INSTRUCTION
stringlengths 11
999
| RESPONSE
stringlengths 0
999
| SOURCE
stringlengths 16
38
| METADATA
dict |
|---|---|---|---|
The use of ～た、～ている、～ていた to refer to a resultant state (new question)
Can someone explain why is used in place of in the following sentence (from Monday's Japan Times)?
>
>
> The first humanoid robot with speech capability to be in space made small talk with Koichi Wakata on the International Space Station.
Based on the answer to the: Use of ~ vs ~ to refer to a resultant state it sounds like the meaning does not significantly change. After referring to the transalation felt more appropriate, possibly because the sentence was in the past tense (ie ).
If this is correct then, I wonder, if the sentence finished with or then would or be more appropriate?
(My feeling is that would be appropriate in both the latter two cases. would be appropriate if the writer wanted to either (1)set the scene in the past (and the robot no-longer existed/had the ability to talk) or (2) just simply the robot no-longer exists/no-longer has the ability to talk, but cannot be sure of this.) | I think both...
>
>
... would sound okay for the newspaper. These sound more formal/literary than...
> ...
>
... to me. (I would use /// if I was to say this in normal conversation.) Even if the sentence ended with or , you'd use or :
> /(or , which might sound a bit more colloquial)
> /(or , but not ) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "conjugations"
} |
Meaning of あります in the following sentences
I don't quite get how is used in the following sentences from the Genki textbook:
*
*
*
*
*
Is used as in "where," "what," or "what's there?"
Thanks! | in those sentences means something along the lines of "There is ..." or "it has". It's an extremely common verb in Japanese with no perfect parallel in English. It is not used for living things.
is used similarly but for living things.
>
What is in your school? / What does your school have?
>
What is in the department store? / What does the department store have?
>
What lives in the zoo? / What does the zoo have [that is alive]?
>
What is there in your country? / What does your country have?
>
What is there in your house? / What does your house have?
* * *
All of that to say that does not make a sentence a question. So then what does? The question is being generated by the at the end and the in the middle.
roughly means "what" transforms a sentence into a question (at least for the sake of what you are asking).
* * *
The form of the answers would be:
> XY
e.g. []{}
or for living things
> XY
e.g. []{}There are squirrels in the zoo. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, translation"
} |
What does the expression くそかわ mean?
I read many times the expression referred to babies, what does it exactly mean in English?
I know that means "damn" while comes from , right?
So _damn cute_? | Yes, right. is used in place here for what usually would be , e.g.
> =
> = (=)
> etc.
(As slang is usually more versatile, there are more expressions with , where isn't a valid substitution, e.g. . Also, note that isn't traditionally a positive interjection/prefix/etc., but traditionally used to embellish derogatory terms.)
I'm not 100% on the precise ordering, but is probably the most recent of a series of similar expressions
> (from )
> (from )
> {}
> {}
>
In any case, as you guessed, it is a stronger expression, just as in English:
> "damn cute"
> "really cute"
As you say, is just a short form of , as common with all "i-adjectives", => (), => etc. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "slang, spoken language"
} |
"高{たか}くっても" vs. "高くとも"、"低{ひく}くっても" vs. "低くとも", etc. usage?
I'm really confused about the meanings of these two similar adjective inflections:
--->
--->
{} --->
--->
"" might possibly be less formal(? because of the ""), but I known that there is a fundamental difference in _meaning_. And, I don't understand. What are some example usage sentences that contrast the meanings, as well as a good explanation in English? thanks. | The only difference is in the degree of formality expressed, not in the meaning as OP appears to have learned somewhere.
In the order of formality: and .
To speak of the meanings, there are TWO meanings in each form.
1) "Even though (something) is high, tall or expensive"
2) "At the highest, tallest, most expensive" It indicates the possible maximum height or price.
Example sentences:
1) A[]{}[]{} = without meaning to
2) []{}[]{}[]{}[]{}[]{} = lunch
EDIT: I think I now know what OP means by "fundamental difference in meaning". An older book or a strict grammarian might say that only should be used for meaning #2 above. In the real Japanese-speaking world of the 21st century, however, is probably used more often than in informal speech for #2. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
What is the difference between 乗り場 and バス停?
I've seen them both with the meaning of 'Bus Stop.' Could someone please explain how they're different?
Thank you in advance! | Firstly, is not limited to buses. It means essentially "getting on point". (Cf. "taxi stand".) There's a word for "getting off point" as well: ().
is used in larger terminals for indicating where the bus stops are. The individual platforms are sometimes numbered as 1, 2, etc., or 1, 2, etc.
A (short for ) is a "conventional" bus stop outside a terminal. I would think of it as a sign at the side of a road, where a bus stops. Usually, for most bus lines, the and are one and the same—some people get off the bus, others get on. Calling a a (or ) would only really make sense to disambiguate from for a particular (group of) bus lines. For example, there may be a roadside bus stop outside a large bus/train terminal, which is the for a bus line whose is inside the terminal. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "word choice"
} |
How to say "Should we [do something]?"
I recently started talking with a Japanese "pen friend" on Skype, and I'd like to ask her "Should we speak in Japanese or English?"
If I said:
>
does that convey what I'm trying to say? Or is there a better way to express it?
I would appreciate it if you could reply in kana, I know precious few kanji. | You want to ask your "pen friend" whether she wants to talk with you in Japanese or English, Don't you?
In this situation, I say " ". This sentence means "Which would you like to speak in? Japanese or English?" | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation, questions"
} |
"You and I both know full well" = 「二人ともよく知っている」?
I'm writing a section of a relay manga for Hokkaido University's Manga Research Society.
How you do you express "You and I both know full well..." and "our actual skills" in formal Japanese?
I have translated it from:
"You and I both know full well that our strength isn’t physical fighting. You really don’t want me to hurl such a heavy encyclopedia at such a pretty face, now, do you? So instead of that, let’s compete by using our actual skills."
as:
>
Is or better than ? Is another word more suitable than ? | How about... ?(>> physical fighting = []{}? or []{}?)?(>> our actual skills = ??) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, translation, words"
} |
あれで for surprise - confusing example sentence
My book explains that can be used to indicate mild surprise, and gives some example sentences. They all make sense to me except this one:
> {}{}{}{}{}{}
In the first sentence, the speaker seems to be pleasantly surprised at the quality of the cafeteria meal. But in the second, he says it's like pig food. Is the first sentence sarcastic? Is something else going on there? | A half literal, half free translation (in the sense of "worst of both worlds"):
> ****
> Regarding today's lunch special, **with that** they have some nerve to say that they improved. It's quite simply pig food.
doesn't express pleasant surprise. is, I guess, where you got lost. It doesn't mean "being well able to say", but rather "how could you say that?".
A sentence from ALC for comparison:
>
> How can you ask me to do that? | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "translation, meaning"
} |
How accurately can 使い be translated as "angel"?
On jisho.org, is translated with words such as "errand", and the same holds true on translate.google.com. Neither site is offering "angel" as a suggestion. Yet in Matthew 1:20, the phrase:
>
is found in English as:
> . . . an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said . . .
Does it mean "angel" or not? Is the Japanese saying something slightly different than "God no angel"? Thanks! | doesn't mean angel in all contexts, but _does_ mean "messenger/bearer/...". In particular, the usual word for "angel" is []{} or []{} = "messenger from heaven". Here you don't have , but "Lord/God".
As snailplane points out in the comments, the phrase "Angel of the Lord" should appear frequently. Wikipedia writes:
> The **Angel of the Lord** (or the **Angel of God** ) is one of many terms in the Hebrew Bible (also: Old Testament) used for an angel. The Biblical name for angel, מלאך _malak_ , which translates simply as "messenger," obtained the further signification of "angel" only through the addition of God's name, as ("angel of the Lord," or "angel of God", Zech. 12:8).
The same in Japanese. translates simply as "messenger" and only obtains the further signification of "angel" only through the addition of God's name (or through the honorific prefix []{}, as in ssb's answer). In that sense, the Japanese seems to be faithful to the original Hebrew. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "translation, words, meaning, religion"
} |
What is the radical which is written by two dots on the top of a Kanji?
I have seen a lot of kanjis with two dots on the top as in etc. What is that radical? In < I see they have mentioned this two dot radical in their list, but when I look it up in any proper Kangxi radical chart, I see no such radical.
Is it a combination of two ´? If it is, how do such dots make any meaning? Another similar example in this regard would be the "diagonal sweeping stroke" in kanjis like and . How to arrive at meanings with such radicals? | In all three, the two dots are . As an element in other characters, often appears upside-down; sometimes it depends on the particular font which way it faces.
As for meaning, we can consult a variety of sources, but they all agree on the basics: Zhongwen.com describes as "an ideograph representing division". Henshall says it symbolizes "splitting/dividing", and is often found in compounds with a meaning of "divide/disperse/away/out". ChineseEtymology.org says that it's a primitive pictograph with two lines indicating "separation".
But note that strictly speaking each character has only one , because are a system for indexing characters in dictionaries, and each character appears under only one in most dictionaries. So although is a Kangxi radical, not all characters containing it are listed under . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 14,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "kanji, radicals"
} |
Is there a name for this furigana convention
...where the furigana is a different "word"/"synonym" for the actual kanji in song lyrics, titles, etc.?
A couple references to this:
* Why are some lyrics' words written in kanji whose usual reading is not how it is sung?
* [ []{«»}](
Is there any distinct name for this technique? | They are called {}{}.
There are two types of :
1. Ignoring the meaning of the Kanji and using them to create a sound (e.g. {}{})
2. Ignoring the reading of the Kanji and using their meaning to demonstrate another sound (e.g. {}{})
In this case, they are using the second type. The voices of the ghosts sound evoke , so while you read , the point is that you are to imagine the sound of their actual voices as having the properties of .
This is also used a lot for children's names today -- parents want to use particular Kanji, but make the reading something totally different from what the characters would normally read as. A search for will get you a bunch, but one example is a girl named {} | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "terminology, furigana, creative furigana"
} |
How does the derogatory term "小便芸者" work?
In Liza Dalby's book "Geisha", while talking about onsen geisha, she mentions various pejorative terms from the general public. She mentions "korobi" (roll-over, presumably ) geisha, and "Daruma" (a doll that tumbles down, presumably ) geisha, both of which I understand the imagery of.
But how does the term "shomben geisha" (, I assume) work? Dalby translates it as "toilet geisha", and jisho.org describes as a colloquial word for urine. I understand that it's a derogatory term, with the same ultimate meaning as the other two terms, but not the imagery involved. Is it because of the male anatomy used with ?
(By the way, Dalby also notes that skilled artists exist in the onsen towns, sentiments that I'd echo) | I do not claim to know the origin of this particular term []{} but I have reasons to doubt the male anatomy hypothesis.
In the most vulgar kind of Japanese, []{} is sometimes added to a noun like a prefix to express the speaker's hatred or strong disrespect of the object. The nuance it carries is much worse than "good for nothing". For this purpose, is pronounced **** rather than the dictionary reading **** .
Examples: []{}(Diet member)[]{}(actor)[]{}(nation) []{}(bar), etc.
Thus, I would tend to assume that the term came by this route. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "offensive words, metaphor"
} |
difference between きれい and キレイ
I was reading the lyrics of a song called by
There is this line that says:
>
I was wondering why above is written in Katakana and not in Hiragana? Isn't katakana used for foreign words? | Words that are usually written in hiragana, when written in katakana, just mean it's being emphasized. You might see this in written works too, in which case the English equivalent is a word being made bold. I hope this helps! | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": -1,
"tags": "meaning"
} |
Where does だって come from?
Does find it's roots in some different combination of words, or is it it's own, self made, particle? Where does come from? | “” is a sentence-ending particle, coming from binding particle “”: a sound change of “”, which is an auxiliary verb of assertion “” followed by ~~an auxiliary verb~~ a binding particle “”, and it is used in a casual conversation. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "particles, etymology"
} |
「こんな夢を見た。」- why not この?
This is the first line of 's story , The first night. The story then goes on to describe the narrator's dream.
It is translated as "I had dream" but I am struggling to align the normal meaning of (This kind of...) to the story. | I feel you are letting your own translated English words get in the way --- "this kind of". Even though, []{} CAN mean "this kind of dream" if it were used in another context, that is not what it means in this one.
For to mean "this kind of dream", one generally needs to have already explained to the readers what kind of dream it was in the context.
In this story, is the first sentence. My own translation would be something like:
"I had a dream that went like this."
You cannot use , either, unless you have already explained what the dream was like. If you said out of nowhere, Japanese-speakers would reply , etc. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
using 〜ば〜ほど with adverbs
You can use this construct with verbs:
and with adjectives:
but what about adverbs?
if, for example, I wanted to say of a windmill "the faster it turns, the more power it generates"? | I think the construction works for adverbs as per the construction Chocolate gives in the comment.
In particular, the simple rule is:
> _The adverb will go with a verb. Use the construction on the verb._
This gets you what you want, because refers to the extent it does [V] [Adv]; here it refers to the extent it turns fast. Compare the rough translations:
> 1.
> If it turns, it generates power.
>
> 2.
> If it turns fast, it generates power to the extent to which it turns (fast). _or_
> If it turns fast, the extent to which it turns is reflected in the power it generates.
> _that is_
> **The faster it turns, the more power it generates.**
>
> | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
Kanji question: the onyomi of 江 is found
The onyomi of is . Can someone give me a real-life example of when this is read this way? It seems that most of the time its pronounced ... I should also clarify, yes, I can look this up in a dictionary, but sometimes dictionaries give you words that are obscure/rarely used by most people-- true in any language, right? | In Japanese, is read mostly in proper nouns --- in particular, Chinese river names such as []{}(Yangtze River) and []{}(Amur River) and Chinese restaurant names.
In non-proper nouns, however, is rarely read . []{} (meaning "rivers and lakes" literally and "this (real) world" metaphorically) might be the only exception but even that is not such a commonly-used word.
is a special kanji for me personally because that is one of the only four kanji in the world that are used in my name (it is read in my name, needless to say) but even I do not know of any common or "everyday" kind of word in which it is read . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "kanji"
} |
How does hexadecimal work in Japanese?
I'm aware this is more of a StackOverflow question. If any of you are computer programmers who speak Japanese: how does hexadecimal work? I mean the system of numbers which is counted 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, A, B, C, D, E, F. Do you use Roman letters and Arabic numbers? Is it all in kanji? | Given that the format 0x[0-9A-F] is baked into nearly every modern computer language, there aren't any other options for representing them in text. But there is still the question of pronouncing them.
I suspect the answer will depend on the individual company culture to some extent.
At our company, the digits are pronounced in Japanese: ... and the letters are pronounced similarly to the English: . One oddball case is zero, which is mixed between and . It's not even unusual to have more than one pronunciation for zero used while reading off the same number.
This actually causes a bit of confusion for those of us moving quickly between the two systems, since the American side of the company uses a phonetic alphabet when reading off things like error codes. ie, the Japanese programmers will say "", the Americans will say "bravo, echo, echo, fox". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "computing"
} |
Question about 「その」 usage
I have a question about part in this text. As far as I can guess is talking about her own hand, but in this case shouldn't it be with , "my hand". The only thought I have is that 's hand, after becoming a doll like, already doesn't belong to "humans domain", but to the "dolls domain". In other words it belongs to someone she's talking with, who gave her this power or somethng. In any case if my guess is incorrect, I would eally appreciate if you give me correct explanation.
>
>
>
>
> ……………
>
>
>
> ……
>
> ???:……
>
>
>
> …
>
> ****
>
> ???…
>
> …
>
> ???:…
>
> …
>
>
>
> …
>
>
| It needs to be because it is the narration, not []{}'s line. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
Is 芸姑 a real word?
Do IMEs offer gibberish non-words when they make suggestions?
I know that there's many words that have the same pronunciation, and therefore users of IMEs have to choose the correct one. I think (feeling) versus (kanji) would be an example of that.
I'm also aware of different kanji for related, but different concepts, that have the same pronunciation and are presumably true cognates. I think (grandfather) and (elderly man) would be an example of this.
But do IMEs offer words that are nonsensical gibberish in Japanese? For example, if I type in "" into Google Translate's IME, the second option I get is "", which isn't found in goo.ne.jp nor jisho.org. Is it a real word, or a word that only makes sense in a language other than Japanese, or gibberish? I once came across someone typing , which similarly seems to be a doubtful word. | The wikipedia article for says that, in Kyoto, is pronounced and sometimes written as :
>
So yes, this seems to be a real but rare word/spelling. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "words, orthography, input method"
} |
Understanding the kanji 相 as "government minister"...?
One of the on'yomi readings of is . If I'm doing my legwork right, when it's read this way, it has an indication of government involvement, in words like (and here, I'm relying on my dictionaries--I have no idea if these words are commonly used?)
"emperor's assistant"
"prime minister" ← I thought the word for this was
Apart from my prime minister question above, I'm struggling to understand what is really meant by "government minister". Is this a government minister of old? (China, even?) Is this contemporarily used for ministers in the government? What level of minister are we talking about? Any old minister, or is it for special ones? | []{} []{}
It refers to the head of each []{}(Ministry) of the Japanese Government. The U.S. counterpart of our would be "Department". is the "official" word and is used like a nickname as looks and sounds pretty heavy for everyday use.
To take []{}(Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology) as an example, its head is officially named []{} but since that is long, it is very often shortened to []{}.
As for the Prime Minister, you will see/hear (therefore need to know) all of []{}[]{}[]{} and []{} in the order of formality. , with or without a family name in front, would be like "Mr. President" in the U.S.
Finally, unless you are planning to be like Donald Keene, you do not need to know the word . It has much more to do with old China than old or current Japan. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "kanji"
} |
What is the proper word for self-study?
So I know that jiko shoukai is self-introduction. And benkyou is study. So I took a guess and figured that self-study is jiko benkyou. The context of this is if someone asks "how did/do you study Japanese?" And the reply is "I studied by myself." or just "Self-study.". So just to make sure I took a quick look at Google Translate and it gave me these options:
* jishuu
* dokugaku
* dokushuu
But didn't give jiko benkyou. So what would be the proper word to use for this response? | To "How did/do you study Japanese?" you'd respond
> []{}
>
(not []{}, []{} or []{}.)
I think the word []{}() refers to "(to) seatwork" or "study hall". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "word choice"
} |
What is the difference between ことにする and ことにした?
I - Lesson 3 says that V (dictionary form) is used to express the decision to do something. If I say
>
this can be translated as “I decided to go to Japan”. This is perfectly clear to me. However, what is the correct translation for
>
? Is it “I will decide to go to Japan”, “I decide to go to Japan”, or “I decided to go to Japan”? Can you explain to me when to use in non-past tense? | We don't have a perfect parallel structure in English. The deciding is not in the future tense even though the action that follows is.
I would go with:
> I will go to Japan.
At least for me, the most common type of the present tense that I hear is for ordering food.
>
=
> I will have the ramen.
In both cases, I take _will_ not to be the future tense but the volitional will. You could replace with _choose_ | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "grammar, translation, tense"
} |
What does 目 mean in 勝ち目?
The word means "odds / chance of success". It is made up of two nouns and .
obviously means "winning / victory". But what does the kanji mean?
Does mean something along the lines of "your _observation_ (eye) for success"? E.g. "" meaning _"you have no observation for success"_? | `` has this explanation:
>
I.e. `` refers to the dots/pips on dice. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "kanji, etymology"
} |
In this situation, Which is correct の or から?
1.
2.
I am want to say Hello, I'm Tanaka and I'm from Tokyo, but I am not sure which is correct. I feel like 2 is the right choice but am not sure.
So which is correct and why? | 1)
2)
1) is grammatical and natural-sounding except for the pronoun part. would sound much better to us native speakers.
2) is not grammatical so it makes little sense as is. To leave the , you need to add a because is a noun. is the grammatical sentence.
Between and , it is difficult to choose which one is better without more context, but the former would certainly be a little more versatile because there is an equal amount of emphasis placed on the name and the city one came from. The latter could sound like the speaker is placing more emphasis on the place s/he came from.
If you are willing to add a few more words, []{} or []{} would be an excellent choice in case you are over 18-20. is the humble version of , and for . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
Function of に in this passive construction
I understand the basics of the "suffering passive". For example, it's my understanding that in a sentence like , "tomodachi ni" marks the person who drank your beer.
>
Who does refer to and what is the role of in this sentence?
!bokunimonkuiwaretemokomaru | You're right that the sentence is Suffering Passive (), a kind of Indirect Passive ().
Here in []{} **** []{}[]{}, doesn't mark the person who does , but the indirect object of .
> **** () = (you) complain **to** me.
It's saying "I will if you to me." | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "particle に, passive voice"
} |
聞いてもねえ事をペラペラと喋る。。。
I can't understand the meaning of this sentence very well:
I know that means to talk glibly about something, comes from to listen, but I don't get the general meaning.
Thank you for your help. | Part-by-part, it means
> things I haven't even asked
> talking glibly about
i.e. whoever is uttering this sentence is talking about a chatterbox, who talks about things nobody wants to hear ( _lit._ about things nobody asked). A better translation might be
>
> He's just talking non-stop about things nobody's interested in ( _lit._ about things I haven't even asked) .
There is a good chance that the speaker refers to someone, who talks a lot about himself/herself, his/her great achievements (i.e. to someone who expresses ). | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation"
} |
How do I say: I am on parental leave
Something like?
() | I think you can say
> []{} / []{}
> []{}
>
for "I'm on paternal leave" (In Japan, normally starting 8 weeks after the birth of the child and ending by the time when the child turns one year old... I think), and
> []{}
>
>
for "I'm on maternity leave" (In Japan, normally for 6 weeks before and 8 weeks after the birth of the child... I think). | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation"
} |
"It is okay to have fun however think about others" translation
I want to say :
It is okay to have fun at new year's eve ,however think about others.
The only part that I was able to translate is :
.....
and I can't complete.
The situation is that people at new year's eve throw their old stuff,beer bottles,garbage,etc.. in the streets. The next day it becomes very hard for the street cleaners to clean that mess so it is kind of sad. I want to write that it is okay to have fun at that day however be considerate to others. | I think you could say:
> []{}[]{}[]{}(or []{}[]{}) (or []{}*)([]{})[]{}(or []{} or []{}[]{}) []{}or ()[]{}[]{}
if you want it in the polite form. * would sound a bit sarcastic.
(I might say if I was very angry.) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation"
} |
How to read this kanji? (see image)
All the methods I know failed. My count is 7 strokes, but may be wrong. I think the key is the bottom part, but no radical matches its shape.
!hard to identify kanji
The rest of the word, including particle, is:
The full sentence is: [?] {}
I tried to stroke the kanji here < with no success. | It's , as in {}, and the radical is . It has **8 strokes** , and is formed by combining and .
Stroke order and other miscellaneous information can be found here.
!stroke order | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning, kanji"
} |
Sentence structure of (verb + to + infinitive) in japanese
Assume I want to say something like :
> I called you to go out.
How a sentence with the same structure would be translated? Is there like a certain pattern or rule to it? | or ought to both be valid translations of that. It depends a little on the kind of _going out_ that you're doing, but you can generally say "I did X in order to Y" with and .
< has these descriptions (English translations mine):
- states the reason why, or the goal, directly.
- explains the reason for the call.
I would interpret this as shifting the emphasis, with being weighted towards the goal and being heavier on the action that was actually taken rather than the reason it was taken. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": -1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, translation"
} |
What does 兜 mean in 黄緑彩兜唐草?
The text I'm asking about comes from a brochure selling pens with bodies of traditional decorated Imari porcelain. Here's the pen design, with its name:
!
From another brochure, I gather that the reading is: .
I understand that describes the yellow-green color, and describes the arabesque pattern. But what's the doing in there?
I have a theory that it might refer to a plant called , but I can't confirm it. | I think that is the name of a particular arabesque pattern by , a well-known pottery store. In particular, this pattern:
!
The imagery of is being strong or forceful. In that sense, seems to be well-suited as a name for fancy accessories like a pen or a wallet. (The name for pattern for a plate or a piece of cloth might be more something like .)
I don't think that the choice of is related to , the aconite plant, as there is no particular resemblance of the pattern with the aconite plant. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, kanji"
} |
How do you say "just curious" or "out of curiosity"?
In English, I often say "I'm just curious, but...". The best phrase I've come up with for this in Japanese is
> []{}
but I've never heard a native speaker use this.
I recently saw , but that sounds strange to me as well. Is this just something that isn't said, or is there a totally regular phrasing for this that I just haven't yet found? | To us native speakers, is a fairly big Sino-loanword and we do not use it as often as English-speakers might use "curiosity" in informal situations (or out on the street with a stranger, so to speak).
Natural ways to say "I'm just curious but ~~" or "Just out of curiosity, ~~" would be:
**Informal** :
* []{}
* []{}
* , etc.
**More formal** :
* []{}[]{}
* []{}[]{}
In formal situations, you could use if you wanted to and say something like . means "just". "mere(ly)", etc. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 18,
"question_score": 14,
"tags": "usage"
} |
What does あと mean in つーか怖いしあとレア?
> ****
I don't understand how is used in this sentence. What does it mean?
should mean rare, right?
Thank you for your help. | is a common modern colloquial word meaning "in addition", "and also", etc.
And yes, means "rare".
You did not ask but I will say for others that is the slangy (and very common as well) way of saying or . It roughly means "I mean", "or more precisely", "or rather", etc. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation"
} |
Where does "歩けど" come from?
The other day I came across this line in a game:
****
I guessed that meant from the context, but I had never seen a verb conjugated like that before. Is it something from a dialect, or perhaps classical Japanese? | The conjunctive particles **** and **** are Classical Japanese contradictory conjunctions, like the English _but_ and _although_. Although they aren't used as much anymore, you surely know them from the modern **()** , and you probably know them from **** and **** as well.
They attached to the (realis stem), which in modern Japanese has been reanalyzed as the (hypothetical stem). In this case, that stem is **** , so you get ****.
Here, the **** pattern has the verb redoubled for emphasis:
> **** ****
Since it's literary, we could try to give it a literary sounding translation:
> ****
> **Walk and walk as I might** , I could see only rocks.
Hopefully you can see the meaning from this simplified example. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 10,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
What is the も in 今年も used for ? What does 雨が少なく mean here, and why isn't it followed by a て?
I have the following translation for class.
>
>
>
>
>
So far, I have the following.
> This year also
> Tucson
> rain is little
> water has become insufficient and
> it might be a problem.
I have a few questions.
1. Why is there that on ? Is it just signifying that the absence of rain is "also" like other years?
2. I am confused by the . I am not sure how to relate it to Tucson. "As for Tucson, the rain is little"? Also, I would expect a at the end (). But is it somehow an adverb instead of form? | 1. The drought in Arizona has been going on for about fifteen years. So it's "this year too".
2. The {} ("continuative form") of a verb or adjective can be used like a conjunction without adding . For an adjective, that is the form, and for a verb, it's the stem you add to.
Here you have the of an adjective, not an adverb. It acts like a conjunction, joining two predicates together. You can think of it like , except that the sentence continues with something like an "and".
We have some questions already where people talk about this usage:
* Adjective. difference between and
* Use of -form over in an -adjective
* Is there a term for using conjugating verbs such that the sentence continues with another clause?
* vs. and stem form vs. form as conjunctions
But if you wait, perhaps someone will write another answer talking about it. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation, て form, particle も"
} |
How do parents obscure spoken messages in front of their children in Japanese?
Let's say I'm a very young child and I love dessert. After my family goes out today, my dad is going to buy us ice cream; he needs to tell my mom in front of me, without me finding out. In English, he might spell it out like:
> After ..., we'll go get some I-C-E C-R-E-A-M. _(Eye see ee, see are ee eh emm.)_
Since very young kids can't usually spell well enough to make out a message like this, it's encrypted to them but not to mom, who needs the information.
However, in Japanese, I feel like saying each kana of would be equally obvious to the child as saying the word since, to my knowledge, kana do not have an alternative pronunciation to the sound they make.
How do parents obscure a Japanese word so that a very young child will not understand it? | Each family would use its own method and all I know for certain is how mine handled the matter.
We used on-reading words, meaning kanji compounds, which small kids generally are not familiar with. We also "created" our own on-reading words in cases where the generic words were already on-reading ones. Our final weapon was to say the words in English (we both knew English) as if they were loanwords when it was difficult to create a word.
For , we used []{}, which is an existing word but small kids would almost never know.
For []{} (snacks), we used []{} or []{}, both of which are existing words.
For , I remember using my own creation []{}, literally meaning "dark-colored carbonated drink". Both and are existing words but little kids would have no clue what they meant, either separately or combined.
For , I proudly coined a []{} but it was hard to say. is a big word for (= "potato"), but a kid would usually need to be around 10-12 to know it. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 37,
"question_score": 41,
"tags": "pronunciation, spelling"
} |
その巨人の腹をかっさいた manga sentence
The complete sentence is this:
I can't really understand the meaning, why is it istead of
Then we have . means stomach while means to cheer, to make an ovation?
Thanks for your help. | It needs to be and not because it is the subject that performed the two actions described --- []{}[]{} and []{}[]{}.
refers to the .
= "ripped open" said in the animated tough guy language using , a verb prefix for that purpose.
"Haiji ate his friend. He ripped open the giant's abdomen."
For your reference, other emphatic verb prefixes include , etc. Unfortunately, these are rarely interchangeable. I will not get into that here, though. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation, manga"
} |
Help identifying a low-res kanji
I've been playing an older Japanese video game, and I've come across a kanji that I'm unable to identify. I've attempted to use the radical lookup on jisho.org, but the low-resolution is making that difficult as well.
!kanji
Here's the context:
!full version | It looks to me like . A smart thing to do would be to show us the surrounding characters --- in other words, context. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "kanji, writing identification"
} |
Differences between verb + の verb + か and -ます/-です?
Consider these two examples:
and
To me, both mean 'Do you believe in God/gods?', with the first example possibly slightly more casual than the second. Other than that, are there any other nuances? I can't really give a context, but in general they seem to be used slightly differently and I can't seem to pinpoint the exact differences. | If I had to make - correspondences, I would say that roughly
> corresponds to
and
> corresponds to
The versions without are plain yes/no questions, something you ask when there is nothing in the discourse/environment hinting either way.
The versions without are used when something in the discourse/environment has provided a hint to the speaker that the addressee believes in God (possibly contrary to previous expectation). | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning, nuances"
} |
Asking "What is the size of the file?"
I am discussing via email about a file, and I want to ask "What is the size of the file?"
Here is my try: ``
I realize it sounds weird though, and `` might sound better but I am afraid that the `` will imply I want an approximate size, which is not true: I want the exact size. | A natural way of asking that would be:
[]{}
If it is for business, one could say:
The problem with []{} is that while it is a perfectly grammatical sentence, it sounds like it was "translated" from anothet language, which it was. When I read that part, it reminded me of the sentence []{} which is also often said by Japanese-learners. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "translation, business japanese, computing"
} |
Grammatical meaning of に-particle in へいわに
I'm aware that the -particle has a lot of different grammatical meanings. The most common of these are time, place and indirect object.
But I came across the following sentence and I can't really make up what the grammatical meaning of the particle is here.
" " --"The people live in peace."
Could someone help me out with this? | []{} = peace
= peaceful
= peacefully
The makes the word function adverbially to modify a verb (in this case, []{}). | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, particles, particle に"
} |
What form of suru is the "されていた" part of 支配されていた?
I understand that means to rule. So I'm guessing the "" in is a weird form of . Is it in passive past te-form? | Almost! ←[]{} in Japanese.
The passive voice past is []{} --- "was controlled".
is passive voice past progressive --- "was being controlled" | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "conjugations"
} |
What does "タイプを分けるとパッション" mean?
So, I was playing the Japanese version of Akinator (cf. English version), which basically entails playing a sort of 20 Questions-like game - the basic idea is that you pick a real or fictional person/character, and then the genie asks you questions about the person you've picked so as to figure out who the person you've picked is.
One of the questions asked about my character was this one:
>
I guess that is English "type" as in "variety"; is "to separate / divide / partition"; and is English "passion" (not sure what sense). I have no idea how this fits together to form a coherent sentence, though. What does this question mean?
It strikes me as possible that this might be the result of machine translation from one of the other languages in which Akinator is available - some of the other questions I've seen appear to be of dubious grammaticality, too. | This question based on a video game called . In that game, there are 3 types("") of idols, which are cute, cool, and passion(""). As dainichi mentioned above, in this sentence means . So, it translates as "If you categorize her into 'type', is she passion? (Do you categorize her as a passion-type-idol?)" or something along the line. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "meaning"
} |
What's the Japanese word for the stuff after the credits of a movie?
In English, we call footage that plays after the credits of a movie a "stinger". See, for example, the wiktionary entry, definition 8:
> A scene shown on films or television shows after the credits.
What would you call this in Japanese? I guess you could describe it as , but is there a more concise / punchier way of referring to it? | It is usually called .
When it consists of bloopers, it is called [NG]{}. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "word requests"
} |
Is はじめまして only suitable for the first contact?
When I'm contacting a colleague for the first time and we're communicating online, I can use as part of my greeting. Likewise, if I'm meeting someone for the first time and it is an in-person meeting, I can say during my introduction.
However, if I talk with someone online and then we meet in person for the first time, is still appropriate? Or is there some other typical greeting for this situation? | It doesn't matter. Feel it out based on your relationship with that person and whatever feels right. I have to imagine that if you had contact with someone before and you said upon meeting them in person it would be accompanied by that kind of weak laugh of shared awkwardness like "what do I say in this situation?" In other words, meeting people from the internet is still a relatively new phenomenon, and while I'm sure there must have been people who had met by correspondence in the past, there is not some universally accepted cultural norm for what to do in this situation. I think you can compare it pretty directly to how the situation would play out in English.
So basically, I don't think there's a specifically Japanese way to do it. The meeting will probably be awkward and fumbling for the first few moments anyway. Personally I'd make a comment along the lines of "nice to finally meet you in person," as I would in English, but that's just me. Just go for what feels right. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 14,
"tags": "phrase requests, greetings"
} |
pronunciation of ひと
I heard today in my Japanese class my sensei pronouncing the "" like my teacher is not from a Japanese origin he studied there. I want to know is this pronunciation right? Should I pronounce every as ? Or is the only case? | Neither, really. Merging and happens in certain dialects, and your teacher probably studied somewhere where that merger is common. You can choose to do it this way, or you can choose to not.
(It has nothing to do with the individual word , though. Some people might merge and in some places and not others, and before a /t/ might be one of those places, but it's not a single-word phenomenon.) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "pronunciation"
} |
心身を病んでいるが兵団から立ち退くことができないのだ
I have some doubts about the meaning of this sentence and in particular about the verb and the expression .
This is the complete sentence.
> .
Does this mean: to be ill in mind and body?
I think it means: Is impossible to leave (?) the army.
Thank you for your precious help. | Yes, you are right on all counts. means, as you understood, to be ill in mind and body. The suggestion here is that the person is under considerable duress that is taking a toll both mentally and physically, and we can intuit that this is a result of being in the military.
is to "leave" in the sense of packing up and getting out of there. Removing yourself from that location. Moving from one place to another, in its simplest terms. In this situation it's just "leaving the military."
However I think it might be more accurate to say "I cannot leave" rather than "it's impossible." | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation"
} |
Using negative verb forms with はず
In the chapter Things that should be a certain way of Tae Kim's guide, the author states that in order to express the expectation of something not happening, one should use something like . I was wondering if the Japanese language distinguishes phrases like "I don't expect him to come" vs. "I expect him not to come"? In other words, are both of these acceptable:
*
*
If not, are there other constructs to express this? | Both are acceptable.
But note that each of them has a different meaning. And these meanings are subtly different.
>
= We have the expectation that he won't come.
>
= We do not have an expectation that he is coming.
The difference here is that we are stating our expectation in the first case. In the second, we are negating an expectation. In the first the expectation is negative. In the second, the expectation is positive. Turned into a chart:
Expectation - + -
Statement + - -
Net Statement - - +
is understood to be stronger than in terms of the strength of our belief he wont' come by native speakers.
* * *
>
= We have no reason to expect he will come.
But
>
= It's no wonder he doesn't come | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 10,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "grammar"
} |
Te form of もっていく
Quick question regarding the -te form of the verb (to take). From my understanding the verb is a combination between + (to go) and as such conjugates its -te form as is this correct?
The reason I'm asking is because I've seen it conjugated online a few times as which would indicate that the -te form would be conjugating as if it were a regular - ending verb, as opposed to conjugating as (to go) does (.
If someone could clarify it's conjugation I'd be super appreciative.
Thanks!
Matt | Are you talking about a website like Wiktionary?
It appears that some sites which automatically generate conjugation charts treat "" as though it's a regular godan verb, but you're correct that it's + , and that conjugates as it normally does.
It should be , not *. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "verbs, conjugations, て form"
} |
Grammar of (verb)し(noun) such as in 選ばれし者
Is there a grammatical explanation for this pattern, which I have seen a couple times in writing? I'm guessing it comes from classical grammar. | It is from 'classical' grammar, or rather Early Middle Japanese. - is the (the 'attributive' form, used to modify nouns) of the past tense marker -. It is used to describe events the speaker knows have happened; in contrast to -, which is used for events the speaker has only heard about but not experienced himself. (There are a few other past tense or perfect aspect markers - -, -, etc - that are older and in varying stages of loss by Middle Japanese.)
then means 'the chosen one(s), the one(s) who has/have been chosen'. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 14,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "classical japanese, auxiliary き"
} |
How do i read 翼 in "one-winged"
I've encountered a song with romaji title `Katatsubasa no tenshi`, which I would understand, but the other day someone handed me an album with romaji-ed names, where the same song was written as `Katayoku no tenshi` so which is OK? | I have always heard this as `katayoku`.
(e.g. _Umineko no Naku Koro ni_ makes plenty of references to a []{katayoku}[]{no}[]{washi}.)
For what it's worth (maybe very little), Google IME also suggests this song title as the first entry upon entering `katayoku` and does not recognize `katatsubasa` as a 2-kanji compound.
There is some discussion here about this same song, where the answerers have the same opinion. The first answer by ffbiyori says that the word was coined fairly recently, and so the reading varies, with `hen'yoku` and `katatsubasa` also being seen sometimes, but less commonly than `katayoku`.
(Also note that if you search EDICT for words ending in , they all use the `yoku` reading.) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "readings"
} |
Is ～も really marking the word just prior to it?
I'm translating an excerpt for fun, but this section struck me as odd:
> ****
This is how I translated that section:
> In mid-motion, she stopped and slowly lowered to the table the cup she had raised to her lips. And after that, as though her soul had left her, she went mute. As I watched, like a flower in time-lapse, her eyes sank inward, her nose drooped, **and the color of her skin that had been so smooth, lost its tension like chamois leather.** Around her lips, a dark stain appeared like that left by mulberries.
My problem is, the idea of "color" losing tension or pluck (candidate translations of ) feels nonsensical in English. One hypothesis is that is actually attached to , not .
What do you think? | It makes sense if the in is
――
and not
―
from < | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "grammar, translation, particles"
} |
小鳥のキス is this an expression or does it mean something else?
> .
This is the whole sentence.
What is a ?
Is it a kind of kiss? Or is it referring to a kind of birds? | is a _type of kiss_. The idea is that the shape of your lips resemble a bird's beak. This could be called "the usual kiss".
( = small bird), presumably references and means a small/light/innocent/no-funny-business type of kiss. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "meaning, translation"
} |
Difference between 方法 and 手段
I was brushing up on some basic vocabulary. Asked what the Japanese equivalent of "the means (of doing something)", I would use . However, they've used . As far as I can tell, these are (fairly) synonymous. Is there a difference? Are there places/phrases where you would use one but not the other? | I have always got by taking as method or "way of doing" and as "a means": As Tokyo Nagoya says, there is some overlap but if you know when to use method and means in English then try to do the same in Japanese.
(Hint: I think is the easiest to adopt. You could leave until after you have heard it used more.) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "word choice, words"
} |
Why is カラオケ (karaoke) written in katakana?
I noticed (karaoke) is always written in katakana on signs/buildings in Japan, despite it being a Japanese word. Why is it not written in Kanji or Hiragana?
As I understand it, the usual reasons for using katakana are things like:
* words with a Western origin,
* to emphasise a foreign/unusual accent/voice or onomatopoeia (especially in manga), or
* for traditional emphasis on words that pre-date Kanji.
But is a modern Japanese word (which has been borrowed by English from Japanese, rather than the other way around), so I don't understand why it would be written exclusively in katakana? | It's not a wholly Japanese word. It's a shortening of []{} ('empty') and . So, since at least part of it needs to be written with katakana, the whole word is written with katakana. (Switching between the two within one word typically only happens in slang verbs like .) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 29,
"question_score": 25,
"tags": "etymology, katakana"
} |
Using 前 and 後 with Time versus Duration
I have the following 2 sentences to translate for class.
Sentence 1:
>
> ****
>
Sentence 2:
> ****
>
>
I think these mean the following.
Sentence 1
> I have a headache so
> before 4 o'clock
> can I go home? (can I receive your action of letting me return home)
Sentence 2
> As for the ... test,
> I didn't know whether it would be difficult so
> I could not have confidence and
> I was worried.
I have the following questions.
1. Is my translation of sentence 1 correct? Specifically the "before 4 o'clock" part.
2. Would the be said as ?
3. Is my translation of sentence 2 correct (what I have). And how is the missing part translated? (test after the 4th day, 4th, etc)
4. How would the be said? ? ? | 1. I believe there's nothing wrong with your translation for the first sentence.
2. Yes.
3. As for the test (I'm having) in/after four days, I **don't** know whether or not it will be difficult, so I **don't** have confidence (I am not confident/ I have no confidence), and I **am** worried.
4.
The translations for both sentences could of-course be better phrased to sound more natural in English but may be you were asked to do a more literal translation? | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, readings, time"
} |
Describing pain, a very painful situation
I have the following sentence to translate for class.
>
>
>
>
>
So far I have the following.
> My head and teeth and fingers and ears and legs/feet hurt and
> it was painful and
> my feeling was bad so
> a bit after 9:30
> I made him go to the pharmacy.
I am not sure if I am missing something about the nuances of the pain structures.
The 2nd and 3rd rows seem a bit redundant to the 1st row. Is there some special meaning I am missing? **Since the 1st row has already expressed pain, how is the 2nd and 3rd row's meaning different or how does it add to the description of pain?**
Also, is the correctly translated as "a bit after"? | has more of a connotation of suffering, or going through hardship.
Because the speaker is suffering from hurting in all these places, | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation, words"
} |
Translation of それを持って来させる
I have the following translation for class.
So far I have the following.
Bad students who didn't study
I made them write kanji 300 times at home and
.... and
after that, I made them stand at the front of the classroom for an hour.
That 3rd line I am really having problems with. I see the "to make someone" structure with the . And then the form of "to have" with the . So "I made them to have this and come"? Or I think and can mean to come to a point. So maybe "so as to make them get to have this" like in an "understand this" sort of way? I just don't know... | means to bring something with you (hold/carry than come) so the 3rd line is something like "...and had them bring it back (to class)" | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, て form, causation"
} |
火の車 Where did it come from
My sensei in class told us about that means someone in a difficult financial strait . I was wondering what does it have to do with fire and a car ? | As written on gogen allguide:
Apparently it's from the Buddhist {} piece of mythology. The story goes that those who were rotten in their lifetimes would be carried into the flames of hell on a cart driven by a petty demon. This suffering was then later metaphorically applied to financial difficulties.
A possible alternate explanation is that it's connected to another Buddhist idea, {}, which compares the pains of the world with a house on fire. Supposedly this may have been applied to to represent financial difficulties specifically. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "translation, etymology, religion"
} |
"Let's not do this"
I wonder how to interpret the following sentence: "The weather is bad so let's not go out?". Basically, I want to stay as literal as possible and not end up saying "let's stay home" or using "if the weather's bad we better not go out".
Basically it would be something like:
>
If it cannot be literally translated, what are the other ways of expressing this? | I think you could say something like this:
> **** (plain)
> **** (polite)
Since your example includes , I assume you want the polite version. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "negation, imperatives, volitional form"
} |
How is 高めの used and constructed?
example sentence:
I'd like to know how is made (verb stem + no?) and how it should be used. I'm guessing the example sentence means "food which heightens your cholesterol". Does mean type/category here? | This `` is the one meaning "slightly" or "somewhat", and the `` is "people". So the sentence translates as "Foods that people with high(er than normal) cholesterol (eat)". It would probably sound more serious if it were just ``, but using `` it sounds more of just a neutral magazine (pamphlet, etc.) headline.
As for the ``, that's needed to modify ``. With, ``, it would just be ``, but `` is not an -adjective, so it requires the ``: ``.
See also this post: “slightly/somewhat” : Usage and limitations. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, translation"
} |
How to say "fact" in Japanese
How would you translate "10 facts about Japan"?
I looked it up but there seem to be many translations for "fact", and I'm not sure if I should use , or something else. | Depending on the severity of what you are trying to convey, there are different options.
If it's very objective matter -- possibly a strong or stern tone like in a news report or something -- I think `` is probably best. This would best suit a scenario like:
> 10 facts about Japan
>
> 1. The capital is Tokyo
> 2. The literacy rate is over 95%
> 3. ...
>
However, if it's something more casual -- for example, personal observations that you're writing in a blog -- you might want to use `[]{}`. This translates more along the lines of "trivia", "fun facts", or "tidbits". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation"
} |
Usage of nan desu?
In a few songs I've heard recently I've noticed that _nan desu_ (without the ) has been used in what seems to be maybe a declarative or emphatic sense (not really sure), is this possible?
I'm not overly familiar with usage of _nan desu_ outside of it being used in the question sense (i.e. _ nan desu ka_ ). If someone could clarify uses of _nan desu_ I would be super appreciative. | There is (often contracted to ), which fits the bill. Just like you suspect, it is declarative/emphatic.
This is unrelated to {}, but rather a combination of (the inflection of the copula , if you like), the nominalizer plus the "politifier" .
It also exists in non-polite form: .
It really appears everywhere, e.g. as a conjunction or question marker . (Again, unrelated to .) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 16,
"question_score": 10,
"tags": "particles, questions, contractions, nominalization"
} |
Does this Japanese sentence sound right?
I'm trying to translate a line from an English song (Journey) and it goes like this:
"She took a midnight train going anywhere"
So far, I've ended up with this:
(Kanojo wa mayonaka ressha ga norimashita doko demo ikimasu)
but I feel my sentence structure is probably wrong.
Oh and one more from the song that goes, "Their shadows searching in the night" As easy as that one may seem, I'm having major difficulties translating that into Japanese.
I just need these two lines. | I would say:
By "midnight train" do you mean an overnight train? Or just a last train? | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "syntax"
} |
〜次第です following the 連体形 of a verb
My textbook includes numerous examples of , such as following nouns in which it can be translated as "depending on", or when following the of verbs in which it can be translated as "as soon as", but it includes another set of examples in which it follows the of verbs and is followed by the copula .
The following is one such example:
>
>
> (I will inform you later of any changes in the time and place of the meeting.)
The only explanation that the book gives for this kind of usage is to gloss the sentence with "".
Looking at these such examples, it seems to me that this type of may be a type of polite language. Is this correct? What are the nuances of its usage? | The usage of []{}/ at the end of a sentence is indeed reserved for polite and formal language --- in particular, it is most often used in business letters.
The phrase means that one is taking an action either right now or in the near future that has been necessitated by another event in the past. here has the nuance of a "natural next step" in the flow of events.
In your sentence, []{}[]{}[]{}[]{}[]{}, has not been finalized as the author writes this. he is saying that he will inform you of the when it is finalized.
Finally, is not even close in meaning to . I, a native Japanese speaker, actually do not even know what could mean without context. Something like "This is the reason I am informing you.", maybe? | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "usage"
} |
How do you say 'to die from...' in Japanese?
For instance, I'm trying to say 'I would die from boredom' and the best I can come up with is
>
However, I strongly suspect this isn't correct. It would also be useful to have the phrase "I suffer from..." laid out as well. | This is Japanese. We can't be confident in a translation without knowledge like who you're talking to, your relative status, written or spoken, what setting, etc. etc.
would mean "to die from boredom". is often used to mark the means or cause of something (cf. =die from an illness, =die from dehydration, etc). Note that the particle marks what is before it. So you could say like for 'I would die from boredom'. To a friend in everyday conversation though, I would probably say something more like . | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation, particles, expressions"
} |
Are many hiragana and katakana found in kanji?
I've noticed a few kanji that appear identical to a kana. is the only example I can remember, where it represents both the kanji ni and the katakana ni, although I'm sure I've seen others. Are there many examples of this? Are they coincidental? | I'm no expert in the history of the Japanese writing system so I'm going to be putting a lot of faith this chart and the idea in general that katakana are derived from small parts of larger kanji. This appears to be generally accepted though Japanese wikipedia notes opposition by one scholar.
If we go by this chart, it's no coincidence that katakana looks like the kanji , since it was taken from the kanji which itself is made up of and . Similarly, is taken from the in , is taken from the in , is from the in and is directly from . I think that covers all ones which are very similar visually. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "kanji, kana"
} |
Does 両目 have a special meaning or is it just a mistake?
Today I found this sentence on my Japanese textbook (I - pg. 70) And it didn't make any sense to me.
>
I looked for on and it says it means both eyes. Still didn't make any sense to me so I put it in Google Translator and the result was... well the expected one:
> We are waiting in the place where I got off the train two eyes from the front.
Does this have any special meaning (I mean the use of ) or is it just that there is a mistake on the textbook and it should just be:
Which means the 2nd train. | Here you have the ordinal , plus the counter {}, which is used to count the cars on a train. The combination would mean "two [train] cars".
When you add the ordinal suffix {} to , it changes from "two cars" to "the second car". So, the whole phrase really means the second car from the front (of the train).
Your sentence does _not_ contain the word {} meaning "both eyes". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 14,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "meaning, word choice, words, parsing, counters"
} |
How can you express "as long as you want"?
I want to tell my friend that he can stay at my house as long as he wants.
I was thinking:
>
or
>
What is the correct way? | Both of those work with a little fixing.
or
Hell, throw it all together and you can sound like a super welcoming friend lol.
> | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation, sentence"
} |
When would I use 飛行場【ひこうじょう】 over 空港【くうこう】 for airport？
So my flashcards say means airport.
But actual airports in Japan always use , like .
What are the differences between these?
And in what situations (if any) would I want to use over | refers to a small local airport with a short runway, often with no regular commercial airline service. It is mostly for private use of small-size aircrafts.
refers to a larger airport with longer runways that serves the general public.
Some (but not many) native speakers use the two words interchangeably in informal conversations. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 13,
"question_score": 12,
"tags": "word choice"
} |
Shop or Shop Owner
If you have the name of a shop plus , what possibilities are there for the translation? I get the sense that it can either be a formal way to speak, or it can mean the store person.
> = pharmacy
> = pharmacy (polite) OR pharmacist
Is this correct? Or does the just mean one of the two? | The way I've heard it used can be for either the store itself, or the store's owner/manager/etc. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "suffixes, titles"
} |
Writing the name Harriet in Japanese
Sorry for the trivial question, but I've just started learning Japanese and thought that I should know how to write my name in hiragana. My name is Harriet.
My first guesses were or . I tried putting it into some web applications: one gave me (which seems like a strange way of doing it), and another gave me some kanji and the romaji 'Harietto' which I guess would be (?)
What would be the correct way of writing the name 'Harriet'? | Try going to < and hitting the Japanese pages to see how other people named Harriet have their names written. It's usually (english names are usually written in katakana) or in hiragana. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "hiragana, names"
} |
Recognizing Japanese handwriting and translating
I have found an old Japanese note that I would very much like to translate. Background info: I found it in an old gaming console where you're supposed to scan barcodes (barcode is at the back of the note) and it most probably has to do with that.
However, it's handwritten (and my Japanese is extremely rusty), therefore just recognizing the characters (especially the kanji) is very hard for me.
I have attached the photo of the note, and I am trying to transcribe it line by line. So far I have (and might still be very wrong):
1. _ (I believe means 'grandfather')
2. ( _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ )
3. _
4. (not even trying this one yet)
I was wondering if there are any tips on recognizing handwritten Japanese? Or if anyone could help me translate this?
!Japanese handwritten note | I think it says
>
> Goku's grandfather
>
> (
> )
> (Blocks the opponent's special move in that round only)
>
>
> Fortuneteller Baba
>
> (BP
> (BP don't decrease for some fixed time, even if you use the special move | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation, kanji, handwriting, video games"
} |
What does サラバイ mean?
I hear the term is casual speak sometimes but I have absolutely no idea what it means.
Example:
Me : <new information shared to team>
other person:
other person: | I got the answer from this link: <
Looks like =, both for "bye".
I don't think this is a proper word in a formal business context, but still possible in a business chat that is not so formal. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "usage, slang"
} |
What's the difference between 舟 and 船?
They both mean "ship/boat". Are they completely interchangeable? Do they signify boats of different sizes or uses (people, cargo, etc.)? Is only `` used in compounds to describe metaphorical "boats" of abstract usage, like `[]{}`? | The interchangeability between []{} and []{} , in theory, is close to non-existent. In real life, however, it is left to the judgement of each individual. Generally speaking, the more educated or well-read you are, the less interchangeable the two will become.
In school, we are taught to use to refer to a small boat, usually (but not necessarily) hand-rowed. refers to a larger boat than a . For this, can be used for a much wider variety of boat sizes. It is all about the physical size, not the purpose of the boat (passengers. cargo, etc.).
Metaphorically, both and are used as well.
[]{} = "timely help or support", []{} = "a small boat-shaped dish on which foods (like takoyaki and sashimi) are served", etc.
[]{} = "blimp", []{} = "spaceship", etc. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 12,
"question_score": 10,
"tags": "words, meaning, nuances, homophonic kanji"
} |
Multiple readings for singular 魚
In what situations is `` pronounced as vs. ? I personally like better, but I don't know why. Is it reserved for only certain scenarios? | This webpage has a comprehensive explanation:
>
>
> | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "kanji, readings"
} |
How do you punctuate phone numbers in Japanese?
Given the phone number in English:
> (012) 345-6789
how do you write this in Japanese? Is it:
>
or:
>
or somewhere in between? My personal research suggests the first one is the right way to do it, but I'm suspicious. Thanks! | On my (and others') Japanese business cards, we use spaces or dashes, never dots. International formatting is appropriate, even if you don't expect to give your card outside of Japan. So these are all appropriate:
* 03 XXXX YYYY
* 08-XXXX-YYYY
* 080 XXXX YYYY
* 080-XXXX-YYYY
* +81 3 XXXX YYYY
* +81 90 XXXX YYYY
Out of my many business cards, I have none that use parentheses for the area code. A couple of times I've seen parentheses used for a small edge case of international dialing, like so:
* +81 (0)80 XXXX YYYY | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "orthography, numbers, punctuation"
} |
Is telling a superior, "電子メールを見てくださいました," correct?
Imagine wanting to tell a superior something along the lines of, "I saw/read/received your e-mail." In Japanese, there's sometimes something with using the te form along with words like and to suggest a favor has been done, or something like that. So would this be a good way to put it:
>
As in, "I saw your nice e-mail," or something like that.
Why or why not? If not, what's the proper way to go about this? Thanks! | is used when the -doer- is the one who needs honorifics, so that sentence makes it sound like you're exalting yourself above the listener. (It can be appropriate if you're talking about someone else having seen your email.) has similar problems - - is used when someone else is doing the thing, so sounds like '[I] had [my] email read'. You don't typically talk about doing favours for other people, generally you talk about other people doing favours for you - the connotations of the relevant grammar honour the person who goes out of his way to do something nice, rather than humbling the person that receives the nice thing.
Typically in situations like this you don't need any particular honorifics beyond -, but if the superior is high enough up in the company's hierarchy, you might feel drawn to a humble sentence like . or is almost always going to be enough. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "politeness, て form, formality"
} |
Is 拝見いたしました an example of 二重敬語?
is presumably considered bad style (or simply incorrect).
I hear/read all the time. Is it an example of ?
I understood to be a little more complex than "used a polite form more than once in a phrase".
To be a bit more precise, I think that to express a verb in , one should make the verb polite, but _only once_ , so that
>
is , but
>
is .
might be fine, because is a () noun and is a () verb; or it might be a problem, because is a () form of . | To answer the title question as a simple yes-no question, the only logical answer would be "Yes, it is." The phrase clearly uses a []{} twice,[]{} and , which satisfies the definition of []{}.
Is the phrase "incorrect" then? According to me, no, it is not. Why not? Because it is in such wide use and it just sounds normal and natural if you have a native ear. It carries none of the "wordiness" (and if I may, "funniness") of some of the other examples of such as []{} and []{}[]{}. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "word choice, politeness, keigo"
} |
Dajare no "dake ni"
This question is about puns, or dajare, where at the end of a sentence almost every time there's `dake ni` to be heard. I'm having trouble understanding what role `dake ni` has in these sentences? When translated literally it doesn't make much sense to me. These are all from recent anime I'm watching, for example:
* One is about shougi (): Sugu komacchau, koma dake ni
* One pun was: juudou () is a sport where every person throws at the same angle, which is juu do (), juudou dake ni
* This one was about bicycle club, where when members drive, Okane ga ochite, charin, charin, chari dake ni
So what's `dake ni` doing there? Or rather how should it be translated? | is used when the result that appeared is contrary to the expectation. It's difficult to give an exact meaning for the phrase in these contexts. and can also occur in other contexts as well that are not based on this meaning.
It is often used incorrectly by young Japanese people to make what they are saying seem more interesting. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "translation"
} |
Could you help me translate this sentence?
I've been reading this article which I can understand fine in general, but it's the last couple of sentences in which the translator gives his own opinion I'm at a loss. The article is about how Lego has been split into specific sets aimed at different genders.
<
>
Except for the first part where the translator states he's going to give us his opinion it just won't come together in my mind.
I think the translator says it doesn't really matter what the person with the critique says(she picked out the lego example herself) because the children will play with the things they want to play with.
It's probably wrong, but the best I can do right now. | This is how i understand it :
>
This is merely the translator's personal opinion but,
>
children's "playing power/force" easily overwhelms something like adult's message transmission power, so
>
if the person himself is interested, regardless of something like "being the target of this merchandise" wouldn't he want to play? | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "translation"
} |
meaning of "~しており、...."? isn't that 謙譲語{けんじょうご}?
The second line in the first paragraph of this Bloomberg news article reads as such:
> {}{}{}{}{}{} **** {}{}{}{}{}
I perceive that to mean:
> Russian military forces already occupy some facilities in Ukraine's Crimean autonomous region, and the Ukrainian government is condemning their having suffered this military invasion.
I've never seen the structure "" (which I assume is the structure from which "" is derived. Isn't "" {}? And, straight news articles surely could not have the context for {}. But, even so, the convention in newspapers is to use "", instead of ""?
I just read past " **** " and assign it no meaning. I want to change this. I'd like to have at least some meaning come to mind when I read "". | The in this particular sentence is certainly not because the speaker is not talking about himslef. Rather, he is talking about . One uses to indirectly show respect to the listener by speaking humbly about himself. In news reporting, as you stated, there is no need or expectation of the use of any kind of .
In this case, is simply the more formal form of not of as you said and therefore, it is in the continuative form. "are occupying ~~ and ~~". could not be translated by itself but it would help you to remember that it functions as the continuative or conjunctive form of a verb phrase describing a state or situation. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 16,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "phrases"
} |
"Formal" Japanese and "honorific" Japanese, are completely different, right?
My understanding is that, strictly speaking, "honorific" Japanese {} is completely different from "formal" Japanese {}. Yet, I sometimes hear even native speakers conflate them:
ex:
{} --->
--->
{} --->
{} --->
--->
--->
formal (not honorific) escalation:-->-->-->
honorific (not formal) escalation: -->
Strictly speaking, am I right about this? But, is the reality that the usage of honorifics necessarily means you are speaking formally? For years now, I've heard the phrases "honorific Japanese", and "formal Japanese", often used interchangeably. Isn't there a distinct difference?
Indeed, I've read a little Mishima, and he writes formally, but not honorifically. So, there must be a clean difference, and it's just that some people carelessly interchange those two phrases, right? | **** is when the subject of the sentence is shown respect.
**** is when the subject of the sentence is being humbled.
**** is when the addressee is being shown respect.
(Note that the subject is often not explicitly in the sentence.)
From the definitions, it should be clear that it is possible to combine and , or and , but not and (in a single clause). So, to answer one of your questions regarding & , the former is , while the latter is both and .
Regarding how to classify , most people consider it to be a kind of (for example, ), but there are some linguists who do not consider it to be . In normal discussion I think that it is safe to assume that contains .
_Formality_ (e.g., ) is yet another dimension unrelated to showing respect. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "honorifics, terminology, formality"
} |
Particle は replacing を - where does the stress lie?
I've recently learned that the particle can be replaced by either particles /. However, the stress on the focus of the sentence doesn't make sense to me.
My book gives this example:
> (I've eaten DINNER; focus is on the fact that dinner was eaten)
> (I've EATEN dinner; focus is on the fact that it was dinner that was eaten)
Shouldn't it be the other way around? From what I understand of /, the preceding word is set as the topic/focus of the sentence. So concerning the sentence ``, the focus would be on dinner and not that they had already eaten dinner right? | First, is a subject marker, is an object marker. One cannot replace one with the other but, if you changed the tense from active to passive, the particle used would appear to change from to ie from your first example to . (Although it does not feel very common way to describe dinner.)
Actually I would say that the first sentence is not really placing strong emphasis on the object or the verb but definitely when you replace with you are making dinner the topic and the emphasis is what comes after . Perhaps the following is more natural:
>
>
> "As for dinner, we already have eaten."
FWIW can be used to place emphasis on the subject that comes before it so if you want to stress that dinner has been eaten you might say (Although as indicated above, I can't imagine many occasions when one would say this)
The change in emphasis between is covered better in the second to last comment on the answers to this question: What is the difference between and | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "particles, particle は, particle を, particle が"
} |
Reading of 三十四日
Is read , in analogy with , , , or is it read ? | It is read .
If you read it , it would sound as if there were a month in which there was a 34th day. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "numbers"
} |
〜くれて, what is the meaning and how do people use it?
Just like the title suggest, I once in a while will encounter what does it really mean and how normally people use it? | is the te-form of the verb .
can be used by itself to mean "to give" or "to let one have" as in
> = "Ken-chan gave me candies."
The other usage of , which is what you are clearly referring to, is to express that you, the speaker, are the receiver of an action by another person. For this, needs to be attached to another verb to form a "Verb + + "
> {}{} = "Helen always teaches me English."
>
> []{}[]{} = "Mom baked cookies for me."
Finally, the continuative form of that is "Verb + + " and here is how it is used. You need to use the **twice**.
> []{} **** **** = "Thanks for coming!"
>
> []{} **** **** []{} = "I am happy that you are here (for me)." | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 12,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "て form"
} |
自分も手会う Translation
I need to translate the following.
So far I have the following.
Yasuda-san
after getting married
without letting anyone but his wife cook?
he was trying to ... also meet a hand by himself?
I heard.
Obviously, I'm not getting that 4th line. And the 3rd line I am not sure about. I know the following.
* = one's self
* = hand
* = to meet
Maybe is a verb I am unfamiliar with? I can't seem to find it online. | From the context, the correct word should be []{}. makes no sense.
[]{} = "He has been trying to help (her cook)."
[]{} refers to the husband here (and it is a key word in Japanese, in which pronouns are rarely used).
Your 3rd line looks off as well. It literally means "Without letting only his wife do the cooking". More naturally, "without letting his wife do all the cooking", perhaps? I dunno. Don't trust my English. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation"
} |
Meaning of として in this sentence
I don't get why is used instead of in this sentence, as it doesn't seem to fit with the "as" sense that I know.
> ****
What I understand is this:
> Treating as a group, regardless of their part of speech, is common.
Thinking while writing: I was assuming that was related to . But if instead it is related to then Y would mean by grouping them as Y.
Which would mean that something like would be omitted in the sentence
>
> It is common to treat ( and ) by grouping them together as .
Am I correct? | Assuming that the phrase was taken from this page, the use of is 100% correct and natural.
You cannot use in place of because the direct object of that sentence is NOT . It is []{}[]{} or more formally and appropriately in this context, []{}, which was omitted.
Thus, it is talking about "treating (demonstratives and interrogatives) by lumping them together as independently of parts of speech."
You were correct in sensing that a word was being omitted. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, usage, meaning"
} |
Particle に (and で) in this sentence
I don't get why is used in addition to in the following sentences.
> ****
> Concerning the demonstratives, there is a regular system (of words, i guess) that starts by .
>
> ****
> There are two ways of using the demonstratives.
On a side note, is it always X that is used in combination with to mean "to start with X"? | doesn't have to represent a physical location. The literal meaning would be `X exists in Y` but as English speakers we will tend to take this too literally. In this case the meaning is closer to `X has Y` and it is a commonly used pattern. Think of it as existing figuratively (`This property (Y) exists in X`).
As a beginner I remember learning the `AB` pattern, but actually the `AB` is more common (or simply `AB`). The first one means more like A is holding onto B, or owns B, while the second means more like B is something that A has permanently (or at least practically permanently). The reality is not quite as black and white as that. To me there are many cases where either one would sound natural (but your example is not one, since the grammatical rule is obviously permanent).
To answer the other question: Yes, in the meaning of "(The word) starts with X" the Japanese will always be `X` | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, usage, particles"
} |
Which word is this use of かめ specifying?
In Kenji Miyazawa's poem "Thief", many words are left as hiragana:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
What does signify? (I tried doing a few searches, but I can't tell if this is related to a shogi piece or an Aryadeva figure). According to this site, it refers to Datta Daiba, but that doesn't clear up the mystery with . | I located another version of the poem as follows:
()
Here = celadon pot. Thus may mean "the pot isolated like Aryadeva."
Anyway, the poem is enigmatic with plenty of room for speculation including this -> < | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation, homophonic kanji"
} |
greeting the wife of a colleague with 「お世話になっています」?
Supposing I'm meeting a colleague's wife for the first time, I was trying to think of how to modify to express something like "I'm always in your husband's care". Is this appropriate? if so, how would I modify the phrase?
I've encountered the phase used where the speaker is thanking the person he's talking to on behalf of a third person - for example - and I wondered if it works the other way around. | You could say to her:
> []{}[][]{}= "I'm always in your husband's care".
Do not forget the honorific . The can be replaced with without changing the meaning.
She would say to you:
> []= "My husband is always in your care."
She will not use the because it is her own husband.
Finally, it is always the particle that can change the meaning of the sentence entirely. In this case, it is vs. .
(If you usually did not speak all that politely or humbly, you could replace the part with , but you could never omit that .) | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "usage"
} |
Help with phrase: えらく[愉]{たの}しい[事]{こと}[続]{つづ}きなんだ
I'm having trouble with the following:
I don't know the meaning of as I've never seen that word before. | Though this seems already answered, I decided to make it more complete.
"" is a kind of adverb( that is used to emphasize on something.
Some examples I came up with...
But overall i don't think i hear this very often. If you just want to emphasize, "” or "” would be a better choice. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, meaning"
} |
What is the correct way of saying "third" in different contexts?
What would be the correct way of saying "third" in the following contexts:
* Chronologically (This is the third time this happens)
* Ranked (I am the third best player in the world)
* Other? Maybe other context I haven't thought of that has meaning in Japanese but less in other languages? | You might know that every time numbers appear in Japanese, they are usually accompanied by a counter word, e.g. , , , , ...
To say "three items" you can say 3, "3 pieces" is 3, "three times" is 3, "number three" is 3.
To make the number into an ordinal, e.g. "three" into "third", you simply add as so
> 3 third item
> 3 third piece
> 3 third [number]
> 3 third time
So, you example first example sentence become
> 3
> This is the third time.
Alas, being _n_ th place (e.g., in a tournament) already has its own counter. In Japanese, you don't need an ordinal, but just the counter {}, so your second example becomes
> 3
> I am the third best player in the world. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "word choice, numbers"
} |
Understanding もう少しゆっくり休む - "Take the day off more slowly"?
I have a long translation I need to do. It has basically talked about how the speaker's younger brother was very sick. The last sentence of the translation is the following.
>
>
> ****
Here is what I have so far.
> I do not know whether my younger brother will be able to go to the company tomorrow but
> if he can
> I think I want to receive his action of taking the day off **a little more slowly**
That last line doesn't sound right to me. "Taking the day off a little more slowly". Can anyone think of a better translation? | > I don't know if my brother will be able to go to work tomorrow,
> but if possible
> I would like him to rest() a little longer().
The doesn't refer to him resting "more slowly", it's resting for a longer period of time. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation"
} |
Meaning of ～と言えよう
Just as the title says, I'm looking for the meaning of this construction, as it is used in the following sentence:
> **** | means to say. means can say. is the volitional form of .
Therefore means something along the lines of "It can be said" or "It could probably be said" and expresses a little bit of uncertainty in the statement. It may also be that the speaker doesn't want to express absolute agreement with the statement by using in this way.
In context, means something like "It can be said that there is a problem." or "It could probably be said that a problem exists". | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, usage"
} |
Is 「<number>回後」 equivalent to 「第<number>回」?
For example, I'm trying to make sense of the following phrase:
>
When **literally** translated to English, becomes:
> Twice After System
I have also encountered a similar phrase:
> 2
Can both phrases mean "System Version 2"? If no, what makes them different? | I am afraid that neither nor 2 makes any sense in my native ears even though I could feel you tried hard.
To use as much as possible from one of those two, one could take the latter and alter it to []{}, but the more natural way of saying "System Version 2" nowadays would be [2]{}. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation, nuances"
} |
The difference between 詳しい and 詳細 when used adverbially or adjectivally
While I know that and both have unique meanings, there are some cases where I am not able to tell the difference between them. Here are two I've stumbled upon:
Adverbially:
Adjectivally:
Is there a difference in nuance, or are they virtually the same? | As (I hope) you could tell from the pronunciations of the two words, []{} is a []{} (an originally Japanese word) and []{} is a Sino loanword.
As with most other pairs of the two classes of words, and basically have the same meaning and the sounds more informal and less technical than its Sino lowanword counterpart. Perhaps I should write the former as "kuwashii" in romaji for this discussion because we are talking about a spoken language whenever we are talking about . Japanese was only a spoken language before the Japanese encountered the Chinese. You will keep witnessing this important fact about the "ranks" of the words used in Japanese for as long as you study Japanese.
Thus, there is virtually no difference in nuance, let alone in meaning, between the two words when they are used either adjectivally or adverbially. Needless to say, only can be used as a noun in one word. The Yamato counterpart of that would be two-word-long ---. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "word choice, nuances, wago and kango"
} |
Understanding Japanese verbs
I took up an interest in Japanese and I have to say I'm enjoying the language overall.
I've been reading online resources and have no problem with normal Godan or Ichidan verbs since they have rules you can follow.
However when I look up verbs in the dictionary such as cooking, painting, etc:
[]{},[]{}
None of the online resources I've found tell you how to deal with these. There are a lot of words that don't end like the regular verbs.
What do I need to learn to to begin forming sentences like
* Do you cook?
* Are you cooking? | There is a class of verbs, sometimes called suru-verbs, which are formed from a noun + the verb , e.g.
> []{} = to cook
So,
>
> Do you cook?
>
>
> Are you cooking?
To learn how to form simple sentences like this, you need to know how to form questions and how to look up word in a dictionary:
The second word you looked up is the gerund "painting" of the verb "to paint", but "painting" is not really a verb anymore. doesn't mean "to paint" (not even with appended), but means a _picture_ (or painting).
"to draw a picture" is in fact {}{}.
To look up verbs in a dictionary, I suggest not to look for the gerund (e.g. cooking, painting, ...), but for the infinitive (e.g. to cook, to paint, ...) to avoid confusion. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "verbs"
} |
Is there a Japanese equivalent of knock-knock jokes?
For those (non-natives, etc.) who maybe aren't familiar, knock-knock jokes are one of the lowest, most basic forms of American "comedy". They follow this format:
> * A: Knock, knock
> * B: Who's there?
> * A: [Something]
> * B: [Something] who?
> * A: [Dumb punchline]
>
Here's an example:
> * A: Knock, knock
> * B: Who's there?
> * A: "Boo"
> * B: "Boo" who?
> * A: It's just me, you don't have to cry. →
>
> "Boo" whoBoo hooBoo hoo[]{}
>
You can make up just about anything and fit it into the format of a knock-knock joke.
So does Japanese have some similar ubiquitous format for making easy "jokes"? | I don't think there are any call-and-response jokes in Japanese, which is sort of an important feature of knock-knock jokes. As for jokes, which follow a particular pattern, there are simple plays on words, which everyone knows and which involve two words or phrases, which are (at least quasi-)homophones, usually at the beginning and at the end of a sentence, which when read without distinguishing the homophones are preferably some sort of tautology (e.g. ) or simply unintelligible (e.g. ). Some all-time favourites
> * []{}
> *
> *
> *
> * []{}
> *
> *
>
They are of a similar standard and similar to knock-knock jokes in that everyone gets the joke (or what's left of it) and everyone knows at least a couple of them. Also, everyone is free to make up their own. | stackexchange-japanese | {
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "expressions, set phrases, puns, jokes"
} |
Subsets and Splits
No saved queries yet
Save your SQL queries to embed, download, and access them later. Queries will appear here once saved.