INSTRUCTION
stringlengths 11
999
| RESPONSE
stringlengths 0
999
| SOURCE
stringlengths 16
38
| METADATA
dict |
|---|---|---|---|
What's the difference between 上る、登る and 昇る?
According to jisho.org, they all have the same meanings, to climb, to rise, to ascend. Is that true? And do they have differences in usage? | They do have differences in usage. I've gathered a few examples that, I hope, differentiate the meanings. First, I'll try to put them in English:
* Go up
* Climb
* Ascend / rise
But I don't know how helpful that is. Certainly there isn't a one-to-one mapping between those English words and those ways of writing . I think you'll get a better sense of what each one means if you look at how they're used:
## Go up
* {}[]{} go up the river
* {}[]{} go up the stairs
## Climb
* {}[]{} climb a mountain
* []{} climb a rope
* {}[]{} climb a tree
## Ascend, rise
* {}[]{} the sun rises
* {}[]{} rise into heaven
For more examples, see the following links:
* Entry for in the New Century Waei Jiten
* Entry for in the Progressive Waei Chū Jiten
* at kanpyo.net | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 20,
"question_score": 17,
"tags": "usage, nuances, word choice, homophonic kanji"
} |
Difference between だけで and でだけ?
The meaning "only", and being the "at/in" particle. When saying "only in/at", does the come before, or after the ? What does it mean, if anything, when it's reversed?
Example: "You can only get this plush toy in Japan". Is it,
>
or
>
Side note: does the same principle apply to ? | The scope of is different depending on where you put it.
* (())- "You can get this plush toy in (only Japan)"
* (())- "You can get this plush toy ((in Japan) only)"
Here it does not seem to show a big difference.
Translating from this source:
> ~ is typically used to mean "just this method/location/person will be necessary to accomplish this task"
> While ~ means "only by ~, and no other method, will the task be accomplished" For example,
>
>> - This job only requires 2 persons. (It doesn't need any more people)
>>
>> - This job only requires 2 persons. (No more, no less) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "word choice, particles, particle で"
} |
What does 金 have in common with triggers/guns?
I read the word and the definition is:
>
>
> ― () ⇒ () ()
But why is connected to the meaning of "trigger"? How is "pulling money"representative of a "gun" or "trigger"? | in {}{} does not represent "money" but "metal". "Metal" is translated as {} and "metal fittings" are translated as {}. is the part of a gun that is made of metal and is for triggering the gun to fire. In English, "trigger" also means the part of a gun as a noun, and "to cause something" as a verb.
References:
**‐**
> ()
source: <
<
Word origin for : < | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "etymology, definitions"
} |
How do Japanese pronounce microseconds (μ秒)?
From this sentence I read:
> 100μ
How am I supposed to pronounce μ ? Should I pronounce it as "mu byou"? or "micro byou"? I also looked up μm (micrometer) and found that it is . I found a few other ones that are just loanwords like for μA. Can this convention be applied to as well?
Is there a convention to use with other measurements too? For example "pico", "nano", "femto"? | μ as a character () would be pronounced . But when used as a measurement I would agree with @Teno's findings that it will be pronounced , based off of the link he provided.
If you take a look at the Wikipedia page for you'll find that they write out on the page (though not in direct relation to μ), | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 10,
"question_score": 14,
"tags": "pronunciation"
} |
How does the use of いかんによっては in this question determine one answer over another?
In my JLPT practise book, in a section explaining the use of ``, which roughly means "depending on", they have the following question:
> {}{}{}{}{}{}
>
> {}{}`______`
>
> A: {} B: {}
I chose the answer B, thinking it roughly meant, "We will decide depending on the course of the typhoon."
However, according to the book, the correct answer is A, which is translated as, "depending on the path it might be a holiday." _(The English translations in this book are not so smooth.)_
Both make logical sense to me, but, despite what the book says, I can't help but feel that B makes more sense because the path of the typhoon is uncertain, and therefor so is the decision about the seminar. Thus, "let's wait and decide."
Why is A the correct answer? | According to N3:
> means to change state or behaviour depending on something or according to something. It expresses variety and is often used with and .
>
> pinpoints one outcome from a range of possible outcomes
For the sentence:
{} _________
A: {} B: {}
A pinpoints one outcome, B does not.
**Note on **
I've got to the correct answer using N3 grammar but I should not really ignore . It means "what" or "how" so in the above sentence I would say the expression equates to "depending on what [course]". The impact of adding to is the same as if added .
An alternative way to look at this is to consider as one expression, equivalent to , which approximates to "in accordance with/is contingent upon".
The impact of adding is the same as the difference between and , which is perhaps easier to workout intuitively.
_References: N3, _ | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 12,
"tags": "grammar, jlpt"
} |
前 as a counter word?
>
>
>
Is being used as a counter word here? If so, what meaning of is being assumed as a counter--perhaps the serving placed "before" a person? | The counter is []{} and is usually used for , , , or other (usually Japanese) foods. It corresponds to the concept of a "serving", which is served in front of the customer, whence .
It is counted using the Chinese-based numbers, i.e. , , , etc.
EDIT: I checked with a chef and recipe book author about the use of vs. . The counter is supposed to be used only for prepared () food, or, by extension, for food (like , for example), which is sold in near servable state. ( is usually sold in concentrated "ready to serve" form and only needs to be diluted with water. A 10 pack of is thus a pack of 10 servings, after dilution.)
As Teno points out, is a related concept and refers to the quantity of food (ingredients). would thus be used in menus; is the preferred choice for recipes. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "words"
} |
Distinguishing 沙 from 砂
I looked up both and in my {} {} today. It appears that they share the same list of readings (). I also see that some words can be written with either kanji. Here are the senses my dictionary lists for :
1. []{}
2.
3. []{}
The dictionary goes on to say that meanings 1 and 2 are normally written with . That makes sense to me--I've never seen or written or . (Of course, I'm only a student.)
So then, where the meanings overlap, is always used? I looked for the answer online, and I found a claim that to mean sand or desert is mostly used in China, while is mostly used in Japan. Is this true? Is there any distinction in meaning between e.g. and ? Are there times when I _should_ write these words with ?
I started wondering when I saw how highly ranked was in the (Agency for Cultural Affairs kanji frequency list), but I fear I've misled myself. | and are almost the same, though is used to describe bigger . 's is quite different from 's . However, today most of people consider as . You can use them in the same way. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "kanji, orthography, homophonic kanji"
} |
'Hearty' in Japanese
How would one say 'hearty' in Japanese? As in `hearty meal`, for example. | I would use:
> {}{}
It's a well used idiomatic expression, representing something you eat that has kind of a resounding effect on how good you feel. Hence, hearty. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "words, english to japanese, food"
} |
かかったためしない - how can this be translated?
I encountered the following sentence in a comic book which I could not make sense of.
The comic strip depicts a character using a simple bird trap and saying: The first part, , can be roughly translated as "I've been doing this for quite a while", and this is quite clear.
The second part, , is not clear.
My guess is that it means something like "Catching is not the reason I'm doing this." The dictionary shows that can be translated as "to catch (prey)" and I know that can be an "intention" and is "do". However, I feel I may be wrong here, especially since it's all written in hiragana.
Some help would be appreciated. | You are parsing the sentence incorrectly. It should be
> ()
It then roughly means,
> I have been doing this for quite some years, but it's not like I have ever caught anything.
(written ) can mean "trial/test", but here it is used in the sense of "experience" (written or ; see Tsuyoshi Ito's comment below and the entry in Daijisen), as is often the case in the phrase (), e.g.
>
> You look like you have never had the experience of ( _or_ a taste of) what it is like to have cleaned a room.
The person from your sentence has been trying to catch birds for many years, but has never had the experience of having caught something. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "words, translation, spoken language"
} |
Function of the first の in とかの他の
Are `......` and `......` equivalent? What is the function of the first in the latter example?
And why can't a follow in `......`? Or can it? | I'm not answering this from a linguist perspective (I'm not a student of Japanese, just a native user). Just a warning.
It seems like these are mostly equivalent ways of saying the same thing, but some sound more natural/awkward than others. Whether to insert a or not depends on the flow of a sentence, and to me a sentence with too many (as in ) sounds very awkward at worst, if not used sparingly. It's almost like trying to put together a sentence while using ”well," "you know," or "um" while thinking what to say next. Doing so doesn't really go against grammar in loose ways but often kills the flow of sentence. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
How to translate rows and columns
I am trying to translate the GUI of a simple memory game from English to Japanese. I want to the user to be able to choose how many rows and columns there should be in the memory game. For a 2x3 memory game it would look like this:
Rows
2
Columns
3
However, no matter how much I look in my dictionary(jisho.org), I can't find any separate words for "rows" and columns". The closest I can find is , but it seems to mean eithers rows or columns. So how would I translate these two words? | It's []{} and []{} for "row" and "column", respectively. (And []{} means "matrix".) E.g.
> 23
> a 2-row-3-column layout | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "translation"
} |
Etymology of the term お局 and how it is used in slang
Can someone explain the etymology of the word as well as how it is used in modern slang? I took an educated guess as to the colloquial meaning but am unsure of its nuances, be they comedic, insulting or otherwise....
>
>
> I’m sick of being scolded by “otsubone.”
>
> : bureau; board; office; affair; conclusion; court lady; lady-in-waiting; her apartment;
>
> colloquial: an older single woman in a man's world/a term used to scornfully describe an unmarried veteran female employee [?] | The etymology is prefix o + noun tubone (). A tubone is a "room" in a large building. These rooms were primarly prepared for women who served at noble or imperial residences. The term has been around since around the 14th century.
Historically, an otubone was a woman who served at the imperial court and given a "room" () of her own. During the Edo period, the otubone was the one responsible for managing the women who served in the .
In modern Japan, there is no longer an , and the meaning has changed to express a woman with some power who has been working for a long time. Until recently, women in Japan were expected to quit their jobs once they got married, so an otubone would be assumed to be single. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "words, etymology"
} |
Is the term 舞妓 used in all of Japan, or only in certain dialects?
The English language article on geisha says
> Apprentice geisha are called maiko ( or ), literally "dance child") or hangyoku (), "half-jewel" (meaning that they are paid half of the wage of a full geisha), or by the more generic term o-shaku (), literally "one who pours (alcohol)".
and later on says
> The only modern maiko that can apprentice before the age of eighteen are in Kyoto. So on average, Tokyo hangyoku (who typically begin at 18) are slightly older than their Kyoto counterparts (who usually start at 15).
Is used in all of Japan, or does the term for apprentice geisha vary from dialect to dialect, just like the word for geisha can be or depending on dialect? Alternatively, are and now considered distinct terms describing different concepts? | I don't think I'd call it an issue of dialect, since is understood and used throughout Japan, but refers specifically to the type of "geisha in training" in Kyoto. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "words, dialects"
} |
Obligatory zero particle
Sometimes, particles are omitted.
I've read, however, that this can be analyzed as inserting a "zero particle" instead. See for example Particle omission or zero particle by Mitsuaki Shimojo. See also Matt's comment on a related question.
Are there situations where a zero particle is required? That is, situations where adding any particle would change the meaning or make the sentence incorrect?
Are there situations where a zero particle is strongly preferred? | I can think of one instance -- a noun phrase with "also" cannot also take //. Because the NP still has grammatical case despite having non-overt case, this can be analysed as the topic/subject/object marker being obligatorily zero.
This isn't the case for other particles like or though. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "grammar, particles, zero particle"
} |
What is the difference between どころか and ものか?
This is a sentence from my JLPT prep book:
> {}{}{}{}{} {}{}
The answer is: ``, but I thought it was ``.
I can't figure out why `` isn't correct or is unnatural. They seem to both mean the same thing, and can both follow the dictionary form of a verb. | I would like to propose that the answer book is wrong.
In the example sentence could only be used to express complete disbelief or rejection of the idea that the economy will improve.
is used to flat out deny an idea as false.
()
And trying to follow that with would be strange grammatically and in terms of meaning.
is used to negate a statement in order to emphasize that the alternative is true.
()
Thus, is correct because of the way it contrasts with where does not have that function. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "grammar, word choice, particles"
} |
What is the etymology of 一人前?
I found this word today, and I thought it was pretty interesting. I read it in the context of "becoming and adult", or "coming of age", but I'd like to know the etymology of it. I could only find definitions for the word itself, not its origins. At first blush it looks like "one person before/ahead", but it also seems like `` can mean a portion of food. "One person's portion of food"? (Perhaps someone is now big enough to have an adult's portions?) | The etymology is itinin + mae. I could say more about mae, but more likely you are wondering why it means this.
The key is understanding that -mae is a suffix which means: 1) an amount or portion suitable for X; sannin-mae: a serving such as food) suitable for three people 2) emphasises ones attributes or functionality; otoko-mae "manly", ude-mae "skill, prowess"
Source (seems to be popular lately): Daijirin, Daijisen
In itinin-mae, the sense is "a person of ability and skills", hence an adult. This is the second meaning given above. Depending on the context, the first meaning is also possible: a serving (such as food) suitable for one person. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 11,
"tags": "etymology"
} |
の要領で as "in the same way as"/"in the manner of" vs. のように
Full text is over here.
This is part of the description of how {} is prepared at a particular restaurant:
>
If was replaced by , would there be any difference? | Yes, there would be small difference. `` often implies a process which consists of multiple steps or involves some special "technique", while `` does not imply that at all. However, this difference is very small. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "words, nuances"
} |
Is there a list of kanji ordered by usage in novels?
I have found many lists of kanji ordered by their usage in newspapers, but are there any lists that order by their usage in novels and other fictional material?
This might be useful to have because if someone wanted to be able to read Japanese novels well, they could study the kanji in the list. | Yes.
< | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 28,
"question_score": 25,
"tags": "kanji, resources"
} |
Expressing: "Send them over/up, please"
This should be a rather straightforward (if a bit specific) bit of translation, but I cannot find a form that makes sense to me and gets corroborated by Google.
How would one translate the typical phrase structure:
> **Send him up/over** [to the nth floor, to my office etc]
Such as spoken to an office receptionist over the phone, to ask them to have a visitor go up to a certain floor/office.
More specifically, I am wondering what verbal form would be appropriate. My two inclinations were to go with either:
>
... but I am pretty sure this could only apply to an object, not people.
Or:
>
... but this sounds more like "allow them/me to go" than "have them go" (and so do most usage examples I can find in Google).
Does anybody know what the definite way of expressing this would be? | > {}[]{} (article from a business keigo website, more examples)
>
> {}[]{} (seen in a keigo manual (p.4), more examples)
Causative form can work too, if you don't need to use keigo to the visitor:
> {}{}
I think is acceptable, but sounds unnatural. This is not because of the verb form, but because of the semantics of . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "translation, verbs"
} |
Explanation of the expression 気が済まない
> A:
>
> B:
>
> A: At the dollar store, there is always somebody who has to buy something even if they don't need it.
>
> B: Yes, yes! That's me.
I am told that means "won't be satisfied unless," or when one "must (do something)."
If I translate the expression literally I get confused--
spirit/mood/feeling
finish; come to an end; excusable; need not
Would anyone be kind enough to give me a clear and thorough explanation of this expression? I think my main confusion is as to which verb comes from. | sum-u has several meanings. The core meaning is for something to to come to an end, conclude. From this, it also takes on the meaning for something to be settled, at rest, or under control (as a result of something being concluded). Putting this together, ki ga sum-u is "for ones feelings to be at rest / under control", hence content. The negative form, ki ga sum-a-nai, is "for ones feelings to not be at rest / under control", hence not-content. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 10,
"question_score": 11,
"tags": "expressions"
} |
俺 and 僕 used as second person singular pronouns
I often see couples where the girl sometimes speaks to her boyfriend using as a 'you'.
Where does it come from?
Can other pronouns like , etc. can be used the same way? | In a word: imitation.
Between couples, often men will refer to themselves as ore. A woman may refer to him (hence "you") by imitating his pronoun of choice. Often ore is not appropriate in various social situations, such as work. As such, some men may refer to themselves as boku. As a result, some people (both male and female), such as bosses (who may refer to themselves as ore), may refer to him (hence "you") by imitating the choice of his pronoun.
I cannot recall hearing it with regard to wata(ku)si or atasi. wata(ku)si, though, is rather unlikely since it could just as equally apply to either person, so the sense of imitation would be more difficult to catch. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 12,
"question_score": 11,
"tags": "second person pronouns"
} |
Usage of 腱 vs 筋
What is the difference between the following characters: vs
Both translate to tendon (as in the connective tissue between muscles and bones) | would generally be read and is the word (generally and medically speaking) that means tendon.
The kanji itself has numerous meanings and uses, so I'll limit this answer to biology.
is much more general, applying to **any fibrous tissue** , muscle being the most common, not tendon. Also, it is not limited to animals as it includes plant fiber as well (this is a video of someone removing the fibrous outer layer of the fuki plant). Other common usages include the string of snap pea pods and the digestive tract in the back of shrimp.
So is a specific subset of pretty much only means tendon in layman's terms. Just like when we say "I pulled a muscle" even though we may not really know at the time if it was a muscle, tendon, or ligament that we injured, in Japanese people say . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "word choice, words, kanji"
} |
What is the meaning and etymology of the (slang?) word まめ?
>
>
> I don't write that well, but I love learning the language.
What is the etymology of the word here and what specifically does it mean?
My friend gave me this explanation:
> .
>
>
I guess is a colloquial word meaning to do well or do diligently? | mame (ni) expresses the way in which one seriously works hard at something without complaining about the task. Often you may translate it as "diligent(ly)".
There is another common usage meaning "healthy" as in mame ni kurasu "to live healthy".
You may see it written as or .
The word is not new; it's been around for many hundreds of years, so I would not say that it is slang.
Links: Daijirin, Daijisen. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "words, etymology"
} |
For the word じき meaning "soon", what is the difference between the kanjis 直 and 時期?
As discussed in this question, one meaning for `` is "soon, momentarily". Looking it up in my (English/Japanese) dictionary, I found both the kanjis `` and `` for it.
I looked them up further (online), and could only find the meaning of `` for `{}`. Is my dictionary misleading me?
From just what I've seen, it seems like it's rarely written in kanji, and it makes sense in my head that the kanji for `{}` would be used, so this question is more academic than practical, but I'd still appreciate any insight on it. | `` and `` are completely unrelated, they just happen to both be written as in hiragana.
is simply means a period or instance of time like in (when you enter school), like (the end and beginning of the year is the busiest time period) or (now is not the time).
can also be seen in the words like []{} . however means "in a short time" and can be replaced with (there also is the form ). For example, (he/she will be coming soon).
However, I should point out that the usage has become less common (I've never heard anyone under 30 use before) and you probably will hear it with older people.
Also, one reason you probably see it in hiragana more is because there also is [[]{}]( like in (a story I directly heard from him), so there probably is a tendency to disambiguate the two.
**Side Note**
In the linked question, the selected answer says:
> means temporally farther than
That is totally wrong. They are equivalent in meaning. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "kanji, nuances"
} |
Was "乎" the man'yōgana spelling of the accusative/object particle "を"?
In the English Wiktionary entry for "" there is a quote or example sentence using the character "" with no explanation seemingly where the particle "" would normally occur.
Now I couldn't find anything in either the entry for "" or "" about them being historically connected via _man'yōgana_, and Google searches failed to turn up anything conclusive either.
In fact I don't know much about _man'yōgana_ at all so could it be that any character with the right reading could be used for ""? | Yes, it was one form. From here:
> [o] [wo]
**Translation**
In the Nara period, was pronounced as "o" and was pronounced as "wo", and were clearly distinguished. []{}(Manyogana) used , etc. for and for . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 10,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "etymology, history, particle を, spelling, manyōgana"
} |
Expressing ethnicity that is different from nationality
How do you go about expressing ethnicity that is different from your nationality.
I happen to be of British decent from Canada (now living in Japan):
That's my best guess. Any improvements? | I'd say the best way is
>
if your nationality is Canadian but you are of British descent. Using in between is okay and perfectly makes sense, but in many cases it will lead to an excessive use of . For example, if you are an British Canadian engineer, then
>
sounds a bit awkward but
>
is pretty much perfect. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "word choice"
} |
Why can 髪の毛 only refer to hair on your head?
I've never really understood why there is a difference between and when talking about hair on one's body. What is it about that makes it only relevant in the context of having "hair on the head"? Why wouldn't I be able to call hair if it was in a different area? | is possibly related to (but not , see Dono's comment below), something that is at the top. , then, refers to the head (i.e. top of the body), so that is the hair on your head. Similarly, would be the hair on your arms, the hair on your legs. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "usage"
} |
Reading 捻る: when is it ねじる or ひねる?
How can I tell whether is read as (P. N.C.) or (P. N.C.)?
I assume the answer is "based on which verb is appropriate", so I've been trying to learn the difference between them. Based on the links above, here's what I've got so far:
1. They both generally refer to twisting. There are cases where it could be read either way, because the meanings overlap:
2. When you put a lot of force into twisting, it's . So you use when you're opening a bottle by (forcibly) twisting the cap off:
3. If you're twisting something with your fingers or fingertips, you use :
4. Metaphoric uses appear to use :
Does this seem correct? | One of the dictionary entries the OP cited elaborates on the difference:
> [][]――
In short, (1) they both mean the same when used for "twisting" something; (2) If the twisting is done with force, can be more suitable over ; (3) In some cases only is used, e.g., , ; (4) has a wider variety of meaning, e.g., (I create a haiku poem); (5) A similar word sees even more limited usage, e.g., .
So basically your understanding is fine. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "kanji, verbs, readings, word choice"
} |
Why is も used instead of が in the sentence 「日本ではクモを見ると良いことがあると言う人もいますよ」
What is the exact sentiment expressed by in this sentence as opposed to ?
It's a sentence in response to someone saying "I saw a spider in my room, I was scared". | is used instead of to add the meaning of "even" or "also." See for comparison the following examples:
>
>
> In Japan, there are people who say that seeing a spider is a good thing.
>
>
>
> In Japan, there are also people who say that seeing a spider is a good thing.
Depending on context, one can also translate as "even," as Istraci does:
> In Japan, there are even people who say that seeing a spider is a good thing.
So introduces an element of comparison, implying that there are people who think that seeing a spider may be a good thing, as well as those who think that it is a bad thing. In natural colloquial English, perhaps one could drop the "even" or "also," as these seem somewhat stilted in the context of a conversation, and introduce a word like "well" instead:
>
>
>
>
> I got scared because I saw a spider in my room!
>
> Well, in Japan there are people who say that seeing a spider is a good thing. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar, particle も"
} |
How to say "To familiarise onself with"
I've been trying to figure out how to say something like:
"I'd like to familiarise myself with XXX before the meeting so do you have any information that you can pass me before hand." (I.e. I have an agenda, but it's the first time I am interacting with the project so I don't know what the project is. I am asking for an overview of the project)
For "familiarise" the only thing I could find was `{}`, but I'm not sure if it's natural or not.
So my sentence would be:
Any comments / improvements? | ssb's answer explains how is unsuitable here pretty well, so I'll just list up some more expressions you can use.
Treat "to familiarize oneself beforehand" as a single concept:
> XXX{}
* : to prep
Breakdown the notion of "to familiarize oneself" into several words:
> XXX{}{}...
* : overview
* : grasp, understand
Combination of the above:
> XXX{}{}...
* : background knowledge
* : get (by extension of "buy", "stock up on") | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "word choice, translation"
} |
Does Japanese have morphemes that span two kanji?
I read once (in this comment by Victor Mair on Language Log) that Chinese has single morphemes that span two hanzi. The example given was the Chinese word pútáo . At the time, I assumed it applied to Japanese equally, because I assumed {} was the same word. I then assumed I could generalize from that to similar compounds. (In retrospect, I don't think that reasoning was very good, which is why I'm asking this question.)
Other compounds that look like they might be monomorphemic include []{}, []{}, and {}.
Are any of these single morphemes? Pairs of bound morphemes? If these are bad examples, are there two-kanji compounds that _are_ single morphemes? | Chinese is a lot neater with regard to its characters; one character equals one word (now morpheme) equals one syllable. In theory at least. being a two syllable morpheme, Chinese would rather adhere to a policy of one character per syllable than one per morpheme if it has to choose. In ancient Chinese there were prefixes and suffixes as well, but they could be added without changing the number of syllables, so one character per syllable held true. All of your examples look like borrowed words where this happened. Japanese is a bit messier. Niwatori is evidently but since in Chinese "chicken" is just one word, Japanese follow suite and uses . I know there are cases of the opposite, where the word has more kanji than morphemes, or even syllables sometimes, but my Japanese isn't great, so I wouldn't be able to give any examples. Someone mentioned . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "kanji, compounds, linguistics"
} |
Rust: 錆 vs 銹 vs 鏽 vs 鏥
In doing some looking around today I found four characters that all mean rust and are all read . Is there any distinction that can be made between these characters?
| Let's put these in two conceptual buckets:
* **** : This one's relatively common. It can be used to write the verb , or the derived noun . Of the four, this is the only one I imagine you need to know. (Note that the lower-right element of can be written either or .)
* **** : These are a lot less common. and both appear to be simplifications of , replacing the phonetic with and respectively. (Note that all three have as an ON reading!) All three are available to write the noun . The latter two can be treated as variants of .
A few less common compounds customarily use , such as {} and {}. Aside from that, I'd expect to be used most of the time.
There doesn't appear to be any real difference in meaning, at least according to my dictionaries. I could be mistaken, of course. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "word choice, kanji, homophonic kanji"
} |
Pronunciation of ううん
The pitch contour of the interjection has been described as high, low, middle. Alternatively, it has been described as a falling-rising tone. In either case, this appears to be unique in Japanese.
In English, the pitch contour of "I donno" is distinctive. I can reduce it to "ionno", "ionn", "nnn", or just hum the pitch contour without opening my mouth, and it's nevertheless understandable.
Given that the pitch contour of is unique, and given that it's already fairly nasal, can I do the same thing? Can I say without opening my mouth at all? If so, is this the normal pronunciation? | I would say both and are pronounced often without opening the mouth, even more so than . I think () and () comes closer to the pronunciation; or even and , like you suggested. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "pronunciation, pitch accent, spoken language"
} |
Can someone explain the logic of the grammar "とは限らない"
I found this example sentence in "A Dictionary of Intermediate Japanese Grammar" under a grammar point unrelated to "":
""
I understand the meaning of the sentence ("People who exercise a lot don't necessarily live a long time.") but I'm struggling to understand the logic behind this usage of "". If this dictionary did not have an English translation I would think it meant "Living a long time is not just limited to people who exercise a lot" since "" means "to limit" in other contacts.
Without the "", the sentence means "People who exercise definitely live a long time." From my understanding of "", you can say "" instead of "" and it should also have the meaning "People who exercise a lot don't necessarily live a long time".
So why is "" used this way? And bonus question, what is the semantic difference between "" and ""? | The expression "" is used when we negate a _general_ statement.
In your example, the statement we want to negate is:
>
You should not interpret the verb "" as "limit" in this case. This verb has a meaning "can't be asserted" with a negative word.
"" after "" is not necessary but emphasizes the negation.
Here are some examples using "":
>
> | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 19,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
Describing my exact height
How do I describe my height in centimetres?
I think you can say "" to say that you're tall, but how about your exact height? Would "cm" sound like broken Japanese?
I came across someone using ": xyz cm" when describing their height, and looking up "example sentences" in jisho.org for "" had a few cases of it being used for exact heights. Should it be "cm" instead? | more literally means your spine/backbone and someone with a long, erect spine is someone who is tall, but that doesn't mean that his spine is 190cm long. ( is the actual word for spine.)
is literally the length of the body and is the standard way of talking about your height. So, just like you suggested, 190cm. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 15,
"question_score": 11,
"tags": "words"
} |
How do you express "try"?
I know that - can mean "try", but my understanding of it is that it means "try it and see what it's like" or "give it a try". But is there a way of expressing "try" that emphasizes that effort was made to succeed?
As an example, saying "I am trying to do Kendo" in Japanese:
>
sounds like I'm going for a brief "trial" to see how I like it. How would I express that I am making a strong effort to succeed at it? | As a native speaker, I would say:
>
or
>
But, these are a little bit colloquial. When I want to be more formal, I will say:
>
or, simply,
> | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 20,
"question_score": 10,
"tags": "expressions"
} |
も particle after an adverb
I know that particle can be used in place of . And it means "in addition", "also".
What function does it have in this adverb ""? Should we treat it as a separate word here? | explains the expression `` on p. 382 as _a sentence adverb_ ().
Some adjectives like ``, ``, ``, ``, ``, ``, etc. can take `` after their conjuntive form to add some _evaluation, criticism, or commentary_ of speaker to the whole sentence.
For example, the sentense
> (Surprisingly, he showed up to the assembly.)
expresses _indirectly_ that the speaker did not expect that he would show up. This _unexpectedness_ is not the main topic of this sentence, but a kind of commentary from the speaker's point of view.
Here is another example:
> (The policeman bravely rescued the hostages from the gang.) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 10,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "particles, adverbs, particle も"
} |
When do you use は/に for どようびは/に?
There is a sentence in a worksheet that goes: Why is it not ? When do I know which one to use and what is the difference?
Spoke to my sensei and she said you can use something like: , which would still be right ... I didn't quite get what she meant. Can someone please clarify, thank you. | The main difference is probably the nuance of the sentence.
is used as emphasis on as the topic of the sentence. "On _Saturdays_ I will read books." (Only Saturday, and not any other day of the week.) It may imply that reading books on Thursday is a habit of the speaker.
is acceptable as well and means the same thing because already indicates emphasis on . helps to clarify that it is when the action takes place, but it is quite clear even without it that indicates the time of action.
If only is used, however, it means that "On Saturday I will read books." (Presumably the coming Saturday.) The action, _to read books_ , and not when it is done, is emphasized. It does not imply that it is a habit or routine, it just so happens that the speaker plans to read books on a Saturday. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 10,
"tags": "particles"
} |
Difference between ともあれ and とかく
According to ALC they look pretty similar and express "anyway, anyhow". I came across the following excercise where you need to choose between those two:
> ****
Apparently the right answer is | You are probably confusing and . and are in fact quite close in their meaning. They are both used to carry the conversation forward, like below:
Both roughly mean "I don't know what the results will be, but the exam itself has finished". Both imply that the speaker had underwent some hassle, but that that hassle has now finished. Another examples:
is quite different though and means that something has a strong (excessive) tendency to do something. For example,
| stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "words, word choice"
} |
Difference Between 修理 and 直す
Although both means repair, but I am not able to understand the differences between them.
Is it that, when human efforts are involved in repair its called **** and when it is being repaired by any other means is called **** | There are many, many examples of this kind. There are always different ways of saying the same thing. The (Chinese-derived word) plus verb is often the more formal version, whereas the simple native Japanese word is less formal. When comparing and , and both mean "to repair", but the latter sounds a tad more technical, but probably only because it is more formal. It's something like
>
> to perform a car maintenance operation
>
>
> to repair the car
but both can involve human efforts. In general, however, means more than just :
> []{} ****
> **Put** the chair **back** where it was.
>
> **[]{}**
> to **cure** an ailment
>
> ****
> to **re** make
>
> ****
> Please **correct** this sentence.
(See Tsuyoshi Ito's comment below.) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 12,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "word choice"
} |
What is the difference between でなくand ではなく？
This is the sentence I have just read:
> If I ever have a chance to go abroad then I would like to go to study rather than just travel.
The feels intuitively correct but what purpose does it serve? There are a number of expressions without the :
> … be popularized not only by ~ but also by
>
> although not in need of
>
> []{} if it is not love, what is it? (possibly
I can't explain why is/is not necessary in these expressions (apart from "these are " but I wanted to get a better understanding than that if possible).
I should be very grateful for any insights. | As you may already know is considered the topic marker. Adding puts emphasis on the denial aspect and what becomes before is generally the topic of the sentence, omitting makes _what comes after_ the focus of the sentence.
A more literal translation of your sentence would be:
> If I ever go abroad, I don't want to travel for just pleasure, I would like to go to study.
The emphasis is on the denial aspect. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 12,
"question_score": 12,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
Horizontal writing in the middle of vertical writing
My character dictionary is written in vertical style. In this dictionary, columns of text are sometimes divided into two smaller columns, which are read right-then-left. I've read that this is called {}. It looks like this:
 escape this rule. Even in , I would always read numbers and Latin-alphabet words the "usual" way (which I think of as left-to-right and top-to-bottom, in this order).
I make sense of it like this:
For vertical writing it is `top-to-bottom -> right-to-left`.
For horizontal writing it is `left-to-right -> top-to-bottom`.
For horizontal writing, `left-to-right` comes first, so two characters should be typeset next to each other, read from left to right.
For vertical writing,`top-to-bottom` comes first, so two characters should be typeset one on top of the other first.
Breaking the column after a single character to type the next character in a separate column doesn't make much sense, so if text is typeset in a single line, it should be read left-to-right. If text is typeset in a single column, there is no confusion. In both vertical and horizontal writing, only the rule top-to-bottom applies. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "numbers, orthography"
} |
What's the word or phrase used specifically to describe someone who is only concerned with physical appearence of others?
I believe it starts with and is something like 'only has an eye for beauty', but it's been a long time since I used it. I believe it's a kanji compound. | You're probably thinking of the word menkui (). | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "compounds"
} |
What does 赤道 mean in Japanese?
What does the Japanese word mean? A Russian site claims that it means philosophical teaching. | It is read as sekidō and means equator. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning"
} |
Etymology of 必ず
In a comment on the question Origin of , I wrote:
> What about ? It's from + . Does that fit the + pattern?
I said this because 's entry for says the following:
>
However, Dono responded by saying:
> That is one suggested etymology, but there is no general consensus.
If there is no consensus, are there other explanations for the etymology of ? | Firstly, is known to have a number of issues. You should get a second opinion on much of what it says. I'm away from most of my resources for the weekend, but below are quotes from several more reliable dictionaries at hand.
: ()
------
:
I am not strongly opposed, per se, to kari + narazu. A good argument may convince me. However, the evidence is lacking. Why does the medial -ri- disappear completely? Also, semantically, the relevance of to is questionable. Anyway, people have argued various etymologies over the years, but as above . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "etymology"
} |
What does “忘れてしまう生き物” mean?
> **** .
Especially, what is "" supposed to mean in "" ? | Judging from your reply to Gradius’s comment on the question, I am afraid that you have trouble understanding relative clauses.
* Human is a creature.
* **** Human is a creature **which forgets lessons**.
In addition, … adds the meaning of “regrettably” or “unfortunately.”
* **** Human is a creature **which, regrettably, forgets lessons**.
I will not try a translation of the whole sentence, but I hope that this gives you a small nudge in the right direction. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, translation, meaning, relative clauses"
} |
How to use いかがですか？
So I've read that `` means "How about it?" and "How is it?". So if I wanted to say, "How's the coffee?" would it be or
Also is there an "informal" way of saying ? | is a more formal way of saying , and similar to . Saying can also mean "Would you like some coffee?" Context should clarify it of course, but I think that would be preferred for asking _about_ the coffee, and if you really wanted to drive the point home you can say something like
To make it more casual you can just use , as in | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 23,
"question_score": 18,
"tags": "word choice, usage, politeness, ambiguity"
} |
Trouble understanding "また何処かで会えると 素敵ですね"
This is what a friend said to me in response to my wishing him a happy birthday on Facebook. The topic/subject omission is often my biggest problem understanding Japanese, as I have trouble discerning what the implied topic/subject is. My best attempt is,
> "If we could meet again somewhere it would be great!"
But I am not that confident. For all I can tell, it could be
> "If we could meet somewhere again it would be a great place!"
Or something else entirely. Can someone please help me with this? | Your first hunch is the correct one.
It'd be like saying in English, "It would be great if we could meet again somewhere."
The way it's phrased sounds like the person doesn't know when-and particularly where-you will be able to meet again. If it were the latter of your guesses it would probably be emphasized for clarity, like | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "translation"
} |
Grammar dictionary
The dictionary that I use primarily is < . I wanted to know of good sources online for looking up how different aspects of Japanese grammar work. I would prefer it if the site were completely in Japanese. I understand Japanese well enough that I should be able to figure out what is being said if the explanations are in Japanese. At this point for me I feel it is a waste of study time to look up Japanese words in English, which is why I use < . I would like to do the same thing when studying grammar. | We generally do not deal with resource questions on JLU.
These sorts of questions are relatively common, though, and to provide a starting point, a number of us have created a resource list on the meta site as a part of this site's FAQ.
In this particular case, you will find a few sites like what you're looking for in the Japanese section of the Websites section.
For questions like this, as well as the other types of questions considered offtopic, feel free to drop by the chatroom, although you may need to link your account to another stackexchange site to get enough rep to chat freely. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, dictionary"
} |
Difference between 〜げ and 〜そう
> **Possible Duplicate:**
> What is the difference between ~ and ~
What is the difference between and ?
Consider for example:
Or are they synonyms? | They are very similar, however there is a slight difference in nuance. implies a stronger sense of _uncertainty_ compared to .
So, in your first example, you are not certain whether he wanted to say something or not, while in the second example, you are _almost_ certain that he wants to say something.
Another example:
> //#1
>
> //#2
If you saw the person and noticed that they were laughing, smiling, etc. You are most likely to use version #1 and not version #2 because you are confident about your conjecture.
However, although in standard dialect there is the distinction I mentioned above, in some dialects (and in young people's slang) they do no make this distinction and is used commonly to mean . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "word choice"
} |
Trouble with 応じる
> **Possible Duplicate:**
> What makes instead of the correct choice for this question?
I am having trouble with the following sentence.
I think it says something along the lines of, "The information adds to the development of the scenario, but if you try looking ahead from time to time that is okay.", but I'm not completely sure. Could someone explain the use of ? | usually means in relation to what ever is happening before the phase.
For example:
* would be "As necessary"
* XYZ would be along the line of "as XYZ progresses"
* XYZ would be "according to the consequences of"
(I'll add more if question becomes popular) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "verbs, questions"
} |
Are there rules for when 'e' becomes 'a' in compound words?
For example:
*
*
*
The only thing I can see for sure is that the second word becomes voiced, but that's more of an after-the-fact thing than a rule that dictates when the sound actually changes from e to a.
Is there a rule or pattern to it? | e does not become a. Rather, it is the other way around: a becomes e. More specifically, there are two forms of e: e1 and e2. (See ) The rule is a + i > e2. Both e1 and e2 merge into e after Nara period.
For reference, these pairs are termed and . The form without the -i suffix is while the -i suffixed form is . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "orthography"
} |
What is the correct kanji for the verb to sweat 汗をかく
What is the character used for the verb to sweat? | The kanji is . Let me describe how you can check.
When you type the expression in with your IME, often a dictionary with appear with usage information. On my system, when I type , to the side a window with details on , , , and appears. For it says: ⇒
Note arrow suggesting that it be written in hiragana. Also note the * which indicates that it is not included in basic kanji, and hence is not typically written in kanji.
Also, the dictionary is often useful. Quote:
> ×
>
> ② ――
Note the × before the headword. This indicates that it is not generally written in kanji. Same details as above. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "kanji, verbs"
} |
Difference between 何の～ and どんな～
Consider the following:
1. {[]{}}
2. {}
What is the difference in the type of information requested by the two interrogatives?
My hypothesis is that is used to request information from pool of discrete data, while requests information from continuous data. ( is broader than )
That is to say that X requests information from a set of established data; X has been categorised into discrete genres and it asks for which, while X seems to be more open-ended. | If you were to ask me , I would respond with the name of the movie. If you were to use , I would respond with a description of the movie. In the broadest terms it's the difference between "which/what" and "what kind of." is asking for something specific where is asking for a description. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 20,
"question_score": 15,
"tags": "word choice"
} |
Omitting ようだ at the end of a sentence
>
So this sentence is saying, "my dad went to take a short course on digital cameras, but it was difficult to the point of surprising him." Could you say
>
instead or would omitting the make the sentence incorrect. What is the point of the at the end of the sentence? | The sentence is complete and _grammatically correct_ without . (Please also see Tsuyoshi Ito's answer.)
… adds "It seems that ...".
In this case,
>
> My dad went to take a short course on digital cameras, but it seems that he was surprised at just how difficult it was. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, usage, questions"
} |
How to translate: "Keep/leave something". So, how to express intention to leave something unchanged
Consider questions like:
Please leave the door open, thanks!
Could you please keep the lift's doors open? Thankyou
Please, leave it as it is.
They all imply something common: not changing the state of something. I know that `` is involved in this situations.
For example, this sentence is translated in this way:
{} => Please, leave it as it is
And I know it is correct as I used it when I lived in Japan. But I do not know how to express more complex situations, like those ones I mentioned before.
Could you also provide a generic explanation, I mean the grammar rules behind this? Thankyou! | There is ~+, e.g.
>
> Please leave it the way it is.
The rationale is you do something and then you leave it that way ([]{} means to put/leave). In informal situations ~+ is oftened shortened to ~, e.g.
>
> Please leave the door open. ( _lit._ Please open the door and leave it that way.)
Similar constructions are
* ~ "to try to do sth.", or
* ~ "to do sth. (with a negative connotation)" | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 11,
"tags": "grammar, usage, translation"
} |
What is the difference between 楽しい and 面白い?
Google translates both of them to be interesting. And which can be used for _a funny guy_? | `` is more like "fun, enjoyable", like a trip to the zoo.
`` is more like "interesting, amusing", like a good movie.
Of course, watching the movie could be ``, and all the neat things you learn at the zoo could be ``, so the meanings are indeed close.
A _funny guy_ would use . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "word choice, words"
} |
Is を頑張る standard Japanese?
This question came up on chat.
In this phrase:
> TOEIC
Can the comma be replaced by ? If not, is there a better particle?
is listed as a in both of my dictionaries ( and ). There are plenty of Google results for though, including in phrases like TOEIC. I've also found some related discussion, though it didn't answer the question.
Possibly related: Are there verbs that are neither intransitive nor transitive? | I think the following are all valid
*
Do your best (while) at Kendo (practice)
*
Do your best for Kendo (generally)
*
Do your best in Kendo
The last two are equivalent up to the difference in nuance between and . Of course all could be used in the same situation. The difference in usage is probably biggest between the first and the last two. The first implies you should give your best (only) when you are doing Kendo. The last two imply you should give your best for Kendo, even when you are currently not practising, e.g. you should attend practice more regularly.
As far as I can see
*
could be short for any of them, although I would probably understand it as an omission of . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 10,
"tags": "particle を, transitivity, zero particle"
} |
Is 郵便 exclusive to Japan Post in this reading problem?
The question is a the bottom since the context may be an issue. Here is a problem from a study text (kanzen master N1 reading)
ANTONIO
/
3
3
522
(ANTONIO
ANTONIO
4(ANTONIO
The answer guide says the correct answer is the first answer. It says the third answer is wrong because . I understand the first answer is correct but still have some questions about the answer.
My first question is why is not considered a subset of as indicated by - is that term only for the Japanese post office, as opposed to the English 'post' or 'mail' which I assume you can use with other companies?
Also, the sentence led me to think going to ANTONIO or and exchanging the tickets would be a ticket exchange and not a cash back refund. Please clarify why this deduction is wrong. | For your first question, the directions for mail expressly request through . Regardless of whether or not it's allowed by mail, they do ask for that which is not there in answer 3. I would be more confused about #2 then #3. Generally, though, I would interpret to be post and to be Sagawa or something.
For your second question, it says right in the first option . By going there you can get a refund for your ticket.
And just for fun let's break down each of the answers:
1. This is valid as explained in the first option, as you know.
2. Incorrect because you need to send the letter to ANTONIO
3. Incorrect because it's not through
4. Incorrect because the answer says he will not be reimbursed for mailing
Hope this makes sense. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "readings, jlpt"
} |
meaning of 蠢{うごめ}き[伸]{の}ばして?
It's taken from OP (lyrics can be found here )
I know the meaning of each individual word, but I can't really understand how it works in this context: | I think the main verb is the part. The phrase is used to mean "reach our your hands." Then the that precedes it describes the way these hands are coming toward (that's where comes in) the indirect object who is not mentioned.
So basically the compound would mean to come reaching out in a kind of creepy shaking/wiggling way. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "words"
} |
Difference between さよなら and さようなら
I just saw the word "goodbye" spelt as . Having clearly heard the long **o** sound before, I thought the word was misspelled. However, a quick online search shows both and being used. Is there any semantic or usage difference between the two words? | is a shortened version of , which in turn comes from [[]{}.](
Both and can be used as interjections meaning "farewell" or "goodbye". However, can also be used as a noun meaning "parting" or "coming to an end".
Here's how I'd describe the uses of :
1. can express literal or metaphorical parting.
* []{} literally "saying goodbye to youth"
2. can be placed directly before another noun. This expresses parting, or expresses that something is ending:
* A farewell party
* []{} A farewell performance
3. In particular, can be used to express the end of a baseball game:
* A walk-off home run
* A baseball game in the bottom of the ninth
Sometimes 1 and 2 can be expressed with , but it's less common. Note that it's always in baseball and in .
Keep in mind that is the older and more "proper" form of the word, and may not always be appropriate. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 17,
"question_score": 16,
"tags": "word choice, words"
} |
Need help translating 「俺が威嚇射撃する ゴーを出したら 突入だ」
I will fire a warning shot, when GO begins (must) rush in.
_My shot at figuring out a translation above._
I figure it's something like, I will fire the warning shot, then say go, then we proceed, which is what happens next in the show. Just now seeing how it all connects grammatically.
Edit:
is spoken right before they go in by another officer. From that it's clear that:
After the commanding officer fires some warning shots, on the signal "go", we storm in. | Trying to break this apart a bit:
* >
"I will fire a warning shot."
* >
>
"when (I) give the signal to go" (note the `` which points to an implicit subject, here which I think is almost certainly "I". Also note the second definition at Daijirin for ``: `` or "a signal of 'advance!'")
* >
>
"it's storming in" (where `` is a noun), which I don't think you can directly translate into English but I think has the meaning of "we'll storm in" in this context.
I don't think that `` could work, as that'd be "the go (signal) that warning shots", so I think there is an implied `` where the space is, as is fairly common in manga and in many subtitles etc (see also Why do TV subtitles use spaces (instead of commas)? for an example of how punctuation can be omitted). So putting it all together:
>
> "I'll fire a warning shot. When I give the signal to go, we'll storm in" | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "colloquial language"
} |
How to say "running total"?
I've looked around but haven't found a decent way to write "running total" like in the following table.
A Running Total
1 1
2 3
1 4
5 9
3 12 | I think you can try using:
* - cumulative sum
* - interim result (in your case a sum) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "word choice"
} |
Slang: What does テラス mean?
What does means in the context of declining an invitation, like below?
>
I guess it is slang?
I am familiar with but it seems different in both spelling and context.
More context: Public comment sent on a night-time birthday event page on a social network. is not her nickname. | So far the only viable explanation I can think of is that is a contracted form of .
* [[]{} entry for ]( defines it as: `3. `
* 3rd sense: Contraction of "terawarosu"
* a 2ch.net post says:``
* "Law-terrace" (and no, it's not "terawarosu" lol)
* a blog post writes: `2`
* "Hari Tea-time Resort Station (to 2ch addicts: it's not "terawarosu")"
As to why you'd want to "roll on the floor laughing" in the context of declining an invitation, I don't have a definitive answer, but maybe one of these:
* She's laughing at the unexpected coincidence of the event and her work.
* She's laughing at herself for having to work when everyone else is able to attend the event. Perhaps the time of the event is normally considered overtime?
* She's softening the request to hold another event for her by adding a laugh. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "meaning, slang"
} |
Noun followed by 「っぱだ」
I'm currently reading a Japanese children's book, and a character says I'm assuming the is like saying or , but I don't actually know. Any help is appreciated! | {} is a word. It means leaf! | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 10,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
How is ものがある used?
So I came across this sentence:
> ****
My take on it is: `There is a thing that will meet you.` I know that's wrong. So how is used?
ADDED: Is there a difference between and | Is it from this song by ALI Project?
If so, the Kanji is "person", not which means "thing", as Oldergod said in a comment:
> ...
> ...there is someone who will greet you. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "set phrases"
} |
Is 千{せん} a "current" number construct?
The reason why I ask this question is because of the pattern I've seen with Japanese numbers. Once you have to repeat a number to describe itself, you get a new unit. For example, = , = , = . So it seems that is a number that had some Western influence in its creation. Implying that it was a number that created in more recent times (ie. the last 200 to 300 years). Am I in the right direction with this pattern I'm seeing? Or is this just coincidence? | The Japanese number system (which I believe is derived from the Chinese one) is pretty similar to the western one (just to call it something), except it breaks at every 4 digits instead of every 3 digits.
Japanese:
> 0-9999 0-9999 0-9999 0-9999
English:
> 0-999 billion 0-999 million 0-999 thousand 0-999
(assuming you're from a part of the English speaking world which doesn't use milliards or "thousand million"s).
The confusing thing about the Japanese system, though, is that when written with digits, it still puts commas at every third digit. This is most likely from western influence.
Slightly off topic, but...
Your idea is interesting, since it would be theoretically possible to have a number system where digits break in a "binary" fashion:
0-99999999 0-9999 0-99 0-9 0-9
I don't know if any language breaks digits in this way, though. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "etymology, numbers"
} |
inter- and intra- prefix
What would one use for the equivalent of the "inter-" and "intra-" prefixes in English?
e.g. intercity, intracity, inter-server etc
I did a fair amount of looking around. looks like it might be usable for some of the inter- words and for a fare few of the intra- (intramural soccer = orbut I was hoping there would be something more consistent. | You can translate inter- and intra- to and respectively.
(Note that they become suffixes rather than prefixes in Japanese.)
References:
* I read dainichi's comments above;
* I found this answer on ye olde Bag o' Wisdom;
* I looked for patterns in the inter- and intra- words in my Kenkyusha J-E dictionary; and
* I briefly checked Google to see if the patterns seemed correct. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "words, english to japanese, prefixes"
} |
Can desire be expressed for entities that do not hold volition?
We can personify things. By using "want" with an inanimate object, it is personified:
> An object with inertia **wants** to maintain its state of motion.
**(Question)** First, is it possible in Japanese for this kind of desiderative sentence to be formed?
If it is possible, do I use `` or ``? Because according to Derek Schaab's answer to "When to use instead of ":
> * you cannot presume to know the intimate details of a third person's mental state
>
> * and even if you're 100% certain he wants, you can't say this directly.
>
>
Will an entity that does not hold volition take `` when personified? | You can definitely personify objects in Japanese.
>
is not _wrong_ per se, but firstly, it's obvious to the listener that a personification is going on, and secondly, the colloquial feeling that the personification creates might not go well with the scientific feel of the rest of the sentence. A more natural translation might be
>
When objects are personified in Japanese, it's probably more obvious to the listener than is the case in English, and therefore more restricted to colloquial/jocular use. But that doesn't mean it's uncommon. For example, it's quite common to use to refer to things, and somebody trying to be funny might even say .
In the company where I work, I wouldn't find it strange if somebody complained about some software causing trouble by saying
>
but the statement would be obviously jocular. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "word choice, auxiliaries, modality, personification"
} |
Etymology of それはそうと
Can anyone explain the etymology of and possibly the grammar of how it fits into a sentence, which does not seem to follow the normal rules (It should have a copula )? I think of it as equivalent to . The Apple dictionary defines it as
> by the way; incidentally; well
and for reference, it also gives the example sentences:
> By the way, did you see Miss Nakano yesterday?
>
> | Incidentally, that book was Mr. Yamada's, just as we thought.
>
> Well, then, when shall we have our next meeting? | Looking at this page which references the , mean:
> ""
Which I think could be paraphrased as "leaving that at that"/"leaving that in that way" etc, and is used in reference to putting aside the previous topic of discussion for the present and shifting to another.
I'm guessing, with the phrases related, that the might take on the meaning of the 2nd definition for at Daijisen, which is used for shifting from the current topic of conversation to another (I can't find a direct ref in the dictionary for that meaning of for the time being, but I think it's likely it has that meaning). | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar, etymology"
} |
How should I respond to a client after receiving materials?
A client sent some materials and I have to respond, so I want to give a quick thank you acknowledging that I have received the materials and will email again once I have reviewed them. (It's always important to get back to prospective clients quickly even if you don't have a proper response ready.)
For the "I'll review them and get back to you" part, I came up with the following possibilities, but none of them really seem right for a business situation
* (Is OK in a business situation?)
* (Just doesn't sound right somehow)
* (Probably not this one, but I thought I'd add it for good measure)
* Something else? | Note that you shouldn't be using here because you are doing the , not the other person. Never use for something that you will be doing. _However_ , you can use for , etc. when directing the action towards someone else.
For your example though, I might say:
>
> XX
>
>
Also, out of the examples you made, the second one sounds fine if you take off the :
>
Taken from here:
> ―――――(Used for actions done by other people, things that other people possess, etc.)
>
> ―――(Used for actions directed towards other people (anybody know a better translation for ?))
As doing yourself does not fullfill definitions `1` or `2`, cannot be used. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "translation, business japanese"
} |
How is 潔{いさぎよ}い related to 清{きよ}い?
How is {} related to {}?
First, I'd like to point out this question: [[]{} meaning](
Second, I've found a possible etymology for {} on gogen-allguide.
Gogen-allguide seems to say that probably comes from {} + {}, with expressing "to a great extent". Assuming I understood right, I don't quite see how this leads to the modern meaning(s) discussed in the other question.
I've also seen the word written as {}. This has me puzzled, too, because I'm not sure if it's supposed to express anything besides . (My character dictionary doesn't list any such nuance, if so.) Is this a hint to the connection between these words, or a red herring? | gogen-allguide says that for the '’ part of , there are suggested origins of () or {}{}. The exact origin appears unclear.
At any rate, it suggests that the modern meanings to do with character reflect the meaning of , not .
This blog has it as as well, and defines it as {}{}{}{}. This gives the same origin, although it's more complaining about people mistaking it as being and saying things like . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "etymology"
} |
a natural and short way to say I'm currently learning Japanese, and it isn't very good?
**background:** I'm playing Shogi on a Japanese site since there are no good english ones, and every once in a while someone tries to open a converstaion with me. While I try to participate as much as I can I'm not really sure how to say in a short manner "I'm not from Japan, I'm currently learning Japanese but it's not very good yet, sorry" or something like that.
I've been thinking about stuff like
But it just doesn't sound very well to me (I'm not even sure it's correct).
any better ideas? | Semantically, I think you can leave out "I'm currently studying Japanese" if you're saying "My Japanese isn't (yet) very good," because it's pretty much implied.
Your example sounds fine. You might also try things like:
> *
> * []{}
> | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 12,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "phrase requests"
} |
What's the proper verb for opening a web page?
What's the proper verb to use when you want to ask somebody to open (or load up) a certain link on their browser? | I think you can try:
* {}
* {}
* (follow the link)
* (click the link)
* (visit a site)
Of course don't forget to conjugate them into the required requesting/commanding forms. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "verbs, word requests"
} |
Typo or am I missing something? 「ドイツ語も勉強しないとですね。」
Context: I have been chatting with a Japanese girl who is going to move to Germany, and I asked if she had any experience with the German language and told her I had been considering learning German recently.
Her response went along the lines of, "I'm very enthusiastic about learning German..." and then...
> ****
Am I right in thinking that means...
> Wonderful, if you **aren't** learning learning German too.
Am I missing something with the grammar/context here? Surely she would rather say "Wonderful, if you're learning German too."? Could it be a typo? I am not advanced enough in the language yet to know whether something is an obvious mistake or not! | "sinai to" is short for "sinai to ikenai". She is saying that she must also study German. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 16,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
Yakiniku (焼き肉 or 焼肉)
> **Possible Duplicate:**
> Is there any difference for compounds with/without okurigana?
I was reading the wikipedia article about yakiniku. I noticed that in the title they use: (`` or ``).
The wikipedia article for says it's readings are:
* On: `` (shō)
* Kun: `` (yaku), `` (yaki)
I would like to know why someone would write it as `` instead of ``. | The easy answer is that it's six in one, half a dozen in the other.
The longer answer is that having the `` there makes it clear that you're supposed to use the kun-yomi for it. See the previous question "What's with this “On reading”/“Kun reading” thing? Is it important to learn both as a beginner?" and its answers for a good discussion on on- and kun-yomi. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "kanji, food"
} |
The meaning\reading of 急停止集団巣鴨?
**Context:** The title of This video by Megwin.
The title of the video is:
> !?
The second part is confusing me.
Too many kanji in a row for me. I understand it's probably a name, but google gave no results and I have no idea how to even try translating it or searching for it's reading. | Perhaps because it is a title, there is high degree of omission.
The full sentence could be []{}It means "flash mob appears at (a place in Japan)".
Probably worth noting is that "flash mob" is not a one-to-one translation of "", but it gets the meaning across. would mean "sudden stop" and would be "a group of people that stops suddenly". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "kanji, readings"
} |
Insertion of "y" sound between vowels
I was watching some anime today, and I heard "y" sounds in places I didn't expect.
Here's a sound clip (MP3) and my transcription:
>
There are two "y" sounds I didn't expect. I'm not sure whether they're related.
1. `` sounds like "sekai ye" rather than "sekai e".
2. `` sounds like "sekai yo" rather than "sekai (w)o".
Can anyone explain these "y" sounds to me? Are they standard? Common? | In cases 1 and 2, you have two vowels in succession: /ie/ and /io/.
Assuming that
1. Your articulatory organs cannot jump from one discrete state to another.
2. You do not generally stop/weaken your breath between words/morae (of course once in a while you have to stop to breathe in)
you will hear the mouth/tongue moving from i->e and i->o, which is what makes it sound like "ye" and "yo".
For the same reason, I would say that you can't really tell if it's or , unless you know, or you ask somebody to articulate clearly, thereby probably breaking assumption 2 above. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "pronunciation"
} |
Understanding the particle や in the phrase "今や"
(Moved from Insertion of "y" sound between vowels since it appeared to be unrelated.)
In the following quote:
> ****
What is the function of the particle `` here? I see a definition for `` in edict:
> now (esp. in contrast to the past); now at last; at present; right now
I don't understand how `` figures into this, though. I would have expected ``. Is there any way to understand the function of `` here, or should I memorize `` as a set phrase? | Goo lists this as being a , i.e. an interjectory particle used for emphasis.
That would be definition 4-2 here, where it also mentions
I don't think this is really productive anymore, so I would memorize as a word/an expression by itself. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "set phrases"
} |
What is an expression that means "of course!" as if suddenly realizing something?
I know that is often used to mean something like "of course (you may)" or even "naturally, ..." However, what would an equivalent expression be for "of course!", used as an interjection as a result of sudden realization or comprehension? For some reason, doesn't seem right, and I don't believe I've ever heard or seen it used in this context. | I think the following come closest
* when you realize something you didn't anticipate (or at least you pretend not to have anticipated, e.g. when you are being polite):
> ()
> Of course! I never noticed!
* when you had confirmed something you _did_ anticipate:
>
> Of course! I knew it! | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "interjections, word requests"
} |
Possible ways to express remembrance and recall
How is it possible in Japanese language to express concepts of _recall_ and _remembrance_?
I mean, _recall_ is generally referred to the way we take out something from our memory which is related to people, situations and experiences of our life.
On the other hand, _remembrance_ is the way we successfully recall not an experience, but something we learnt, something we were taught about. | @Andry covered the differences pretty well. But two other words you can use for "recall" are `` and ``. AFAIK they all mean pretty much the same thing, although I'm not aware of any nuances they might carry. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "nuances, verbs"
} |
What is the difference between 家屋, 家 and 住居
I've found yet another word that's translated as 'home' which now makes it 3. Could you please tell me if these words have the same exact meaning or is there any difference between their usage? | and can mean the same thing. However, more often than not implies your own home, while does not have this implication. Also, has as special meaning when talking about local real estate tax []{}), were it probably is most often used. In this situation it pretty much means _any_ building with a roof on it, including factories or warehouses, etc.
can be thought of differently than or , as it does not necessarily refer to a house, it can be thought of as "the place where one lives". For example, many people live in apartments, etc. and this also can be consider one's .
Note there are many other similar words, etc. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "nuances, meaning, word choice"
} |
"Don't say it, if you don't want to" in Japanese
Don't say it, if you don't want to.
You don't have to say it, if you don't want to.
How do I convey these in Japanese correctly?
My idea is
But I am really confused by verb conjugation here.
Don't say it = iwanai? ienai?
Don't want to say = ienai? But then it would mean 'I can't say'....
Could you please help in both translation and explanation for these two conjugation forms. | >
> _lit._ If you don't want to say it, you don't have to say it.
Some comments:
* The "don't have to"-form is ~+, i.e. you have to form the ~ form of the i-adjective , which is the correct negative for the verb (and not ).
* The English leaves out the verb the second time, which can't be done in Japanese.
* is just one option for "if" (which I think fits best). Other ways to say it would be
> …
> …
* means indeed "can't say" Your (slightly corrected) sentence means
>
> Things you can't say, you don't have to say. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "conjugations"
} |
Is しまった an appropriate translation for "Oops"?
In the course of localising an app for the Japanese language I have been tasked with translating the Google-style error string "Oops", which will presumably be used as in
> **Oops**
> Please check your password and try again
Presuming we want to preserve this conversational interface style (such is the brief), would `` be an appropriate translation?
Given that this app will be used by children, I would like to know if this is considered acceptable language or not. If not, are there some good "family-friendly" alternatives? | I agree with Dave's answer and don't feel quite fits here, because the computer/device gives out the error.
There are
* Billy's , which I feel can be used by bystanders, who empathize with the person who made the error.
* , which is usually used by bystanders. I don't know why, but I feel that is used by people, who wouldn't have made the same mistake, but are empathizing with the person who did make the mistake. feels stronger than . (You usually say ``.)
* ( _or_ ) which is the counterpart to Tim's and is the sound associated to giving an incorrect answer. I would use for your application, since giving an incorrect password is just inconsequential and comes pretty close to giving an incorrect answer.
Or you could use all three in the order
*
*
*
for people who enter their password incorrectly for up to three times, which is quite cool, coming to think of it. (But then, I am obviously no computer programmer...) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 10,
"tags": "words"
} |
Why does 皮肉 mean "irony"?
I gather that can literally mean "skin-meat." I also see that one definition for is "mask (hiding one's true nature); seeming." So perhaps can be understood as "hiding the real meat," which can be related to irony. What is the real answer? | snailplane's link says, it comes from "skin meat bones marrow" attributed to the Bodhidharma of Chinese Zen Buddhism. Bones and marrow came to take on the meaning of essential, skin and meat became synonymous with superficial. From there, was also used as a word for criticizing faults/defects (which stems from not recognizing the true nature of sth.), which seems to be its primary current usage, e.g. the JDIC dictionary entry for the derived []{} says:
>
> to speak cynically or with sarcasm
Although is sometimes best translated to irony, as in the fixed expression , e.g.
>
> I quit my part-time job, but ironically was busy with other work all year.
I think works best for cynicism/sarcasm or dark/pessimistic irony, rather than the lighthearted variety of irony. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 25,
"question_score": 25,
"tags": "meaning, words, etymology, nouns, religion"
} |
「七つの海商社」"7 Seas Trading Co." as formal name for a company
wanted to ask a question re:company names in .
Wouldwork as a name for a company? Or does this combo of kana+kanji not work in formal business names?
Greatly appreciate any help. Thank you. | This wiki page gives same law regulations about how to name a company. To give a simple summarize: a company is free to name its company. However, the name of an entity which is not a company cannot make its name look like a company; the name a company must include one of "", "", "", "" to the kind of the company. Currently, Kanji, Kana, Roman letter, number, "&", " " (space), "", etc. can be used in company name.
So, for , if it is a company, I think it is lacks the part showing its kind("", "", "", "").
As to part, I think it is ok to name a company, thought it may be hard to guess what the company does.
As a matter of fact, there is a company called . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "kanji, kana"
} |
The meanings of 写真{しゃしん}
I'm currently studying Japanese vocabulary following the JLPT programs. I'm doing the JLPT 5 and I've come across the word .
According to my dictionary, the meanings are:
> 1. Photograph, photo.
> 2. Movie
>
A friend of mine, Japanese native speaker, has expressed some doubts about whether nowadays people actually use to mean _movie_. Note, I'm aware of the word {}, but I wasn't that surprised of seeing an alternative word: as we say _film, movie_ , we can have , , etc., but as I'm not a native speaker, I can't say for sure what's the actual answer.
Is perhaps the _movie_ term there to refer to the "photo films"? Just a bold guess, actually. But what is it then? References on the matter would be much appreciated. | In the sense of a movie, is an abbreviation for "motion picture". Post c. 1935, the term has all but dropped out of usage and been replaced by . In nearly all modern usage of the word, just means picture. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "meaning"
} |
What does the ぬ in 詰まぬ mean?
I encountered a Shogi saying:
>
And I'm pretty confused about the there. If it was I'd expect the meaning to be something like:
"If you have 3 knights, you can't be mated"
But looking at it's explanation here and here it looks like they are talking about mating (attacking) and not getting mated (defending).
Well, while typing this I suddenly realized I can just search google for instead of , so I'll guess I'll be answering my own question as I was encouraged to do on other StackExchange sites. | The is a classical form of . While it's not often used you will probably still encounter it in some situations (proverbs are a great example).
In this situtation = meaning "not being mated" so a translation for the proverb may be:
> With 3 knights, there's always a mate (no such thing as being unmatable?) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "conjugations, classical japanese, auxiliary ず"
} |
Why does 今度【こんど】 mean "next time"?
The word , though its literal meaning is "this time" is in my experience used pretty heavily to refer to tbe _next_ time or some unspecified point in the future. For example:
>
> Let's go together next time!
This has confused me since I was just beginning to learn Japanese, and I messed it up again not too long ago, after years of study. Maybe some reasons will help keep this straight in my head.
Why is so often used to mean "next time" or "sometime" rather than "this time"? | The reason is because that is generally the _closest_ translation that you can get in English most of the time.
Let's look at some examples:
> (My new job is harder than my old one)
In English, when we think of "next time", we think of something that hasn't happened yet, something that is in the **future**. However, as shown in the example above, "the new job" is something that already has started. So, when we think about , it is possible to think about something that has already happened.
>
Notice that the above is something that has already happened (past tense).
So from the above we can gather that can talk about something that happened recently in future or the past. The idea is refers to something that happens multiple times and you want to refer to the time that just happened recently or will happen in the immediate future.
> A
Another use of is to mean the same thing as or as a fixed expression when doing , etc. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 17,
"question_score": 36,
"tags": "words, meaning"
} |
How is アェ pronounced?
A video game I've been playing has the following word in it:
>
I'm not familiar with ``. Does it represent a specific sound? If so, what sound?
If it makes sense to do so, please include ```` `` in your answer. | “” is not a valid spelling of any sound in the standard usage of kana letters. If it is used to describe any sound (in a nonstandard way), I agree with AHelps that it probably describes “æ” sound.
However, according to web search, is a password which appears in a video game “ SaGa3.” As it is a video game, the password used in it does not have to be actually pronounceable. It is (the name of the company who made the game) spelled backward. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 17,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "pronunciation, katakana"
} |
Uses of the 「-て」 conjugation of verbs
I am trying to understand something from the N4 and N5 practice test book. I think the sentence has revealed a gap in my understanding of the use of - verb conjugation.
The complete sentence is:
>
(where the bracketed part was to be filled, and I have inserted the correct answer).
Word for word, I would translate this as:
* - Yesterday
* - Home
* - Returning (or something similar)
* - What
* - Doing
But I am having trouble understanding the meaning as a whole; I think this is down the use of the - verb. Some ideas for a rough translation are:
> Yesterday, I/you returned home by what method?
>
> Yesterday, I/you returned home and did what?
>
> Yesterday, what happened when returning home?
None of these really seem likely. What am I missing here? | The ~ form can be used to chain sentences together. That is, any two sentences can be made into one by changing the verb of the first sentence into its ~ form. The result can be translated with the conjunction `and` and means that the first sentence happens and then the second.
In your case
>
> Yesterday you went home. What did you do?
becomes
>
> Yesterday you went home and what did you do? _or better_
> What did you do after going home yesterday? | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "jlpt, て form"
} |
Kana to kanji mapping for a rōmaji keyboard
I've been tasked with implementing a rōmaji keyboard in a medical device. As I understand the problem, the user is to be permitted to enter katakana, hiragana, and/or kanji via the rōmaji keyboard. I have resources covering the mapping of rōmaji to katakana/hiragana symbols; however, I'm having difficulty locating resources to guide mapping of the resultant katakana to kanji symbols. Can anyone recommend a resource that would assist in mapping the katakana to kanji? | Mostly it's just obtaining a list of kana -> kanji conversions that will solve your problem. You can find that in any freely-available dictionary database, such as EDICT. Creating your own is going to be difficult on the same order of magnitude as writing a dictionary.
However, what really determines the quality of an input method editor (IME) for Japanese is how well-sorted the results are, e.g. when I type , the first result should be relevant to the other things I'm typing. There is, unfortunately, not an easy solution to this problem, and mostly I imagine it will require a lot of resources (time or effort) to reach a satisfying solution. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "kanji, katakana, hiragana"
} |
Simple Particle Question (よびます）
I am a little confused as to what is going on here:
Why is this not (recipient of the invite) (place of the invite) ? It would be helpful if someone can please explain, thank you. | Let's insert a subject.
Who is doing the Yobu? I am. Who is the target of my Yobu-ing? My friend. Where am I Yobu-ing him to? A party.
marks the object, marks (in this case) the target location, directionally.
is the place in the invite, statically, as opposed to directionally-- You might say , "We had fun _at_ the party." You wouldn't say, "We had fun _to_ the party" in this case. But since you're calling him _to_ the party, we use . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "particles"
} |
Etymology of ごちそうさまでした
> **Possible Duplicate:**
> [About []{}: two “runs” would give you “a feast”?](
gochisousamadeshita ·
expression: That was a delicious meal (said after meals); What a wonderful meal
(lit. You were a Feast (preparer))
Is the literal translation here accurate, and is there a longer phrase that preceded this contemporary one? | The says, the term "feast" has its origin in the fact that in order to prepare a feast, the host would have to dispatch horses in order to get all the ingredients.
As for the literal translation, I would say that is not a suffix for a person (like , etc.), but closer to the meaning of . (Same for , , .) So that the phrase translates, also literally, to
>
> It was a feast.
The phrase dates back only to the latter half of the Edo period. Before that, the phrase was used in the sense of "Sorry for the inconvenience/Thank you for your troubles". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "etymology, expressions"
} |
Can 猿 technically mean "ape"?
It has long been a pet peeve of mine when people talk about apes calling them "monkeys".
Recently I've seen bonobos being called in an anime, so from that it's pretty clear that also refers to apes informally in Japanese. So I've been wondering:
Does also mean ape in technical/scientific Japanese speech?
From what I was able to gather from Wikipedia and dictionaries, apes (Hominoidea) are and great apes (Hominidae, which is what a bonobo is) are called .
But that does not clarify whether can be used technically to refer to them, or even if is accepted nomenclature in scientific/technical speech at all. | Some notes from wikipedia on with my translations:
> monkeyold world monkeynew world monkey
The English term 'monkey', and corresponding terms in some other languages, is a general term referring to the old world monkeys and new world monkeys.
> monkey
That is, lemurs, tarsiers, and apes which are covered by '' are not considered 'monkeys'. (The exact classification of the tarsiers is not settled but regardless of that they are not included under the term 'monkey').
> ()
Thus, even in Japanese, particularly in translated works, these animals (particularly humans' nearest relation, the chimpanzee) may not be included under the term .
I would add that the use of katakana, rather than kanji, for and other animal names is usual in technical writing. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "meaning"
} |
What is the difference between mannenhitsu and pen?
I was studying on another website and ran across a blurb that said that a pen is also called `mannenhitsu` in Japan. Is there a difference between the two? If not, is mannenhitsu said sometimes, just as often, or more often as `pen` in Japanese? | specifically refers to fountain pens, whereas is more generic and can also refer to other types of pens, such as ballpoint pens. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "word choice"
} |
What does イケメン mean?
I am in a Japanese 101 class. We are supposed to translate the following sentence:
> ****
I am having trouble with that word ``. So far, I have:
> The Japanese culture professor is ______ but he/she is not lenient at all so I don't like him/her very much
I am pretty sure we haven't had `` in class. Also, "ikemen" doesn't sound like an English borrowed word (at least to me).
Google translates it as "Twink" and I have found some places that say "handsome", "cool", etc. But I don't know what to trust. Can anyone explain to me the meaning(s) of the word? | is a new word which means "Good looking male person".
comes from which roughly translates to "cool", "good" etc. is a word play, and has two meanings; as in "men" i.e. the English word for men, and as in i.e. the Japanese word for "face".
It is used exclusively to refer to the physical attractiveness of males. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 31,
"question_score": 14,
"tags": "translation, meaning"
} |
What is the nuance and feeling of the expression 愛の営みをする?
If //itonami is a noun meaning: work; life,
then is a literary way of saying "to make love" ?
What feel does this expression have? Does it sound perfunctory or passionate?
to make love to
to make passionate love to | I would say that is indeed literary speech. The feel is similar to "to make love", which is certainly the best translation. I understand it to be neither particularly passionate, nor perfunctory, but factual. The phrase can be changed in the following way, making it more and more suited for conversation:
* (practically not used in conversation)
*
* []{}
* (sometimes used in conversation)
The top of the list would be more likely to come up in a conversation with your grandma, who wants to understand the chances of her seeing her great-grandchildren. The bottom might come up in a conversation with your boss, seeing that you have been acting discouraged for a while and enquiring how things are going between you and your wife.
In conversation amongst younger people, "to sleep (with)" or "to do it" are more common, just like in English, I would say. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "expressions"
} |
Questions on the word シクシク
I understand that the word is /giseigo/onomatopoeia equivalent to the English "boo-hoo/boo-hoo-hoo."
>
> : To whimper in fear
>
>
> : She wailed in misery when her boyfriend dumped her.
However, I also see it as a qualifier for pain, but I can't tell what kind of pain it describes. Is it a pain so "gripping" as to make one sob, or is it a "dull" pain (which implies something more to be inconvenienced or annoyed by)?
>
> : It is a dull pain.
>
>
> : have a gripping pain in one's stomach | implies continuing, moderate level of crying/pain. I don't know if their etymology is related but also means that a moderate (not too hard, but not soft either) level of rain continuously falls. Maybe this sound pattern is associated with moderate, continuing things in Japanese. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "words, onomatopoeia"
} |
Why do Japanese people read Classical Japanese with a set of weird sound shifts?
I'm learning a bit of Classical Japanese recently, and of course the spelling of words is pretty different, due to sound changes over the centuries. For example, was spelled . That I can understand, since no language has static sounds.
I then went to YouTube and listened to a Japanese guy explain Classical Japanese. In the first lesson what he did was explain "historical kana orthography" and gave a whole bunch of ridiculous pronunciation rules. Yes, I understand that was how Japanese pronunciation changed over the centuries, but why should we emulate the sound shifts into Modern Japanese when we are reading Classical Japanese? What bad is there in reading as "i ro fa ni fo fe to, ti ri nu ru wo" as it used to be pronounced? | As you pointed out, there is no single correct pronunciation of Classical Japanese. It would be more accurate to teach different pronunciations used in different periods, but it would be probably too complicated to teach at schools. The pronunciation of Classical Japanese taught at high schools is the newest one used in Meiji period and later. (I do not know if the same is true for the YouTube courses which you watched.)
I do not know why this choice was made at schools. My guess would be that it is more likely to encounter recent text in Classical Japanese than very old text in Classical Japanese.
It is not only the pronunciation that varies over time. The grammar of Classical Japanese is not static. I believe that the grammar taught at schools also follows the newest part of Classical Japanese, but I would like someone who knows better to give a more complete picture of the situation. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "orthography, kana, hiragana, classical japanese"
} |
Subsets and Splits
No saved queries yet
Save your SQL queries to embed, download, and access them later. Queries will appear here once saved.