INSTRUCTION
stringlengths 11
999
| RESPONSE
stringlengths 0
999
| SOURCE
stringlengths 16
38
| METADATA
dict |
|---|---|---|---|
What is the background of the phrase 背中で教える, and where does the meaning "to teach with one's back" come from?
I came across this phrase today while doing a lookup on .
>
I checked several sources, and all listed the meaning, amongst others, "to teach with one's back". It seems related to learning by example, such as when growing up how you learn from your parents or older siblings. Things related to manners, morals and in general "how to get along in the world".
But as far as I searched, I could not find good example sentences using this phrase. I found some examples here
<
but these seem to be general teaching references in a historical setting.
So I am wondering if this phrase has a historical background, and also where the "back" reference came from. Learning while watching someone from behind? | To understand what this expression means, picture a father and a son. The father is a craftsman, who spends most of his time awake at work. He's not very eloquent, and while he cares about the son, he won't really say much. The son goes through the usual juvenile process, struggling with the meaning of his life, not ready to accept the simple life of his father. Eventually the father dies, and the son becomes a grown man. He'd then say to refer to his father not really telling him how to live but showing him how.
means teaching without words. Because teaching by explaining requires one to face the other, this expression uses to emphasize the lack of words. As you wrote, this almost always refers to such teachings as morals and way of life, and not for specific techniques or knowledge.
As far as I know, this is just one of many , and it does not have anything that suggests a historical background. None of the examples you cited in weblio.jp actually use this expression. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "usage, set phrases, culture"
} |
Etymology of 赤字/黒字
and seem to correspond directly to the English expressions 'red ink' and 'black ink', meaning a (financial) deficit/loss and surplus, respectively. If Wiktionary is to be trusted, Mandarin, Cantonese and Korean use in the same way. Furthermore, French has the expression _être dans le rouge_ ('to be in the red').
Etymonline lists the first recorded instance of 'red ink' in English as being from 1929, and asserts that and spread in Japanese during the (1912-1926) to the start of (1926-1989).
How did and come to be used in Japanese? Are the terms borrowed from a European language (or vice versa), or did the practice of using red ink for losses and black ink for profits arise independently? | Over the years, I've found Shogakukan's (KDJ) to be a good resource for etymologies and term dating. Their entry here at Kotobank lists a first citation in Japanese to 1929, roughly in line with the appearance of the term _"in the red"_ in English, dated to 1926 in this Wiktionary entry.
The Japanese Wikipedia article on lists a slightly later appearance in 1931, close enough to the KDJ for rough purposes. This article notes that the Japanese term may have arisen as follows (my explanatory addition [in square brackets]):
>
> The Japanese terms "red figures" and "black figures" may be derived directly from this Western bookkeeping [writing income and gains in black, and expenditures and losses in red], or they may be borrowings from the aforementioned Western languages. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "etymology"
} |
How did 冷やかし come to mean "window-shopping"?
I'm curious how `` came to mean things such as `` and ``.
Here's what I can figure out:
* `hiya` seems to be a root meaning "cold" (like in `hiya-ya-ka`)
* `hiya-k-u` is an old verb based on this root ("to become cold")
* `hiya-k-as-u` is the same verb plus a causative affix ("to make cold")
* `hiya-k-as-i` is a noun derived from the of this verb
So it seems that "to make cold" is the literal meaning of the verb, and it can still be written with the kanji ``. However, it doesn't appear that the noun `` retains this literal meaning--at least, I don't see it anywhere in :
> ** 0 **
>
> * * *
>
> 1.
>
> **―**
>
> 2. ()
>
> **―**
>
> 3.
>
>
I suppose these three senses are probably related to the literal meaning, but I can't see the connection. How did the meaning go from "make cold" to "window shopping"? | According to , comes from the verb , which in addition to the obvious ‘to cool’ has these meanings:
> (2)
>
> (3)
>
> (4)
Obviously, sense (3) is the one that the ‘window-shopping’ meaning of is derived from, and I suppose sense (2) is a special case of sense (3). On the topic of etymology, the dictionary says:
> (2)
Apparently, sense (2) comes from stories of the paper-makers in Asakusa “window-shopping” in Shin-Yoshiwara while the water for their paper-making cooled. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "etymology"
} |
What does 撥の音も加えた gliss. mean? (in sheet music)
I am a musician playing the Marimba. Because quite a bit of music for marimba is written by famous Japanese composers, occasionally I come across some Japanese text I would like to understand.
In the piece "Two methods of Movement for Marimba", written by Toshimitsu TANAKA, there is, on the 6th page, a Glissando (moving with the sticks along all bars) with a star. At the bottom of the page, the star is printed again, this time with a note in Japanese.
> _gliss._
I would be very grateful if someone could unveil the meaning of that sentence. | It reads: "[]{}[]{}[]{} _gliss_ ". This literally means: "The sound of drumsticks"-too "added to"-gliss, and in translation:
`Glissando complemented by the sound of drumsticks.`
It seems a bit rendundant, knowing that a Marimba would only allow for discrete glissando. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, music"
} |
しゅみについて meaning
My Japanese lesson has an oral exam, the title is . Can anyone explain what is the meaning of the title? Can I start the conversation with this? | The title sounds like the exam is "about your hobbies".
It might be a good idea to begin by talking about your hobbies... or, perhaps, by asking your conversation partner about their hobbies.
I would not recommend using "", though. You might want to start out by using something simple like: | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
Konnichiwa and Konbanwa
What is the difference between `Konnichiwa` and `Konbanwa`? Is it appropriate to use either one in everyday conversations? | They are both common greetings. The "ban" in "konbanwa" means "evening". The "nichi" in "konnichiwa" means "day".
We use "ohayou gozaimasu" before about 10:30 am, "konnichiwa" after about 10:30 am, and "konbanwa" in the evening. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 19,
"question_score": 13,
"tags": "word choice"
} |
What is the わ in 忌まわしい and 嘆かわしい?
On chat, Chocolate helped me find some examples of adjectives produced from verbs using the `` suffix. In the following examples, it appears to attach directly to the :
> →
> →
> →
> →
> →
> →
> →
> →
> →
But in these last two examples, there seems to be an extra `` inserted:
> →
> →
I can't seem to find a dictionary entry for `` or ``. What is this ``? | The `` in these words is actually the of the , which historically attached to the of other verbs. In this case, the combination of `` and `` formed the verb ``, and the combination of `` with `` produced ``. It is these words that combined with the `` suffix:
> → +
> → +
In modern Japanese, the `` becomes ``, and the classical `` is replaced with the ``, which loses its /k/ and becomes ``:
> + → +
> + → +
So as you can see, these words aren't really exceptions. Your list includes `` and ``, and that word can be explained in the same way. And in all of these examples, the suffix `` is attaching directly the of a verb.
By the way, there's some interesting discussion in English of the auxiliary `` in this blog post on tumblr. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 13,
"question_score": 10,
"tags": "etymology, morphology"
} |
Talking about what other people think
As far as I know when we talking about other people thoughts in japanese we have to use something like etc. But I've got a problem in the following sentence, I cannot understand here about , though I'm not sure if it's correct, or about ?
>
> ****
Thank you very much for help! | The second sentence means
> (=The workbook that prepared for me)()() **__**
>
( chose the workbook for me, thinking "".)
The refers to . The subject for and is the writer(), and the subject for () is . The () could be rephrased as / . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, translation"
} |
Japanese word for Operation, in the sense of a project or task - slang
What would be the Japanese equivalent of the word **operation** , in the sense of a project or task?
Some examples would be:
* Operation Infiltrate-the-Castle
* Operation Human Shield (from South Park)
* Operation _random cool name_
In English this usage obviously comes from a military background, but what is the corresponding Japanese term? **And more importantly, would you use this in the same tongue-in-cheek manner as in English, to glorify some task or project and make it sound exciting?** | It is easiest to give a familiar example
> Operation Desert Shield
ie place the name of the operation in front of
I think you could get away with using katakana words for foreign activties. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, slang"
} |
Why does どれだけ seem to mean the opposite of どれ + だけ?
The other day I read the word `` which means `how long; how much; to what extent`. I've read several example sentences, and I that's all well and good, but I cannot shake the feeling that it's really counter-intuitive to me.
If means `which; whichever; any` and `` means `only; just`, I would guess combining them would give some sort of exclusive amount, for example in "Only this many people may enter" or something along those lines.
I may be reading too much into this (or it's gone way over my head), but it still seems strange to me. Are there other question words that have in them? I did a cursory trail-and-error search, and couldn't find any. | The quick answer: rather than interpreting this as "only", this is ("length"). Normally read as take, voices during compounding.
Before someone calls me out on it, the more precise answer: both are the same word. The word dake "only" is written as and derives from (take). The translation "only" is not always appropriate as is clear in this case.
> Are there other question words that have in them?
Yes. At least the following: \- \- \- \-
As the above dictionary link mentions, remenants of take can be found in words and . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "words, questions"
} |
Etymology of もん・もの
How do I make sense of the as in
>
>
Although I have only heard it in speak, I guess it comes from , which I think should be + .
But what can follow the and what can follow that . Is the same that roughly means "also"? Is the nominalizer here?
P.S. I am not asking what it means, when it is used, etc. I want to know how to make sense of it grammatically. At the moment, it has also been suggested that derived from , but it seems to follow different rules than what one would expect of a particle derived from a noun. | If I ignore semantics and discuss syntax only, I think that it went like this:
1. was originally , a lexical noun (), which could be modified by a relative clause ending in .
2. It was then grammaticalized into a formal noun (), losing its literal meaning but still appearing in the same syntactic position, after a relative clause ending in .
3. After the morphophonological merger of and , it was possible to reanalyze as because the two looked and sounded the same. This in turn made it possible to reanalyze as a .
4. Once it was possible for to be treated as a , it became possible for it to appear after .
So now (or its contracted form ) can appear as a or a . And of course the original word is still around. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "particles, etymology, sentence final particles, spoken language"
} |
Difference between 学生・生徒・児童
As the title says^^ I think is for elementary school, what about the other two? | Students are for most of their educational life:
> kindergarten ()
> elementary school ()
> middle school ()
> high school ()
> university ()
> graduate school (), ()
I would always pass myself off as (member of the doctorate course). I was never corrected on this.
The other two act as group descriptors, rather than something a student would refer itself as:
> "children", up to including elemenatry school
> "a member of the body of students", middle school and up
According to Japanese animated television series, Japanese spend what is called their life in school and then transform into a rigid plant-like lifeform. Hence there are a lot of other terms describing that growth phase, such as:
* []{} (novice of some craftsman)
* []{} (enrolled high school student)
* []{} (enrolled student)
* []{} (scholarly student)
* []{} (student learning under and working for a teacher) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "word choice, words"
} |
Is 暖かった standard Japanese?
I know Google hits aren't necessarily reliable, but I nonetheless searched for the following two forms:
* \- 2,770,000
* \- 2,810,000
The numbers are much further apart if I search for the - form:
* \- 41,900,000
* \- 97,500
As I understand it, is considered prescriptively incorrect because it looks like the past form of the non-existent adjective ×. However, if this form has really become more common than , then I suppose it's an acceptable form. Unfortunately, I can't base that conclusion on Google hits alone, so I decided to ask here. My guess is that it's easier to say than , so one of the s gets dropped.
If you _can_ drop the , I'm curious whether you can contract to at the same time, as in option four below:
1. \- 122,000
2. \- 211,000
3. \- 395,000
4. \- 376,000
Are all four of these forms in common usage? Are some of them considered non-standard or colloquial? | There's no such word as / at least in standard Japanese...^^ You'd surely be corrected if you wrote in your essay or written test in primary school. You wouldn't find in children's books, too. I believe it's just a typo and doubt people (who speak Kanto or Kansai dialect at least) really use it in normal or casual conversations.
appears in the song by Gackt, but many people have pointed out that it's wrong Japanese, for example here, here and here.
It seems pretty hard for young children to pronounce /, especially the and parts, so I think they tend to pronounce it as /. I don't know if the / used online is new internet slang, and I suspect some of its writers might be imitating children's speech, trying to sound childlike or cute.
As for []{}/[]{} or []{}/[]{}, I normally use the former because I was taught to write it that way and also because I've seen it written that way more often. Maybe the latter is more used by older people...^^ | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "colloquial language, adjectives"
} |
How is の方 used in それより公安の方は?
> A: []{}
> B: []{}[]{}[]{}
> A:
> A: The money?
> B: Planned as always. Aside from that, public safety
> A: Don't worry. We're with you.
I'm not understanding what the is doing. Or what it's supposed to mean. | []{} is just a way of emphasizing "about".
> Apart from that, what about the public safety department?
Literally, it means "direction". A similar way of saying X in English would be with "on the X side of things", i.e.
> Apart from that, what about the public safety department side of things?
P.S. There was a similar question where the OP confused []{} with []{}, which is grammatically viable (replace a noun with another noun), but doesn't make as much sense here. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "comparative constructions"
} |
Would 私は怖い mean "I'm scared" or "I'm scary"?
Or does it mean both? If so, is there any way to explicitly distinguish between "I'm scared" and "I'm scary"?
If it only means one and not the other, how would you say the other? | To give a few working examples:
> **** ****
> **I'm scared** of cats.
>
> ****
> Emiko seems to be fine around cats, but apparently is **scared of me**.
>
> ****
> **I'm scary** , just so you know.
That makes officially ambiguous and the answer to your question must be "both, depending on the context". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 18,
"question_score": 11,
"tags": "meaning, i adjectives, ambiguity"
} |
What is particle と means here
I'm a bit of confused with in the following sentence, what does it mean here and how can we translate the whole sentence?
>
Thank you very much for help! | This text, even with the context taken into account, does not make much sense. refers to doing something seriously with one's full might. So it doesn't fit where the homework solves itself without human interventions.
I'd say this is a mistake of ""
The previous line from the girl asks the boy to stop studying and play with her, so this line translates to something like "It'd be very convenient if it [the homework or something?] would make progress on its own just by literally leaving it alone [but it doesn't, so I have to do my homework]" | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, translation, particle と"
} |
What does "一味一禪" mean?
I have found a small Shodo fragment stating "" - which is not the classical "Zen and Tea are of one taste" ().
What is this supposed to mean? Is it correct Japanese (I suppose it is, coming from an actual Japanese, but she is not here to explain it at the moment). | Certain forms of caligraphy get closer to poetry (like ), so it could use phrases and sequences of Kanjis that you won't see anywhere else. As caligraphy is a form of art, it is more interesting to intentionally deviate a bit from common words, because it gets the reader thinking.
I'd consider to be one of those. I can only guess its meaning, but my guess would be something like "every tea making is an act of zen", or something close to . Its use of (different more traditional forms of the same kanji) not also adds another angle to the deviation.
Whether one calls it "correct" Japanese or not is red herring, in my opinion. But you probably don't want to use it in e-mail or other everyday writing. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation, kanji, yoji jukugo"
} |
adjective before adjective
As far as I know an adjective can be before noun(for ex. ) or before other adjective, but with (for ex. ). But in the following sentence - this part is a bit of odd. Of course maybe I'm just don't know something, so can you please explain this part to me?
> ****
Thank you very much for help! | I think you got the parsing wrong, sir! I think the sentence divides into the following:
> (()()())
I don't feel anything wrong with , so using multiple adjectives by itself is not a problem. I think your "something is wrong" feeling is because "looks like a reserved seat" doesn't make sense as an adjective for a boy.
(I have to say the sentence is poorly written, though. Adding ',' appropriately makes the sentence a whole lot more readable!)
> | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, adjectives"
} |
How many Kanji characters are there?
I have been searching around, but all the sources give completely different answers ranging from 2,000 to 50,000. So my question is how many Kanji characters that have ever existed since the dawn of time? Does this include unofficial characters? | An authoritative classic, the Kāngxī dictionary, lists over 47,000 characters. The Hanyu Da Zidian, a more modern reference, has over 54,000 characters; the Dai Kan-Wa Jiten, the Japanese equivalent, has over 50,000. Even more recently, the Zhōnghuá Zìhǎi has over 85,000 characters, but apparently many of those are variants.
Of course, such counting is more-or-less academic. In Japan, there are only 2,136 Jōyō kanji (lit. commonly-used kanji), which are the ones taught in school, though literate people usually know more. The equivalent list in Chinese is the Xiàndài Hànyǔ Chángyòng Zìbiǎo, which has about 3,500 characters. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 26,
"question_score": 18,
"tags": "words, kanji"
} |
Kanji pairs that mean and are pronounced the same by themselves
I have found several pairs of kanji that are pronounced the same and mean the same when they are used individually:
* and
* and
* and
This especially bugs me because, in Chinese (my native language), the latter ones are almost exclusively used when by themselves.
I had a small discussion about this but we didn't really come to any conclusion other than they are used interchangeably.
I currently have a few questions about this:
* Are they be used completely interchangeably without changing meaning (not connotation)?
* Is one used more commonly than the other? I'm assuming the former ones are.
* Do they give any "feeling" such as old, formal, mystical, etc?
Remember, this is only when the characters are used individually and not part of compound words. Also ignore their usage in expressions/idioms/proverbs.
Also, I would be interested if there are other kanji pairs like this. | I think and are restricted in usage:
* {} refers specifically to according to my . Once you chop it down, it ceases to be a . Although a standing tree can be or , a wooden object can only be made of , not .
I also think that perhaps might seem a bit more literary or grandiose. I've mostly seen it used to refer to very large (still standing) trees in fiction.
* {} refers specifically to physical eyeballs. can express that too, but it also has plenty of figurative uses that does not. For example, I believe you can write ("a terrible experience") as , but it would be strange writing it as *.
In both cases, the simpler kanji ( and ) are more general and encompass the meanings of the more specific kanji ( and ).
If you'd like to read about {} and {}, I suggest you read Tsuyoshi Ito's answer on How can I differentiate between feet and legs? . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "usage, kanji, homophonic kanji"
} |
Problem understanding some parts in a sentence －てくの and －んだろうって
The sentence is this one:
> **** ****
I think I got the rough meaning of the sentence: I () am wondering () what's () is the right thing () to wear () for her position ().
But, I'm still puzzled over the meaning of the bolded parts. |
= = = wear + go
= + casual quotation particle
After that it's pretty simple! | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
What does "ごうと音がして" mean?
I am currently practicing Japanese by reading a novel but I have reached a sentence that I could not understand. Can you please translate the vocabulary and verb used along with any unique sentence structure/grammar it may have. Thank you.
If it helps, the full context is I understand that the beginning reads "These questions are useless" and the last part reads "Fire blazed from inside the witch's hand," but I have no clue about the middle part. | is a sound, a short version of meaning "thundering". The full sentence then would be something like
>
> There was a thundering sound and fire blazed from the hands of the witch.
The indicates that is used as adverb. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "words, translation, onomatopoeia"
} |
What does 正宗で大根を切る。 言い出しっぺ。 mean?
I'm not sure if this off-topic for this site but I would like to know what " " means. I tried translating it through google but I don't think it translated it properly. I found this on a user's profile.
Thanks! | {}{}{} essentially means "Using a precious sword (a Masamune) to cut an everyday daikon." It's an example of using something very important for something mundane. For example, if someone earned a Doctor of Philosophy but the only job they ended up doing after graduation involved teaching a kindergarten class, this expression could be used.
{}{} is an expression that has to do with the idea that if a speaker initially brings up an issue in conversation (or initially puts the blame of something on someone else,) it probably means that the problem lies with the speaker. In other words, _"He who smelt it, dealt it."_ | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation"
} |
Why are こんにちは and こんばんは used for greetings?
If they are translated literally it gives "today is" and "tonight is".
Is it some sentence that got shortened ?
(Also not sure how to classify this question so forgive me if I used the wrong tags...) | They do appear to be shortenings, but perhaps not of any _particular_ wording. says they're short for sentences like the following:
* is short for sentences such as
* is short for sentences such as
In each case, marks the sentence in quotes with , implying it doesn't necessarily come from those sentences _specifically_ , but sentences _such as_ the above. The Iwanami Kokugo Jiten does the same thing; when I looked up these words, I found the following examples in quotes:
* is short for sentences such as
* is short for sentences such as
In each case, the dictionary marks the sentences with to illustrate that they're the sorts of sentences that _could_ complete or , not that those specific words are implied by the greetings. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 12,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "set phrases, history"
} |
Explain づき in the given sentence
First of all, hi everyone.
In the beginning of an anime episode I often see a message to turn on the lights in the room and not to sit too close to the screen. Leaving some stuff out it looks like this:
**** ****
Note the bolded parts. I have 2 questions.
I looked up in the dictionary, it's like "to be attached, to be included". Does make it a verb? An adverb? Or what is it? Is it a state "being attached to a TV"? Or is it an action "do not attach yourself to a TV"?
2nd question about . As I understand is "to try". So as -form + . Doesn't it make it kind of redundant to use both at the same time? Is it common?
Thanks guys. | For the first situation, is not its own word. It's part of the verb {}, which means "to get near," which has been conjugated to fit the construction, so it becomes , or "get too close."
You have a slight misunderstanding on the second one. While _does_ have the meaning of try in many situations, this is a case where it doesn't and in fact it is using the literal meaning of . Your clue to this can be the fact that the is written with kanji whereas in the "try" construction it is usually written without kanji.
So to break it down a little more, means something like "be careful that you're not too close," and connected to it's advising you not to sit too closely to the TV _when watching_. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
Pronunciation of じょ and よ
Spanish is my mother tongue and I almost can't differentiate and sounds. Maybe the same thing happens to English native speakers. How do you solve that problem in English... is there a common English word that uses the sound and another that uses the sound ? | For equivalent English sounds, you can find the Japanese sound in certain names and words:
* Joe
* Joad
* joke
You can also find the Japanese sound in certain words:
* yo-yo
* yo _(slang)_
Here is an example of a phrase in Japanese that uses **longer forms** for each of the sounds and on this website: JOUYOU KANJI
On that page is an audio recording of someone named "akitomo" speaking a phrase that includes both the and the sounds: "JOUYOU KANJI". _(In that recorded phrase, can you hear the difference between the first part "JOU" and the second part "YOU"?)_
As your native language is Spanish, you could almost think of Brazilian Portuguese pronunciation for _(at least some cases of)_ the letter "j" when it comes to pronouncing the sound, as well. Do keep in mind, however, that the Brazilian Portuguese pronunciation might be slightly different _(i.e. more of a softer "j" sound)_ than the Japanese pronunciation of . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "pronunciation"
} |
Relative clause in japanese
How do you form relative clauses that involves first person action? For example : "There aren't people I can talk to". Basically my doubt is about all those questions that require a particle like "to", "ni" and the like, when you can't use V-te ageru/kureru/morau to explicitate who's doing what to whom..Don't know if it's clear >.< | I think you might find the explanation of agency you are looking for in the introduction to the Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar (which I have not got to hand right now) but the other approach is to think of different ways of conveying what you want to say eg
"There aren't people I can talk to".
(which even in English feels like a rather clumsy construction anyway(?))
= There is nobody I can talk to/with = There is nobody who can talk to/with me
=
or perhaps even;
| stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation, relative clauses"
} |
Should there be a に instead of を after クラスメイト in「それをクラスメイトを見られて以降」?
In the following sentence is it correct to put the second here?
> ****
Maybe it should be ? And if it's correct, how can we translate this part?
Here's the paragraph where the line is taken from
> **** | I believe that you cannot put two since it marks a direct object. If I am correct, you would use this if the classmate can see something . If you use after classmate, I'm pretty sure it means that the classmate is the one being observed and most likely would be written as . But I believe that you would want to use . Sorry if I'm incorrect, I haven't gotten too far in my Japanese studies yet. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, translation, particle を"
} |
Difference between った and ってた
Can someone explain to me the difference between the following forms?
*
*
* | In English, you might be able to think of those forms like this:
`` _(I)_ thought
`` and `` _(I)_ was thinking, _(I)_ had thought, or _(I)_ had been thinking.
Do note that and are the same... but is more of a form you would want to use in formal writing. In conversational writing, however, you are often free to use either form (depending on the audience to whom the writing is being addressed.) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "word choice, verbs"
} |
How can I understand など followed by a noun phrase?
The following two sentences are from , page 116:
> ****
My question is about ``. From context, it seems like the phrase `` is modifying the following phrase, ``.
I'm a little confused, though. _A Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar_ (p.268) states that "[a] particle normally follows _nado_ ", so when I read this sentence, I was expecting some kind of particle after `` to indicate the role played by ``. Instead, `` was followed by a noun phrase! As a result, I don't know what role `` plays in the sentence.
**How can I understand`` followed by a noun phrase?**
My guesses:
1. `N1N2` = "N2 such as N1"
2. There is some sort of particle deleted after `` | Your first guess is right. N1N2 is "N2 such as N1" or "N2 (for example N1)"
When we say is followed by a particle, such as N1, it should be probably thought of as a suffix decoration to a noun, as in "N1 (and several other things like N1)" | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
What does 相手 mean in 「素直な自分をぶつけられる相手」?
I'm confused about how to describe here. I don't know if it's “partner who can show their true self” or “partner to whom can show your true self”. Also, is the here like ?
> ****
Here's a screenshot for more context. | doesn't necessarily translate to "partner". Here it's more like in []{}, "someone (to talk to)." →
The sentence can be rephrased as
> (or)
> (or)
> (I and would have gladly been the ones to whom could show her true self.)
>
The here means the same as . (The is the potential auxiliary verb, not passive or honorific.) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, translation"
} |
What does 着 mean in 「六時着」 and in 「六着」?
One of the kanji we recently learned in class was . We learned it could be used for **to wear** []{}, **to arrive** []{}, and as either a "classifier for arrival" or a "counter for jacket".
In our homework, we have the following 2:
1. []{}[]{}[]{}
2. []{}[]{}
I am not sure how the classifier and counter work. This is what I think they mean:
1. 6 o'clock arrival (like as in an appointment)
2. 6th arrival (as in the 6th person to arrive) **or** 6 jackets
Is this the correct way to use the kanji? | Yes, that is correct. I think it's usually more obvious, especially when they appear in paragraphs. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "kanji, counters"
} |
Why censor this one kanji?
I was watching an old _Saturday Night Live_ sketch from the 1970s, called _Night of the Moonies_ , making fun of the Unification Church by putting them in the context of the movie _Night of the Living Dead_.
The video I was watching happened to have Japanese subtitles. I noticed that in the subtitles, when they referred to the Unification Church, which is called `{}{}` in Japanese, they replaced `` with ``, so it looks like ``.
My understanding of the use of `` is that it is the equivalent of when in English words are blacked out, to censor them so as not to offend. But I'm a little baffled by this instance of censorship, or even if that's what it is.
!night_of_the_moonies_-_japanese_subtitles
> []{}{}{}{}
>
> {}{}
>
> "The Unification Church is my family. I don't like my parents."
Why censor the name of the church? Why block out only one of the kanji? | You are right that is used here to mask a letter.
There are several related but different reasons as to why one would do this. The comment section already refers to one such use, where certain words are deemed inappropriate (especially on broadcasting), the equivalent of f*ck. But I don't think that explains this one.
In this case, I think the intention is to poke fun at in several ways.
First, by disgracing their name, by implying that it needs masking, as in the same league of f*ck and such. It also implies that the content refers to them in a negative way, which would actually make it more attractive to certain audience (who despise them.)
And finally, because the masking in this case doesn't really mask anything, for those who do not see nagatively, this sends a signal that they should.
(Perhaps you aren't aware of the controversies surrounding , and if so, reading upon it a bit might make it easier to understand this.) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 31,
"question_score": 22,
"tags": "usage, kanji"
} |
Can a 読点{とうてん} ("comma") join two complete sentences?
Can `` join two complete sentences? In other words, can `` replace ``?
I thought it could, but in this answer, user1205935 seems to suggest that it cannot. (Rather than ask about it in a comment, I decided to make a separate question about it.)
Here are a pair of examples:
1. AB
2. AB
Is example 2 ungrammatical? | Based on a document from , it's not ungrammatical, and it's a pattern used only when the two parts of the sentence (before and after the ) have the same structure (like those in your example).
Examples:
>
>
Here is the brief explanation it gives:
> | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "punctuation"
} |
Name identification for 安田 味子, and "saying" using という
I have the following sentence I need to translate for my introductory Japanese class.
>
There are 2 parts I am having trouble with.
First, the name translation. I think it should be something like Mr/Ms Yasuda Ajiko. When I type "Yasuda" in hiragana, my computer translates it to the correct kanji. However, the "Ajiko" doesn't get the right kanji, making me think that it is not the correct translation.
The second issue is the sentence as a whole. I know the first part is "the name of my friend". And then the second part I think is "say it is Yasuda Ajiko". But these 2 parts of the sentence don't really go together into a good English sentance. "I say the name of my friend is Yasuda Ajiko"?
Any help is appreciated. | (?) is such a weird name... As @Earthliŋ has pointed out in his comment it might be read as . I'd rather expect (as a girl's name) to be spelled as , or something, though.
The (its plain form is ) means "", "to be called/named". See No.1 in .
>
>
might look redundant but actually we often use , and I don't think it's regarded ungrammatical.
>
>
>
>
All of the above sound alright to me. Compare:
> ( is the humble form of .)
> []{}("What's your name?"--casual/friendly)
> []{}[]{}[]{} /[]{}(archaic) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "words, readings, names"
} |
Question about もらう
As I learned, we can use like this , where noun before () - giver and (etc.) - reciever. But I saw sentence like
> **** and the second one - !enter image description here
Where noun before is not giver(though in second case it's , so I'm not sure), but as far as I can tell - receiver. Can somebody please explain this part to me, thank you very much for help! | In ,
([①][②][③])
① is the receiver and ② is the giver.
ie. ② does ③ for ①.
In ,
([①][②][③])
① is the receiver and ② is the giver.
ie. ② do ③ for ①.
In []{},
([①(=the writer?)][②(=topical particle)][③])
① are the receivers and ② are the givers.
ie. ② do ③ for ①.
( want to do .) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
Why use あんなに instead of こんなに when expressing one's memories?
My textbook contains the following dialog where interviews her about what he did last evening:
> ****
> ****
> ****
My previous understanding of was that
* refers to something closer to the speaker than the listener,
* refers to something closer to the listener than the speaker, and
* refers to something equally distant to both the speaker and the listener.
From this, I would think that the tastiness of the is much closer to the (he was there and had them, was not), and, therefore that he would use **** , but my textbook says (but doesn't explain why) to use when talking about one's memories of a past experience.
To put it differently, I thought that **** would be appropriate if both and her had been at the together. I interpret 's response, **** , in the same way, that the experience is closer to the because she wasn't there.
Could someone explain the point I'm missing? Thank you. | Like you say means close to the speaker, so
>
would be appropriate, when he is actually eating the food, e.g.
>
> I never thought it'd be _this_ good.
* * *
means close to the listener.
>
> It was _that_ good?
* * *
means far from both the listener and the speaker (in my opinion not necessarily equidistant).
>
> First time I had _that_ good.
At the time of speaking the tasty is far from both the speaker and the listener. Here far doesn't necessarily mean far in terms of distance, but could be far in time. Then memories are always far from both listener and speaker and is usually appropriate.
In English, too, using "this" for memories does not work. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
What's the difference between ぜひ and きっと when inviting someone to do something?
You can say for example
*
*
*
and
*
*
I would translate both and in these sentences with "by all means", but I'm sure (as always), there's a nuance in meaning when you use either. Could someone please explain this nuance? Thanks! | Comparing
>
>
expresses a hope/wish, whereas expresses an expectation. ( would express obligation.)
A teacher telling his students "" means more like "I am expecting everyone to come". Thus feels stronger (it's an expectation, after all), but may just mean that whoever is inviting really wants you to come.
Maybe it's a bit like this
>
> See you (again).
>
>
> Please (by all means) come again.
>
>
> You'll come again, won't you?
> You'll have to come again. (friendly tone)
>
>
> You are required to attend. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 14,
"question_score": 12,
"tags": "nuances, word choice, adverbs"
} |
Who are Mrs. Fuji and Mrs. Gas?
Is there any etymological relationship between the - suffix in or and the - suffix you put at the end of a person's name? Or are they unrelated? | Totally unrelated.
[mountain] is a Chinese word "shān" assimilated in Japanese.
as a honorific suffix is an old undergone some phonetical change.
There are many homophones in Japanese besides that. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "honorifics, suffixes"
} |
Can ご存じです function as a transitive verb?
I recently got an automated email from Twitter with the following subject (except with real user names):
> username username username ?
My question is about `` paired with ``. As I understand it, `` normally marks the direct object of a verb. Therefore, I expect it to be followed by a transitive verb; if there is no verb, I expect one to be implied. However, this sentence ends with a noun and copula instead, so I can't make grammatical sense of it.
I assume this phrase _is_ grammatical, as I got it in an email that was likely to be proofread, and I can find plenty of uses online on websites that I think are likely to contain standard Japanese.
So how does it work grammatically? The only explanation I can come up with is that `` is functioning as a transitive verb, like a polite/honorific form of ``. Is there a better explanation? | is an irregular honorific form of the verb . It functions exactly the same with respect to subjects, objects and so on.
More than that, there is a regular honorific form of verbs +Vi+ (Vi is a - stem). For example, from the verb . It also has an internal form noun+copula, but functions as a verb.
It seems like any predicate, be it verb, adjective, or noun+copula, can function like a verb, if there are some logical slots for subjects, objects or modifiers in its meaning, | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "grammar, particle を"
} |
What's the most appropriate negative potential form for this situation?
This morning my co-worker asked me if I wanted some coffee. I said, "No thanks, I can't drink coffee because it upsets my stomach." I was thinking of how I'd say this in Japanese, but I'm not sure which is the most appropriate way to say "can't" in this situation.
It seems like saying `` or `` would only be correct if I physically couldn't get the coffee down my throat. Since that's not the case and I'm using "can't" to really mean "I won't because of the undesirable after effects", those two seem wrong.
Is either of ``, `` more correct and/or preferrable? Or would something without potential, like `` work better?
* * *
**Update** : I knew I was forgetting an option when I wrote this topic. I left out the possibility of ``, but that sounds _really_ wrong to me. | > Is either of , more correct and/or preferable?
No.
> Or would something without potential, like work better?
Hmm... no. / might sound like you're having difficulty swallowing/drinking because you have some problem in your throat... or maybe you really hate the smell of coffee...
> Since that's not the case and I'm using "can't" to really mean "I won't because of the undesirable after effects", those two seem wrong.
Even so, I think would be the best choice.
> "No thanks, I can't drink coffee because it upsets my stomach."
I'd say …or maybe(or)/etc. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "grammar, nuances, potential form"
} |
Typing Japanese text from images or clothing
Is there a way of typing Japanese characters when you have no knowledge of the language? I've cut and pasted from Japanese websites before and used translation websites from English to Japanese with no trouble. I'm just wondering how I can search for what the text is from a t-shirt I have.
I've had this t-shirt for a while now and wear it a fair bit. I'm just wondering what I'm saying to people who can read it as I go about my business. If you can answer my above question or simply translate it for me that would be great - I understand it may mean I'll never wear it again, however!
!enter image description here | From what I can gather, this shirt appears to be made somewhere other than in Japan, as the top and bottom line of characters mean nothing intelligible _(unless you start making up your own meanings for each section of the random list of characters.)_
The middle line is closer to something that makes sense, and it almost reads: Sapporo Beer. _(But the characters are slightly out of order, and there is a random period next to one of the characters.)_
This might be a parody T-shirt... where the characters are switched just enough in order to avoid legal problems from an actual brand _(Sapporo Beer mixed with Heineken, in this case.)_ It would be interesting to know where this shirt was found... _(perhaps Thailand?)_ | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "words, translation, computing"
} |
What is the correct way to say 小さい『つ』?
This is a two part question.
1.) When spelling out a word in kana, what is the correct way to call the small (for example the small in )?
I only have experience with my Japanese friends using the informal sounding
>
or
>
Is there a formal grammatical term for this "character"?
2.) If there is, but in reality it sounds too academic, which term would be the most immediately understandable in an informal setting? | It appears that one more-formal way to describe characters like is to use the phrase {}{} or simply{} So, in the case of , it would be something like: {}.
_But in an informal context, something likewould probably get the point across._
For more information, there is a more detailed writeup by a user named "nullstrings27" that further explains {}{} in general. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "kana, spelling"
} |
How to say "for"
I will use a specific example. I was trying to write "My love for you is hurting me."
"" Is what I came up with, however, I am unsure about the usage of "" in this situation.
And if it is incorrect, what would be the correct way to say "for"? | Like user1205935 said, or or seems to be the translation. In my experience, things like "for you" get turned into statements of possession. The only other case I can think of is when thanking someone for something- you don't even use , it just turns into **** is more along the lines of for the purpose, implying some end in mind- which in this case doesn't make sense. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "words"
} |
Addressing a friend's parents when meeting them for the first time
I have met the parents of a close Japanese friend two times in my life and have never been sure how I should address them. Both times I've asked the friend beforehand but never got a satisfactory answer.
One friend said I could just call her parents ; the other friend said that her parents would find it rudely over-familiar if I were to call them that.
Both times I suggested last-name+ but both friends felt this would be weird/confusing as there would be many people with the same last-name present.
I feel first-name+ or would sound rude...
So the question is: **How should you address a friend's parents when meeting them for the first time?**
Thank you! | It is usual to call them last-name++ and last-name++ (that means, you refer to your friend by the last-name). It is widespread to call people by their function unless you got closely acquainted with them. Both referencing and addressing the same.
basically means "my mother / my father", either in direct or figurative sense. ( **Update:** At least, when used for addressing.)
last-name+ is ambiguous.
last-name+first-name+ is unambiguous, but it is worse than calling by function, because it looks like you are forgetting or neglecting that function (and being a parent to your friend is good enough to be not neglected).
first-name+ is very familiar and unceremonious, neglecting the difference in age and status. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 13,
"tags": "politeness, second person pronouns"
} |
What verb is in 覚えてみたい?
I found this YouTube comment:
(*∀)ww
I'm not sure how to parse . The context seems to make it have nothing to do with , and in any case the doesn't make a bit of sense with . Is this a typo or some word not in my dictionary? | From the given sentence, it sounds like someone is talking about how he/she is wanting to learn (or memorize) the dance moves and choreography of a song by the singer that goes by the name "Kyary Pamyu Pamyu".
In this case,is actually a form of the verbwhich can mean "to try". When is attached to a verb, it simply means: " **to try** " \+ _**verb**_. So when another form ofis attached to a verb, the meaning will still have something to do with the idea of "to try".
Here is a breakdown of where {} comes from, in this case:
> {} to learn, to memorize
>
> {} [I] will try to learn _(or memorize)_
>
> {} [I] want to try to learn _(or memorize)_ | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, words"
} |
Question about subject
I cannot understand what is the subject in the following sentences, mainly in the second one . Is it ? Something like **** ?
>
Thank you very much for help! | > Something like ?
>
I'd rather say ""/
The subject and object for []{} are not mentioned here. There's someone who is a , who now has the duty to (=to lead other s) because he's got a . It is that he can't do (=attack someone thoughtlessly/carelessly. goo) because he has the duty to (I think maybe his situation is like... a schoolboy who has become class president, supposed to keep order in his class and therefore not to pick a fight with another class member...)
* * *
>
>
The relative clause modifies . modifies . modifies . I think the is used as ("is imposed") here. The sentence has the same structure as:
/(To/On ~~, ~~ is added/charged/imposed.)
>
>
It can be rephrased as (I think the is used as an emphasis.) It has the same structure as:
(It's natural that~~/Naturally~~/No wonder~~) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
Encountered な with ten-ten
I am currently reading a manga for studying Japanese and encountered something strange. A girl exclaims?!
The situation is that she has just had water squirted up her nose, so I am guessing it's a kind of 'gnya' sound?
So my question is, is this a real Japanese language thing, or is it just the artist taking liberties with the language for comic effect?
Cheers | We sometimes write !?,!? or !? (These three will be pronounced the same way) to mean or . Probably it's like "Wha...!?" or "What the...!?"
We also sometimes write in place of to add emphasis, but the ([]{}) won't change/affect the pronunciation, so it'd be impossible to pronounce or correctly (I don't know what would be "correct" here though).
However, if I were a voice actress and had to read them, I'd probably read them as...
instead of
(So... maybe you'd call it a "thick/gruff/husky(?) voice"?? Or, is this what you'd call "strained", as in @ogicu8abruok's comment?) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "grammar, pronunciation, orthography, hiragana"
} |
Which readings were changed in the 2010 Jouyou kanji reform?
I'm looking for pointers on which readings (on/kun) were changed in the 2010 reform. By that I mean which kanji has additional readings and which kanji has had one or more readings removed? Is there a document that summarizes these changes? | The official ("Revised Jōyō Kanji Chart") itself contains this information. It starts on page 169 of the document, which is page 203 of the PDF, under the heading . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "kanji, readings, jōyō kanji"
} |
「可能な額を払う」= Pay what you can?
In ALC, I found the following example sentence:
>
>
> pay what you can
It's the first time I see the word used in this way and I wonder if this is just a case of mistranslation or if there is such an idiom (and what its usage would be). | This is not read but from ``, `` etc. which means an amount of money. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
Translation of "for whom" or "to whom"
How would you translate the following sentences? 1/ Check the identity of any other person for whom you may have requested an extra card. 2/ She is the person to whom I sent the documents.
I always struggle when I have to translate "for whom" or "to whom". On the web, I found "" to translate "person to whom one sends the attachment". Is this translation acceptable ? If I am correct, this may also mean "the person (or party) who sends the attachment". So I am really confused.
Thank you very much for your help. | I think this falls into the area of appositives/relative clauses, as in the example you gave, but you can be tricky and get a little more specificity out of it:
<\- explicit
<\- explicit>
I am confident in the first one, but you should bounce the second one off someone else, too. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, translation"
} |
Question about 仕事 vs. 仕事場
While studying Japanese through Rosetta Stone, I've run across these two sentences:
I'm confused as to why the first sentence doesn't use "" since the person is going to the workplace. | is standard for "go to work", just as in English we don't tend to use 'go to the/my workplace', although you might use 'office' as an alternative if you work in one. I think the purpose is implied - you are going to move from your current location to another location, and work there.
would be used if you wanted to clarify that you meant the location. If you were talking about visiting someone else's workplace, or going back outside working hours to pick something up, for example, you might use (or other terms such as {} or {}) instead of .
So when talking about physical location, is logical. If you wanted to just indicate that you are working, including if you were working from home, then something like can be used instead. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, word choice"
} |
逃げる vs 逃す. What's the nuance?
It's pretty straightforward, I'm wondering what the nuance between and is?
I'm assuming it's something like the difference between "run away" and "escape", but which one is which? | → escape
→ let escape (tried to catch it but could not)
→ let escape (on purpose) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "nuances"
} |
逃げる vs 逃れる What's the nuance?
This is the question I was trying to ask when I made this question, but I guess I can't type or read or think.
I'm looking for the difference between `` and ``. I'm assuming it's something like the difference between "run away" and "escape", but which one is which?
And I'm aware that even "run away" and "escape" are pretty close even in English, but these things happen. | They both mean to "run away" or "escape", but `` means this only physically while `` means this physically or metaphorically (escape a bad situation, run from temptation, avoid responsibility, etc.) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "nuances"
} |
What is this colloquial / dialect form? 〜たるけんね
!Screen shot
I'm still playing Final Fantasy VI, and I came across this bit of dialogue:
>
>
I understand it up to ``. Orthros is going to drop the weight on her head! I can't make heads or tails of ``, though. I assume it's some kind of dialect.
My best guess is `` ← ``. Specifically, I think it might involve these two changes:
* `` ← ``
* `` ← ``.
Does that seem right? | I think ~~ is Kyushu dialect for ~~(for a desired action) or ~~(for a desired or an undesired action; can have a vicious tone). Here I think it's the latter. I don't know if it's Hakata-ben, Kumamoto-ben or another but this page () states:
> :
> | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "colloquial language, dialects, contractions"
} |
Legal characters for first names include: hiragana, katakana, jinmeiyo and joyo kanji. What about latin letters?
Is it legal for parents to give to their child a first name with latin letters (romaji, I guess), instead of using katakana, hiragana, or kanji?
For example, if Japanese parents want to give their children the English name John, can they avoid using katakana and just use the original latin letters? Is this legal or not? | According to this page, the following types of characters are allowed in names:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
So that's hiragana, katakana, extension, and repetition marks. Valid examples are given for each in the parentheses. Note also that many old forms of kanji are officially acceptable, but many of them cannot be displayed on computers and cannot be read easily.
The following character types are _not_ permitted for use in names:
> ****
>
> ****
> …
> ⅠⅡⅢ…
> ×
It says that roman characters, as well as non-standard kanji, Arabic and Roman numerals, and some other unusual characters (shapes, symbols etc. that aren't part of standard orthography) are not acceptable for registered names.
So there you have it. Assuming this source is to be trusted then we can conclude that Japanese names are registered with Japanese text only. Foreign names, as in the examples above, will need to be given at least a katakana equivalent. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 23,
"question_score": 11,
"tags": "katakana, hiragana, names, rōmaji, jōyō kanji"
} |
Is ネコでも分かる・サルでも分かる idiomatic?
I heard the expression ... mentioned in a TV drama as title for a (fictional) book, in the sense of "...for dummies". A quick search on Amazon brings up a few (real) titles ... or ...
Is this an idiomatic expression you can use in day-to-day speech, or is this just restricted to these lines of books by particular publishers? If this is a normal speech pattern, are there any other animals commonly employed in this context? | As your hunch says, this expression means "for dummies" in the sort of "explained simply" meaning used principally for instructional materials, much like the line of books in English. It seems predominantly to be used with with some mentions of . There are some other kind of punny ones for pandas and dogs and sheep. It doesn't appear to be connected with a particular brand like the "for dummies" line of books, but that's the meaning we can safely assign to it.
In fact, I just checked alc and it says exactly that:
>
> for dummiesWindows for DummiesWindowsExcel for DummiesOil Painting Set for Dummies
For reference, here is a general google search that shows the different varieties in action. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "colloquial language, idioms"
} |
Meaning of だろうと
What is the meaning of in the following sentence, and how can we translate last part of sentence (bold one)?
> **** | (Making an answer out of Chocolate's comment)
(~~) means the same as (~~).
I don't know the context, but the last bit of the sentence means something like:
> [...] it is possible to fire as many shots as wished | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, meaning"
} |
How to appropriately display the day of the month by itself? Is 日 required, optional, or undesirable?
I know that an acceptable way to display (this is in a computer program) a full year/month/day date is like so:
> 2013519
What If I wanted to display the day **only**? Does the following look right, OK, or weird to native Japanese user? Is the character required, optional, or undesirable in this case?
> 19
In other words, would it look better if it was just the number?
> 19 | You would be better off using the . The same in other language, without unit the number does not mean anything. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation, computing"
} |
Why is it 一つ、二つ、三つ 「の」？
Why do the counting words use a possesive particle? | I don't think is strictly a possessive particle when addressing quantities, much like the functionally overloaded and .
In Japanese, you can use counting words as prefix: 500 or suffix: , so it acts more like a connective than a possessive particle anyway. If you look at ("the butter of all" = all the (blocks of) butter) vs. ("all of the butter") you might even /feel/ that there is a difference, though I think that difference is too obscure to make use of it.
Possessive particles are well-defined on (a subset of) the domain of (NP,NP), e.g. and have their syntax reused for other domains, e.g. (the flower of green), (the bread of one).
It is possible to think of as a substitute topic marker (). Such is the reasoning for these phrases:
or ?
What is the role of in ! | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "particle の"
} |
What does "だがたまには下も見るもんだぜ" mean?
There is a suggestively conversation between two men who are fighting each other. A is claimed to be strongest wizard and B is nearly strong as A. Here is the conversation,
> A:
> B: []{}
Here I get,
> A: In the world there is (always) upper of upper. (Which implies there is always someone who is stronger than you, OK I got it!!)
> B: I know that well. .......................... That guy might be just right under your feet.
Does "" mean "But sometimes there are ones who look down too" or "But sometimes they should look down too" ?? If I'm mistaken then what does it mean? I'm confused about it, yoroshiku onegaishimasu~~ | > ****
>
> ****
In this context is a slightly more informal way of saying , which is similar to as covered in this post. So the speaker is trying to say that 'one should...(look down etc.)' For better flow of the translation I would personally translate it as follows:
A: There is always someone above you in this world.
B: I know that well. But you should take a look below you once in a while. That someone below you may be right at your feet.
Hope this helps. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, idioms"
} |
Can we use 通る about 心地 or 気持ち?
Just before these sentence main character told that he is worried about crossing the tunnel(because of some childhood memories). That is why I'm not sure what is he talking about in this sentence(bold one). About crossing the tunnel and it wasn't scary at all, or he talking about from the sentence before ?
> ****
Thank you very much for help! | refers to . as a noun doesn't couple with . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
What does しやがって imply? shiyagatte doesn't seem to show up directly in dictionaries
I've run across the expression/word a few times in manga, and generally the context indicates that it's a conjugation of with the indication of "3rd party appearance of internal state" (as in -> ). Is this generally correct? If so, where the comes from? or is this just yet another 'special' conjugation?
An example fragment I have here is:
> , ...
(Context is a few moments before a love declaration... meaning is obvious enough)
Another example comes from pg 12 of the first QED manga, where an enraged player who has just lost a video game competition yells:
> | This is conjugated into -form.
Basically does not do much aside from make the sentence rougher. Technically, it express a disdain for the action it attaches to, but personally I think it's not quite so strict on usage. You hear it very often in anime-talk where everyone is trying to sound rough and manly. Generally not in real life unless it's a very tense situation, or the people are close enough for it to not be offensive (like in that first quote of yours).
Here is a question covering in more detail: How to use the inflection ""? | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "conjugations"
} |
Pronunciation of ワンマン運転
I hear as , with the of dissapearing, or perhaps being very soft.
Here's an example:<
Another question shows that there can be something phonetically special about vowel words. This suggests the 'u' sound might be nasalized, but I don't hear the 'u' sound being different from a normal in this example.
How do I pronounce ? Is this different from ? Is there a rule that applies to some other words? Or is it a special case like ? | Intervocalic is usually pronounced as a nasalized version of the preceding vowel, so in this case [ã]. This would lead to a pronunciation of (I'm adding the from the clip, since otherwise I wouldn't be able to determine the pronunciation of the last in ) sounding something like
> [wa.m.ma.ã.u.n.te.ẽ.o]
(dots between morae, tilde over a vowel means nasalization)
The nasalization on the intervocalic tends to spread to surrounding vowels, so it might even sound like this
> [wa.m.mã.ã.ũ.n.tẽ.ẽ.õ]
or, if you prefer:
> [wam:ã:ũntẽ:õ]
I believe the nasalization of intervocalic , and the spreading to surrounding vowels depends on how clearly the speaker articulates, and probably also the speaker.
would not sound like , since the latter lacks a mora, but I find it quite likely that could be mistaken for , especially with reduced sound quality like this where the nasality can be hard to determine. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "pronunciation, phonology, phonetics"
} |
Parsing a sentence with a て connecting verb
This sentence is from NHK newsweb easy.
>
I'll remove the easier parts and try to reduce it to the part i'm having trouble parsing...
>
I can't figure out how plays into the sentence. I have two main ideas...
(1) is a high-level clause, and the rest of the sentence after should be treated as a unit. The flu is spreading in reality.
(2) goes together; the spreading of the flu causes people to die/causes people to worry about people dying. The flu is not necessarily spreading in reality, it is just a hypothetical situation (). | A - form is usually linked to its sentence. You cannot guess what is happening without the end.
- \- _I'll pass by the post office and go home._ \- _I passed by the post office then went gome._
It is your second guess the correct one.
>
_They think/fear people are gonna die because the flu is spreading._
Then, you add a context condition on it with ``. Which means nothing is happening.
_The government made a guideline plan about what to do **in the case** they think people are gonna die as a result of the flu spreading._
**Edit** Different point of views
> (oldergod)
> (oldergod) ①
> (oldergod) ②
> (oldergod)
> (mukai) ①
> (mukai)
> (akagi) (akagi) ②
> (akagi) ②
As you can see, everyone is getting a hard time.
I just personally think that it is definitly your second guess. They don't make a plan for one season flu. They'll use it everytime there is the flu spreading around. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "て form"
} |
Is 回す ever used to mean "gang-rape"?
Sorry, I've been on reddit...and found the eighth definition here:
> 1: to turn; to rotate; to gyrate; 2: to circulate; to send around; 3: to surround; 4: to put something to a new use (e.g. leftovers); 5: () (after the -masu stem of a verb) ... around (i.e. to chase someone around); 6: to dial (e.g. telephone number); 7: (Godan verb with su ending) to invest; 8: to gang-rape
Is this definition ever used? Is it slang? If it is not asking too much, would someone provide an example? | A little investigation shows that this can also be written as {}, which appears to be the formal word for gang rape, {}, adapted to the slang term .
I'm going to go on the assumption that the term originated from the idea of (I'll let you go ahead and think about why) and later took on the slangy reading.
See the following for details:
< | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "words"
} |
What does こと mean between two nouns?
What is the function of the first in the following sentence?
Logically it seems it has a function similar to . If that is indeed what it does, does it have any other nuance?
If possible I would like to have a translation, or other examples of being used this way.
This sentence appears in an article in . | As dainich said in the comment, this "AB" just means "B also known as A" / "B otherwise known as A". As can be seen in this example, A is normally a nick name, a monikier, or a noun that may be unfamiliar to some readers, and B is used to explain what A means. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "translation, particles"
} |
What's the substitute word for missing/unimportant part of sentence?
Sometimes there are situations when you'd like to describe someone saying something, but what exactly he says is less important than the rest of sentence and it can be easily ignored. Or in case when someone is saying some long and tedious speech and in your sentence you're just using "bla-bla-bla" instead. What's the word Japanese would use in such cases?
Other situation is when part of sentence is missing. In most cases during lessons or exercises. (Or when you heard something all but one word missing and describing it to someone.) Teacher then uses some substitute word like "something-something" instead, just to keep the pace when reading. What's the word Japanese would use in such cases? | The usual placeholder in Japanese is , although type-specific placeholders such as and may be used. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "usage, spoken language"
} |
Question on an apparent solipsistic usage of the "quotative って"
> A: Be careful not to make a mistake.
>
> B: I know that without being told.
>
> A:
>
> B:
In the final in B's answer, I am supposing that this is the "quotative ," used as a way to emphasize B's own voice. Is he metaphorically quoting himself?
Perhaps the implication is:
> "Yeah, like I said, I know that without being told."
Is this line of thinking correct? Would someone explain this use of ?
Is there a Japanese term for this ?
*Apologies in advance for my colorful usage of the word solipsistic. If you think of a better title feel free to change it. | Yes, he is quoting himself for emphasis (although I don't know what is solipsistic about it). I think of it as an ellipsis of something like
> ****
> **I'm telling you,** I get it even without being told.
There is also
> ****
which means roughly the same thing. (See sense 2 of this dictionary entry.) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
Origin of 楽しみ and 楽しみにする
is derived from isn't it? Despite this, it's used as if it were an adjective, and I don't completely understand why it can be used in . What is the name of the form that is relative to , and why can you use it in ? | Another set with the same conjugations is {} (adjective/verb/noun), where means, more or less, . In some cases, this noun form of a verb has picked up additional meanings along the way.
is something of a special case in that it has at some point acquired both the status of a na-adjective, and a meaning of anticipating that some future event will be . Hence, you can say (but probably not ).
That said, AB, where both A and B are nouns (and the A part may be dropped) is a common grammar pattern with the general idea that A is made to be/treated as/viewed as B. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "verbs"
} |
~くなりました with ない
For example, if I want to say "(this food has) become not tasty", would the correct way to say that be ""? How would this be distinguished from , "died tastily", however meaningless that may be? Is there some more idiomatic way to say the former, and can I expect to behave perfectly like a ? | > For example, if I want to say "(this food has) become not tasty", would the correct way to say that be ""?
Yes, this would be a correct way of saying "(this food has) become not tasty".
> How would this be distinguished from , "died tastily", however meaningless that may be?
Context. Precisely because it's meaningless, and because it's a common grammar point, and in writing due to the lack of kanji for . The same way is not likely to be , "rang tastily".
> Is there some more idiomatic way to say the former
is fine, but you could phrase it positively like
> can I expect to behave perfectly like a ?
I think this is classified as , while the in something like is a (Sources: goo dictionary, goo dictionary, oshiete!goo). But I believe you can just think of it as an i-adjective in terms of conjugations. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "words, usage"
} |
Is this word slang? アメテ
I can't find a definition for this word ``. Aside from sounding like an amateur, the word didn't make sense in the context.
In the context, a character was flipping out. The entire sentence he screamed was:
> !!
Is this just a random sound he made or... what?
The sentence before ended with !! if that helps. | ! is baby speech for ! (Stop it!). | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 10,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "translation, meaning, slang, child speech"
} |
Why use 分 in this question?
I have come across the following sentence :
>
I understand it means something like "Are you throwing out this cardbox?". But what does mean in this context and why is it at that position in the sentence? | > ****
> Is that cardboard box **the part** you are putting out with the rubbish?
here means "part". Another example:
>
> This is the part I am giving to Abi. _or_
> This is what I am giving to Abi. _or_
> This is Abi's share. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, meaning"
} |
きちんとした性格の母さん Sentence help
I would like some help understanding this sentence.
I don't understand the part, because how can modify "personality" which can't do anything?
I also don't understand the function of , especially what the particle means.
If I had to give a translation, I would say: Given her real personality, my mother .... | > I don't understand the part, because how can modify "personality" which can't >do anything?
on it's own is an adverb, for example /do the cleaning _properly_.
It's one of those words you can add to afterwards to make it into an adjective. For example: / (My) mother has a proper/orderly/impeccable personality.
This gets put in the past tense* when it is brought in front to modify the noun (): / (My) mother who has an proper personality.
> I also don't understand the function of , especially what the particle means.
Let's look at another sentence where it might be easier to understand: / a serious _and_ sincere _and_ kind person.
You connect na-adjectives together with the same way you might connect i-adjectives together with , for example: /cheap and tasty cake.
So here means: (My) mother who has a stiff and proper personality.
*I swear there was a question about this and I wanted to link to it but I couldn't find it... | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation"
} |
How is the last name Curry transliterated to japanese?
I'm transliterating my friend's names for fun and I'm having trouble figuring out the kana for the last name `Curry`. Would it be `` Which doesn't seem right...
It confuses me that this is also an actual Japanese dish. lol.
Actually I'm also unsure about the last name `Castañeda`. I've done about a dozen names correctly by checking Google results and I would like some help with these two. :) | When you want to translate names, just look for some famous ones in Wikipedia.
| stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "english to japanese"
} |
Proper usage of 四字熟語 in Japanese
In Chinese, usage of a lot usually demonstrates sophistication and things like political announcements etc that want to sounds powerful and sophisticated use a big load of them. What does using them convey in Japanese? They seem a lot less common. Are they considered "clichés" as English expressions such that "it is raining buckets" or "... is in hot water"? Chinese seems peculiar for treating unoriginal clichés (used appropriately of course) as good style; did this carry over into Japanese? | I think apt use of does demonstrate sophistication, just like, it seems, in Chinese. are taught at the level, with other parts of the curriculum being , literature, etc., which alone should tell you something about the perceived status of these "idioms".
The infamous exam question is:
> Complete .
with the correct answer being , _not_ .
In serious writing, are analogous to the poignant use of idioms, which one finds in well-written newspapers, for example. Maybe less like "raining buckets" but more like "skate on thin ice"... | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "words, usage, yoji jukugo"
} |
What does おめでとう煜ございます mean?
At first I thought it was a typo, but inserting the character into birthday wishes or the like seems to be common, e.g.
> ****
> ****
> **** ****
I have several problems:
1. **What does it mean?**
WWWJDIC has "bright, shining, brilliant", which sort of fits.
2. **How is it pronounced (if at all)?**
The readings given in WWWJDIC are , , , although none of them look like a particularly meaningful interjection.
3. **How is it typed?**
None of the readings , , , produce the character in my IME (although I do get , which has the readings , , and ). | It is now clear that was never intended to mean anything related to the kanji. In that sense it is a typo introduced by reading a message on a computer. I did find an alternative to the banana hypothesis, though:
maps to the smiley face (:D) on the SoftBank iPhone (see the middle character):
![enter image description here]( ![enter image description here]( | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "meaning, kanji, internet slang"
} |
What are these suggestions in hiragana typing?
What are these in hiragana typing when I want to type `wa`?
!typing wa | Well, only one is a hiragana, namely . It even says so next to it (), but written _in hiragana_.
There is only one way forward for you: learn hiragana.
The cursive-like appearance itself gives it practically away, but if you're interested in learning Japanese, learning hiragana is the best starting point.
The other suggestions in the list are kanji, which (among other groups of characters) you need to write Japanese.
These are simply the choices Word gives when "wa" is input using the keyboard; The desired character is marked by using the space bar to scroll the options, and when the desired choice is highlighted, hitting Enter selects it for the text. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "words, hiragana"
} |
How to translate "once" and "every" in Japanese? 一度 or いつも
`[]{()}` means `once`, but `[]{}` also mean `once` in sentences like `once I did something` or `once I am a something`.
`` means `always` in sentences like `I always am a something` or `I always do something`
But idiomatically, `Once bitten twice shy` is translated as `[]{}[]{}[]{}[]{}` in Japanese.
So if I want to say `Once a thief, always a thief`, is this phrase grammatical `, `?
What if I want to say `Once a X, always a X`? and X is a noun/noun phrase? | I believe you are making the mistake of attempting to replicate an English pattern in Japanese.
As snailboat points out, the idiomatic equivalent is as follows:
>
And if you make this search,
<
one finds that the nearest Japanese equivalent seems to be:
> noun phrase noun phrase
If one uses the vocabulary you suggested, the nearest equivalent seems to be:
> Once an actor, always an actor. Once an addict, always an addict. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "adverbs, time, english to japanese"
} |
What does 直打ち mean? also whats the reading?
Can someone help me understand this , as used in the following sentence:
`URL`
(this is an error message in a log file)
My dictionaries have no idea what this word means. As far as I can tell this means something like:
`"There's a possibility that there was a directly accessed URL"`
So means "direct access", as in (directly) and as in (hit)
Also regarding the reading, i asked a couple of Japanese people and got told both: and
any ideas which is correct in this context? | This is the prefix `{}` ("direct"), plus `{}`, a noun form of the verb `` ("to hit"), which in this case refers to typing ("hitting" keys).
Although I couldn't find a dictionary entry for this exact term, it's described in the entry for IP in the IT on Weblio, which confirms that the reading is ``. This page also confirms that it means "direct(ly) input".
I think the message means there's a possibility the URL was typed directly rather than followed from a link. Since this is in a log file, perhaps it indirectly means there's no _HTTP referrer_ information. (In which case, it might show up even in cases where the URL wasn't directly entered, like if you use a "favorite" link; cases like these might be why it says a _possibility_ of being typed directly.) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "meaning, definitions, computing"
} |
ぜ at the end of sentence?
What's the meaning of at the end of sentence? Is a particle?
What's the difference between:
> {}
and
> {}
I found a couple of explanations on the web but none I could fully comprehend. | and are sentence-final particles used (primarily) by male speakers which are more colloquial versions of the particle .
In order of decreasing politeness, they are
>
>
>
The addition of give the statement an assertive feel, maybe like an exclamation mark or adding something like "hey!" (although that's already represented in the sentence by ).
Speaking of which, is also a very colloquial way of getting someone's attention, which fits well with the use of over .
This question also has an explanation for , which carries over to as well. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 13,
"question_score": 17,
"tags": "grammar, usage, particles, sentence final particles"
} |
Pronunciation of イ列 + う
It is somewhat uncommon, but some words such as {} and the name {} end with + . I thought the pronunciation might be different from a simple concatenation of the two vowels, since {} is pronounced as , and because in the examples I gave it is somewhat easier on the toungue for me to change the trailing to , resulting in either or for .
How should I be pronouncing these? | There may be rules in modern Japanese regulating this, perhaps observed by TV announcers. However, practically, I believe it is more natural to produce the sound `` than a forced `-`. The same goes for ``. In fact, `` is spelled with `` in many cases. Some people might prefer to split `+` if they are separate morphemes... but practically, they are just so ambiguous when pronouncing.
From a history point of view, there was no clear difference between `` or ``. Actually, the small notation of (contracted word) is adopted after the WWII ( __ in 1946). Before that, in old literature like _ (Tsurezuregusa)_ in the 14th century, there was **** in the preface passage, which in modern day notation (and pronunciation) would be **** .
For `` being pronounced as ``, the pronunciation existed long before this notation of ``, so the rule of how to produce `+` should not be deduced from the notation. `` was written as `` in old notation. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "pronunciation"
} |
Reading of 味 as a suffix in "X-flavour" / as a counter in "X flavours"
This question brought to you by the existence of
In my head, the reading here is But I know {}, so it seems like as a counter it's
I'm almost 100% sure that would be "", but what about ? | {} itself is a morpheme with a Chinese original, thus the `{}` {}. The pronunciation rooted from ancient Chinese. {} is a similar example.
In the contrary, and are lexical items clearly not rooted from Chinese words. `` contains 2 **free morphemes** `` and `{}`. So, a `{}`, {}, would be appropriate in this case.
There are many examples provided by this snack:
You can see they have listed a lot of flavors there. Most of them are combinations of a `Western origin word` \+ `{}`
**Edited** :
For {}, a thing {} that actually exists make it quite detachable , resulting free morphemes `` \+ ``. It is very like the ``+`` in the original question. However, like `` it is heavily linked together. One thing you could check is, try adding a between to see if it makes sense. Like {} makes sense, but things like {} doesn't make sense.
Also, you can see {} {} {} are basic tastes the one could sense. The pure sensory counterpart for salty is {} | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "readings"
} |
What does にして mean in this sentence?
Tell me please what is means in the following sentence and how can we translate part?
> []{} **** []{}
Thank you. | `The name of our sin is Pride, the olden snake. Be wary!`
Chocolate's link should be it. sounds more elaborate than a mundane . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, translation"
} |
Again question about modifying nouns
Seems that I stuck with modifying a noun again, in the following sentence is it only modifying or both verbs ?
>
Full sentences: < | > (([]{}[]{})()[]{}[]{}[]{})([]{})[]{}
>
is the object for both (#1?≒[]{}... "toy with"? but probably physically, not mentally) and .
(≒) modifies .
and both modify . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, nouns"
} |
Is 行ってみい a dialect form of 行ってみよ?
The following dialogue is from _Final Fantasy XII_ :
> ……
> ****
>
I bolded ``. I'm not sure what this is, and there's no dictionary entry for ``. My guess is that it's a dialect form of `` with the last vowel dropped. I think that without the /o/ at the end, /miy/ becomes /miː/. Does this make any sense?
Here's a picture from the game:
!Screen shot of Final Fantasy XII | ()() etc. are not from a regional dialect but (Wikipedia):
>
>
>
[]{LLHHL} ( is spoken with the intonation of standard Japanese)
[]{HHHLH} (We have a different intonation pattern in Kansai)
* * *
Yes, the is from . According to Wikipedia :
> → | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "colloquial language, dialects"
} |
Can 一応ね be understood to mean "...just socially."?
I found this example on lang-8, and wonder if anyone could clarify the use of here:
> A: Are you going on Facebook or Twitter?
>
> B: Just socially.
>
> A: FacebookTwitter
>
> B:
When I look up on tangorin I get:
> ichiou · adverb: once; tentatively; in outline; for the time being; just in case; so far as it goes
>
> If there are past exam questions then I think it would be best to give them a quick look over.
I asked the original writer (native speaker) and he said that the translation was the meaning in his use of the phrase. Does this meaning exist in common usage and if so is the meaning as specific as the english phrase, "just socially?" | No. This is a paraphrase, that only works because of the context.
As I wrote in this answer, can be understood as "tentatively, not to the full extent". That can be interpreted here as "I'm not completely using them all the time, not totally invested in the whole thing, but nevertheless I _am_ on those services for what that's worth" ...so, "just casually" or "just socially".
There's no special meaning in play here. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "words"
} |
How to pronounce 研修生？
I'm totally a beginner in Japanese.
I'm confused about the pronunciation of . In the textbook, it's written as . When I listen to the tape, I found that is not pronounced. Could anybody explain this phenomenon to me?
Furthermore, could somebody recommend a reference for this kind of pronunciation question? | You have to count the syllables. is twice as long as , but the vowel is the same. (An alternative way of writing the pronunciation would be and , which makes the vowel length more obvious.)
Similarly, is usually pronounced (as a long vowel ).
Native speakers of English, for example, have a high risk of not being able to pick up on the length of a syllable. This fact is made worse when one considers that sometimes romanized Japanese is displayed (incorrectly so) without the macron, e.g. kenshusei, which should be kenshūsei.
Counting syllables is not only important for vowels, but also for "consonants" (namely ) as in , often mispronounced as konichiwa (no syllable only for "n"). | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "pronunciation"
} |
Kanji and meaning behind Shikifuton?
I've been looking at futon recently and there's a particularly kind called the Shikibed or Shiki Futon. I was wondering where this "Shiki" was coming from. | , or "shikibuton" refers to the bottom part of a futon, which traditionally has two parts: the part you lie on and the part that you cover it with, or basically the mattress and the blanket (or duvet if you want to go there). The terms and are derived from their purposes. For example, {} means to spread or lay something out, so the shikifuton is what you spread on the floor. The (kakebuton) is what you use to , or to "put on" in the sense of adding it on top. The respective kanji, and , retain these meanings. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "etymology"
} |
What is an equivalent phrase to the colloquial "I know, right!?"
What are the Japanese equivalent phrases for the phrase "I know, right?!"
The scenario is my friend said PS4, and I'd like to respond with something akin to "I know, right?!" comes to mind but I'm unsure if it has the same effect. | Yes, `` is what many young people use (optionally prefixed with ``; but often without). I'm not sure if this usage is just among the younger generations (under 30), or extends to all ages, but I haven't often heard middle-aged or elderly people use it in the same vernacular (much like I don't often hear middle-aged/elderly people say "I know right (Inorite)?!" in English).
Additionally, "Inorite?!" seems to be more prevalent among young women and girls in English. **_My_** experience in Japan with `` was similar, but that's not to say it's mainly used by everywhere. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "set phrases"
} |
What's the difference between [上]{あ}がる and [上]{のぼ}る?
The textbook I'm studying from lists []{} as "to go up", but I've previously learnt that [[]{} also means "to go up"](
Jisho.org only lists "to go up" and any derivations of that as a single definition out of its 23 definitions for . I'm currently only wondering about when it means "to go up", but explaining the other definitions would be good too.
Also, what are the differences between and the other kanji, and ? From my Chinese background, the other two seems to mean about the same, "to raise up something", but I want to confirm this for Japanese too. Jisho.org doesn't help much here either since it lists the same 23 definitions for all three, and doesn't provide any examples for the latter two. | means "to climb" and means "to rise".
I find it an interesting observation that both are used when describing a weather event:
> []{}
> The sun rises.
>
>
> The rain stops.
As Jesse Good explains in his answer, and are different in that the former means that something/someone is climbing by his own strength, whereas the latter means that something simply rises with no own input.
The above examples are interesting in the sense that / is often assigned a personality in Japanese and therefore can climb out of its own accord. The rain is usually not personified and thus just "rises", as a natural phenomenon.
Here was written , which is usually only used for the "climbing" sun. Other are for "hiking" and for climbing stairs or "climbing" numbers (e.g. 2 "to double"). | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "usage, nuances, word choice"
} |
What is the meaning of 「ほおかむり」?
My daughter is in first grade at a public elementary school in Japan.
In some homework yesterday, there was the appearance of the word ``. My Japanese isn't great as a non-native and she didn't know what it was, so we Googled it. Most results steered us towards , which it seems this is a synonym of.
It appears in the context it was presented to have meant the head covering ``, is this simply another way of writing it? | A () (also or ) from "to cover the cheeks" is a cloth that is tied around the head to cover the head (or the face) and usually tied under the chin.
The infamous wearer is the Japanese thief () (another picture)
who wraps his head with a cloth and ties it **under his nose** , supposedly to conceal his identity. In children's stories, the usually steals , or .
In such stories, a is (when not worn by a ) usually a characteristic of "simple folk" and can be worn by farmers (or other workers), presumably because the cloth covers from the sun, protects the head from dust and is easy to wash. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "words, learning"
} |
question about 以下
What does mean in the following sentence, and how does it compare with ? Could it be something "even less than plain..." ?
> | It simply expresses the degree. When is used with a number, it always is inclusive and means "X or less". When is used like in your example, it always means less than and is exclusive. In other words means that the is not even . The writer just wants to say that room was extremely plain (to the extent that it is less than ).
For example, a more common example might be , like in , which definitely is not a good thing. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
What's the difference between 見解 and 意見
I've been unable to find the difference from example sentences online. Is it a matter of formality? Something completely else? | From Goo thesaurus:
>
>
Loose translation:
> can be well thought out, or it can just be something that popped into your head.
> refers to the result of sufficient consideration and judgement, and is often used with the thoughts of official institutions such as the government.
This fits with my own experience of the words. I see more in political news and academic papers, whereas I see everywhere from daily conversation to expert "opinions" in news articles etc. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "word choice, synonyms, nuances"
} |
Very confused about "には" in indicating relationships
I read a very detailed and useful answer explaining the difference between "" and "" but am still confused about a sentence I recently encountered.
I do not understand the function of in this sentence. I get the general meaning -- that the speaker and their partner have two sons, but beyond that my brain is sort of melting. Please help. :c | This is a topicalization of the -marked (a.k.a., dative) subject . is a -marked (a.k.a, nominative) object.
Basically, what you are missing (judging by your comment on @torazaburo's answer) is that can be used as a subject marker given certain predicates. I talk about this in detail in this answer: What is the difference between "" and ""? | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar, usage, particles"
} |
What is it called when someone is made poor from attending too many weddings?
I cannot remember the phrase once taught me for when someone has become poor by attending too many weddings in Japan.
Due to usually having to pay at least 30,000 yen just to attend weddings as a guest here. | As summea says, the term you're looking for is {}. This is the state of poverty that results from having to attend too many weddings in too short a period of time. For those reading this that may be unaware, it is customary in Japan to give several _man_ in yen (a few hundred dollars) at weddings and when babies are born, this on top of travel costs and whatever else it may cost to participate in a wedding. When many of these obligations pile up in a short period of time it can create a rough financial situation for those who would like to attend and also honor the traditions of giving money. The internet is rife with people troubled about this:
< <
Among others! | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "words"
} |
What's the difference between 売店 and 商店
Is more used for smaller stuff, like a stand? I'm finding it hard to pinpoint the exact difference. | You guessed it. has
> ****
>
i.e. a shop selling _consumer goods_. E.g. a clothes shop:
!
> ****
>
i.e. a stand selling things. In particular, a small stand/shop in hospitals, theatres, amusement parks or other facilities. E.g. a in a train station:
!
In other words, a 's main business comes from their goods; a 's business comes from their location within some facility. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "nuances, word choice, synonyms"
} |
Meaning of おま言う
On the Internet, two persons talk about spying and open source:
> A: w
> B:
What does B want to express?
I thought it was a typo but there seems to be many people using this expression.
Full context: <
Other examples:
Not a single dictionary in the first 2 pages of Google results. | On the 3rd Google page I have found this blog post that has more information:
>
>
>
So is the abbreviation of .
Thanks to oldergod for pointing out that the meaning is: 'shut up, you are not in a position to say this' | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "internet slang"
} |
What's the difference between 食品 and 食料
I can't quite figure out the differences between these two. I would guess that is only used in situations, where the only thing that matters is that the food is there or not there (As in, searching for food, gave food, need food)
I've only seen used in connection to the process of making, acquiring, selling and storing the food.
Am I on the right track here, or completely off? | You are on the right track. They are almost the same meaning, however is generally used for manufacturer products or food that consumers buy (the end product) (). , as implied by the , implies the base materials, i.e. the stuff used to make . Also, note that does not include (which is an important concept in Japan), while is generally used to mean (rice, wheat, etc.). | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "nuances, word choice, synonyms"
} |
"Boo" equivalent in Japanese?
Is there a disappointed or sad "boo" equivalent in Japanese?
Kind of like:
> _Person 1:_ Hey man, can I borrow 10 dollars?
> _Person 2:_ Nah, I don't have any change.
> _Person 1:_ Boo, now I don't have enough to go to the concert. | I think you could say . It's a lot like "boo hoo". I've heard that it's used more in fiction than in real life, but I think that's true of "boo hoo", too.
Chocolate pointed out on chat that you could also say . Although I don't see entries for this interjection in any Japanese dictionaries, you can find it in Japanese-English dictionaries such as edict. Edict describes it this way:
> oh no (used as an expression of despair or when giving up); sigh of boredom or disgust; oh boy
Another related word is . Again, I'll quote edict:
> feel disappointed; dejected; lose heart; feel emotionally drained; feel let down
Edict lists more parts of speech for this word than Japanese dictionaries, so I decided to link to it here. You can say, for example, `` or ``. I think you can also use it as an interjection, though the only place I could find listing it that way was ALC: `` | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "expressions, colloquial language, english to 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.