INSTRUCTION
stringlengths 11
999
| RESPONSE
stringlengths 0
999
| SOURCE
stringlengths 16
38
| METADATA
dict |
|---|---|---|---|
"一人にせず"? Meaning
In this phrase I've some doubt about "". Using google, I can translate it as "not alone". But I read "" is a negative form of "” and indicate that one action took place without or in the absence of another action. But... It seems senseless. | The sentence makes perfect sense.
Structure: "I have thought about a method that would achieve "Primary Goal" while satisfying "Condition/Prerequisite"."
Primary Goal = = "giving you a little punishment"
Condition/Prerequisite = = "without having to leave you or myself alone" | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, translation"
} |
Difference between 表れる and 現れる
How are these two terms different? Also how about and ?
Thank you so much!
| This was exactly my homework back in 7th or 8th grade (in junior high school in Japan)!
Basically it is Abstract/Intangible vs. Concrete/Tangible.
The Abstract/Intangible things []{}. Those include emotions, feelings, results of efforts such as grades, etc. becoming visible.
The Concrete/Tangible things []{}. These are things like humans, animals, monsters, clouds, etc. appearing from somewhere.
and are basically the transitive versions of the intransitive and .
You can (= to display, reveal, etc.) things like your emotions on your face, your ideas in art forms, your opinions through your actions, etc.
means "(concrete things) showing themslves" such as the stars at night, visible symptoms on your body, your hidden talents, etc. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "word choice, words"
} |
Meaning of そのままにする
I came across a sentence I don't understand. The essay it's from has a feminist theme about the roles of women in Japan. It's the second sentence below:
>
What I'm guessing is "That's because _women_ keep the status quo of men failing to grasp the _social_ progress of time."
What is the exact meaning of , and what is the role of its object marked by ? Who is the subject performing the action of in that sentence? | means something to the effect of 'the way something is', and so is 'the way that it/that is', sometimes better as 'the way it/that already is'. XY means 'make X Y' (or 'put X at/on/in Y', but not here), but X translates better to 'leave/keep X the way it is'.
It seems like the subject of the sentence is neither men nor women, but _the state of women having to work hard_. You could loosely translate those two sentences together into one English sentence as something like this: 'Their hard work deserves praise, but I can't say that all women ought to do the same; since that would allow men to continue ignoring the progress of the times.' | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, meaning"
} |
translations of 楽にして?
How can I translate "" ? I read it change if transitive or intransitive...
The sentence was:
the context is: a guy asks to another about "being friends", but the other doesn't accept, the other guy is evil. The evil guy says that sentence before starting to control the good guy's mind.
can be "I'll make it easy (to you become my friend)?" | can mean a few things without further context.
The meaning that Japanese-learners would be most unfamiliar with is, believe it or not, "I will kill you/him/her."
Other meanings include:
"I will help/make you (or someone) feel better."
"I will cure your desease (or injury)."
It all depends on the context. One of the above may or may not apply. If not, please provide more context. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, translation"
} |
Particle は VS の when identifying ownership with the verb ある
Quick basic grammar question.
With respect to expressing ownership of an item using . Am I correctly understanding the general meaning and particle use in the following sentences?
1. → I do not have MY dictionary
2. → I do not have a dictionary
I think the second example makes sense grammatically speaking, however I'm unsure if the first example is correct. Can I use in similar situations like this to express if a particular item belongs to me? Can I use it like this with as well?
For example:
1. → The child is mine
2. → I have a child
Thanks!
Matt | does NOT mean "I do not have my dictionary." This is a very common mistake among J-learners. To us native speakers, it can ONLY mean "My dictionary is missing." as in "I brought my dictionary here but I can't find it now. Where did it go?"
Yes, means "I do not have a dictionary."
does not mean "The child is mine." It is not such a natural-sounding sentence but if anyone said it, it would mean "There is my kid."
Yes, means "I have a child." | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "particles, particle の, particle は"
} |
What is the negative form of 勝ちそう?
- meaning: I was about to win the game.
How would I say:
I was not about to win the game, (but at the last minute I won).
A) ...
b) ...
C) ...
As an English speaker, how am I to guess what each of the above mean? Is it obvious if I just think hard enough? | Although []{} is grammatical, the native speakers' word choice would surely be in this particular context.
A) ... makes little to no sense. One cannot say . With a in there, it looks as if you conjugated a verb as you would an adjective. If you said this out loud instead of writing it, we might not understand. The part would just throw your listener.
B) ... makes more sense than (A). This is ungrammatical as Snailboat stated in the comment above. We would, however, understand it if you said it. The grammatical phrase is .
C) ... is 100% grammatical. Whether or not this sounds natural, however, is another thing because of what I said at the beginning.
In conclusion, even though (C) is best as far as grammar without correction, (B), if corrected, takes the cake for the naturalness of the structure choice. By using instead of to form a , it would be best. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
What is the difference between "ちょっと" and "ちと"? Is one more polite than the other?
It seems like is more polite since I've seen more people use it. Is it true? | I disagree that is used more often than . Rather than making you sound polite, I think using would just make you sound odd for using such an uncommon word.
on the other hand is used reasonably often, especially in .
If you'd like a more formal version of , I think would serve that purpose well in most situations. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": -1,
"tags": "words, keigo"
} |
しとけ and sentence translation
I've some trouble with the translation of this sentence:
>
I don't know what stands for.
Could you please tell me how would you translate this sentence?
Something like:
> You are not going anywhere but here.
Maybe? | +
Combined with , this means " ** _to choose_** ", not "to do".
suggests that someone has been looking for a good/best place for something, and the speaker says that no more searching is necessary because that place has been found, which is "this" place.
So, your translation is already good. literally means "Choose this place for good."
**This is extremely useful at an eatery** :
Me: = "What y'all having?"
Girl A: = "A coffee for me."
Girl B: = "I'll have an iced tea."
Girl C: = "What should I have? I guess I'll have a coffee." | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation, contractions, subsidiary verbs"
} |
何かそのちょっと expression meaning
Could you please explain me this expression? | can mean different things depending on the context because it is a combination of vague words -- "Somehow, well, kinda."
Possible meanings are:
"Well, how should I put it....?"
"That seems a little, um..."
"I do not know if I agree."
"Not sure if that is correct/good."
I could go on and on but will stop here. If none of these seem to fit, please come back with further context of the conversation. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation"
} |
Exact meaning of 教科書をトピックに選ぶ
The following sentence is from a formal conversation. The student is talking to a teacher.
Can someone explain to me the **exact** meaning of ""? Literally translated it appears that he "chose a textbook", but that seems like a strange thing to say, since students don't normally choose their own textbooks (no other context about the project work is given). As an adverb, I'm not sure what could mean.
Alternately, could it be an equivalent of , i.e. "make the textbook into the topic" of the project? Is it common to replace with other verbs such as , if this is the case? | Actually, a literal translation will work perfectly here --- provided that one is able to "detect" the implied plurality of the .
[]{}[]{}[]{} means "I selected Japanese History textbooks as a topic (for my project work in my Japanese language class)."
If it helps, think of it as .
It is not saying that you can choose your textbook. It is saying you chose "Japanese Hitory textbooks" as a topic.
And yes, you can rephrase it to without changing the meaning. It is just that it sounds "better" if you use a more specific verb like than using the broad . Use []{} and it will sound even more formal. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning"
} |
Is ありす a traditional girl's name?
Is , or a name pronounced the same as "", a traditional feminine given name? (If I have to define traditional, then pre-dating the end of the Sakoku policy)
I've heard about parents naming their girls because they like the foreign name "Alice", but does the name actually pre-date the event of Japanese knowing the word "Alice"? | There seems to be prior occurrence of as part of a traditional Japanese surname, amongst other names. can be the common Japanese female given name (Arisu), which most likely comes is derived from Japanese Imperial branch family surname surname (Arisugawa).
As a somewhat ironic side note, the English name Alice, a name derived from Old French and Germanic, means "noble/nobility." | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "loanwords, names"
} |
How to correctly analyse kanji from jisho
!enter image description here
I am newly learning Japanese , so I whenever I encounter a new Kanji I search for it on jisho.org , but then I find that there are given `Japanese Kun` `Japanese on` and`Japanese names` . How do I know which one is relevant ie , suppose the english meaning is `middle` then which one of them is the correct pronunciation ? | This has probably been asked answered before... but Japanese kanji have two fundamental types of readings.
on () - which are readings of the character that originally come from China and approximate the sound of the Chinese character at the time. e.g. (,gokuraku)
kun () - which refer to using a Chinese character in part of a non-Chinese origin native word. e.g. (,tanoshii)
Comparing the two above gets pronounced "raku" in the on reading instance and "tano" in the kun reading.
name () readings are readings used in names which is kind of its own ball game of mostly native pronunciation.
To know which one you want, you can look for what is call okurigana (). For many kun- readings, there will be after the character (e.g. ). Otherwise, you will have to learn/guess based on context. There are some hints but no absolute rules, i.e. pairs of character tend to be on-yomi. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "kanji, pronunciation"
} |
ポイント as percent
In my writing class, I was surprised to learn that can be used to mean in graphs. In English, we don't normally call percentage points just points. Does anyone have any background / insight as to when/where can be used in Japanese? | It's just a shortened form of "percentage point." Japanese is a language that loves to abbreviate things, and saying every time could be unwieldy, and using "percentage points" is more accurate than saying "percent" when talking about increase if we're talking about a simple increase in a number of percentage points. For example, if we have 50%, and we say "It increased by 10%," technically that would make 55%. However if we say "It increased by 10 percentage points," it would be 60%, and that's where Japanese takes the usage from.
You can find some more details under here on Wikipedia. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "word choice"
} |
What's the difference between 浮かぶ and 浮く?
I often see in contexts relating to floatability, like:
However, sometimes I see used where I'd use . When should one be used over the other? Are there any cases where both are acceptable? | to float, float to the surface.
to be floating at a surface, float with no movement (think of the like ~ | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "word choice"
} |
Meaning of からに?
I have a little question.
> ****
My question is about the first sentence. I guess it must be translated like: "You're walking slow! And we have no time to lose!" I'm not sure, but **** is confusing me. What can that mean in this sentence? | Split the first sentence into these two pieces:
1)
2)
The first part is as you mention "(Because) you're walking slow"
The second part's key phrase is an altered form of which means something like "of course this is the reason why..."
Putting the two together, this would be "It's because you're _walking_ too slow (of course)!" as if to pin the blame on you for the group being late as a foregone conclusion. The next sentence then goes on to say "there's no time to waste!" as if to tell you to hurry up.
translation: < | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
On more than one は in a sentence
When is it okay to have more than one in a sentence? I've come across a few examples where there have been more than one , and hadn't why.
Example:
Thank you! | I think there are two ways to parse this:
>
and
>
In the first parsing, the second is contrastive, as in "With respect to Japanese, you at least know that there are a number of different speech styles, yeah?"
In the second parsing, the first is contrastive, as in "You know that Japanese has a number of different speech styles, but another language does not, right?"
There are two rules that I have internalized:
* Any embedded s are contrastive
* The first non-embedded is a normal topic marker, any following non-embedded s are contrastive
I have had other people disagree with this though, so a native speaker's opinion regarding this answer is needed. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "particles, particle は"
} |
How would you use 気持ちを込める?
Could you please give me an example of the expression '' and when you would use it?
Thank you in advance! :) | []{}[]{} is an often-used phrase when the mental or psychological aspect of something is being emphasized. = "to put my heart into ~~"
Baseball pitchers often say after a good performance, []{}[]{}[]{} = "I put my heart and soul into every pitch I made today."
A singing teacher may say []{} = "You need to put more heart into your singing!"
[]{}= "I put my feelings into baking this cake." | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "expressions"
} |
can anyone explain 聞きたいっておっしゃてました
Im scratching my head trying to figure out grammar behind
Its from my text book, which is translated into something like want to hear his word saying about it. I knew = want to hear, = polite word for say/speak, but couldnt put them together.
I guess there are some sort of contracted speech involved since the conversation is somewhat casual, but there isnt sufficient grammar guide for it in my book, nor could I google anything helpful beyond auto translation. Can anyone explain it to me and guide me roughly through this "contracted form" puzzle? | It's a conversational form of
where is a conversational form of the quoting reporting something being said, and the of is elided as it usually is in conversational speech. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
さらっと滑り meaning and use in this sentence
.
I can't understand the meaning of this sentence, someone is asking the permission to stop doing something because it's impossible to (?)
Could you please explain me? Thank you. | makes no sense as is because of the character.
If it were or , it would make perfect sense and the sentence would mean:
"Please do not slip a tall order in here as if it were nothing!" if that makes sense in English. In case it does not, the speaker is asking this person not to make an unreasonable demand without hesitation. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation"
} |
In「～てこ」, what does the こ do?
There are some lyrics in the song VOICE by Perfume that go:
>
> everything
I've no idea how functions here as I don't think I've encountered it before like this. The group are from []{} if that helps, though I couldn't find anything about it on the wiki for . It's probably something really simple. | It has nothing to do with Hiroshima dialect.
(volitional form of )
is just a colloquial pronunciation.
= "Let's go ~~ing!" or simply "Let's ~~!" | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "て form"
} |
How would you use 化かす?
The dictionary says that it means 'To bewitch.' Could you please give an example of it's use and when you'd use it?
Thank you immensely! | Taking an example from :
* []{}[]{} ("bewitched by a fox")
In this case, what did the bewitching (the fox) is followed by and the appropriate form of []{}.
If you wanted to add who was being bewitched, just add them as a subject, followed by , at the beginning. From there it works like any other Japanese verb. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "word choice, words, expressions"
} |
Why did Asahi Shinbun write "子{こ}ども" instead of "子供{こども}" in this headline?
I just happened across an Asahi Shinbun article with a headline that reads:
{}{}{}{} {}{}{}{}
(-) Compacting articles as much as possible is a standard practice in every newspaper in the world. Yet, the 3 character long "" was written instead of the 2 character long "".
(-) My understanding is that "" in "" is not {}{} If somehow it is, I hope someone can elaborate? "" does not happen after tangible nouns, right?
The writer of that headline absolutely has a reason for writing "", but I cannot imagine what it is. Conserving space in a newspaper is paramount, and "" looks good to me.
thank you. | The reason is the negativity associated with the plural suffix , which tends to be used in a derogatory way as in []{}, []{}, etc. " **Mouths to feed** " is what could sound/look like and unfortunately that is what the word used to often imply because Japan has not always been a wealthy nation like it is now.
In schools (Japanese schools. of course), I myself never officially learned to write or entirely in kanji -- **never**. I had, for that reason, long been wondering why Japanese-learners write it in kanji. However, in June of 2013, our Ministry of Education changed its mind and announced that it would use in all of its official documents.
<
I myself will probably keep writing it as or because old habits die hard, but since last June, we suddenly have every reason to write it as . Newspapers can go either way because they are not official documents issued by the government. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 31,
"question_score": 21,
"tags": "kanji"
} |
What's the difference between 「〜とつきあう」 and 「〜につきあう」?
I understand that means "to hang out with, to date, to keep company…". I've seen it used both with and with , but I haven't been able to figure out when to use which. So for example, what's the difference in meaning between
and
| There is an important difference in nuance and often even in meaning.
Nuance:
(Someone) **** = "to hang out with someone willingly"
(Someone) **** = "to hang out with someone **unwillingly** " because you feel obliged to do so.
Depending on context, (Someone) **** means "to date someone" and when it means this, the phrase cannot be replaced with(Someone) **** . That is unless you are dating that person unwillingly. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "word choice, particles"
} |
Meaning of ったらねえ
> ****
"That's why girls are so variable". I guess.
What about ****? I found that **** you can use when you tired of repeating yourself or when you are exasperated with somebody for not listening to you. So what would **** mean? | is a colloquial form of , and is a fixed phrase meaning "very" or "extremely". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
Meaning 良しとしましょう?
>
I'm confused. What that mean? | []{} can mean:
"Let's call it good enough!",
"We will let well enough alone.",
"It could be worse.",
etc. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
What makes 飯場 sensitive?
The entry for WWWJDIC lists as a possibly sensitive word (sens). However, the definition is just
> construction camp; bunkhouse; workers' living quarters
and it appears in , a novel from 1967, without any particular prejudice attached (in the description of a construction site). What's going on with this word? | From the Wikipedia article on Hitachi Mine (there does not appear to be one for itself):
>
The language is not direct, but it's easy to imagine what went on.
(as an aside, here appears to refer to a system of apprenticeship between miners.) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": -1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "word choice, nuances"
} |
もし without ～たら or ～えば
Can anyone explain this use of ? I thought it had to come before or .
> | I find this slightly non-standard, but fully understandable. I think it's a mix of the sentences
> ... People who saw it on TV, please...
and
> ... If anybody saw it on TV, please...
I don't think there's a hard rule that has to go with or , but it needs to precede some kind of condition. For example, () and () are also possible. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
What is the meaning of しちまおう?
I'm playing a video game and in this scene the character is on a hill and says:
>
My guess is that it's a conjugation of but it doesn't look close to at all.
What conjugations are present in that word and how does it affect the sentence's overall meaning? | Like snailplane commented, it is a contracted form of .
I would add that the final marks the volitional form of . If that can help you understand better the sentence, an other very similar way of saying it would be:
> | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, translation, meaning, conjugations"
} |
Usage and relation of に to 他
Tae Kim translates the following as:
_There are a lot of other good things, but as I thought, I'll go with this one._
Here is a noun, adjective or an adverb? I would think adjective, but then why the Because is a (as opposed to adjective then the conjugation to change to an adverb should be "" not "". However, () does not end in so I'm thoroughly confused as to how conjugates as an adverb.
Can someone please explain to me what is and why we use as opposed to or to express "good things"? | I would recommend avoiding projecting English/Western linguistic terminology onto Japanese as much as humanly possible, as it will mostly just distort what is really going on. Focus on how it is used until you're ready to read about native Japanese linguistic analysis. is because that's how it's used, in the end.
A more satisfying answer in between blind tautology and heavy-duty analysis is to analyze as a 'list of alternatives', as shown by the fragment. "" is expressing the existence of other choices, which you know is given the particle.
> ****
>
>> …
>
> ****
>
>> …
>
>
>
>> … ****
(If you are a programmer or an adventure gamer, you can think of it as a forked path, and the "" here as marking a direction or destination you go to upon choosing.) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "particles, adjectives, adverbs, na adjectives"
} |
さくらさくらの「ぞ」はどういう意味？
{}
I don't really know how well I structured that. In any case, what is the functionality of in ? I can only find web definitions for emphasis, at the end of sentences. | This is a {} (binding particle) from classical Japanese.
**History** : It was originally in the Nara period, then in the Heian period, gone in the Muromachi period except for people intentionally trying to sound poetic, such as the author of this poem.
**Semantics** : It stresses/emphasizes what it marks
**Syntax** : It occurs in the usual spots of a (the syntactic class containing , , , , etc.), but in addition, it is followed by the of a verb -- this phenomena occurs with a few other in Classical Japanese and is called .
**Examples** :
> ****
> ukon zo misiritaru. yobe.
> "Ukon knows for sure. Call her!"
>
> ****
> mina yorohi no sode wo zo nurasikeru.
> " _Everyone_ wet the sleeves of their armor."
In your case:
> **** {}
> kasumi ka kumo ka nioi zo izuru
> "Is it mist? Is it a cloud? The color radiates!"
(This is in fact a newer spelling of the of the , , meaning that this sentence fits the bill.) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "particles, song lyrics"
} |
Do 親切な (taisetsuna?) really exists?
From a basic Japanese book I'm reading, I found that word in a vocabulary table. Now I'm having problems finding that word using Google, jisho.org, etc. I can find (taisetsuna) and that kanji sequence Is what I get if I type the romaji in Windows or Linux, but I don't see the other word as an option. | The word in the title of your question is not {}, it is {}.
If you look up in jisho.org, you should discover that: on jisho.org | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "words, meaning"
} |
Is there a Japanese phrase that gets translated into English as "Steel and rice" coalition?
In a course I attended about Japan, there was the mention of a "Steel and rice" coalition. I don't understand the concept, so I can't define it.
When searching for the phrase, one match was for the following, in "Japan Transformed: Political Change and Economic Restructuring" by Frances McCall Rosenbluth and Michael F. Thies:
> The result was a "steel and rice" coalition backing the LDP, whereby heavy industry provided money for campaigns and farmers turned out the vote in large numbers.
The book compares it with an "iron and rye" coalition in nineteenth-century Germany. This makes me suspect that there is not a Japanese phrase that gets translated into English as "steel and rice" coalition, but instead English-speakers merely made a snowclone based on "iron and rye".
Is there a phrase that exists in Japanese that gets translated into English as "steel and rice" coalition? | []{} is the only term I could think of.
I am pretty sure that it should predate "steel and rice" in English, but I highly doubt that it predates "iron and rye" from German. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation"
} |
Meaning of かって?
> ****
I see the point, but this **** confusing me. And **** don't mean negative sense, right? And I guess that **** mean "Shit a brick" but I can be wrong. So, what **** mean here? | is not a word or phrase so it does not mean anything by itself.
is a colloquial pronunciation of . The is a question particle and is a quoting particle.
[]{}[]{}[]{}
"I thought/wondered to myself (that someone might) "
As you said, here is affirmative.
here means "I" (= the speaker). | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
「行きと違い」 phrase meaning
I completely cannot grasp the meaning of here:
>
"After I finished the dinner, I wandered an unfamiliar road to the dormitory. , without my friend's guidance I almost lost my way." | is the of , comparable to here.
X is "unlike X", "different from X".
And is the opposite of , that is, "on the way there" as opposed to "on the way back" (presumably the character is currently on the way back). See . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, translation"
} |
What does ちゃい in やっちゃいねぇ mean?
Context:
> ****
What does the in mean? I suppose it's not aka ... | here is a combination shortened/colloquial version of .
> is a change that happens frequently in colloquial masculine speech (which this pretty obviously is, it's got also).
is a shortening of . You're generally allowed to put a topic particle between the two halves of a -+VERB construction (unless the verb is ). | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, meaning"
} |
Differences between なし and あらず?
At some point in history, replaced * as the negative of , at least in the Kantō dialect (Kansai seems to have ; is also apparently attested in some dialects).
When did this happen? That is, when did and its descendants replace and its descendants? Were and coexistent in the Heian period, or was one preferred over another? I see both used in later CJ texts, but it feels strange that there are two words with exactly the same meaning for such a common idea (not exist).
Currently, in polls etc you often see as choices, rather than . Is this a Modern Japanese influence, or is this usage idiomatic (i.e. rather than was seen as the obvious opposite of )
Additionally, does and have different nuances? | is often used in or old sayings (like ) probably made at least around 50 - 100 years ago.. but I don't know exactly when.
Nobody would say in spoken or written language today. Although people can fully understand it, it's something you only read or hear people citing those old saying. It is not used in day-to-day life.
So, simply means "there is not", while meaning the same with the nuance that the sentence was composed / used long time ago. It also brings the nuance that the message conveyed has stood the test of time, and with a bit more authority, or properness. Modern people might intentionally use to bring this atmosphere of some old saying even though the sentence might be composed quite recently. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "etymology, history, classical japanese"
} |
How accurate is the ふりがな on Aozora Books?
I would love to use Aozra Books as a learning tool, but the accuracy of its concerns me. This book, for example, claims is pronounced instead of .
Is the former a proper pronunciation? | To answer the question in the title, the furigana in Aozora files are the furigana that were actually used in the printed original. So they are accurate in the sense that they represent actual usage.
However, because most of the books there are very old (the majority being prewar), that usage often does not reflect what the Ministry of Education deems acceptable today. In the first few lines of Ozaki Hōsai's "Yogisha", for example, I see {} and {}. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "furigana"
} |
What is the difference between "出勤" and "通勤"?
As the title implies, I want to know the difference between "" and "".
Both of them mean "commuting to work" in English.
And which should I choose in the following sentence:
> | There is a fairly big difference in meaning between the two words.
[]{} means "arriving at one's workplace". The focus is on your presence at work by a certain time and/or on certain days. It has an antonym []{} = "absence" from work.
[]{} means "commuting to and from work" and the focus is on the transportation method, the time it takes you to commute, how easy/tiring it is, etc. has no antonym.
Thus, the answer for the question at the end should be . The word[]{} should give a clue as cannot take place both in the morning and in the evening. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "jlpt"
} |
- に詰まる meaning and use
in the sentence
.
I know that means to be at loss of words
Does mean to stop thinking?
thank you! | It means "to have a momentary brain freeze" but it is not of the icecream kind. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation"
} |
"くださいませんか" vs. "いただけませんか"
When I want to make more formal, I always say . But, I want to double-check this.
I never say . While that seems perfectly fine, I don't think I've heard it used very much by native speakers. Rather, I think they more frequently say .
(-) Is really used more frequently than ?
(-) Ignoring any sort of "nuance", are there any cases where I _cannot_ say and I _must_ say ?
thank you. | You did not mention one (important) thing so I would like to ask. Are you aware that the unmentioned subjects of the sentences are different between and ?
BTW, you would need to write and in KANA because they are used as supplementary verbs here.
In , the hidden subject is "you". With "Verb + ", the subject is the listener. This is polite speech.
In , the hidden subject is "I". With "Verb + ", the subject is the speaker. This is humble and polite speech.
To answeer your questions, we do not really use one form more frequently than the other. In general, however, would sound more polite, so it would be considered too polite to use within your []{} group -- your family, bosses, colleagues, etc.
With your []{} group, it would not sound too polite; in fact, it would sound just right. That group includes strangers, people from other companies than your own, teachers, etc. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "word choice, honorifics"
} |
When おばあさん is not really your grandmother
When native speakers of Japanese use to refer to an older woman who is not that that individual's own grandmother, does their _concept_ of the woman include any expectation that she would have had children at some point during her life? | Generally speaking, yes, there is that assumption in our minds, but this custom rarely, if ever, causes problems when the older woman addressed as by a stranger actually turns out to be someone who has never had a child in her life. That is because it is likely that she herself has been addressing any older lady since she was little. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning"
} |
Saying "I did X because of Y"
Is there a common way to express the reason for something _after_ stating what the something is? All the ways I can think of explaining situations involve putting it before. I.e. . I was hoping to say something along the lines of "I had this thought because ~". | There are many ways to do that. I will only introduce the patterns most often used by us native speakers. Note that to do this in Japanese, it will basically take two separate sentences. In informal writing, however, one could get away with combining the two into one by replacing the period after the first sentence with a comma.
1) A sentence.
2A sentence.
3) A sentence.
4) A sentence.
To express "I had this thought because ~~.", you could say:
XXX/or
XXX | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
What does 「つけ」 mean as slang?
Specifically in the context of the following sentence, from (1967):
>
>
> …
>
> ****
Background: The speaker is describing a low-level gangster who is running a shady group of unlicensed meal trucks near a large rural construction site.
I looked up on zokugo-dict.com, but didn't find anything. Is he spiking the food with drugs, or what? Why does he have to bribe his superior back in the city to do it? | / is a regular word, not a slang one. I know exactly what it means but am not too sure how to say it in English. "Tab" maybe? You keep an account at your bar and pay monthly or something. The word comes from the verb []{} which means "to enter (numbers in an account)".
means you (are permitted to) keep a tab.
Regarding the bribe, it is saying that the workers bribed the to have him negotiate with the bar so that the workers can keep a tab and have the company pay for it from their wages periodically. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "slang"
} |
やつしてみたかった expression meaning
I've never read this expression before. I just know that means _to be absorbed, to lose yourself to_ , so I was gessing that maybe in this case it could mean:
"I wanted to lose myself in a kiss"
I am I right? Or does it have a different meaning?
Thank you a lot. | You're parsing it wrongly. It's not the verb , but the noun and the verb .
- kiss
- colloquial form of
- in this case simply means "thing"
So we have "thing called a kiss" so far.
- te-form of
- from which attached to the te-form of another verb means to try doing something
- emotive final particle
Put it together and you get "wanted to try doing".
So a very literal translation would be:
> I wanted to try doing that thing called a kiss
You might have been confused because there is no particle between and but these particles are often omitted in casual speech. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation"
} |
"くれない" vs. "ください"
I recently asked about the differences between "" and "". But, I just realized I have a related question.
Doesn't "" have the same basic meaning as ""? And, isn't it more polite, and less confrontational? For example:
"" <\-- direct / confrontational. spoken to someone beneath you.
"" <\-- same meaning and more polite?
If that is correct, then I can be done with saying "". I've got respect and humility to pretty much everyone, so I'm just going to continue always saying "". That makes sense, right?
btw: In the case of "", I would say:
"" instead of "". Is this correct? Is it like slang, or something?
thank you. | You have it backwards. is the honorific version of .
is a tiny bit softer than (since it's negated), but in terms of showing respect, actually less polite -- do not use it with your boss.
Something worth pointing out though, is that could be more appropriate in some situations where the extra respect actually makes things overly distant and as a result, somewhat rude or odd (for example, when talking with friends or subordinates).
(As for vs , you are correct that is slang, generally not used in writing but by some people in speech.) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "word choice"
} |
Question about particle にも
I cannot grasp what means between and in the following sentence, maybe something like "foolishness of taking up arms not knowing their place" ?
As far as I can understand the sentence: "Let them taste true fear. Make them remember the foolishness of () taking up arms against our nation and our people, and then allow them to savor their bitter victory!"
> ****
Thank you! | It is the emphatic that is used frequently in Japanese. It emphasizes the word or phrase that immediately precededs it. In this case it is that is being emphasized.
= "not having the slightest idea who they are (or 'what position they are in')" | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
What does これも at the start of a sentence mean?
I have found a dictionary definition of , (meaning roughly "this is also") so I'm assuming that this is a shortened version of it. What troubles me is I can't find it without the , so I wonder if it is very informal or if it shouldn't be used in polite writing/speech. Any insight on this would be really helpful.
> | It's just a literal "this too" in the example you gave.
>
This is what we're talking about. Young readers don't like to get too sentimental. This concept is what we're referring to in the next sentence with .
> _(=)_
So this idea of fearing the sentimental may be a lonesome expression of fear of being hurt, to offer a simple translation. The is implying that there's been another mention of these manifestations of those fears, or at least that the reader is familiar with them, and this is referred to as . So there are more of these concepts; this just happens to be one of them. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "words, particle も"
} |
Passive usage of 「済まされない」 in sentences
I cannot get my head around the verb in this sentence.
> 10
I found this in the on goo dictionary's page for the verb . The page says that the sentence means _I can't make do with 100,000 yen a month_.
This is fine, I think I can understand the sentence and if I see something like this in the future I think I can recognize it.
However, as the goo dictionary page is about and not I'm bound to think that [] is the passive conjugation of the former. But, if I translate this to English or to my native tongue (Hungarian) the sentence/expression/meaning doesn't sounds passive (to me) at all (forgive me if my translating skills are way off about this).
Can someone explain to me how the verb or verb conjugation can be interpreted "passively" in sentences? Thanks! | It's true that () is often referred to as a "passive" form because that's one of its main uses, but it has other uses as well. They can be divided into four categories:
* - passive _(most common)_
* - potential
* - honorific
* - spontaneous _(least common)_
This is an example of the **potential** use of (), here inflected to the negative , meaning . You can see this reflected in the English translation in the word "can't":
> 10 ****
> I **can't** make do with 100,000 yen a month.
Here, **** means ****. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "conjugations, transitivity, passive voice"
} |
Does 甘い蜜 have another meaning?
literally means "sweet honey". But in some sentences it seems to mean something different. For example,
> 1) **** ……
_From time to time giving a sweet honey, but also dropping into darkness._
> 2) ****
_After all, only they always suck a sweet honey._
> 3) ****
_I instigate you, give you sweet honey, and in the end corrupt you._
Well, in the last sentence it must be "give you a pleasure". Anyway, I think that must mean something pleasurable, something that makes people happy.
My question is: what is the meaning of in sentences like these? | []{}[]{} is seldom used to mean what it literally means --- "sweet honey". Instead, it is generally used metaphorically to refer to instant pleasure or satisfaction that is often used as a trap or lure. That is what the phrase means in your sentences #1 and #3.
In #2, is used for a meaning that is kind of close (but not exactly) to its literal meaning. There, it means "the sweet reward". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
Reading of 退く meaning "Go away"
Here is a passage from my Japanese Bible
> **** []{}
>
> Then the Devil took Jesus to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world in all their greatness. "All this I will give you, " the Devil said, "if you kneel down and worship me." Then Jesus answered, " **Go away** , Satan! The scripture says, 'Worship the Lord your God and serve only him!' " \- Matthew 4:8-10
So the choices we have are ``, ``, ``, and ``. I know all of these readings overlap at least somewhat in meaning, so I'm not really sure which one is best. I think `` would be more for "get out of my way" rather than "go away", but that would imply some kind of movement on Jesus' part (the pre- and proceeding verses don't indicate he was walking or otherwise mobile). `` just sounds too long and unnatural, although that's just a subjective assessment. `` feels the most natural to me.
So which one is it? Or is more than one acceptable in this context? | Without looking at anything, I would have to say that would be the most natural choice. If it were , or , a good writer or translator would have written it in hiragana. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "nuances, kanji, readings"
} |
How do I address my juniors in college or school?
If "senpai" means someone's senior, then if I am the senior what do I call my freshman i.e. the one who is younger than me in the same school or something. How do I address them? | To address younger kids in your school, you use their names and nicknames. You DO NOT address them as []{} unless it is jokingly done (and it is rarely done).
However, younger kids can address YOU as []{} either all by itself or by combining it with your family name like []. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation"
} |
Siri's pronunciation of ふ
Recently, I've been using Siri in Japanese to set cooking timers. I've noticed she pronounced theinclearly as /hu/, not /fu/.
_From Wikipedia:_
> Old Japanese does not have /h/, but rather /ɸ/ (preserved in modern fu, /ɸɯ/), which has been reconstructed to an earlier /*p/.
_Also from Wikipedia:_
> It represents the phoneme /hu͍/, although for phonological reasons, the actual pronunciation is [ɸu͍].
The sound sample in the Wikipedia article does sound more like /fu/.
While I understand it's basically the same phoneme for the Japanese, I do hear the difference. Hence the question.
Is the Siri's variant acceptable? | Well, I can again only speculate, but if they say it did not have `/h/` but had `/ɸ/` and nowadays it have `/h/`, it have probably evolved from that `/ɸ/`. When _I_ played with my mouth and tried to say /hɯ/, with stiff lips as the Japanese /ɯ/ is to be pronounced, than I get a sound which resembles rather /ɸɯ/. So, maybe it is ok to try to say /hɯ/, you say /ɸɯ/ anyway, if you are a living human being, just Siri isn't ;-)
But that's just my speculations. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "phonetics"
} |
Dictionary entry legend
I'm reading the section on sanseido.net about how entries from a certain dictionary are laid out but I'm having a little trouble understanding the section below. As far as I can tell, is put on the right of non-Jouyou kanji (as in the first example). I can't quite figure out what or are used for. What is?
> (2)
>
>
>
> [0]
> [2][0]
> [0]
> [0]
Also, unrelated to the main question, but does anyone know what the [2][0] is referring to? I was thinking something to do with pitch accent but why are there two numbers? Two different possible pitches? | is for kanji that don't appear _at all_ on the .
is when the kanji appears on the chart, but the word uses a reading the chart does not include. Their example of `` marks `` this way because the official chart only includes the readings and for that kanji.
The referred to is part of the as well (see page 154 of the PDF linked above). It contains readings such as and which are assigned to entire compounds rather than individual kanji. For example, the reading is assigned to the entire compound . These are marked with in .
Yes, [2][0] refers to two possible accent locations. (second mora and unaccented). | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "dictionary"
} |
Is 結構くせ related to 結構人?
I recently came across the word . Haven't found any entries for it in the usual places (zokugo-dict, WWWJDIC, etc.) According to kotobank, is a synonym for .
Is the (negative) habit of being an ?
Context: … | []{} is an extremely often-used word meaning "fairly", "pretty (much)", "to a (great) degree", etc.
means "to have pretty strong or peculiar habits"
[]{} habit
Lastly, []{} has nothing to do with . It means a "very likable person". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "definitions, synonyms"
} |
What does 春夏冬 mean?
So, I was watching an anime, whereupon I found the following text (cf. screencap):
>
>
>
This text appears in the context of the character trying to find work. I'm having difficulty figuring out what means. If you just glue the _on_ readings for those three characters together, you get , which only seems to appear as the name of various establishments. I also found that this can apparently be read in a punny way as (since is all the seasons but ).
I'm guessing that the correct reading of in this context is since doesn't fit. But what does that actually mean? I doubt it's / / "not autumn", given that that doesn't make sense in context.
This term doesn't seem to appear in any of the standard online dictionary searches (kotobank, goo.ne.jp, weblio, nor even in zokugo-dict), so I'm kind of at a loss here. | _The following answer is based on information taken from an earlier answer written by Tokyo Nagoya, which has been deleted by the author._
As you point out, {} is a reference to the four seasons, and in the case of , has cleverly been left off (and a added). Your intuition about the part meaning that there is no autumn is correct. When you add the {} at the end you get , which is a homophone of . This is synonymous with {}, or "in business"/"open." It's a kanji pun saying that his business is open.
So we go →→→{} | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "words"
} |
how does いと + 形容詞 work as a pattern?
The phrase "" occurs pretty frequently in the Japanese bible in the book of Daniel.
Doing a little sleuthing I'm also seeing and as somewhat similar constructions. I get that means exceedingly as an adverb that modifies the adjective.
>
>
> _Gloria in excelsis Deo_ ->
>
> "Give me the lowest place" -> () (
1. What is this conjugation called?
2. How does this conjugation work?
3. Is the set of that receive it limited?
4. Can the prefix only be used with this conjugation? | 1. is the classical form of the of . Sound changes caused to turn into for the modern (and ).
2. works exactly like in modern Japanese, except it can't be at the end of sentences, it can only be in relative clauses:
3. No, any can end with in classical (or pseudo-classical) Japanese.
4. is:
* an adverb (), not a prefix -- it can modify any adjective (in any conjugation) and any verb
* archaic ( being the closest word used in modern Japanese), so it'd be unlikely to see it mixed with an ending (as opposed to classical endings , , etc.), but honestly there are no rules for creating pseudo-classical Japanese text, so someone could decide to use with if they felt that it gave the right feel to their text.
I would certainly not recommend using either the ending or yourself. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "conjugations, adjectives, i adjectives"
} |
How are these translations of "I had an exam yesterday" different?
How would "I had an exam yesterday" be translated?
>
>
>
If both of the above are correct, what is the difference between them? | Your first sentence is almost grammatical. It has one big problem, though: doesn't take a direct object (marked with ). If you replaced it with , it would be grammatical with the intended meaning:
> {} ****
I think in this context you could also say {}:
> []{} ****
Alternatively, you can use the verb {}, saying you _took_ a test rather than _had_ a test:
> **** {}
Notice the here rather than , because is the direct object of .
Your second sentence is grammatical but wouldn't be my first choice to express having a test. I think that phrase would be more likely if you were giving someone else a test than taking one yourself. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, particles"
} |
Have a trouble with まで
>
This confusing me. In this case it's translating like "even", right? | Here, is an intensifier and "even" is a valid translation.
[]{}[]{} | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation"
} |
文言 もんごん ぶんげん why are the differences between these two readings and why is もんごん more common?
As stated in the title the reading for can be or . I know that is almost always used in speech, but why do two readings exist and why is so much more common? Also, are their any specific circumstances when is preferred? | is the reading, and is the reading. Although kanji compounds () can in principle have both readings (in addition to any number of customary ones), it seems it is more common to have only one. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "etymology, readings"
} |
Vて vs Vてから vs Vたうえで
There is a question in JLPT Prep book Kanzen Master N2 that confuses me:
>
> a. b. c.
V suggests a cause/effect relationship so c is obviously wrong.
a is right but I want to know why b is wrong?
It's grammatically wrong or is there a problem with the meaning in this case. | Think about how the part is involved. If you made it `b`, the would only apply to the first part leaving by itself and making it not clear that that part is also supposed to be . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "jlpt"
} |
~したいと思います Does it mean exactly as translated? I think I want to
I frequently hear this pattern when watching Japanese TV. From a japanese native's perspective is this the only meaning to it: "I think I want to ~" | I think we say to mean "would like to do (now)", and to mean "would like to/hope to do (in the future)". I think / sounds politer (and humbler?) than . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 10,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
買えっつてだろうが meaning
>
It's very colloquial but I can't understand this part Why is written like this ? | I think it's meant to say ().
| stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning"
} |
Don't undestand this particular use of ない form
This is the example sentence from one of my textbooks.
Textbooks translation - "We have some time so how about we grab a bite to eat and then go?"
I don't understand why the form here doesn't translate to a present negative like 'grab a bite to eat and don't go" hence my confusion over its meaning. Either the translation is somehow off (unlikely), this sentence is simply incorrect (unlikely) or theres some rule I'm forgetting or don't know about (very much likely). Please help. | The textbook translation is correct, but kind of roundabout. It's more like, "We have some time, so **_why don't we_** grab a bite to eat and then go?" The "ikanai" would be pronounced with a rising intonation that affords a suggestion: `[]{LLLH}`
It does make sense if you do some "logical shifts" of the **not** part of the meaning and some semantic substitution.
> ...
> → Will we eat and then **not** go?
> → Will we **not** eat and then go?
> → Will **not** we eat and then go? (ungrammatical and/or strange in English, but added for visual reference)
> → Wo ** _n't_** we eat and then go?
> → "Wo ** _n't_** we eat and then go?" + rising-intonation = "Why do ** _n't_** we eat and then go?" | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, translation, meaning"
} |
Use of も in this sentence: パブもシティーセンターも静かになります。
This is the sentence in question from one of my text books.
>
My Translation - "There are no students so the pubs and city centre become quiet."
Why is it and not separating and and then another before which I don't understand at all? | As pointed out in the comments, (with a positive verb) corresponds usually to the construction "both ... and ..." in English. The Japanese construction is not limited to two nouns, but one has (which might be "all of ..., ... and ..." in English).
I understand the construction to be "not restrictive" in the sense that can mean "both ... and ... and a bunch of other ...". On the other hand suggest "exactly ... and ...". So here
>
> Because there are no students, pubs, the city centre _and everything else_ become quiet.
>
>
> Because there are no students, particularly pubs and the city centre become quiet _although everywhere else business is as usual_. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar, particles"
} |
すげえまずい expression meaning
what is the meaning of the expression alone?
I've never read it before.
Thank you. | <= <= i.e. gross/really awful tasting.
As for the change => , you might be aware of, for example, => , both of which are very informal.
P.S. Since you provide no context, I assumed that refers to food. is used in other contexts, so you may have to adjust the translation accordingly. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation, slang, spoken language"
} |
Translation of マネージャー
> ,
Well, is manager. If here was "dispenser" instead "manager" it would be understandable. So what "manager" doing here? | One of the meanings of `` is "food/provisions provided for someone (who is busy with some task)". So, the sentence could be translated as:
> Well, let's drink this together. The manager brought it earlier for us [while we were working].
Another sign that `` is a person here is the verb ``, which can be applied only to people (though I guess personification is possible).
If you're not familiar with usage of ``, here's a pretty detailed post on the four verbs to express giving and receiving:
<
In your sentence, the speaker received something from the manager and is expressing gratitude for it. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation"
} |
ふざけずに! what is the meaning of this exclamation?
What is the meaning of this exclamation alone?
>
I know that means to kid - to play and that means without, so it could be "without kidding" but it doesn't sound right to me. | It's an indirect negative imperative. A stereotypical example:
> A:
>
> B: ?
>
> A: Nah, actually I don't need it.
>
> B: Aw, don't be like that. How about I cut the price a little bit more? | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation"
} |
Is there a strict usage difference between 耐性 and 耐容 in medical contexts?
According to WWWJDIC and ALC, is used for drug tolerance (e.g., ), but is used for radiation (e.g. ). Based on that, my guess is that can be used to express neutral effects like decrease in drug _effectiveness_ , while expresses limitations on _harm_.
Is this a strict distinction? Does the distinction exist at all? | The kanji carries the meaning "to accept", "to allow". Similar constructs include etc. The here is used for the same meaning. I.e. does imply how much it can tolerate **harm** being done. on the other hand is neutral.
To recap, can be used to refer resistance against both benefit and harm, while can only be used for resistance against harm:
Benefit: -> ok
Harm: -> ok
Benefit: -> bad (unless you mean how much insulin one can take)
Harm: -> ok | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "word choice, usage, jargon"
} |
Does 鉄拳 mean "fist" or "iron fist"?
The kanji for seems to suggest that the word means "iron fist". However, various dictionaries suggests that the meaning is simply "fist".
For example, Edict shows that the meaning for is "fist", and the meaning for is "punishment by striking with fist".
Kotobank, Excite.co.jp, and Goo also show that the meaning is "a (clenched) fist".
Does mean "fist" or "iron fist"?
How does it's meaning and usage compare with ()? | An excerpt from 's definition for :
>
In short, means fist, while means more specifically a _tightly clenched_ fist. This should come as no surprise to you, as you've already looked it up in dictionaries which say so.
It's true that it literally means "iron fist", but it isn't generally used for its literal meaning. Instead, it's figurative: when you tightly clench your fist, it's strong and unyielding like a fist of iron. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 10,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "usage, meaning, nuances, synonyms"
} |
Checking the translation of あそぶ in this sentence
The sentence in question:
My translation - I guided my friend who is coming from Japan around London.
I know that can be used to mean 'hang out with', and that’s what I'm guessing it means here, but I'm struggling to translate it into English and have it sound right with the rest of the sentence. You wouldn't say for instance "I guided my friend, whom I hang out with, who is coming from Japan around London" - It just sounds odd.
Could it be translated as "A friend whom I hang out with is coming from Japan and I guided him/her around London"? | I think here means something like "for fun" or "for leisure". In other words, they came on a pleasure trip, not for business or studying.
What may be confusing is that it's natural to express this in Japanese directly when you'd express it only indirectly in English. Phrases like "came to visit" or "went to see" generally _imply_ that it's for pleasure and not for business. You don't need to say "My friend came to visit me **for pleasure** " because it's implied by the phrase "came to visit".
As a result, the most natural translation here doesn't include words like "for pleasure":
> [ **** ]
>
> [ my friend who **came to visit** from Japan ]
But it's natural to express it explicitly in Japanese with . Phrases like and are very common. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 10,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "grammar, translation, verbs, word order"
} |
Can you use 持つ to mean 'to wait'?
My translation – “Do you want to hold/wait on going to the party?”
Is this translation correct basically? I wasn’t sure if ‘to hold’ could be used in the same sense as ‘to wait’ in Japanese as is the case in English as when I look up in my dictionary it doesn’t give a possible meaning of ‘to wait’. | No, []{} cannot mean 'to wait', your translation is incorrect. Are you confusing it with []{}?
> []{}
> "Shall we go ahead and bring something along to the party?" | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, meaning, verbs"
} |
字幕：一ヶ月前⇒発音：いっかすまえ?
In the finale of a drama called , around 8:26 in, I saw this subtitle:
> ****
But the pronunciation of sounded either like or to me, with no sign whatsoever of . The two speakers in the dialogue are male and both have pronounced that word the same way. One final detail I can add is that I've noticed quite a bit of spoken in this. Is this slang? A regional dialect? I can't find any info about this kind of contraction.
Update: Here's the clip(sorry it took 4 months ^^ ): < | @rintaun and I determined that this quote is from the finale of a drama called , around 8 minutes 26 seconds in. We both listened to it and heard the /g/, though I'd describe it as "swallowed", while rintaun described it as "slightly elided, but it's there".
We both thought it sounded like the velar nasal allophone of /g/ which is pronounced [ŋ], very much like the <ng> sound in English _sing_. What might make it hard to catch is that unlike the other Japanese pronunciation of /g/, this one doesn't actually stop the airflow, it just makes it go briefly through the nose.
The nasal /g/ appears more often in Eastern dialects, not Western. The actor who plays is named ( ) and according to his official website is from Tokyo, so it makes sense that he'd have that pronunciation of /g/. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "pronunciation"
} |
What is the difference (if any) between these two sentences?
As far as I can tell both translate to - "I want to study at university". I'm just wondering if one sounds more 'natural' in Japanese than the other and indeed whether either structure is more approriate in different situations or not. | >
Here, `{}` is a noun, and `` is the verb being acted on it, so you have something like, "At university I want to _do_ study." However, this direct English translation is a little ungrammatical, and the original Japanese isn't. So, with a little flexibility, perhaps we can capture the Japanese meaning with something like, "At university I really want to _do some study_!" By acting **on** the noun with a separate verb, it holds it up for emphasis.
>
Here, `{}` is made into a verb by attaching `` directly to it without the `` particle. It becomes, "At university I want to study." This would most likely be the preferred way of expressing the idea.
Depending on the context in which you were speaking, `` could work, but if all you want to express is your desire to study at university, `` is the more natural of the two. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "usage, nuances"
} |
Sentence with ように
>
Yeah, mean "as/like". So this must translating like "I thought that it's normal when people around are kind to me like believe that dad loves me." ? Or not? | Yes, means "as/like" here, among a few possibilities. This is a minor issue, but I would interpret is what happened in the past: so the sentence translates like "... like I believed that Dad loved me." | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation"
} |
Use of a comma to separate a single word
I brushed up on the use of Japanese commas () here, but I don't think it explained this usage I found on .
The sentence is this:
Why exactly is the OP using the comma like this? The rule of thumb for me in English is that if you pause when speaking, you should use a comma in writing. I've just carried that over to Japanese somewhat, but this sentence would sound very unnatural to my (non-native) ears if one where to pause after . Is that just not the case? Is this a standard use of the or internet slang, or...? | Strictly speaking, I think it should be
>
but the person wrote it as
>
probably because s/he thought it wouldn't cause any confusion (and maybe because s/he was just being lazy; I might do that too when I want to save the trouble of typing the brackets :p). If it was like
>
then...
> ()
might look a bit confusing and it might be a bit harder to realize how it's parsed at first glance. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar, punctuation"
} |
Does using the characters です at the end of a sentence make almost everything(depending on the sentence) sound polite?
For example if i say something like,"”
Versus if I say,"".
Is the second sentence (stated above) grammatically correct or does there "need" to be a particle at the end of my sentence?
I appreciate all the help I can get from you wonderful people.
Please give me your knowledge and help me better educate my self.
~A man seeking to improve himself | There are actually three sentences worth discussing
> **(1)**
>
> **(2)**
>
> **(3)**
For each sentence, we should consider three dimensions: **grammaticality** , **softness** , and **politeness**.
(1) is **soft** (doesn't sound too direct), **polite** (shows respect for addressee).
(2) is **rough** (sounds like a point's trying to be made), **not polite** (doesn't show respect for addressee).
(3) is **soft** (doesn't sound too direct), **not polite** (doesn't show respect for addressee).
_All three_ are **grammatical**.
(Note: "Not polite" doesn't necessarily mean "rude". There is no need to use the polite form with your friends, close family, or people much younger than you, for example -- in these cases the polite form would be overly distant or odd.)
(Note 2: It's probably worth pointing out that the presence of makes all of these sentences sound a little jarring.) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "spoken language"
} |
Can ガム mean "bubble gum"?
A quick Edict, Kotobank, Excite.co.jp, and Goo search on shows that it is an abbreviation for .
Google results for also seems to suggest so. (Notice that the results only show and no )
But can be used to mean "bubble gum", or is it actually already a _codified_ term for "chewing gums"?
Take for example we have both a chewing gum and a bubble gum on a table. Will "" be ambiguous because can refer to both items? Or would it non-ambiguous because in that context, will most surely be referring to the chewing gum?
Note: Bubble gums can be blown, like a balloon coming straight out of the mouth. Chewing gums can't achieve that, no matter how hard one tries. | Sure, can be used to refer to bubble gum.
is short for , and according to , is a type of :
> **-**
> ****
And if you look online, you can find people saying {}. Sure, sometimes they write , but sometimes it's just . For example, take a look at this question on OKWave:
> ****
>
> ...
>
> ****
> **** ****
Here, they talk about how they can always manage to blow bubbles with "bubble gum", which they compare to "regular gum". And the question title simply says , which appears to be a hypernym of both and . If really didn't include , the question title would be confusing, and they wouldn't have had to specify in the question body—just saying would be enough. Obviously, that isn't the case!
The same goes for the top answer on the question. Here's an excerpt:
> ****
> **** OK
You can find plenty more examples like these. As you can see, people don't have trouble understanding (or ) as a type of . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "word usage"
} |
What particle to use as *of* when saying "X percent *of* something"?
I would like to be able to say X percent of something, but I haven't been able to find the particle that would correspond to _of_. Could you use
For example:
> 10 (10 percent of population)? | Yes, I think you can say here:
>
> _10% of the population_
I think it would be more common to write than , but either way.
As an aside, for even tenths I think you can use instead:
>
> _a tenth of the population_
Each is one tenth. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "particles"
} |
Simultaneous actions with the -te form
In English you can use conjunction to express two simultaneous actions:
> I was standing in front of an audience and presenting a new technology.
Or simply juxtapose two participles where one modifies the other:
> I was standing in front of an audience, presenting a new technology.
Am I correct to suppose that in Japanese you would use something like (i.e. juxtaposed -te form verbs) for both variants? | Yes, but there are multiple ways to say it. Just off the top of my head, I can think of at least these:
*
*
*
*
Some of them has subtle nuances that others don't have, but I think all of them are more or less interchangeable. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, syntax"
} |
Is there a shorter way to say 下の名前?
Since can also mean full name, it would be nice to have a single word that is complimentary to . Is there one available for common use? | In spoken language, strange as it may sound, there is really no shorter way to say []{}[]{} to refer to one's given name. As a native speaker, I would surely know if there were such a word.
There are a couple of ways to ask for one's given name in spoken Japanese.
1) Direct: []{}
2) Indirect: []{}[]{} (or []{})
In both cases, you already know the person's family name but not his given name.
In written language, however, a short word for "given name" exists, which is . On official forms, you often see two separate spaces for []{} and []{}. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "synonyms"
} |
When is 兄弟 interpreted as "siblings" and when is it interpreted as "brothers"?
I know that people often ask []{} but does this mean "do you have siblings?" or just "do you have brothers?".
Since the answer would be different in either case:
(Has a sister) "No, but I have a sister" or would it be "Yes, I have a sister" (Has a brother) "Yes I do" | When you say , it normally means "Do you have siblings?" (You'd say like ()/ to mean "Do you have brothers?") I think ()/()() will normally be responded with
> ///(X)
> ///(X)
>
>
etc...
You'll say "No" when you're the only child:
>
>
> | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "words"
} |
How do you say "question", and which counter should be used?
I'd like to know the word for "question" itself. For example if I wanted to say:
> I have a question
>
> (question)
I've had a hard time finding an answer to this question because when I search, Google turns up results for question words instead, and I'd rather ask a fluent speaker than a dictionary.
I'd also like to know what counter should be used for counting questions, and if it is regular (so if, when pronouncing the number before the counter it just follows the regular sequence of , , , etc. or if there are any exceptions.)
Apologies for asking three questions, I can move them onto separate threads if need be, but they're all related which is why I didn't. | means question, so the sentence would be Interestingly the counter for question is which is the last syllable of source
I don't know how to say you have three questions, as you can probably tell I'm not a native speaker, but I think you can say I have some questions, using which means some, a few or several source. So the sentence would be like this or | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "word choice, counters, questions"
} |
What are the different ways to use ように&如く?
Ex:
I've seen a few things on the former, but nothing in my materials mentions anything about the latter. Everything I have turned up has revealed precious little about it. Anyone have any info? | only means 'similar to', while can mean either 'similar to' or 'I hope that'. Also, both uses of are perfectly modern, while is rarely ever used in Modern Japanese outside of intentional archaisms.
As mentioned in the comments, can take a genitive phrase with either or the more archaic , while can only take genitives with . Also, I am not sure about the grammaticality of a , but is quite happy with them - indeed, the desiderative use of requires one, and is one of the few cases where you'll see - used as a .
You may also on occasion come across the even more archaic form of , . Originally it was an adjective (though somewhat defective IIRC, I've only ever seen these two forms) - - is the archaic of adjectives (the modern form being -, descended from the archaic -). | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
Distinguishing between んな/な, んの/の, etc
I'm learning Japanese, but I'm still very early on in my education (Rosetta Stone, some books and a Japanese-speaking friend). I'm pretty sure I'm grasping the basic concepts okay, but I'm having issues when hearing other people speak the language. Specifically, right now, hearing the "" sound.
When hearing a word like spoken, how do I know this word is written and not ? To me, the pronunciation is extremely similar.
Is there a rule or any tips that will help me discern when I am hearing "" (" _nna_ ") as opposed to "" (" _na_ ")? (Also "" instead of simply "", you know what I mean.) | The difference is audible as Japanese pronunciation has a rhythm based on morae:
* Every simple kana , , , etc., is one mora long. (This includes !)
* The contractions , , etc. are one mora long.
* The long vowel mark () (e.g. in ) is one mora long.
* The small () counts one mora.
So is five morae long and should be pronounced that way, i.e. /ko.ɴ.ni.tɕi.wa/ and not /ko.ni.tɕi.wa/. Similarly, will be pronounced /o.ɴ.na/, not /o.na/.
If you listen closely, you should detect the difference.
N.B. The difference between and is clearly audible (the latter is pronounced twice as long as the former). The difference between and is much subtler: []{}, []{} are examples, where the etymology is clearly /, but the words are now written / instead. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "pronunciation, spoken language, morae"
} |
Why is the き in 充電器 器 not 機?
A charger is a machine. Why is it not ? | `` is for "large" machines; things with "lots" of likely "large" moving parts. What comes to mind are like automated machines of an assembly line (cars, packaging, etc.), printing press, etc. Also, aircraft (``, ``).
`` is used for "smaller" things. It is often used to mean `[]{}` \- tools, instruments, appliances, etc.
Where the cutoff between "small" and "large" is, and who decides those things, I'm not sure. There may be some counterexamples, but if you stick with the "small" and "large" rule, you'll be right most of the time. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "words"
} |
Can two consecutive の particles be used in the following way?
We can use `` as a substitute in successive sentences for something we've already mentioned so that we don't need to keep saying what it is:
> * T → ****
>
Then there is the possessive/associative :
> * etc.
>
I was telling my friend about a new wallet I bought. By implication (or obviousness), it means the wallet I had before is now the "old wallet". So I wanted to talk about the contents of the old wallet. Can I use these two ``s consecutively to describe them, like:
> *
>
Is this grammatical? Used? Or would it be better to just say ``? | The first is the _pronoun_ .
The second is the _genitive_ .
There are two possible sequences of these two s:
> 1. _genitive + pronoun:_ ~~~~ "This book is Hanako's."
>
> 2. _pronoun + genitive:_ "the cover of the red one"
>
>
In the former, the sequence of two s is ungrammatical; you have to delete one of them.
In the latter, the sequence of two s is okay.
(Examples adapted from a draft version of Hiraiwa's _Constraining Doubling_, although there are a number of publications on this subject--see the references section of the linked paper for further discussion.) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "grammar, syntax"
} |
Using いちばん、にばん (first, second, etc.) in a sentence
I want to use first, second, etc. in a sentence, i.e. say "first car, first love, etc". In this case, would using be correct as the linking particle, e.g. ?
| For ordinals, the general construction is ~[]{} -- in this case, not meaning eye but rather *-th
as in []{} = 1st
as in []{} = 2nd
etc.
but in the case of first love, []{} and the use of with the pronunciation is common for several of these types of firsts.
* * *
More generally for the first instance of something you can use []{}
e.g.
= first love
= first car
= first English lesson
if you use this pattern, then the second is []{}[]{}. Third is []{}[]{} | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "grammar, particles"
} |
Sentence with いいわけない
>
The second part of the sentence is bother me. If must mean "no excuse", then the rough translation will be: "When you asking "It's ok?" don't answer "no excuse". So, how the second part is translating? | Hmm?? Isn't it
> []{}[]{}[]{}/
If I was asked "Is it okay?", I would answer "No way!"
(I mean, I think the is not (negative command) but (light assertion).) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation"
} |
Are both of these sentences grammatically correct? (stem+に+行く vs て+行く)
These are the sentences:
>
>
>
Are they both grammatically correct? Also do they both mean the same thing, which by my translation is "I went to the union and bought a sandwich."
Do they only differ in their formality with the second sentence being more casual? | > (or []{}?/?)
sounds fine to me. It literally translates to "I went to the union to buy a sandwich." Its casual version would be:
>
* * *
Your second sentence;
>
sounds a bit awkward to me. It sounds to me like "I bought a sandwich and went to the union." (parsed as >> might sound more natural but it also means "I bought a sandwich, and went to the union".)
is like "went to buy" whereas is like "bought and went".
As a side note,
> **** (-->)
would be "I bought a sandwich at the union and went (somewhere)"; "I bought a sandwich at the union on the way (to somewhere)" | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, translation, formality"
} |
What are the rules for verb bases(?)
I am quite confused as to how "" has suddenly changed into another word, albeit similar meaning when you do this: "."
My question is, how has the "na" appeared and the "ru" disappear? | is a shortened form of , which, as you probably know, is form from the -stem + .
These shortened forms (, , , ...) are only used in spoken language. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "verbs"
} |
Is the word マガ a shortened form for マガジン ?
Is the word a shortened form for ? | Yes, it is. However, it is not that we refer to any magazine as . Instead, we use it to shorten an existing magazine name or a compound katakana word if it contains in it.
(name of popular comic magazine) is shortened to .
(= "e-newsletter" in English) is shortened to .
We never say something like []{}[]{}[]{}[]{} = "Let's grab some magazines before hopping on the train!" In this case, we will use the word []{}, not or let alone . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation"
} |
Saying something is like/not like something else
How does one say "this is like/similar to that" or "this is not like that" in Japanese in essence? An example sentence is
"In this way, the English are like the Japanese"
; I have not been able to find any materials detailing this (but a whole lot on how to say something is better/worse, which is not helpful!). | There are a few simple ways to express this.
> or + []{} = "similar to ~~"
> + + // = "(sort of) like ~~"
> + // = "(just) like ~~"
>
To use a slightly bigger word, one could say:
> + []{} + // = "(very) similar to ~~"
For the negative forms of the phrases above, make the following changes:
> ⇒
> // ⇒ /
>
Thus, "In this way, the English are like the Japanese" can be said as:
> []{} **** ****
> []{}or
>
Finally, if I am allowed to introduce a colloquial word that we use **_very_** often, I will mention . It means "just like" and you can say something like:
> **** **** or **** or
> **** ****
> | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 17,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "grammar, syntax"
} |
What could リル mean in this situation?
I'm reading a children's story called . Here's an excerpt:
>
>
>
>
>
I'm assuming is some sort of currency, but all of my normal internet searches aren't helping me figure out specifically what it is. What could mean in this context? | Yes, it seems to be the currency the woodpecker is selling its sounds for.
It seems other people where wondering the same thing, including native speakers so this is definitely a word made up for the story, and it isn't made very clear in the story either.
See this Q&A where someone asked the same question (and how to read ``).
> []
This blogpost also talks about this story, and if you do a quick search for on the page you'll find several people in the comments wondering what this currency may actually be, how much it's worth... | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation, words"
} |
kanjis have 音読み{おんよみ}、訓読み{くんよみ}、and something like "人名読み{じんめいよみ}". But, what is the real term for "人名読み"?
sorry that I could not come-up with a better title...
The readings of the kanjis in a person's name, is theoretically arbitrary. But in reality, a kanji tends to have a set of maybe 3 or 4 probable readings when used in a name. For example: , under the " **Japanese names** " header, has the following probable readings: "". So, what is the official name for that set of readings?
a kanji has:
(-)
(-)
(-) ??? <\--- set of the most frequently used readings in people's names.
what is the set name? | I think you are looking for []{} | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "kanji"
} |
Difference between intransitive and passive?
I was thinking about Japanese passive and made the following example
> which means to be broken
But looking at the English definition of "to be broken", isn't there another Japanese word for that being, How are these two different in meaning and use, and are the differences the same in all verbs that can act like that, e.g and
Thanks! | There certainly is a difference in nuance between the intransitive and passive voice in Japanese.
Intransitive: []{} = "(My) TV broke down."
Passive Voice: []{} = "(My) TV was broken down."
would usually be said when there is no one to blame for the incident. The TV just went out of order by itself.
Please note that we also say [] though I will not explain the difference here. would be said only when there is a person or phenomenon that is responsible for the breakdown.
When Japanese-speakers use the passive voice describing a negative event or situation, there is almost always a sense of damage or nuisance expressed (or at least implied) with it. When using the intransitive verb, in comparison, we are usually just stating a cold fact without expressing or implying any feelings.
The exact same can be said about []{} and . I naturally have not considered all verbs but I would say that what I have stated should be valid with at least most verbs. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 15,
"question_score": 13,
"tags": "grammar, word choice"
} |
Why is it で+◯◯がある, not に+◯◯がある, in this sentence?
Today I saw this sentence:
>
I didn't understand why that would be the case instead of because if it is I feel like it could be rewritten:
>
which just sounds like Iraq is war.
Is there a reason for this? Is it an expression or something like that, can it be rewritten the way I wrote it and if so could you say ?
Thanks for your help | > ≒
The means []{}, []{}, []{} (meaning #12 in goo)
Compare:
> XX(= There's XX in Iraq.)
> XX(= XX occurs/takes place/will be held in Iraq.)
* * *
Edit
doesn't sound very natural but would mean "The war will take place in Iraq" as a response to (Where will the war take place?). It can't be interpreted as "The war is Iraq" nor rewritten as .
"how would you differentiate the that shows what something is and the that shows where something is"
I think it's all up to the context.
> XX/YY
If you said , then I'd interpret it as "My hometown is Kyoto". If you said , then I'd interpret it as "We'll have the next meeting in Kyoto". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 15,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
What do you call the hooked tip of a kanji stroke?
When writing a kanji, some downstrokes have a clean end (such as in ) while others end with a little hook (e.g. the center stroke of ).
What are the names of such stroke tips? | is what I always hear it referred to as.
A web search finds lots of sources to back this up:
<
<
<
etc | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 10,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "kanji, handwriting, calligraphy, stroke type"
} |
The difference between 一流 and 五つ星 in hotel classification
What is the difference between and in the context of hotel classification?
They both mean "5-Star" or "Luxury" but is there a subtle nuance that differentiates them for native Japanese speakers? | As in English, `` gives a feeling of a more objective assessment (as in awarded by an independent and normalized entity), while `` is as subjective as "high-end" can be. Said otherwise, `` sounds more "it is said that / TV or magazine / everybody around me said that it is that good", while `` sounds more "I think / feel / had the experience that it is that good".
As for the stars though, I'm no expert but there are several (private) entities delivering stars on their own criteria, and it seems everything called "5-star" hasn't necessarily been awarded them by one such entity...
As a general rule though, only the very best hotels are likely to be referred to as ``, while pretty much anything could be referred to as ``, especially `` is also more likely to be used by the institution itself. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "word choice"
} |
Does this sentence using も twice say that the speaker doesn't have 女子力?
I am participating in a relay manga through a university student group in Japan, and the previous member's contributed pages to the manga about a introduced a sole male character who seems to be a team member in the competition. I need to draw the next section of the manga.
The captain of the opposing team protests his appearance by saying,
The next speech bubble is not clear as to which of the two characters is speaking, either the male or the opposing team's captain. It says,
Is the male character replying to her that he doesn't have ? (Does mean ?) Is it possibly the captain accusing him of not having ? Or do the have another meaning?
Thank you very much! | From simplest to most complex:
1. is a vulgar bend of .
2. The first is that sort of emphatic 'even' you may know, like (there was not even a single drop of rain this summer)
3. ~ is an extreme comparator, indicating that whatever applies to the previous one, also applies to shit. I believe it comes from which means that between two things, one good and the other bad, there isn't very much difference at all.
It sounds like a continuation from the rival captain's first line. "You even got a dude mixed in there. Your girl power ain't _shit_." | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "grammar, translation, meaning"
} |
semantic difference between two keigo verbal forms : に なる(ni naru) and なさる(nasaru)?
Japanese grammar has a rich subset of grammatical forms named ("keigo", formal language or respect's language).
The rules allowing to transform a normal verb into a keigo verb are complex and I'm stuck with a difference I found here on a well-documented site.
For each verb it seems that there are TWO ways to create infinitive keigo forms :
* o either + [-stem] &
* o either + [-stem] &
By example : (kaeru) becomes either either .
I don't understand if the difference between these two forms is merely formal (like in French : _je m'assois_ , _je m'assieds_ ) or if these two verbal forms are used in different linguistic contexts. | There are several "categories" within keigo, depending on the type of meaning that you want to convey: ``, ``, `` and ``.
The 2 forms you ask about here, `()` and `()` both are `` forms, so they serve the same purpose and have the same function in politeness (i.e. as `` they serve to "elevate" the grammatical subject of the sentence). So, basically, no difference.
That being said, ``, especially used with a `` (-stem), may sound slightly more old-fashioned and is more likely to be used by older people, while `()` may be more common nowadays (besides some almost idiomatic usage cases such ``), though both are correct and used.
From the :
> | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 12,
"tags": "grammar, verbs, keigo"
} |
Subsets and Splits
No saved queries yet
Save your SQL queries to embed, download, and access them later. Queries will appear here once saved.