INSTRUCTION
stringlengths 11
999
| RESPONSE
stringlengths 0
999
| SOURCE
stringlengths 16
38
| METADATA
dict |
|---|---|---|---|
Come to ～: ～てくる vs. ～ようになる
Can someone please explain the fine nuances of these two? Things such as:
* Are there conditions/restrictions of when you can use one or the other?
* What are the "approximate" time periods that each covers?
* Anything else relevant...
Here's an example I saw on a particular website.
> * X **** → What it actually said
> * X **** → What I thought it should have said
> | It depends on the _aspectuality_ (or more specifically, _telicity_ ) of the predicate.
* With _telic_ predicates like `, `, the event described involves a change of state. There is a change within the event before and after this point. With such predicates, various forms have the meanings such as the following:
> (perfect)
> (gradually towards the point of view of the first person)
> (gradually apart from the point of view of the first person)
> * (ungrammatical)
* With _atelic_ predicates like `, , `, the event described does not involve a change of state, and is homogeneous throughout (unless there is a direct object indicating an endpoint such as `, 100, `). With such predicates, various forms have the meanings such as the following:
> (progressive)
> ( on the way or before coming)
> ( on the way or before going)
> (gradually/eventually come to )
There is no fixed time period for ``. It depends on the context. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 10,
"question_score": 10,
"tags": "grammar, nuances"
} |
擦れ違う usage and etymology?
is one of my new vocabulary words, so I try to understand as much as I can. I looked up a couple of meanings for the word and I found that it is used to describe 1) when two things pass each other (opposite direction?) and 2) When two people have differing opinions.
I think means to rub or touch very lightly. However, I'm not sure when I can use . In the first case, can I only use when two things pass each other in opposite directions? Is that where the part comes from?
I'm also interested in how the second definition / usage came to be. Thanks for the help!
EDIT: My sources for the above definitions were from space alc
The following example gives me trouble when trying to understand the second meaning.
[] | In its original meaning, (also written as ) means to pass each other in opposite directions at such a close distance that they almost touch. I do not think that it is correct to use it when two things are moving in the same direction, although some people may use it in this meaning.
I do not think that means “two people have different opinions.”
There are two figurative meanings. One is to come close to each other but fail to meet. The Daijirin dictionary shows an example (to fail to meet because of being late to the appointment). The other figurative meaning is for an argument to go crisscross. This meaning is close to what you wrote in the question but not the same because disagreement means that two people are talking about the same point, but going crisscross means that two people are talking about different points. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "usage, etymology"
} |
Stative verbs: ～ている vs ～てある vs ～（ら）れる
I'm not sure if I'm wording this properly, but I want to know the nuances of these "stative" type verb forms that act kind of like adjectives.
For example, you could describe an open window with any of the following:
> *
>
> *
>
> *
>
Another one I often see is for "it is written":
> *
>
> *
> | I think (I'm not a native speaker) that
* `` is a neutral statement of the fact; in English "the window is open".
* `` is saying that someone opened the window in preparation for something. Compare for example to ``, meaning, in preparation for tonight you have put cans of beer into the fridge to get them cooled.
* `` is the past passive tense of `` and is again neutral; in English "the window has been opened".
As for the other two examples you gave:
* `...` means "it is written that...", so context matters: unlike above, `~` can also occur in a neutral sense, i.e. without doing something in preparation.
* `` is again the past passive tense of "to write", again in a neutral sense.
Hope this helps and hope native speakers will correct me if I said anything wrong. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 13,
"question_score": 14,
"tags": "grammar, nuances"
} |
How to say "quarter to" or "quarter past" some hour?
For example, how do you say:
It's quarter to 3.
and
It's quarter past 3. | A quarter to three is 245 (), and a quarter past three is 315 ().
If we want to emphasize the difference from three o’clock, we can say “315” and “315,” but this is not the usual way to state the time. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "time"
} |
Difference between 十分 and 十二分
Is there a clear difference between the meanings of and ? I rarely have ever seen the second one. When should the second one be used and in what context?
EDIT: To avoid confusion, I'm talking about when used in the context of "enough" or "sufficient". Also, why is it that meaning "10 minutes" is also used to mean "enough"? | I will preface this by saying that I am making some assumptions on different readings of the kanji. I never really thought of this term as "ten minutes" when used in the metaphoric sense as "enough," for the obvious reason that the pronunciation is different, but maybe there is an actual correlation that I am unaware of.
"Ten minutes" is pronounced or .
"Satisfactory" or "enough" is pronounced .
> = More than enough
>
> = Plenty; enough; sufficient; satisfactory; adequate;
In a counting system based on intervals of ten, the number ten will represent a complete set. can be thought of as "degree," as well as minute (it has many meanings). Thus a "complete degree" of something will be "enough". This expression can be seen as arbitrary in as much as an english speaker will use "100%" as an arbitrary term to mean "giving it one's all," or will say "That girl is a ten" to mean a stunning beauty. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "definitions, word choice"
} |
混信 and 干渉 difference in terms of communications and computing?
I read an article that had the sentence
> 1.9GHzZigBeeWi-Fi2.4GHz
I previously learned that means "interference" or "jamming". I saw this word used often. I'm wondering if and are interchangeable and whether or not the sentence above would still be correct.
I think holds some property of something (a signal) being "mixed". However, I'm not able to derive the meaning of . | as you mentioned literally means , or when two signals emitted from two different locations "mix". This happens when the signals are at the same or very similar frequencies. generally refers to , or wavelengths longer than infrared light. So, you will see its use when talking about wireless communications, radio and television broadcasting, etc.
has a much broader meaning. In physics, it is the when two waves superimpose to form a resultant wave of greater or lower amplitude (reference). Note that this is not restricted to radio waves as is. Also, can refer to noise(electronics) but cannot. So, can refer to any type of interference (in other words it is not restricted to signals).
So, in your example sentence, I think that both and can be used, but depending on the context they are not necessarily interchangeable. Also, I believe is much more common because it has a more general meaning than . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "definitions, word choice"
} |
What do we call things that are neither kana nor kanji?
I was wondering Is there a Japanese name (or term) for written stuff that are neither kana nor kanji?
By that, I mean stuff like:
* (, for indicating the dash in foreign words)
* (, for separating foreign words, to make it more readable)
* (, for indicating deadlines)
* (, on a product to show that it complies with industrial standards)
* (, from... to... e.g. )
* (, for indicating the start of a singer's part in a song)
* ※ (, the English equivalent of asterisk for indicating attention) | I think you would call them `{}{}`, or "symbols".
If you look at the Microsoft Office IME's `` page, you'll see some of these listed under ``.
I think you could also call them `{}{}{}{}`, or "special characters". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 12,
"tags": "words, terminology"
} |
Different permutations of 気
Lots of words/expressions/phrases use in one way or another. For example , , , , , etc...
Is there a reference somewhere for the seemingly more "interesting" phrases (like the ones using as described in Dissecting verbs). By reference i mean translation, sample usage and maybe even an explanation of why it means what it means. | You can try looking for these phrases or words with these sites:
<
<
If you become a member of < (it is free), you can ask native speakers for examples or explanations. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "word choice, etymology, set phrases"
} |
When to use "もっと" vs "より"
Giving examples if possible, what's the difference between e.g. `` and `` to mean "more (than)"/"bigger (than)"? In what situations would you use `` over `` and vice versa?
For instance, why or why not would the two be interchangeable in the following sentences (example sentences from Space ALC):
>
> "at greater risk"
>
>
> "It is more than that; it is a bigger dream." | I'm not a native speaker, but like Chocolate says, I think simply feels more "common language", whereas feels more fancy.
To ilustrate the range of difference, let's take your first example:
>
> "at greater risk"
Now, if you used , I think this translation...
>
> "at (a) bigger risk"
...accurately illustrates the kind of difference between the two words. Not a huge difference, but "greater" kind of sounds more eloquent than "bigger". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 16,
"tags": "word choice, particles, particle より"
} |
What does 勝つべくして勝った mean?
I came across this phrase while looking at the meaning for ``:
>
It seems to be a set phrase, but I'm not 100% on the meaning. To win in order to win? To try really hard to win? To be sure to win? | is of the auxiliary verb , 'should/ought to/be supposed to do~~/it's natural to do~~'. ~~~~ is a set phrase which literally means 'was supposed to do ~~ and did ~~'/'had to do ~~ and did ~~' so would be like 'someone was supposed to win, because he was competent to, and he did win'/'it was natural for someone to win because he was competent enough'. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "set phrases"
} |
Different versions of より?
Here is one definition for :
> (adv,prt) (1) from; out of; since; at; (2) than; (3) other than; except; but; (4) more;
I see that one of the definitions of this word is "more". Is a different word altogether, or does it derive its from the one defined above?
> () (exp,adv) (1) still more; even more; much more; all the more; further; (exp,adj-no) (2) increased; greater
Are all these examples of the same word? How are they different from one another?
1.
>
>
> A is a bigger dream than B.
2.
>
>
> A is a bigger dream.
3.
>
>
> A is an even bigger dream.(?)
4.
>
>
> A bigger dream than A. (?)
Are these translations correct? In reference to how I translated number 4, see this example:
>
>
> Because I'm a foreigner, my facial structure and my body are relatively big as compared to a Japanese, but I don't think I have a scary aura about me at all. | 1 and 4 are the same. They are a particle placed after noun phrases, meaning roughly the same as the preposition "than" in English (which some will claim has to be a conjunction, but let's not go there), i.e. it makes the noun phrase a basis for comparison.
2 and 3 are the same. They are an adverb placed before adjectives, meaning roughly the same as the English "more" or "-er", i.e. it turns the adjective into its comparative form.
What might be confusing you is that Japanese doesn't need to use a "comparative form" of adjectives in comparisons, i.e. you can say
> AB
In this case attaches to B and isn't modified.
You _could_ also say
> AB
which I guess more closely mirrors the e.g. English construction, but there's no reason for the two s, and this sounds awkward (while maybe not ungrammatical). | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "grammar, words"
} |
(noun) です vs. がある when either is appropriate
> ~
>
> ~
>
> ~
>
> ~
These are just two examples. Obviously you can't stick in any noun, but I don't know if these fall into some well defined class either.
Anyhow, are there any difference in nuance when formulating yourself one way or the other?
I'm also wondering about the negative:
> ~
>
> ~ | The structure affects the difference in the meanings.
> ...
> 'my will is such that ...'
>
> ...
> 'I have a (partial) will such that ... (but I also may have another contradicting will)'
This results in that the former has more determined meaning than the latter (as SomethingJapanese observes).
This difference in meaning also explains what Chocolate and gibbon discuss in the comment. Unlike `` 'will' or `` 'plan' which may or may not be strongly determined, `` 'being ought to' is strongly determined by nature. Therefore, it does not go well with the weaker expression ``, whose implicature that it is "weakly determined" contradicts with the "strongly determined" meaning. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "nuances"
} |
Why do some kanji have furigana that are not valid readings?
In my text I read the sentence:
> []{}
(furigana is from the text)
I understand , and I understand some words with like . However, when I looked up in a dictionary, I was unable to find anything.
Why do these kind of readings exist; however, they are not in a dictionary? | Basic furigana means, for {}, 'zettai' is how you read ...period.
For the non-standard cases, think of it basically the same way, but with a little twist: for {}, 'oo' is how _I want_ you to read .
As a deeper example...
> {}{}{}
If this is a line of dialogue, the person is saying "I can't trust you", but the implication is that "you" are a thief, and that is why you cannot be trusted.
When the furigana are not standard, in my experience, the furigana is what is said, and the kanji is what is meant. For your example, there's not a lot of difference between and (), but it should be basically the same thing: is how it's said, but is the underlying meaning. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 10,
"tags": "kanji, furigana, creative furigana"
} |
Is まい as in あるまい really only used in literary texts or TV?
My understanding --admittedly limited-- is that in Japanese, people say as much as they can with as little words as possible. So I wondered why would be used in everyday speaking instead of ? The latter seems shorter and easier to use than the former. | To answer the question in the title, yes, it is generally only used in literary text and, I would say less often, on TV. It could also potentially be used in a really formal speech or something like that.
I remember in my 9th or 10th month of studying the language I tried this out on a Japanese friend, saying something like `` instead of ``. I got a weird look followed by a laugh, and he explained that it would never be used this way. The only explanation he could offer was that it sounded archaic, and this is the reason it's not generally used - the same reason that we don't start using old English in English conversations.
Sure, it's fair to say that users of the Japanese language tend to shorten things a lot, but that's not to say that the shortest way is always the normal or "modern" way. For example, the archaic form `` meaning `` is not used in modern Japanese. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "usage, nuances, etymology, culture"
} |
Is ノシ considered 絵文字?
My friend ended a letter thusly:
>
symbolizes a waving arm. Is this considered or does it have a different name? | Nico Nico actually calls it . (And so do other places like here.)
**Edit** : There is, perhaps, some crossover, but more broadly refers to things like pictograms (pictures with meaning), while refers to...well, (characters put together to make faces). | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "culture"
} |
What is the etymology of どんちゃん騒ぎ?
WWWJDIC defines it as this:
> (n) merrymaking; high jinks; spree
>
> The tourists painted the whole town red
What is the etymology of this word? Is it in common usage? | Take a look at <
In summary, is the sound of drums and gongs accompanying a battle scene in Japanese classical drama. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "words, etymology"
} |
Kanji 何: why is it missing in 今なにしてる (facebook text in status editbox)?
I had the impression that is pretty common kanji and that it is used in situations as above (after all, is there, so it is not that it wanted to be hiragana-only). Do I understand it right that it could be written as and if yes, what is the reason it is written instead? | As said, could be written as . However, I can think of two plausible reasons why they write instead of .
First, hiragana gives more informal and casual impression than kanji. I do not know the overall tone of text used on Facebook, but I assume that it is quite informal, judging from the colloquial expression (instead of ), so writing in hiragana is aligned with this casual atmosphere they want to give.
Second, some people prefer to avoid writing two kanji letters in a row when they do not form one word, because two kanji letters suggest that they form a Sino-Japanese word. Compare to and notice that may look like one word, especially if you are not paying attention. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 13,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "kanji, hiragana"
} |
What are the rules of using に and で with regard to 住む and 勤める?
I am going over the cases when and are used with location. According to the "Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar", is used when something exists in a specific location (page 299) and is used for events taking place at specific locations (page 105.)
The difference is rather clear, however there are two exceptions: and . While I can understand that might mean "to exist", the meaning of is less clear (I exist working at the office?). Are there other examples/exceptions to this? | You can see my answer to the question that Flaw asked, but I will state it again.
* is used when what the predicate means involves the location and will not make sense without it. Examples are: when someone/something is located somewhere (, ), lives somewhere (), goes somewhere (), commutes to somewhere (, , , ), etc., the very meaning expressed by the predicate necessarily involves the notion of place.
* is used when the location is not necessary to express the meaning of the predicate. For example, reading, running, studying, etc. do not require the notion of location to express their meaning. Of course, the agent needs to be at some location in order to do these things, but that just follows from our encyclopedic knowledge about the world, and is irrelevant to the description of the meaning of these predicates. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "verbs, particle に, particle で"
} |
difference of 将来(しょうらい) and 未来 (みらい)
> **Possible Duplicate:**
> Difference between , and
Is there any difference between these two words? I first came across in a PS3 game (FFXIII-2) and after a bit of digging, I found it in a manga and also some songs. So I get the feeling that is used more in fictional material or art. Is my theory correct? Though I get the feeling that Im badly mistaken. | is the more general term. is about future with particular focus on someone's carrier in life, or a master plan of some institution, place, product, etc. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "word choice"
} |
Numbers and Counters
I am still in a very early stage in learning Japanese, and just I have just learnt some numbers and my first counter words, such as the ones for telling time and ``.
Do you ever use "regular" numbers (`, , `, etc.) for anything or are they always modified (`, , `, etc.) or followed by some counter?
I still don't know any kanji; that is why I use kana, and I hope you can provide kana in your replies as well. | This isn't a dumb question at all! For the most part, you do have to modify the number, you can't just say it by itself. You can't ask for just two bottles of beer, you have to add the counter () or use ``.
One scenario where you can just use the numbers is if you're just counting for the sake of counting. Like, for example, you're counting jumping jacks as you do them you'd go "" and so on. Or, if you're trying to count how many people there are in a room, you might say just the numbers in your head or out loud. In the end however, you need to use the counter () if you wanted to tell someone the total. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "numbers, counters"
} |
The etymology of the word バックシャン
What is the etymology of the word ? I understand it commonly refers to a woman beautiful only from behind. See this definition-
>
I understand the back/ part, but is the a version of ? When did it come into common usage? | It is a compound of English "back" and German "schön" ("beautiful"). | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "words, etymology, archaic language"
} |
Translation for 食べ物を腐らせずに保存する
Saw this in my textbook. The translation is "to preserve food from decay". I get it, but I am not clear about the after . Where is it coming from? | -zu is a negative particle. It is equivalent to the negative -nai. kusarasezu ni means "without letting [it, the food] rot". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation, conjugations, auxiliary ず"
} |
What are some good ways to say "how to spell" in Japanese?
I wanted to know the correct way to spell a compound word in Japanese, and was wondering if there is a verb that correlates to "to spell" in the Japanese language. I found , but was told this is used only for foreign languages; as I was told, it may be used in a linguistic context to speak of spelling in Japanese, but in common usage it is used mainly to refer to the spelling of foreign words. To sum it up, if I want to know the kana spelling of a word or compound word (for instance what would be a few ways to ask this? Is the word used primarily in linguistic contexts? If I want to ask friends or acquaintances, are there other terms besides , or to use? Would be okay to use in this context? (I wanted to avoid saying something like as this seemed too easy) | The best way to request anything in Japanese (in Japan, to Japanese) is to say as little as possible and to leave as much wiggle room as possible.
I think you want []{}[]{} 'way of reading' when you have kanji to point at, and []{} 'way of writing' when you have sound. 'Spelling' is not safe to use because there are so many ways to be wrong with kanji.
Of course always start with the usual self deprecating set-pieces about how stupid you are and how difficult Japanese is. You may think you don't have to do this with friends and colleagues, but this is part of friendliness and good manners. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "words"
} |
anata no koto suki vs anata ga suki
> **Possible Duplicate:**
> What is the in sentences such as ?
> What are the guidelines of omitting particles?
It is possible to say both of these:
*
*
The adjective is usually used with the particle to express what we like. What is the difference between these sentences? and why is the particle can be omitted in the second case?
**EDIT**
I just saw this question What is the in sentences such as ? and it answers my first question, but it doesn't give any hints about the second one. | It's common to drop particles in casual speak when there's no ambiguity about what is being said. But strictly speaking, it's not "correct" to drop the particle there.
Also, is a -adjective, not a verb. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "particles, particle が"
} |
Can we use すら without negation?
From what I understand, is commonly used with the negative conjugation (~, ~) of verbs.
For example:
1. I expected (him) to be able to write hiragana. But even hiragana, (he) can't write.
2. I expected tears to fall. But even tears, didn't fall. _(I expect him to cry but he didn't even wept a tear.)_
Basically I was wondering is it grammatical to use with the positive conjugation of a verb?
For example, can be considered grammatical, assuming the context is that the speaker expected "no tears to fall", but indeed "tears did fall"? | You are right in that is often used with negation, but I do not think that it is a hard rule. For example,
> He eats even dog food.
But in general, the use of itself is rare in the modern Japanese, and is used more often.
(By the way, I am not sure if you understand the meaning of correctly. Your translation suggests that you consider that it means something like “not sad enough to weep,” but it usually means “too shocked to weep.”) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "grammar, usage"
} |
Why does 腰抜け mean coward?
Why does mean coward?
I see (waist) + (missing/losing) = (coward), but I fail to see how they add up. | Looking at the Daijisen definition, it seems to mean in the first definition "losing the strength of the back/waist and becoming unable to stand", and probably from that in the second definition "lacking guts"/"coward".
I would say from this that `` might be very close to the English expressions "spineless", "no spine", "lacking spine" etc for a similar reason. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "words"
} |
What does ただいま actually mean?
I was wondering what the literal translation really means. I've seen it translated as `I'm home` but I've also seen it in a few situations where the person wasn't arriving home. | The []{LHHH} that you say when you arrive home is a contraction of .
( = /just, = now, = (I) came back / came home / returned)
I think one other situation you're talking about might be where you say , 'Certainly, sir' / 'Yes sir, I'll do that right away' / 'Yes, I'll be right with you', etc., when someone tells you to do something or calls you, and probably rushes you. I think this []{LHLL} (with a stress on and a falling tone on ) literally means 'right now' 'right away', like / or / | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 12,
"question_score": 10,
"tags": "usage, definitions, idioms"
} |
Does ごめん really mean sorry?
Normally is translated as sorry or excuse me, but that seems like a translation for non-native speakers. In the same way, can also be translated as excuse me or pardon me. But it really means "I'm being rude". So... what does really mean? | () in () means 'forgiveness/to forgive', like in the verb '/' (which I think is the literary or archaic form of ''). makes it imperative, so literally means 'Please forgive (me)', like /. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 18,
"question_score": 16,
"tags": "usage, definitions"
} |
Particles で and も and でも
In both these sentences, what does `` mean? (I think I know the meaning of the sentences, just not the particles)
I know that `` is a particle that can denote location or mean something like "by means of". I know that `` is a particle that means too, either, etc. I also know that `` can mean but, but this doesn't seem to be the case.
Do both particles acquire different meanings or do they become some sort of particle themselves? Or do they simply retain their meanings, but combined have a different one?
Thank you!
P.S.: I do not know any kanji, hence I wrote in kana and hope you can too. | It can be loosely translated to "even".
is "with", and is "also", so you put them together and makes "also with", or "even with"...but we generally wouldn't say that in English, so it becomes "even": "You can even pay by card". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "particles, particle で, particle も"
} |
Was 俺 ever gender-neutral?
I've heard elderly women in Japan referring to themselves using ``. This leads me to believe that the usage has changed overtime to become only used by males. Did `` used to be gender-neutral? | According to WWWJDIC via Rikaichan:
> (pn,adj-no,male) I; me (rough or arrogant-sounding first-person pronoun, formerly also used by women); (P)
So it seems that it used to be a gender-neutral noun. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 16,
"tags": "etymology, first person pronouns"
} |
Is there any difference between 意志薄弱【いしはくじゃく】, 薄志弱行【はくしじゃっこう】, and 優柔不断【ゆうじゅうふだん】?
...Because they all seem very similar to me. | * : "not strongly determined, easily give up the original goal, easily get bored"
* : I have never seen this word. Probably very rare/non-standard word.
* : "cannot decide, take long time deciding" | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "nuances, synonyms, yoji jukugo"
} |
Does ～たり～たりする mean "and" or "or" in dictionary definitions?
I think that `` generally means "do things like (among other things)", but in dictionary definitions, can the pattern mean "and", "or" or "and/or"?
In e.g. `XY` would it imply that both `X` and `Y` occur or can `X` occur without `Y` occurring (or vice versa)?
In the Daijisen definition for `` for example, it's used in the following way:
> **** ****
>
> Being impressed by something which takes difficulty (or? and? and/or?) the achievement of an unthinkably delightful outcome.
How would it differ from `dictionary form verb+` (if "or") and ``/`` (if "and") etc.? | In the example you cite, the meaning is obviously "or", and I think that is the meaning `` generally has. The the following example implies "and":
>
> Denotes: 'drank or ate'
> Implies: 'drank and ate'
rather than "or", and that is probably because of pragmatic reason: It is about something that already happened, and if the person did only one of drinking or eating, then there is no reason to mention both, so the very fact that both are mentioned in the sentence implies that both were done.
In your example sentence, it is a definition, which is talking about the possibility of one or another event being done, either case of which satisfies the definition; that is why it remains to mean "or". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
Why does "お侍ちゃん" sound funny?
I recently noticed a Japanese comedian named ``. It indeed sounds funny. Why is it? | I am not a native, but I would make two guesses as to why it sounds funny:
1) It could be because expresses that the speaker finds that person endearing. Since is a position that holds superiority, the use of now becomes condescending and rude.
2) The other reason I can think of, is that in japanese the combination of and that I have seen are applied to the elderly while still holding the endearing quality such as and . Substituting in place could show that their still maintains a characteristic of being amicable between the person and speaker regardless of the title. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "honorifics, diminutives"
} |
understanding the grammar of "XをYに"
>
Is there an implied verb after , or not? Is this sentence more along the lines of the situation when you have two verbs connected with the form, or is it more along the lines of "" being an element of the verb in the same way that is?
Could you replace with here? If so, how would it compare with the sentence using ? If not, why not?
I know I asked a lot of questions; just address whichever ones make the most sense.
!niisan wo esa ni | You are on the right track about the missing verb. The missing verb can be . But you do not need to change the particle. Just add the missing verb: ``. Using `` here is unnatural. I think `` can be used as "as if", implying that it is not actually it. In `...`, the brother is actually treated as bait, so `` should be used. In `` or ``, there is implication that the brother is not actually bait, so `` is used. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "particle に, particle を"
} |
Is 「３人いるだと」 grammatical?
>
Can you say as a statement? If is simply + , I would expect . Is considered a particle in its own right, with different rules than ?
!dato
Transcription of the contents of the picture:
> A: []{}!!
> 17[]{}[]{}!?
> 3!?
> B:
> 8
> C: ……3!? | `` at the end of a sentence, e.g. `` "say what!?" can indicate shock or disbelief, e.g. "you say there are three people there!?"
**Edit:** The `` seems to have come from ``. According to Daijisen's last definition:
>
>
> [final auxiliary] from the binding particle ``'s end-of-sentence rules of use Attaches to a quotation. Indicates additional emphasis of criticism or surprise in regards to the other person's speech/words. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 14,
"tags": "grammar, particle と, copula"
} |
Why does 音物【いんもつ】 contain 音?
When looking up the definition of (a present or a bribe), I thought it was very odd that it contained the kanji . I can't think of what (sound) could have to do with presents or bribes.
Is there some significance that is being lost in translation or am I just overthinking this? | (Aside: I did not know the word .)
One of the meanings of the kanji is “message,” that is, a piece of information sent from one person to another. (as in ) and seem to be the most common examples of with this meaning. The reason (present; often refers to bribe) contains kanji because a present is something which is sent from one person to another.
It is the best to look up a (a dictionary which explains kanji letters in Japanese) for questions like this, but the Daijisen dictionary, which is available online (linked above), contains entries for common kanji letters and comes in handy here. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "words, kanji"
} |
Can the word まだしも be broken up into distinct meanings?
I'm studying grammar, and one of the new forms that I'm learning uses the word . I looked it up and I found:
>
>
> /
Based on how the word is used in the following examples:
> 1210
>
> I could have handled [coped with] one or two of them, but I was flabbergasted when ten people pushed their way into my office.
>
>
>
> I was not only cold but also hungry.I would not have minded the cold so much, but I also began to feel hungry.
I'm wondering if can be broken into multiple parts , , and . Where would indicate "as yet; hitherto; still; not yet". If this is possible, what role does and play in the context of this word? I'm wondering why and constitute to the "" or "" portion. Specifically . | Yes, it can be broken down into multiple parts like sawa explains.
Together intensifies the meaning of the word it is attached to () and comes from classical Japanese ([]{}) (reference).
Here are some examples of in use (however, in modern Japanese, only these set phrases are used):
> ****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> **** | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "grammar, particles"
} |
Polite speech and うち よそ
I can't understand the difference between and . I learned that they are used in polite speech, for example:
| [/keigo] has three different forms: "[/the polite form][/the honorific form][/the humble form]". is the dictionary form. is the polite form (). (usually used to say [EDIT:] "Someone in the speaker's in-group says") is the humble form () and is the polite form of . (used to say [EDIT:] "Someone to whom the speaker has to show his respect says") is the honorific form () and is the polite form of . By the way, I've never heard used as grammatical terms... | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "politeness"
} |
What is the meaning of 〜たりして?
I've just come across "" at the end of a sentence in a post on Facebook, so it's probably very casual. Does anyone know the correct meaning and typical usage? | is used to posit some event as a possibility but something you are not sure about. For example, about the future:
> 10
From the nature of this expression meaning "not being sure", it is also used as a hedge when you want to be modest and a bit comical:
> | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 15,
"question_score": 13,
"tags": "usage, meaning"
} |
What is the te-form of 問う?
What is the correct te-form of ? Is it or or both? | While may seem the logical conjugation, is actually irregular (see the Wikipedia entry for ). According to this article, is "almost never used". It appears therefore that is correct in modern Japanese.
In case you are wondering why, the author of the latter article hypothesizes that this irregular conjugation makes the dictionary form of this verb more obvious when using its te-form in speech (as well as others, such as ).
One contributing factor is that the pronunciation of the dictionary form () can be thought of as one long vowel syllable (), so conjugating it as () would result in the modification of that identifying first syllable.
Of course, this reason alone would not normally be sufficient justification for this irregularity. The author adds that due to frequent substitution of with in modern Japanese, is now less common and thus requires extra disambiguation when used in the te-form. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 14,
"question_score": 19,
"tags": "grammar, verbs, て form"
} |
Can you say "half hour" or must you say "30 minutes"?
I know that to say `an hour and a half` you can say ``, but is it possible to express simply `half an hour` even though the counter comes before ? Or would you just have to say ``?
If both ways are possible, is one widely more common or are they both equally common? | We normally say []{}.
Some people say []{}, but I think it's only used in Kansai area.
→ OKWave
P.S.
I'm from Kyoto but actually I've never noticed any of my friends say ... Most of them are in/from Kyoto, Osaka, or Shiga. I think it's more used by older people (probably in Osaka?), because the only two people I can remember that use regularly are from Osaka, living in Osaka and over 70 years old. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 21,
"question_score": 20,
"tags": "numbers, expressions, counters, time"
} |
「様」vs「殿」, which is more respectful?
Ammy claims that is more respectful than :
> -sama: a respectful honorific used for those of a higher social standing
>
> -dono: even more respectful than -sama, less likely to be used solely out of obligation
However, Wikipedia claims otherwise:
> when attached to a name, roughly means "lord" or "master". . .
>
> . . . and lies **in between san and sama** in level of respect.
Who is right?
Doescommand more respect than, or is it the other way round? | is more respectful than . The reason Ammy gets it wrong is because _used to be_ more respectful in the past, but it has changed overtime and has become more respectful. Nowadays, is used as a fixed expression in some circles. Many companies use it in their e-mails when referring to a coworker, but I would use instead if I were referring to someone in a different company. However, it may still be tradition at some companies to use all the time, but always use instead if you are not sure. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "usage, honorifics"
} |
What is the difference between 借りる and 貸す
I've seen them before used as borrow and lend. So I've been a bit confused on when to use which verb? What's the difference? Is there a difference? | Although the English verbs can admittedly be confusing, you are correct that they are "borrow" and "lend" respectively.
So in the case of borrowing an item, `` (borrow) is the verb describing the temporary receiving of the item, and `` (lend) describes the temporary giving.
When asking to borrow something either of these are acceptable:
> (Can I borrow it?)
> (Will you lend it to me?) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "usage, verbs"
} |
Pronunciation of 家 in ...家ちんも安い
Here's the actual sentence:
>
How do you read '' and what does it mean? It's most likely that is usually written in kanji since I got the sentence from a Japanese textbook for beginners. | It's pronounced ``, and written `` if using all kanji. It means "rent", as in "the rent for this place is expensive". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "readings"
} |
What particles can be used in the ～よう〇 ～まい〇 pattern?
In the pattern ` `, I've found from several sources that you can use `` and `` (i.e ` `), and using one over the other doesn't change the meaning or have a particular nuance. What's confusing me is that I've found one instance of this pattern using ``, and I can't find if there is anything in particular that distinguishes it from the ` / ` version or not, or if it's a typo, or what. Can anyone shed some light on this? | …… and …… have different meanings. The fact that they have the same English translation “whether … or not” is a coincidence.
The English expression “whether … or not” has two different usages: (1) as a noun clause, and (2) as an adverbial clause. For example:
(1) I wonder _whether_ I will write to her _or not_.
(2) I will go to New York tomorrow _whether_ it rains _or not_. (= I will go to New York tomorrow _no matter whether_ it rains _or not_.)
…… means (1), whereas …… means (2). Therefore, possible translations of the two sentences above are:
(1)
(2)
(But I think that in (1), …… puts a heavy emphasis on the “whether … or not” part. A usual way to say (1) without this emphasis is .) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "grammar, particles"
} |
What is 日本橋{にっぽんばし}？
So I'm doing some exercises in Minna no Nihongo and run across these two sentences:
*
* ``
I looked it up and saw it mean `japanese bridge` but the way it is in the sentence it sounds like the name of a store or something like that. Anyone have any ideas? | It is the name of a place in Ōsaka. See here: < . Also note that there is a Nihonbashi () in Tōkyō. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "usage, culture"
} |
What is って doing in this sentence?
From Noir, Episode 2 (anime).
I don't get what the is doing in this sentence. For context, the father came home early from work. He quickly answers his wife in the first sentence then in the second sentence is asking his son this:
> | It is the `` form of `` which means "to want".
> → The game that I'd been wanting
xref this post. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation, verbs, meaning, conjugations, i adjectives"
} |
Questions on the figurative meaning of 食って掛かる
If is one word meaning "to lash out at someone" or perhaps closer in figurative language, "to bite someone's head off," how should I think of the ? If I want to understand the logistics behind this word, perhaps I can imagine it as "to be hit with someone's bite," wherein provides the "to be hit with" meaning? Is this the right way to think of here? | means "to be hung on, get involved into, bite into, get locked, lean on." 's literal meaning is something like "bite on and get locked on it (for fighting mode)".
Obviously, is not a single word. It should be called an idiom. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "words"
} |
Correct usage of から in this particular sentence
I want to make sure that I understand the basic usage of .
If I say: Would this sound natural or stilted to native speakers? | It is perfectly grammatical, and is used regularly, but it is not in the most natural word order. is a conjunct that heads an adverbial clause, and adverbials appear to the left of the verb phrase in Japanese. The most natural order is
> {}(){}{}
The one you have splits this into two sentences, and the latter involves inversion. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "word choice, usage"
} |
What is the literal meaning of ”いいかげんにしろ！”?
Some translations for the expression are:
> that's enough!; cut it out!; get a life!
If the correct kanji of this expression is , what is the literal meaning of both and in this expression? | * 'good, preferable'
* 'adjustment (by addition and subtraction)'
* literally 'make/leave it to the right/reasonable/acceptable/tolerable degree'
can also be used with a negative connotation with the meaning "sloppy" (almost opposite of the original meaning) as in the sentence given in yadokari's comment to this question. As for why, that may be a good independent question; there are some other words like that. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "words, expressions"
} |
How would one express an opinion from the perspective of an inclusive group?
Often times, it is common for a speaker to make an assertion or opinion based upon a (ethnic or social) group to which they belong. In English it is common to use prefixes like " _we_ " or " _us_ " to indicate this. For example:
> * _We Americans_ love hamburgers.
> * _We Trekkies_ believe that Klingon is a better alternative to English.
>
Is there an equivalent to this in Japanese?
Using the first example as a baseline, a possible translation could be to use as a modifier, and could be rendered as:
> * _[]{}[]{}_ []{}
>
But I have no idea how this would be interpreted by native speakers.
Also, since idea of making statements based upon an inclusive group may be seen differently depending on the culture, if someone could tie in some tidbits as to how common it is to use expressions like this, how they reflect upon social status, or any other important things to note, that'd be great. | It is said the same way as in English: "---" / "We ---"
For example, "" is a common way to say "We Japanese". Your inclusion of was incorrect.
Here are a number of examples:
The same goes for "We Americans," () and as an added bonus, here is an example with
> We Americans make no secret of our belief in freedom.
>
>
< | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "expressions, phrases"
} |
"Postage stamp" word choice
I have two words that I think mean the same thing:
- - stamp (postage)/merchandise certificate
- - postage stamp
When I look at some sample sentences, the first one is used for both stamp and check. While the second one has no sample sentences but the Kanji makes a lot more sense. - "Mail Ticket"; - "cut hand"
So how would I use both? I feel that would be used to describe stamps of any kind while can only be used for postage stamps. Am I on the right track? | Postage stamps are usually called . Strictly speaking, can refer to other kinds of certificates of payment, and postage stamps are more formally called , but almost always refer to postage stamps.
I had never heard of the word , and judging from a quick search on the web, I think that this word is used almost only in the legal community.
* * *
Answering to your question in the comment: _What is the etymology of the word_ ?
According to , a website explaining the etymology of various Japanese words, was originally an abbreviation for , where both and means certificates of payment. literally means something like “paper to cut” (imagine a train ticket) and literally means “shape of hand” (because handprint was used as a signature). In the modern Japanese, means ticket and means either handprint or specific kinds of security. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "word choice"
} |
Saying "to miss" ("I missed you over the weekend")
What's the best way to say "to miss" in the sense of feeling a longing for something, or that something pleasant is missing? I understand there's []{}, but it seems to me that, like , is more appropriate for recalling your childhood home or a great vacation or something like that, not a "smaller" context like "I miss having lunch with you on the weekends" or something like that. Am I wrong? | In that situation, it is more natural to express that you are lonely without the person.
>
> 'I was lonely without you during the weekend.' | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 14,
"tags": "word choice, translation"
} |
What's the difference between 話せる and 話す?
I came across []{} in the Japanese WOTD chat room.
Can you speak English?
What's the difference between it and []{}?
(Googling got some hits, but they were from user generated content, which isn't always reliable) | is the potential form of . The potential form implies being able to do the verb. It's an immensely useful form!
The potential form is created by adding to the stem of -verbs, or adding the form of the final kana of verbs plus to the stem of verbs (I think the cool kids call those ichidan and godan verbs, respectively).
> - to eat
> - to be able to eat
>
> []{} - to swim
> - to be able to swim
>
> []{}[]{} - Can you read this kanji?
> - Can you use chopsticks?
A special exception: Just use for -type verbs.
> []{} - Can you drive a car? | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "verbs, potential form"
} |
What are the rules for saying "made of [blank]"
Take these words for example:
> {}{}: made of wood; wooden
>
> and
>
> {}{}: made of gold
I have been under the impression that `-` is used for where an item has been manufactured (i.e. Made in Japan; Made in America), or the manufacturing of a certain product (i.e. iron manufacturing, etc.). I also thought that `-` was for what material something is made out of. Flipping through my dictionary it seems `-` is more common than `-` for referring to the material used (e.g. `: made of steel`).
Is there a rule about which materials use `-` and which use `-`? Is it just something one has to learn? | When describing materials, the difference between - and - does not come from the difference of materials.
- is usually used when describing the primary material of a building or a nonbuilding structure. Examples are (made of wood), (made of steel (or iron)), and (made of reinforced concrete).
For everything else, I think that we use -. For example, “wooden flute” is and not . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "words"
} |
Which つける do I use?
So I looked up and saw it can be written as:
>
>
>
>
>
And they all seem to have the exact same definition: `to attach, to join, to add, to append,` etc. So are these "spellings" interchangeable or is there some difference? | As is usual with homophonous kanjis, there is a general one, which, in this case, is . That means, in general, the other kanjis can be replaced with this one, but not the other way around. is used when the attachment is along a surface, especially in wearing clothes (that is, the clothes touch the skin along surfaces). means to append, and I think it is an archaic kanji. Most often, you can find it in combnations like or (archaic form of and ), especially in proper names like . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "kanji, meaning, definitions, homophonic kanji"
} |
Why would you use まいります for rain? (降ってまいります)
I ran across this example sentence in a basic dictionary, but I can't figure out what particular meaning has in this context.
Generally speaking, it's used as the humble verb for motion. In this case, []{} replaces []{}. Why would this be attached to rain? Is there another meaning or would this simply be a slightly formal way of talking? | I hope that someone can explain this more accurately, but let me try some explanation.
According to , the document explaining the use of honorifics in Japanese written by the Council for Cultural Affairs, there are two different kinds of what have been traditionally categorized as (humble words). Most of them are solely used for actions/belongings of a speaker or someone considered to be on the side of a speaker, and those are called I. However, the other humble words such as and can also be used for actions/belongings of something which is on neither the speaker’s side nor the audience’s side. In this usage, they play almost the same role as (polite words). These humble words are called II.
Therefore, in the example sentence, is essentially used to make the sentence simply more polite than .
To emphasize the difference between I and II, we cannot rephrase the example sentence as because … forms I from a verb. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "politeness"
} |
The difference between ～ようだ, ～ように見える, ～ように思える and ～みたい
In a Japanese English grammar textbook, "seems" is translated as ``, for example:
> He _seemed_ to have been ill.
> ****
I've also seen "seems" written as `` in various example sentences on Space ALC:
> ****
> It doesn't _seem_ to have an effect.
What's the difference in meaning and usage between ``, ``, `` and ``? | As for the difference between and , it is too subtle for me to tell.
Between the various endings after , they indicate how indirect the observation is (i.e., how much inference is involved).
* is declaration, so is the most certain among the endings using .
* adds the hedge , meaning that it is directly observed, but is less certain than .
* adds the hedge , meaning that a thought process is involved, so it is less certain than . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "grammar, word choice"
} |
Japanese pun to pronounce an English phrase
I have once heard that, during World War II, when the American Troops invaded Okinawa, they wanted the Japanese civilians to surrender, and in order to let the Japanese say the phrase "I surrender", the Americans threw fliers from the air that instructed the Japanese (of course in Japanese) to shout "" 'I am going to be loved' when they want to surrender. Is this true, or is it an urban legend, or is there a bit of truth behind this? | Quote from this page:
> I surrender. → 1878-19591989
Translation: I surrender (which was made as []{}, a play on the English phrase) : Oka Shigeki (1878-1959, a native Japanese who became an American citizen) wrote this on flyers passed out to Japanese soldiers so that they knew what to say when they are left behind by their army (this was reference from a book by called ―.)
So, if this book (and reference) is correct, it is a true story. Also, the man, Oka Shigeki, left behind many papers on the history of World War II, unfortunately I could not find any evidence other than this reference to this book. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "puns"
} |
Beginner: book/ website for reading comprehension and vocabulary
I'm looking for a book/website that helps me to increase my reading skills and vocabulary. The only "problem" is, that it should be only written with hiragana and katakana. At the very best there should be an English or German translation.
This question seemed to be a good starting point but later I saw that all of the texts contain kanji. | The book you are looking for is Minna no Nihongo. The main text is in only kana and kanji. They have a separate textbook that is translated to the reader's native language. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "readings, katakana, hiragana"
} |
What is the original Japanese for "It's always the darkest under the lighthouse"?
What is the original Japanese saying meaning, "It's always the darkest under the lighthouse"? (reference) | It's probably {}{}{}{}, meaning we tend to overlook what is right under our nose.
< | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "translation, quotes"
} |
What does the nakaguro (・) between these two words mean?
The first sentence on the Mac OS X article on the Japanese version of Wikipedia reads:
> Mac OS X **[]{}[]{}** Macintosh[]{}[]{} (OS)
Now, in between the words and there happens to be a nakaguro. In this context what does it mean? Is it simply a short-hand listing for verbs? (similar to an `&` sign?) or perhaps something used to build some special type of compound verbs? Also, how would that be read (e.g. _pronounced_ )? Considering that this is an encyclopedia article, is this convention formal or informal? | `` is used to express listing. In English, it would be expressed with a comma and the word `and`.
> ABC (Japanese)
> A, B, and C (English)
Japanese has a counterpart to the comma, that is ``, but its use is different from a comma. Some people use for listing things like this:
> ABC
but it is not standard. In horizontal writing, some people use the English punctuation `,` and `.`. In that case, the comma `,` can be used for listing.
It is a good point that you recognized that `` is not repeated. If you wanted to, the non-final ones will become `()`, and would be used instead of .
>
>
This indicates that is used for connecting noun phrases that are not syntactically connected. When the listed items are connected syntactically as in the latter example above, is used.
is not usually pronounced, but if you want to, `` or `` may work in some cases. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 21,
"question_score": 20,
"tags": "meaning, punctuation, orthography"
} |
に[配慮]{はいりょ} vs. を[配慮]{はいりょ}
I want to know if there is any difference between `` and `` when used with ``.
Example sentences:
> []{} ****
>
> ****
>
> []{}[]{} ****
>
> ****
Are they interchangeable? Does the meaning change at all? (Googling gives many hits for both, but I feel like `` should be not used in these situations). | I agree with you. Using sounds ungrammatical. With , should be used, and I think the writer of got mixed up. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
What is the difference in terms of grammar between ～かける and ～っぱなし?
Spawned from What is the difference in terms of grammar between and ?; I started thinking about ``. Don't these essentially mean the same thing? I'm failing to see any difference except that maybe `` doesn't necessarily have a negative nuance to it.
> * → An apple I started eating
>
> * → ??? (is it even grammatical; or used?)
>
>
> * → Started but not finished (?)
>
> * → Unfinished, incomplete
> | As Chocolate suggests, one difference is that implies that the activity is not completed, whereas means that the activity is completed, and as a result, some negative situation (messed up, etc.) is left.
> 'had started working on something (but have not completed)'
> 'completed doing something, (and have not cleaned/put away the tools after it)'
>
> 'an apple I have started eating (but have not eaten up)'
`` is very strange because, if you complete eating it, there should not be anything to talk about regarding the situation of the apple that had disappeared. You can talk about a dish (that had the apple on it) not being put away, or a table on which such dish is left, but then, the sentence should be
>
> | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, nuances, word choice"
} |
What do you call these words?
I'm trying to figure out what the term is that describes words that look like this:
>
They seem similar to and , but I think they have a separate classification...
Is there a term that describes words like this? (Please let me know if this has already been asked). If there is not a term, how would one talk about these adverbs in Japanese? If I needed to state that "I have problems remembering (these types) of adverbs", how would one go about explaining that? | They are called adverbs. Among them, and are called sentential adverbs, and are independent of the core event described by the predicate. , , , and are called manner adverbs, and are directly tied to the core event described by the predicate. I am not sure which group belongs to. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "terminology"
} |
What does ending a statement with 「っ」signify when coupled with 「・・・」?
I have seen a few sentences or exclamations that end a sentence with . Specifically, I read the example below:
>
The following sentence is listed below (However I'm not sure it is a "new sentence"):
>
Is the necessary at the end of this sentence? Does it have any meaning? The only instance where I am familiar with the use of is to indicate a pause when pronouncing something. However, since signifies a pause (I think), and an exclamation follows after the , what does this actually mean? Does indicate that the last vowel is carried on for sometime, and then abruptly stops?
Would it be any different if the sentence looked like the following?
> ! | <
> The sokuon is also used at the end of a sentence, to indicate a glottal stop (a sharp or cut-off articulation), which may indicate angry or surprised speech.
The equivalent Japanese article also suggests it may be used when a person can't speak, as from a blocked throat or extreme pain.
Often, in manga, it is used effectively as an alternative to an exclamation point (e.g., ), or in addition to one as well.
Aside from these uses at the end of a sentence, the sokuon may also be used for stuttering (e.g., ).
In your example, I think the sokuon plus "!" is slightly different than if it was just "!", but I'm not sure what that intended distinction is (if any)... | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "syntax"
} |
How do you say "You have gotten better at X"?
I was just reminded on another site that "being good at something" is expressed as `[]{}/[]{}`, not ``. How do you tell someone they "have gotten better at something"? `X, ` would be my thought. Is that right? Would that be the way a native would say it? Is that even how a textbook would word it? | You can use `` (to become) to indicate change, as follows:
> (-adjective, ->)
> (-adjective + )
These both mean "to become good/skilled".
Then for "to become more skilled" you can use , or :
> to become better
> to become even better
> to become better than before | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 14,
"question_score": 10,
"tags": "usage, adjectives, phrase requests, na adjectives"
} |
What is the meaning of ぶさかわ?
I was talking to my language partner and she mentioned being used in situations when you want to describe something not pretty but nice. Apparently the word is relatively new and was first used in a pet magazine.
What is the actual meaning? | Probably, it is short for []{}[]{}[]{} 'ugly' + []{}[]{} 'pretty'.
It may sound contradictory, but the direction of the two properties point to slightly different angles, and the positive one somehow out wins the negative property.
Realizing that you mention it was used in a pet magazine, I think it typically refers to the face of a bulldog or a pug, which sometimes is ugly but nevertheless cute. It is contrasted with other kinds of dogs that have the nose sticking out and the chin skinny, which are considered simply "handsome/beautiful".
A similar one with contradictory flavor is , which is short for []{}([]{}) 'bad at' + []{} 'good at', and means 'drawings or writings intentionally made to look bad (like a child's scribble) but are pretty much under control'. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 10,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "words, translation, internet slang"
} |
What does the phrase らしいと言えばらしい mean?
I am reading a book where one character describes another's reading habits, and the person she is talking to says . From context, he seems to be saying that her reading habits are unsurprising given her personality, but why not just say ? What does the part add? | 'AA' means "(I would not spontaneously say so, but) if you are going to say A, I am not strongly against it". 'AA' means "(I would not spontaneously say so, but) if you are going to say it is characteristic of A, I am not strongly against it". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "translation, set phrases"
} |
Meaning of given character
I was just wondering the character shown in image is Japanese or not. If yes then can you please tell me the meaning of it.
!enter image description here | Could it be - falcon? Pretty certain about the top part, less sure about the bottom. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "kanji, kana"
} |
How to decide to use どうせ or しょせん?
The dictionary translates both (WJDIC) and (WJDIC) as "anyway / in any case / after all".
But what exactly is the difference in nuance between them?
For example, what is the difference between this sentence:
> ****
and this:
> ****
How do we decide when to use which? | * may imply excess or insufficiency.
>
>
usually implies insufficiency (# indicates pragmmatic anomaly).
> #
>
* implies that **a proposition** has something to do with the context.
>
> ()
implies that **a property** of something has something to do with the context.
> *
> ()
From this, it follows that , but not , can be used in conditionals.
>
>
> *
> * | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "usage, nuances"
} |
How does the katakana lengthening mark (長音符) sort?
Usually, lists are collated using the gozyuuon order. But how does the katakana lengthening mark `` fit in?
Given the following sequence of words, what order should they be in? What are the sorting rules regarding katakana?
{}
{}
{}
{}
{}
{}
| According to the wiki articles and , there is an Industrial Standard (JIS X 4061) specifying the ordering of kana, though sometimes not strictly followed.
The lengthening mark will be changed to according to the previous kana, and if the previous kana is , and the changed word would be used in sorting. If two changed word forms are the same but the original one is different, then the one changed from the lengthening mark would come after: →
The words you listed should be ordered as:
{}
{}
{}
{}
{}
{} | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 10,
"tags": "kana, sorting order"
} |
Can you substitute やっぱり with さすが in 「疲れているが、やっぱり行くつもりだ」?
In such a sentence as **** , can you substitute with , with the meaning of "as one would expect", "also", "as I thought", "still"? How would the meaning change in this sentence? I can't grasp the real meaning of both adverbs in their daily usage. | #
1. 'after second thought'. In this usage, the colloquial form can be used.
> /
> I am tired, but after second thought, I decided to go.
2. 'as expected'
>
> When I went to a bargain sale, it was crowded as I expected.
#
'as expected from the severe level of ...'
>
> I am tired, but I am going to go as expected (because I have been absent for so many times, and it is severe now).
>
>
> When I went to a bargain sale, it was crowded as expected (from the unbeatable deal they are offering).
#
'... (= a positive thing) expected from the characteristics'
>
> It is tremendous of him to go even when he is tired. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "word choice, adverbs"
} |
How is this もって used?
I have this sentence as an example for the grammar point ``:
`I`
`` can either refer to [1] the means through which something is done, or [2] a point in time where something ends/begins.
I'm not really sure which usage this is. As far as I can figure out, it's either something like [1] "The world found out about the war in Country X with a shock/suddenly", or [2] "When the war broke out suddenly (with a crash/bang) in Country X, the world found out about it."
Or, more likely, none of the above. Can someone shed some light on what I'm missing? | I think it means something like:
> `I` ****
> The war which `country I` initiated was conveyed to the world with a shock.
> The world was taken aback when told of the war which `country I` initiated.
According to this oshiete question, `` has the same meaning as `` and ``, or "together with shock"/"accompanied by shock". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "grammar, jlpt"
} |
ところ vs どころ: Interchangeable or different meanings altogether?
I have two questions.
A) Why do they use instead of in this sentence? Is it possible to use without changing the meaning?
>
B) Is it correct to say the following?
> () | As you imply, indeed seems to have been derived from by rendaku, but today, it has evolved into an independent expression. It is no longer part of a compound. The initial voicedness stands by itself. You cannot replace with any more.
> ****
> 'It goes without saying that you cannot enjoy the beauty of Kinkakuji'.
> ****
> 'This is not a place/moment where you are supposed to enjoy the beauty of Kinkakuji'.
Interesting question. I had not realized cases where rendaku fossilized into an independent expression.
The alternative you give is correct. A related expression with a different meaning you may want to compare with is:
> | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "grammar, nuances, meaning"
} |
までに, まえに and うちに to express "before doing X, Y happens"
I've come across this sentence:
> **** .
1. I would have used instead of . Is it correct? How does the meaning change?
2. Furthermore, is it correct to say
>
3. Can you say the following?
>
> | Provided that the obvious typos are corrected as I did,
1. It is correct. is before, is by. I cannot feel any difference in the meaning.
2. It is correct.
3. The former is wrong. The latter is correct. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, nuances, time"
} |
Difference between ながら, がてら and つつ
What is the difference between , and ? | means doing multiple things simultaneously.
means to do one thing at somewhere middle along way to doing another.
means doing multiple things alongside but not necessarily simultaneously, little by little in turn.
>
> 'eat while driving'
>
> ()
> 'eating along the way driving (after having driven half way)'
>
>
> 'take a bite and drive a little, take a bite and drive a little, ...' | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 15,
"question_score": 14,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
Why まで and not に?
So I'm reading Chapter 12 (of Minna no Nihongo I) and ran across this sentence:
> ****
It's translated as:
> Which is the faster way to get to the airport, by bus or by train?
Why isn't the sentence written this way?
> **** | In this type of sentence, `` means "all the way to " with emphasis on the journey. The question is asking which is faster to get **to** the airport, but in order to judge this, you have to consider the whole route. xref this post for more information. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 10,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "particles, particle に"
} |
What is 在り方 used for?
Consider the extracted original Japanese text from the translation attempt in "Why is the negative form of " :
> """="
Also consider this proposed translation:
> "Regarding this fact, I think it is appropriate to think that it is due to the 'semantic features' of the verb '' and the image (= the way we perceive) that we have against ''.
Isn't "the way we " for -nouns expressed using ``? How is it different from ``?
Can the same difference be reflected in other verbs?
I.e. if for -nouns there is a "pair" like ``/`` then is there a similar "pair" concept for verbs like ``? If `` is analogous to ``, what form of `` is analogous to ``?
What is `` used for? | I think the literal idea of `` is 'the way it came into existence', 'the way it should exist', and it is concerned with the meta level of the way of doing something. As opposed to `` 'way of doing', `` may be translated as 'the way it is designed to do', 'the way it should be done', etc.
For verbs not derived from suru-nouns, you can add `-` to their stem: ``. If you want to use a counterpart to ``, you would have to find a noun with the corresponding concept. You may not be able to find an exact counterpart, though: `[]{}` 'the way calligraphy should be', `[]{}[]{}` 'the way books should be'. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "word choice"
} |
Kanji use in these words, 今 vs 未
I'm learning vocabulary from N2. In one section they describe four words and group them together (I assume because they have slightly different meanings but somewhat similar). They group them with an example as follows:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
I was wondering why is used. Why not ? Possibly I'm misunderstanding why this kanji is used because I don't know any other words with that hold the pronunciation . | I think it can be either written as or , but probably the former is the official one. This is an example where the difference between ancient Japanese and Chinese is relevant. The Japanese native word comes from 'now', whose concept is written as in Chinese, as you wrote, but Chinese had another concept 'not yet', which would better fit with , so the latter came to be written as . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "words, kanji"
} |
What is the difference between 首相 and 総理?
I learned `{}{}` as the word for Prime Minister, but I've recently learned that `{}{}` is also used. Is there a difference in usage or meaning? Is one more polite than the other? | is an abbreviation for , which in turn is an abbreviation for . This is specifically the Prime Minister of the Cabinet () and is a formal title.
is the common and informal name. In Japan, this refers to . Originally, a is a person who assisted a lord or emperor in his work. This is essentially a minister. The primary or head is known as , which in Japan is the Prime Minister. Note that one of the meanings of is "to help", which leads to the above usage. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 19,
"question_score": 14,
"tags": "words, nuances"
} |
Using な after い-adjectives
What does it mean to put a after an -adjective? For example, many Youtube videos are called begin "CM", and a Japanese text book I have uses this sentence as an example:
> ****
>
> Go along this street, and you will find a large crossroads.
What is the meaning of this ? It is also unusual that the is missing the final but the is not. I cannot find it in my textbook or on using Google. | * Your example ` CM` is not an adjective modifying a noun. It can be taken as a quoted sentence modifying a noun. It may be more recognizable if it were in quotes like `"" CM`. The `` in `` is a sentence final particle that adds the first person's subjective feeling to the proposition.
* There are both the i-adjective `` and the (possibly) na-adjective ``. However, whereas the i-adjective has full paradigm, the part in the na-adjective form cannot be extracted and be used like . It looks like the na-adjective form is a fossilized form. For this reason, traditional grammar reserves an independent category called . The two words are usually interchangable, but for a subtle difference, see the answer here: i-adjectives used as na-adjectives: is there a difference? (e.g. versus ). | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "i adjectives"
} |
What is the difference between 意味 and 意義?
I have learned () and (as "meaning". I am confused these two words. Are they same or is there any difference in usage? | Add on to sawa's answer. is the more philosophical version, often used in existential discussions, such as the meaning of one's life. However, when saying meaningless, the word will still be used | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 11,
"tags": "words, nuances"
} |
Meaning and usage of suffix -まい
According to the WWWJDIC, the verbal suffix can mean:
> (1) probably isn't (doesn't, won't, etc.)
> (2) don't (doesn't) intend to; intend not to
> (3) must not; (when used in an imperative sentence) don't
but I've found this sentence in my text:
> , ****
Which is the right translation? Or are there other possible translations?
> a) 'No matter what, if it's necessary, I'll probably have to buy it.'
> b) 'No matter what, if it's necessary, I won't probably have to buy it.'
If it's b), it doesn't make much sense, does it? If it's a), it contradicts the meaning given by the dictionary. | * I am not sure if there is meaning 3). What example sentences do yo have in mind?
* Your sentence has with meaning 1). In both of your translations, you are dropping `` ' **be in a good situation** '. That is why your translations do not work. A literal translation is:
> 'Whatever it is, if it's necessary, it probably won't be good if I do not buy it.'
This may sound a bit unnatural. That is because Japanese lacks a single word for "must" (except for `` which is weaker in meaning), and you have to say `` "it will not be well without", `` "it probably will not be well without". A more natural translation is:
> 'Whatever it is, if it's necessary, I probably must/should buy it.' | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "verbs, negation, suffixes, volitional form"
} |
Analysis of もしかして (perhaps)?
I'm hearing this word a lot in Japanese drama and anime. What is the literal meaning of it? Does it have a Kanji form? What root(s) does it contain (I think there is a in the second half of it? What about the part?)? | > What is the literal meaning of it?
A literal translation will sound very awkward: (just) if doing. In any case, it is an expression of supposition about something that may be possible. Hence, "perhaps".
> Does it have a Kanji form?
(perhaps even ), but it will usually be written in hiragana.
While not recognized as modern readings, the following characters have all historically been glossed as mosi in various texts: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , and .
> What root(s) does it contain
Adverb mosi + interrogative partical ka + verb s- + particle -te. The particle ka strengthens the interrogative ("if") sense of mosi.
Just for the record, there are other compounds of mosi-ka, including "mosika sitara" and "mosika suru to".
> What about the part?)?
An adverb meaning "if". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "words, compounds"
} |
は as sentence final particle
I meant to gather more examples before posting this question, but here we go. These are some lines out of various Ghibli movies I saw last weekend.
- when asked to take a guess about something
- after looking for someone in a specific place
I realize this is casual and may not be strictly grammatically correct. Still I wonder what's the reasoning behind these type of sentences. It's not difficult to understand what they mean, but why ? How would a native speaker justify the particle? And if someone can tie it to some formally correct version of the sentences that would be great! | As a sentence-final particle, it's ``, not ``. See more about in this post and this post. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "sentence final particles"
} |
What is the difference between 義務and 本分?
Now, I try to brush up my vocabulary in Japanese.
In dictionary, both and mean "duty". Is there any differences in usage?
And can I use instead of in following sentence?
.
with regards, | * is a general term meaning "obligation".
>
>
* particularly means "duty", or "activity that someone is supposed to be spending most of their time on according to their title/occupation", and does not necessarily have the strong meaning of "obligation".
>
Using in your example is completely wrong. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "words, nuances"
} |
What may be the difference in the usage of 自尊心, 誇り and 自慢?
I read a paragraph and it contains the word ``.
I want to know the meaning of ``.
Dictionary says ` = pride`.
Is it the same with ``? or ``?
What may be the differences in the usage of these words? | * is a kind of pride concerned with your characteristics like: membership to some group (i.e., nationality, alumnus status, etc.), your belief, activity, or achievement.
>
>
* is the pride about being yourself, and is not tied to any of the particular characteristics mentioned above.
>
>
* is the act of showing off something related to yourself, like the characteristics mentioned above, or your belongings.
>
> | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "usage, words, nuances, meaning, word choice"
} |
How is ちょっと、たべたら、どう used in this sentence?
This is from the second episode of Noir. The two women are sitting quietly eating dinner. One of the women says to the other:
For the life of me, I can't parse this sentence into something understandable in English. Here are my issues:
1. How is the topic (or is it subject) of the sentence? What is its meaning here?
2. from what I know is "When you eat", but I don't know how to quite translate it with .
3. The whole phrase is in front of so it is some type of relative or dependent clause. So is the beginning of that sentence, "How about (that) when you eat ...."? This is my guess. I'm not sure if I'm correct though. | Ok. So after some searching and accidental googling, I think I've figured it out.
`<verb>` \+ Means "why don't you `<verb>`". It indicates a suggestion. It can also be used to express a negative connotation when the speaker is dissatisfied with how the listener is performing (or not performing) the .
- an `<i-adjective>` \+ = "seems/looks like `<i-adjective>`". could also be translated as "as if" instead of "seems" or "looks" if the translation requires it.
- has already been explained above.
So the sentence means (as others have pointed out):
> Why don't you eat as if the food is delicious, just a little?
>
> or
>
> Why don't you eat, just a little bit, as if it's delicious? | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "words"
} |
Why is 「人口」 used to denote population?
I'm just curious at the appearance of that makes this word mean "population". Why should it be as opposed to any other body part or anything else? Is there a definitive reason or story associated with this word? If is used as a counter then why couldn't replace it? If I'm not mistaken doesn't refer to individuals more so than ? | In old Chinese--where Japan borrowed the term-- was a counter for people. More specifically, it referred to the number of people needing food. English has this construction too: the number of "mouths" (=people) to feed.
As for , it generally refers to individual non-animate items. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 16,
"question_score": 11,
"tags": "words, kanji, counters"
} |
What does で分かる mean?
I have a hard time understanding the use of . I'm guessing that it doesn't just simply mean that "something is understood". Instead I wonder if it means that "something was realized"? I read the following sentence:
> ****
Would it be correct to say that "this situation was realized due to the person's story"? | Both of your guesses are wrong. You don't have to interpret it as passive. The experiencer (subject) is implicit. `` means "by" or "from".
> (We) came to understand from ... that ...
`` means "come to understand". Be careful that it does not mean "understand", which is expressed by the perfect form ``. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "words"
} |
What's the difference between ちゃんと, きちんと, きっちり and ぴったり?
The four of ``, ``, `` and `` all seem to mean something like "perfectly", "precisely" or "exactly", and there seems to be a lot of similarity between their definitions.
Daijisen says that all three of ``, `` and `` can mean something like "without disorder and well arranged" and `` and `` "without deviation", but I think they're used in different ways.
I think just from the way I've seen them used that `` might often, though not always, be close to "(do something) the way you're supposed/expected to", `` "spotless", `` "to the letter", `` "firmly" and `` "(suits) perfectly"/"perfect (match for)", but I'm not really confident and I don't have sources to back it up.
What is the difference between them and how do their usages differ? | The first two are used in contexts like: "do it properly."
>
>
>
To me, it seems that implies more concentration/involvement. The result is cleaner, more polished. Thus, would be "I did it as required", while would be "Not only did I do it as required, but I also paid attention to every detail."
The last one is used to express a perfect fit.
>
I've never used/noticed , so I won't discuss it. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 12,
"question_score": 14,
"tags": "word choice, adverbs"
} |
"XYZ mentioned in newspaper ABC!" in Japanese?
My organization XYZ has been mentioned in a newspaper, and I would like to post a link to the online article, together with a short explanation like "XYZ mentioned in newspaper ABC!"
How about `XYZ` or `XYZ`
What is the most natural way to say this?
I don't want to appear excessively boastful either. | means to write down, and cannot be used here. means identity exposed or revealed, and cannot be used either. or would fit in this context. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "translation"
} |
What is the difference between 直観 and 直感?
I'm trying to understand if there is a difference between the two words and . After looking both words up in a dictionary, the entries both list "intuition / intuitive". I also tried looking up the words in a Japanese dictionary, but I was unable to see a notable difference.
What are the correct ways to use these words?
Could this sentence be replaced with
> **** | is a term coined by translation. (In Japanese we call this ) Specifically, it is used to express German "Anschauung" or English / French "intuition". In the 1881 dictionary , English "intuition" and German "Anschauung" are both translated as . But by 1912, the two terms are distinguished in which gives English intuition as and German Anschauung as .
Also notice that in the historically spelling () system, the two words were spelled differently: is (chokkan) while is (chokkwan).
is a philosophical term, while may be more widely used. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "words"
} |
What is the etymology of the word バレる?
What is the etymology of the word , and why is it often written with katakana?
> (P); (v1,vi) to leak out (a secret); to be exposed (a lie, improper behaviour, etc.) (behavior)
>
> The secret came to light at last. | The verb bare-ru is a verb, so you can expect that it was bar-u before that, hence bar-u > bar-uru > bare-ru. It is noteworthy in that it begins with a voiced consonant (b), which essentially does not happen in words of Japanese origin. Rather, it is more likely that it is a recent contraction of another word, which I assume was abare-ru (). And in fact, it is a recent verb with early citations from the mid 17th century. Reasons to write it in katakana are 1) lack of kanji, 2) emphasis, 3) colloquial. Hiragana works just as well, though. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "words, etymology"
} |
How to read the 動＿下一, ＿下二 pattern found in dictionaries?
There's a common abbreviation system in dictionaries and I'm wondering how they're read and used.
Here's an example:
!dictionary abbreviations
I'm guessing it has something to do with how to fill in the blanks in the example sentences, but hoping you can save me the detective work. | * is , verb.
* means the verb conjugates on the r-.
* (shimo ichi) and (shimo ni) are abbreviations for (shimo ichidan "lower monograde") and (shimo nidan "lower bigrade"). These are verb conjugation types. There are other conjugation types: (yodan), (godan), (kami ichidan), (kami nidan), (sa-hen), (ka-hen), (na-hen), and (ra-hen). | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "abbreviations"
} |
What's the etymology of 負けず嫌い?
It seems strange to me that {}{} means "hate losing" and not "hate not losing". ( for example seems to mean "hate a food without trying it".)
Providing credible sources if possible, what is the etymology of ? Is there any difference in meaning or strength between and ? | According to this page, the in is not negation, but from an old way of writing /.
It says connects to an imperfective form of verbs/some auxiliary verbs etc, and it's said that it's a transformation from `auxiliary verb "/"`+`particle ""`+`verb ""` ("/"). It says "" usually has basically the same meaning as "/", but it incorporates extra emphasis.
According to this page, it means something like , or "hate thinking that you'll lose".
* * *
Alternatively, according to this page, it quotes the as saying is a mixture of and , and says that it may originally have been but came about via incorrect usage.
Daijisen says it might have come from a mixture of and ("unyielding spirit") etc (I'm not sure which is correct). | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 10,
"tags": "etymology"
} |
What's the difference between にかけてand にわたって?
It looks like has just one meaning, "over (a period of time)" whereas means "over (a period of time)" and also "until". Is that correct? Can they be used almost interchangeably? | They are different. You use with an endpoint, and with a span.
> 20 ...
> ...
>
> 3 ...
> 3 ... | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "expressions"
} |
How do I say "I understand much better than before."?
Or "I understand much better now." If someone helped me with a translation and I responded with: Would that be the correct way to express that in Japanese? | A typical phrase in japanese for this situation is "", though it is obviously not a direct translation. Maybe you could say:
>
Or from Chocolate:
> | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "words, greetings, phrases"
} |
Why does 一体 mean "what the heck?"?
the definition for :
> Adverb : ...the heck (e.g. "what the heck?"); ...in the world (e.g. "why in the world?"); ...on earth (e.g. "who on earth?");
>
> —Before an interrogative, forms an emphatic question. Where on earth did you meet him? Why on earth did you take him to the station?
>
> Noun : one object; one body; unity
>
> one form; one style one Buddhist image (or carving, etc.)
>
> Adverbial noun :
>
> generally; in general; →
Given the definition of the noun, why does this word possess an implied incredulity when used before an interrogative? | > Given the definition of the noun, why does this word possess this adverbial meaning?
Your definition list is incomplete. Another sense means "the whole", "entirety", "general". This sense--while still a noun--is used like an adverb and may be accompanied with , such as . It is from this usage that the adverbial sense derived. Adverbially, the meaning changes to "on the whole", "in general", "in short" etc. Adverbial quote: (Sōseki, Botchan*) When used in a question, it emphasizes the questioner’s feelings, which you are translating as "what the heck".
* Note: This is a famous, well-known quote with + non-negative predicate. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 11,
"tags": "words"
} |
Subsets and Splits
No saved queries yet
Save your SQL queries to embed, download, and access them later. Queries will appear here once saved.