the night starry sky, lots of stars while the latter talks about (at most) a few stars twinkling. \n * ギラつく is used like: ギラついた人 = a person with eyes gleaming with _ambitions_ ; or ギラギラした = gleaming with ambitions (not sure if _gleaming_ is correct here).\n * テカる does not necessarily imply light - it is used for some wet surface, especially with something oily. Possibly close to _glisten_. E.g. テカついた肌 = The oily skin\n * 照る is mostly used for the sun. E.g. 日が照る = the sun is burning hot. 照らす is close to _shed light on_. E.g. 月が道を照らす = The moon lights up the road.",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2021-07-19T14:22:08.847",
"id": "87561",
"last_activity_date": "2021-07-19T14:22:08.847",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "45489",
"parent_id": "80105",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
80105
| null |
87561
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80123",
"answer_count": 1,
"body": "I have a doubt regarding the use of で and に in the following sentences:\n\n 1. 私は車の中に座っている\n 2. 私は車の中で座っている\n\nAs per me, I think で should be used as, the person is sitting inside the car\n(i.e. an action is being performed inside the car), so で should have been\nused. Whereas, when I used Google translator it was showing the first sentence\ni.e. 私は車の中に座っている, and not で座っている. However, when I clarified it by involving\nthe use of 椅子 then the particle governing 車の中 changed to で i.e.\n私は車の中で椅子に座っている.\n\nSo, my question is,\n\n 1. Whether the use of に instead of で grammatical (sentences 1 and 2)?\n\n 2. Could you please highlight the difference between 1st and 2nd sentence, if sentence 1 is grammatical?\n\n教えてください",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-13T12:01:00.463",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80110",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-13T19:45:14.277",
"last_edit_date": "2020-08-13T16:50:11.773",
"last_editor_user_id": "36729",
"owner_user_id": "36729",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"に-and-で"
],
"title": "Usage of に or で in the following sentence",
"view_count": 101
}
|
[
{
"body": "私は車の中に座っている is more natural. When you use the verb 座る, the particle に is used\nto mark the thing on/in which the sitting is happening. I can understand your\nconfusion because 座る is a tricky example.\n\nSometimes it helps to analyse sentences in terms of its main message. This is\nvery general advice but, is the sentence mainly trying to describe a 'what'\n(the action) or a 'where' (the place)? で is generally used with 'what'\nsentences and に is generally used with 'where' sentences. It's more obvious\nwith things like chairs (椅子に座る) which describe a 'where', but the principle is\nthe same. It's not impossible to use で with 座る, but it would no longer be\nmarking the specific object of the sitting.\n\nSo is a sentence like `I'm sitting in the car` describing a 'what' or a\n'where'? The main message of this sentence is not to describe an action being\nperformed (a 'what') - it's to describe where the person is sitting (a\n'where'). So に makes more sense. But if you change the focus of the sentence\nto a 'what', something like `I'll eat the bento in the car`, now it's clear\nthat the main point of the sentence is to describe an action which is\nhappening in the car. Then it would be 車の中 **で** 弁当を食べる.",
"comment_count": 5,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-13T19:45:14.277",
"id": "80123",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-13T19:45:14.277",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "80110",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
80110
|
80123
|
80123
|
{
"accepted_answer_id": "80125",
"answer_count": 2,
"body": "In that sentence, what is the form of the verb?\n\n> 世界の学生の６０．５％の１０億人が学校に行くことができなくなっています。\n\nWhat's the difference with できないです?\n\nThanks in advance.",
"comment_count": 1,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-13T12:41:22.340",
"favorite_count": 0,
"id": "80113",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-13T20:00:15.833",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "39992",
"post_type": "question",
"score": 2,
"tags": [
"conjugations"
],
"title": "What is the form of that conjugation できなくなっています?",
"view_count": 379
}
|
[
{
"body": "I suppose if you were to take it apart:\n\nFirst of all, that part is a mixture of different grammatical forms.\n\nできなくっています。\n\nYou first have a short negative potential verb できる －＞ できない Then you have the\nte-form for that verb できなくて\n\nAnd since verbs can be connected with the te-form なる is added at the end to\nmake できなくっています。\n\nAll in all, this would mean: to have become unable to do...\n\nThe reason why they don't use できない here is that they are talking about a\nprocess.\n\n```\n\n 世界の学生の６０．５％の１０億人が学校に行くことができなくっています。\n \n```\n\nThis means over time these students became unable to go to school and are also\ncurrently not able to go to school.\n\nIf it was できない instead of できなっています。it would rather mean that a certain amount\nof students have always been unable to go to school.",
"comment_count": 2,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-13T18:59:08.103",
"id": "80121",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-13T18:59:08.103",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "18873",
"parent_id": "80113",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 1
},
{
"body": "Think of ない on its own first. The adverbial form is なく. Add the auxiliary なる\nand you get なくなる (become not). This can be used to modify any verbal negative\nない.\n\nできる - できない - できなくなる (become not able to)\n\nNow you can add ～ている which describes an ongoing action or a state (in this\ncase, a state).\n\nできなくなっている have become (and are now) unable to\n\n> 学校に行くことができなくなっています have become unable to go to school",
"comment_count": 0,
"content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0",
"creation_date": "2020-08-13T20:00:15.833",
"id": "80125",
"last_activity_date": "2020-08-13T20:00:15.833",
"last_edit_date": null,
"last_editor_user_id": null,
"owner_user_id": "25875",
"parent_id": "80113",
"post_type": "answer",
"score": 2
}
] |
80113
|
80125
|
80125
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.