Datasets:

---

p1atdev

/

japanese-stackexchange

like 3

[ { "body": "It means \"only\". You can think of it as the written version of だけ.\n\nのみ can replace だけ except for these cases:\n\n> * i-adjectives: 高い{だけ・*のみ}\n>\n> * na-adjectives: 静かな{だけ・*のみ}\n>\n> * quantifiers: 一つ{だけ・*のみ}\n>\n>\n\n>\n> * denoting unacceptability\n\nAlso case particles may appear before/after のみ with virtually no difference in\nmeaning except for で.\n\n * Xでのみ, Y - Only using X, Y.\n\n * Xのみで, Y - Using \"Only X\", Y.", "comment_count": 9, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-26T00:39:23.090", "id": "4445", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-26T01:24:53.317", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "542", "parent_id": "4444", "post_type": "answer", "score": 14 } ]

[ { "body": "I don't think that kigatsuku means to wake up. It means to notice, to become\naware etc... to wake up is okiru. As well. \"Minna\" or \"Mina-san\", but not\n\"Minna-san\". Finally, I would not use a \"wa\" but a \"ga\".\n\nThen you are asking the best between \"okitara, minna ga neteita.\" and \"okita\ntoki (ni), minna ga neteita.\"\n\nBoth are fine actually. The first one focus more on yourself noticing that\neveryone is still asleep. The second one is quite neutral, you are just\ntelling a fact. This is my perception.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-26T05:49:03.370", "id": "4448", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-26T05:49:03.370", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "4447", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "I think I'd need more context, or at least I'd need to know if you want it in\nspoken or written style..., but anyway I'd rather say \n'[気]{き}づいたら、みんな[寝]{ね}ていた' (kizuitara, minna nete ita.)' \n'[気]{き}づくとみんな[寝]{ね}ていた' (kizuku to minna nete ita.) \n'[気]{き}が[付]{つ}いたら、みんな寝ていた' (ki ga tsuita ra, minna nete ita.) \n'気が付くとみんな寝ていた' (kiga tsuku to minna nete ita.) \nbecause 「[気]{き}づく」also means 'to regain consciousness'=('to come to', no?). We\noften use the verb [気]{き}がつく/気づく to mean 'to wake up' in daily conversation,\nlike 「[今朝]{けさ}、[二度寝]{にどね}してさ～、で、[気]{き}が[付]{つ}いたら８[時]{じ}だったのよ！」or something\nlike that. Of course you can also use the verb '[目]{め}が[覚]{さ}める' instead. \n \nIf I were to put any particle after みんな, I'd rather use は, and I wouldn't say\nみなさん here because you're not talking to 'everyone'. \n \nIf you want to use とき, I think '気が付いたときには、みんな寝ていた' would be more natural,\nthough it might sound more like 'Everyone had gone to sleep by the time I woke\nup/became conscious.' \n \nJust one more thing... I think you can also use the verb '[眠]{ねむ}る' instead of\n'寝る', like '気づいたらみんな[眠]{ねむ}っていた' etc.", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-26T07:43:40.423", "id": "4451", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-26T09:02:06.217", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-26T09:02:06.217", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4447", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "There are 3 basic different ways to say \"when\" in japanese:\n\n**〜と** , to indicate that an action brings about a natural consequence.\n\n> このつまみを回すと、音が大きくなります。 \n> When you turn the knob, the volume turns up.\n\n**〜たら** , to indicate that something happens after another action.\n\n> うちへ帰ったら、シャワーを浴びます。 \n> When (or as soon as) I go back home, I take a shower.\n\n**〜とき** is used to mark the moment, in general.\n\n> うちへ帰るとき、友達に会いました。 \n> When I was returning home, I met a friend.\n\nSo the best way to phrase your sentence, in my opinion, is:\n\n> 目が覚めたら、みんな まだ寝ていた。 \n> When I woke up, everybody was still sleeping.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-27T18:52:36.033", "id": "4462", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-21T11:11:44.430", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-21T11:11:44.430", "last_editor_user_id": "1103", "owner_user_id": "1103", "parent_id": "4447", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "First, these are two different constructions:\n\n * ついたら is 付く verb [連用形]{れんようけい} + た [助動詞]{じょどうし} [仮定形]{かていけい}, so one a verb conjugation\n * ついた時 is 付く verb [連用形]{れんようけい} + た [助動詞]{じょどうし} [連体形]{れんたいけい} + 時 noun, so a verb conjugation and a noun\n\nSo the nuance would be:\n\n * \"気がついたら\" => \"When/if I/you noticed\"\n * \"気がついた時\" => \"At the moment I/you noticed\"\n\nAnd yes, it is a proper use of these constructions, but in my opinion adding\n\"、\" before \"皆\" would make the sentences more natural.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-23T08:41:20.333", "id": "9552", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-23T08:41:20.333", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1868", "parent_id": "4447", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "[腹ん這い]{はらんばい}になって is an 音変化{おんへんか} (shift in sound) of\n[[腹這い]{はらばい}になって](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E8%85%B9%E3%81%B0%E3%81%84%E3%81%AB%E3%81%AA%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6)\n\"flat on one's belly\".\n\nIn a similar way,\n[[四つん這い]{よつんばい}](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E5%9B%9B%E3%81%A4%E3%82%93%E9%80%99%E3%81%84-654615)\nis an 音変化 of\n[[四つ這い]{よつばい}](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E5%9B%9B%E3%81%A4%E9%80%99%E3%81%84-654578)\nfor example.\n\nSee also [腹這い](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E8%85%B9%E9%80%99%E3%81%84-605066).", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-26T06:47:58.207", "id": "4450", "last_activity_date": "2015-11-12T21:07:50.617", "last_edit_date": "2015-11-12T21:07:50.617", "last_editor_user_id": "796", "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "4449", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes, accents change when words are combined/conjugated/etc. I'm not sure if\nthere are any truly sentence-level phenomena, but there is definitely more\ngoing on than just \"words have the same accent all the time\". The NHK\ndictionary does include a fair bit of information about these rules.\n\nTo take your examples -- here are some answers I got from consulting the\ndictionary quickly. (Linguists, please forgive my half-assed terminology and\nuse of the dreaded LH representation.)\n\n1) This is actually more complicated than it looks! The 日 and 昇る in 日が昇る are\nboth unaccented, and the の after an unaccented noun does not cause a drop, so\nthe whole phrase has no accent. However, the 日 in あの日は (assuming you mean\n\"that day\" and not \"that sun\" IS accented. They are not actually homophones if\nyou take pitch into account. あの is unaccented, and は coming after an accented\nmora = no accent, so あの日は = LHHL.\n\n2) あの is unaccented as you say, but in combination with certain nouns, the\nwhole phrase takes on an accent. I don't know how to account for this, but the\nNHK dictionary gives あの人 its own entry, with two possible patterns: LHLL or\nLHHH(drop) -- so maybe it is partly lexicalized, or at least the result of\nsome rule obscure enough to justify including the result as its own dictionary\nentry.\n\n3) When の is combined with a two-syllable word with a drop after it (like 橋 as\nyou say), the drop generally \"disappears\" and the result becomes unaccented.\nSo 橋 is LH(drop) but 橋の is LHH(no drop). Why 次の should work differently is a\nmystery. (The dictionary lists 次の間 as an independent item with either LHLL or\nLHHH(no drop), so clearly it is a known phenomenon.) -- Although, it should be\nnoted that の working this way is kind of an exception in the case of noun +\nparticle, which usually doesn't change the accent on the noun.\n\nThe problem with the information in the NHK dictionary (I mean the general\n\"rules\" rather than the entries for individual words) is that although there\nis a lot of it, it is for reference rather than pedagogical purposes -- and\nit's not even indexed very well. So it's not easy to learn from it if what\nyou're after is a general survey of how Japanese accent works. I imagine it\nworks much better if you're using the book as a reference while taking a\ncourse on how to speak NHK-style.", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-26T09:09:49.140", "id": "4453", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-26T09:09:49.140", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "531", "parent_id": "4452", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "「[台]{だい}」= the mark, level. \n \ne.g.「[今年度]{こんねんど}の[利益]{りえき}は2[億円台]{おくえんだい}に[達]{たっ}した」= This year's profit\nreached the two hundred million yen mark.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-26T17:05:34.767", "id": "4455", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-26T17:05:34.767", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4454", "post_type": "answer", "score": 14 } ]

[ { "body": "As the dictionary says, 国体 in this context is an abbreviation of 国民体育大会\n([National Sports\nFestival](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Sports_Festival_of_Japan)).\n山口国体 means the National Sports Festival held in Yamaguchi, in the same way as\n“London Olympics” means the Olympic Games held in London.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-26T23:24:57.527", "id": "4457", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-26T23:24:57.527", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "4456", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "I would say\n\n`すみません、判子をいただけますか？`\n\nIt's just barely formal/respectful, but that's all that's needed for a phrase\nwhich is just a formality.\n\nLike \"Could you sign this, please?\"", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-27T01:41:02.893", "id": "4459", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-27T01:41:02.893", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1059", "parent_id": "4458", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "`~てやる` is synonymous with `~てあげる` but used when the subject of the act (not\nthe person being spoken to) is an inferior. You might define `やる` as \"give or\ndo to an inferior\".\n\nSo \"feed the cat\" would be `猫にえさをやる`\n\nIf your boss told you that your underling needs \"a talking to\" about\nsomething, you might say `私が言ってやります。`", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-28T04:06:23.290", "id": "4465", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-28T04:06:23.290", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1059", "parent_id": "4464", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "～てやる works the same way ～てあげる does but this is really for inferior ranked\npeople, pets or really close people.\n\nYou can use it in the same cases you can use お前. It can be **really** rude if\nmisused so my best advice would be to avoid using it till you feel confortable\nenough in japanese.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-29T01:05:37.410", "id": "4472", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-29T01:05:37.410", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "4464", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "I think that the other answers have already outlined the main differences\nbetween the two. `～てやる` can be much less polite than `～てあげる`, but both have\nthe same basic meaning.\n\n* * *\n\nIn the book [`問題な日本語` by\n`北{きた}原{はら}保{やす}雄{お}`](http://www.amazon.co.jp/%E5%95%8F%E9%A1%8C%E3%81%AA%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AC%E8%AA%9E%E2%80%95%E3%81%A9%E3%81%93%E3%81%8C%E3%81%8A%E3%81%8B%E3%81%97%E3%81%84-%E4%BD%95%E3%81%8C%E3%81%8A%E3%81%8B%E3%81%97%E3%81%84-%E5%8C%97%E5%8E%9F-%E4%BF%9D%E9%9B%84/dp/4469221686),\nit's stated that expressions like `猫に[餌]{えさ}をあげる` and `花に水をあげる` have become\nfrequently used even by the older generation in recent times, even though some\npeople have an uncomfortable feeling when they're said.\n\nIt says that essentially, `あげる` was the `謙{けん}譲{じょう}語{ご}` (\"humble language\")\nof `やる`. As a result, expressions like `先生にあげる` (\"give to a teacher\") and\n`友達にあげる` (\"give to a friend\") have been pointed out as correct, and\nexpressions like `猫に餌をあげる` (\"feed a cat\") and `花に水をあげる` (\"water a flower\")\nhave also been pointed out as incorrect by some people. However, due to shifts\nin the language, people have started using `あげる` in places where `やる` was\nused, as `やる` has connotations of `品がない` (\"lacking style\") and `粗野`\n(\"vulgar/rustic/rude\") and `あげる` is a `上品な言い方` (\"polite/elegant/gracious way\nof talking\").\n\nIt also states that `あげる` has lost almost all it's humility and has largely\nchanged from being `謙譲語` into `美{び}化{か}語{ご}`, and that there is major trend to\nit only being used for people of equal or lower status. As a result, most\nstudents can't say things like `これをあげます` and `カバンを持ってあげます` to teachers. It\nalso makes a hypothesis that as `差{さ}し上{あ}げる` has come into more common usage,\n`差し上げる` might have replaced the `謙譲語` usage of `あげる`.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-29T08:51:11.637", "id": "4473", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-29T22:37:39.797", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-29T22:37:39.797", "last_editor_user_id": "796", "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "4464", "post_type": "answer", "score": 14 } ]

[ { "body": "The 〜かれ appearing here is the imperative form. I suspect this exact\nconstruction is no longer productive in modern Japanese as adjectives are no\nlonger thought of as having imperative forms; however, the dictionary offers\nthis modern rephrasing of 善【よ】かれ悪【あ】しかれ:\n\n> よいにしろ、悪いにしろ\n\nSo in some sense the abstract construction of \"imperative + imperative\" to\nmean \"be it ... or ...\" still survives. (The \"be\" appearing in the English\nversion might also be construed as an imperative, but it's probably a\nsubjunctive.) The\n[thesaurus](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/thsrs/17207/m0u/) (for want of a\nbetter word) lists some alternatives:\n\n * ～にしろ…にしろ\n * 〜にせよ…にせよ\n * 〜にしても…にしても", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-28T11:25:30.187", "id": "4469", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-29T00:03:25.897", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-29T00:03:25.897", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "578", "parent_id": "4466", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "For perspective: There are also the expressions\n\n> ～ろうと～ろうと\n>\n> ～ろうが～ろうが\n\ne.g.\n\n> よかろうと悪かろうと be it good or bad\n>\n> 早かろうが遅かろうが be it early or late\n\nI think these expressions are more productive than ～かれ～かれ, although they do\nhave an archaic feel to them.\n\nAlso, it might be interesting to know that よかれ is commonly used in the sense\n\"good intentions\" or something like that:\n\n> よかれと(思って)したことが裏目に出た I did it with good intentions but it backfired on me\n\n～かろう, although slightly archaic, is still sometimes used instead of ～いだろう\n\n> それはおかしかろう！ (You have to admit) that's strange!", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-31T02:28:53.203", "id": "4492", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-31T02:28:53.203", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4466", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes, they are ambiguous. No, there is no correct interpretation, so far as I\ncan tell. English has the same sorts of problems. Consider:\n\n> **A** saw **B** as he walked down the boulevard with **C**.\n\nWho was walking down the boulevard, and who was who walking with? In practice,\nno English speaker would wittingly use this sentence without an obvious\nimplied interpretation. More likely, the speaker would avoid the ambiguity by\nusing another grammatical construct.\n\n> **The child** saw **Mr. Sanders** as he walked down the boulevard with\n> **Mrs. Sanders**.\n>\n> _Or_\n>\n> **The child** saw **Mr. and Mrs. Sanders** walking together down the\n> boulevard.\n\nIn the case of the sentence 「AとBとCが会談した」, a Japanese speaker would likely use:\n\n> Aたちと会談した\n>\n> BたちがAと会談した\n\n... etcetera.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-28T06:59:38.563", "id": "4468", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-28T07:10:00.313", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-28T07:10:00.313", "last_editor_user_id": "895", "owner_user_id": "895", "parent_id": "4467", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "など functions like \"etc.\" You can see it commonly at the end of a list to\nindicate \"other stuff like this\" without having to exhaustively list every\nitem out.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-29T23:02:18.720", "id": "4475", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-29T23:02:18.720", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "162", "parent_id": "4474", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "It expresses the idea of \"as much as\" or \"to the degree that\", referring\nspecifically to the most/best such thing: _\"The most A is the most B\"_\n\n~~We excel in a thing as much as we like it. We excel in a thing to the degree\nthat we like it.~~\n\nYour translation \"People become best at what they love the most.\" expresses\nthis well in the relationship between _best_ and _most_.\n\nHere are some examples I found:\n\n```\n\n 短い条文こそ奥が深い\n やさしい曲こそ深い\n 知識は使ってこそ技術になる\n 速いランナーこそ要注意\n \n```\n\nSo \"The shortest law has the deepest meaning\", etc.\n\n~~If the subject is a single thing that can not vary in degree, こそ simply\nserves as emphasis.~~\n\nIf used with things that vary not in degree but possibility, it emphasizes\nthat the thing is best/most likely by contrast with the other _implicit_\npossibilities.\n\n```\n\n 彼こそ社長になるべき -> He, if anyone, should be president (instead of the current guy).\n 今年こそ海外に行きます -> This year, for once, I will go overseas (after giving up every year until now).\n \n```\n\nEDIT:clarified the indication of \"the most\" in light of sawa's comment.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-30T03:15:35.953", "id": "4481", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-30T05:59:09.790", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-30T05:59:09.790", "last_editor_user_id": "1059", "owner_user_id": "1059", "parent_id": "4477", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "_Edit in revision 4: If you are interested in this proverb, do not miss\nthe[answer by Matt](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/4593/15) to another\nquestion, where he cites an earlier form of the proverb._\n\n_Edit in revision 2: I rewrote the answer completely to give a more detailed\nexplanation. If you prefer a shorter answer, see the[old\nrevision](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/revisions/4482/1)._\n\nこそ signifies emphasis. In other words, it adds the meaning of exclusiveness\n(as sawa wrote in a comment to this answer). It is not archaic, and it is\ncommon to see こそ outside of proverbs or set phrases (see Paul Richter’s answer\nfor examples). In this answer, I will try to explain 好きこそものの上手なれ, focusing on\nthe role of こそ.\n\nWithout こそ, the sentence would be\n\n> 好きはものの上手なり。 Liking makes mastery.\n\n好き means the action of liking something, just as in modern Japanese.\n[ものの[上手]{じょうず}](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?p=%E7%89%A9%E3%81%AE%E4%B8%8A%E6%89%8B&stype=1&dtype=0&dname=0ss)\nis an archaic phrase which means a person who is very skilled at something. なり\nis a copula in classical Japanese. Therefore the literal meaning of the\nsentence above is roughly “Liking = A very skilled person,” but obviously this\ndoes not make sense because an action is not a person. I think that it means\n“Liking makes a very skilled person,” or in short, “Liking makes mastery,” but\nI do not know the exact reason this “action = person” construct can be used.\n\nNow we add こそ and the sentence becomes\n\n> 好き **こそ** ものの上手なれ。 _It is_ liking _that_ makes mastery.\n\n好きこそ means “liking, and nothing else.” So the sentence means that liking and\nnot anything else (such as aptitude) makes mastery. A similar meaning can be\nexpressed in English using a [cleft\nsentence](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleft_sentence) “It is … that …” like\nthe sentence above.\n\nI changed the auxiliary verb なり at the end of sentence to なれ when I added こそ.\nAs Chocolate pointed out in a comment, this is an instance of the grammatical\nphenomenon called 係り結び. In classical Japanese, when a phrase/clause ending\nwith particle こそ modifies a conjugating word at the end of a sentence, that\nconjugating word takes 已然形 instead of 終止形. Similarly, when a phrase/clause\nending with one of particles ぞ, なむ, や, and か modifies a conjugating word at\nthe end of a sentence, that conjugating word takes 連体形. This phenomenon is\ncalled 係り結び.", "comment_count": 9, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-30T03:52:38.727", "id": "4482", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-12T23:46:07.290", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:48.447", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "4477", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "After searching on Google, I found\n[this](http://blogs.yahoo.co.jp/tubomi3737/29896855.html) and\n[this](http://blogs.yahoo.co.jp/tubomi3737/30447174.html), so I'm assuming\nthis is from Naruto:\n\n> ...\n>\n> カカシ「ま！お前らは忍者学校に戻る必要もないな」 \n> Kakashi: \"Meh! There's no need for you lot to return to Ninja school.\"\n>\n> ...\n>\n> カカシ「……そう 3人とも… 忍者をやめろ！」 \n> Kakashi: \"...Yeah, the three of you... Quit (training to become) ninja!\"\n>\n> ...\n>\n> ナルト「なんでやめろまで言われなくちゃなんねェんだよ!!」 \n> Naruto: \"Why must you go so far as to tell us to quit!\"\n>\n> カカシ「どいつもこいつも 忍者になる資格もねェガキだってことだよ」 \n> Kakashi: \"Every single one of you, you're brats who're unqualified to\n> become ninja!\"\n\n* * *\n\nHere's a breakdown of that sentence:\n\n> なんで やめろまで 言われなくちゃなんねェんだよ!! \n> Literal translation: \"Why [must you/do you have to] go so far as telling us\n> 'quit'!\"\n\n`なんで` means \"why\".\n\n`やめろ` is quite strong, it could be an imperative of \"quit!\" or \"stop!\".\n\n`まで` can mean \"as/so far as\" as well as \"until, till doing\".\n\n`言われなくちゃなんねェ` is a more colloquial and more emphasized form of (the already\ncolloquial) `言われなくちゃならない`, which is `言われなくてはならない`. `...言われなくちゃなんねェんだよ`,\n`...言われなくちゃならないのよ！` or `...言われなくてはならないのよ！` all mean \"Why must you to go so far\nas telling us 'quit'!\".", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-30T03:10:34.510", "id": "4480", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-30T11:43:02.107", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-30T11:43:02.107", "last_editor_user_id": "796", "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "4479", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "First, understand that やめろ is a really raw/strong/rude way to say \"Stop (it)\n!\" so I won't translate it to keep the strong meaning. (Other answers are\nmissing this important fact. The speaker does not complain about being told to\nstop, but the way he is being told to stop.)\n\nWith your context, this sentence would mean: Why do you have to go this far by\ntelling me やめろ. (ie: You could have been more gentle, a softer way to say this\nblabla....)\n\n```\n\n なんで sets the question.\n やめろまで up to \"やめろ\"\n 言われなくちゃなんねェんだよ splited is like this\n 言われなくちゃ: 言われなくては\n なんねェ:　ならない\n んだよ: のです\n いわれる: to be told\n いわれなくてはならない => I have to be told\n \n```\n\nIt's kind of _Why do I have to be told things this far/rude as やめろ_.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-30T04:40:09.990", "id": "4483", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-30T06:51:46.940", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-30T06:51:46.940", "last_editor_user_id": "1065", "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "4479", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "```\n\n なんで: why\n やめろまで: up to \"stop it\"\n 言われなくちゃなんねェ => 言われなくてはならない: \n it needs to be said / [someone] needs to be told (\"it won't do if not said\")\n んだよ!! => のですか: is it?\n \n```\n\nthus:\n\n```\n\n Why does \"stop it\" even need to be said!?\n \n```\n\nThe sentence itself does not define who is being told やめろ、so if the person\nbeing told やめろ says this as you indicate, it would mean:\n\n```\n\n Why do I even have to be told to stop?\n \n```\n\nIf the other person is doing something that the speaker doesn't like, but\nhe/she doesn't stop until told to by the speaker, the same thing would mean:\n\n```\n\n Why do you even have to be told to stop?\n \n```", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-30T05:07:32.213", "id": "4484", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-30T05:23:17.793", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-30T05:23:17.793", "last_editor_user_id": "1059", "owner_user_id": "1059", "parent_id": "4479", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "I think `界隈【かいわい】` would work. It covers a wider area than `近所`.\n\nFor your reference, there is a phrase that expresses an even narrower area\nthan `近所`; that is, `向こう三軒両隣{さんげんりょうどなり}` \"three houses across the street and\nthe houses on both sides\" (1--5 in the following picture)\n\n.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-30T18:14:16.203", "id": "4486", "last_activity_date": "2023-03-11T00:18:53.333", "last_edit_date": "2023-03-11T00:18:53.333", "last_editor_user_id": "816", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4485", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "近辺（きんぺん）辺り（あたり）周辺（しゅうへん）～らへん・・・ \n \nI live in Minowa. Do you know that neighborhood? \nみのわに住んでるの。その[辺]{へん}、知ってる？/その[辺]{あた}り、知ってる？ \nみのわに住んでいます。その[周辺]{しゅうへん}を知っていますか？ \n \nWhat neighborhood do you live in? \n「どの辺りに住んでるの？」「どの辺に住んでるの？」「どこら辺に住んでるの？」「家はどこら辺？」", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-30T18:17:10.043", "id": "4487", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-30T18:17:10.043", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4485", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "Interesting question! The cases I can think of are ～より, ～には, ～にしても, ～にあたって\n\n> バスで行くより、歩いて行くほうが早い It's faster to walk than to take the bus\n>\n> 日本に行くには、ビザが必要だ You need a visa to go to Japan\n>\n> 正しいにしても、やはり心配だ Even if it's true, I'm still concerned\n>\n> 参加するにあたって欠かせない This is necessary for participating\n\nThere are probably others.\n\nAs to why zero-nominalization occurs, I'm not sure. But it seems like it's an\nold construct in Japanese, which used to be more prevalent, but now only\nsurvives in certain combinations. So an more interesting question might be why\nit started to disappear.\n\nよくしろ would mean \"do it well/do it often/make it well\". よいのにしろ would mean \"make\nit a good one/choose a good one\". I'm not sure if it's to distinguish from\nthese cases that zero-nominalization survived here, but it might be a theory.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-31T03:05:23.033", "id": "4495", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-31T03:05:23.033", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4489", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 }, { "body": "Regarding your first question, the answer is economy. In general, language\ntends to omit things that are obvious, although different languages have\ndifferent restrictions regarding what you can omit. The less content a word\nhas, the more easily it can be omitted. Especially, nominalizers do not have\nany meaning, and is easy to be omitted.\n\nThe `i` ending of i-adjectives in present Japanese is due to a morpho-\nphonological process called イ音便. Classically, it used to be `ki`, which\npartially shows the `ku` ending.\n\nSince dainichi gives Japanese examples, I will give English examples:\n\n> The poor and the rich \n> The Japanese", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-31T04:14:27.430", "id": "4497", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-31T04:14:27.430", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4489", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "I would advise you to read up on the differences between all conjugations of\nthe copula だ/である/です and the existence verbs いる and ある.\n\n 1. \"~はない\" (read as \"wa nai\") means \"~ is not present(Lit: not exist)\".\n\nThe `ない` is the negated form of the existence verb `ある`.\n\n 2. \"~ではない\" (de wa nai) means \"it is not ~\"\n\n`ではない` is the negated form of the copula (`である`). It can also be colloquially\nshorted to `じゃない`. The polite form is `ではありません`, and it's corresponding\nshortened form is `じゃありません`.\n\nSo to answer your question more directly, ~はない is not the same as\nじゃありません/ではない.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-31T01:47:45.730", "id": "4491", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-31T01:47:45.730", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "542", "parent_id": "4490", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "No, きっと means \"certainly\" here.\n\nI don't understand what you find wrong with 'is' in your translation. Insert a\n'you' before 'will' and it makes perfect sense.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-31T05:58:43.987", "id": "4499", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-31T05:58:43.987", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4493", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "な is the attributive form for the copula だ. It allows you to modify nouns. ようだ\nis predicative, ような is attributive.\n\n * 立ち止まる - stop, halt, stand still\n\n * 立ち止まるようだ - is a way similar to stop\n\n * 立ち止まるような時間 - time in a way similar to stop\n\n * 立ち止まるような時間はない - do not have time that is in a way similar to stop\n\n * ここで立ち止まるような時間はない - at here, do not have time that is in a way similar to stop\n\nThe above is an extremely crude and literal translation.\n\nIt should approximately mean something like, \"We/I/you do not have the time to\ndo things like stopping here\"\n\n(I feel this answer is limited. It does not compare the difference between\n立ち止まる時間 and 立ち止まるような時間 to an extent that I wish I could have done.)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-31T04:16:10.550", "id": "4498", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-01T07:18:33.577", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-01T07:18:33.577", "last_editor_user_id": "542", "owner_user_id": "542", "parent_id": "4496", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "In this sentence, you could remove ような without changing the meaning much.\n\nThe ような adds a slight nuance of \"or the like\", i.e.\n\nWe don't have time for stopping or the like.\n\nA very similar effect could be achieved by saying\n\n> ここで立ち止まる時間などない\n\nI don't have the context here, but I would say that in this case it's probably\nused mainly for emphasis.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-31T08:16:37.213", "id": "4503", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-31T08:16:37.213", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4496", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "ような here is equivalent to \"kind/sort of\" in English.\n\n> \"We don't have the kind of time to stop here.\"\n>\n> \"We don't have that sort of time.\"\n\nIt expresses that, in order to do this action, we would need to have an\nentirely different category of amount of time to spend -- in other words, it\nemphasizes the lack of time more than without ような.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-31T12:19:40.150", "id": "4506", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-31T12:19:40.150", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "315", "parent_id": "4496", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "You have 'risk, danger, peril, hazard, caution' etc... But we can use just\n危険(or恐れ?) for most of them, and we would need some explanation to understand\nthe difference and to know which one to use in what context. Like... we have\n米、ご飯、米飯、白米、稲、ライス、もみ etc... while you can just say 'rice' to refer to them. \nAs rio-san and istrasci-san said, I think 'risk' can be referred to as\n[危険性]{きけんせい} as well as just 'リスク'. \nWhen you'd want to talk about 'financial risk', like 'I would rather not take\non that risk,' I'd rather use 'リスク' though・・・→\n[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RURgbNJZ6rA&feature=pyv](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RURgbNJZ6rA&feature=pyv)\n\\-- at 2:45, 3:45. \n[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ABvLOW_nEh8&feature=related](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ABvLOW_nEh8&feature=related)\n\\-- at 1:37, 1:43, 2:39, 2:59 etc...", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-02T17:41:23.393", "id": "4535", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-02T17:41:23.393", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4501", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

[ { "body": "キャッシュフローis rather formal and isn't used in everyday conversation I think.\n\nmaybe you could consider using 家計\n\nnot sure tho", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-31T14:28:42.343", "id": "4507", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-31T14:28:42.343", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1109", "parent_id": "4502", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "You could use `収支【しゅうし】` (which is a contraction of `収入【しゅうにゅう】` and\n`支出【ししゅつ】`). It means \"earnings and expenses\", which is basically the same as\n\"cash flow\". Although it's not informal like \"cash flow\", so if you are\nlooking for something informal or slang-y, this wouldn't be a good choice.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-31T15:50:33.380", "id": "4508", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-31T15:50:33.380", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "4502", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "The problem with 'cashflow' in English is that it has a business meaning\n(which I think is income generated from a business or investment) and a\ncolloquial meaning (referring to liquidity or general financial situation).\n\nIf you're looking for an equivalent to the business term, I think キャッシュフロー is\nprobably ok. But if you're just trying to refer to your impecuniousness in a\nmock-business sort of way, you should look for something else. キャッシュフロー hasn't\nmade it into ordinary Japanese vocabulary in the same way that 'cashflow' has\nin English. I might suggest 金銭状態 as a possible equivalent, but there are\nprobably snappier and more appropriate ways of saying it.\n\nNote: I just thought of the expression 金回り, which might also fit the bill --\nalthough 金回り could suggest a rather more serious situation than the casual use\nof 'cashflow' would imply. At any rate, this page\n(http://thesaurus.weblio.jp/content/%E9%87%91%E5%9B%9E%E3%82%8A) gives a lot\nof interesting synonyms for 金回り that might be useful:\n\n 1. 個人・会社などの金回り \n収支 ・ 財政状態 ・ ふところ具合 ・ 台所事情 ・ 金繰り ・ 資金繰り ・ 金融（調査） ・ （金の）流れ\n\n 2. 金回りがよい \n羽振りがよい ・ 金がうなっている ・ 潤っている ・ 金持ち ・ バブル（紳士） ・ 潤沢な資金をもつ～\n\n 3. 金回りがよくない \n経済的苦境（にある） ・ 手元不如意 ・ しけている ・ 苦しい ・ （台所は）火の車 ・ 金欠病 ・ 金詰まり", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-01T13:37:38.470", "id": "4517", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-01T22:25:42.540", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-01T22:25:42.540", "last_editor_user_id": "1038", "owner_user_id": "1038", "parent_id": "4502", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "I think「一緒に」is necessary, but it will be better to say 「一緒に行きませんか」( if Aーさん\nisn't close to Bーさん) or「一緒に行かない？」( if B-さん is a friend). It's more polite.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-31T10:10:39.587", "id": "4505", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-31T10:10:39.587", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1024", "parent_id": "4504", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "They are used with time nouns, in parallel. I know of only these usage\npatterns:\n\n * [朝]{あさ}な[朝]{あさ}な (also read as あさなさな) - every morning\n * [朝]{あさ}な[夕]{ゆう}な - every morning and evening\n * [夜]{よ}な[夜]{よ}な - every night\n\nAccording to Kadokawa Shōjiten \"Nihongo no Gogen\", it's shortened from 「の間」\n([source](http://okwave.jp/qa/q4444313.html)), but I can't confirm the\nveracity.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-31T22:22:27.787", "id": "4510", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-02T01:47:48.823", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-02T01:47:48.823", "last_editor_user_id": "154", "owner_user_id": "154", "parent_id": "4509", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

[ { "body": "To begin with, I do not think that the use of 自称 in the first sentence is\ncorrect.\n[自称](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&p=%E8%87%AA%E7%A7%B0&dtype=0&dname=0ss&stype=0&pagenum=1&index=108389700000)\nmeans how someone refers to him/herself (regardless of how others refer to\nhim/her). For example, 自称音楽家 means a self-styled musician. (This example was\ntaken form [New Century Japanese-English\nDictionary](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&p=%E8%87%AA%E7%A7%B0&dtype=3&dname=2ss&stype=0).)\nIt is not really about a name, but about a self-claimed occupation or some\nother attribute of a person. I would say something like 名前から期待するほど instead of\n自称ほど in the first sentence.\n\nThe use of 自称 in the second example is incorrect because 我が国の教育制度 (the\neducation system in our country) does not refer to itself as something good.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-31T23:36:58.993", "id": "4514", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-31T23:36:58.993", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "4511", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "According to edict, the third definition of `なめる` is \"to make fun of, to make\nlight of, to put down, to treat with contempt\", so \"don't make fun of me\".\n[Space ALC\ndefines](http://eow.alc.co.jp/%E3%81%AA%E3%82%81%E3%82%8B%E3%81%AA/UTF-8/)\n`なめるなよ` as \"Don't monkey around with me.\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-31T23:24:30.470", "id": "4513", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-31T23:29:48.620", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-31T23:29:48.620", "last_editor_user_id": "796", "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "4512", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "an other meaning of なめる is to look down on someone, to underestimate in a\ncondescendant way.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-01T00:12:58.497", "id": "4515", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-01T02:00:13.323", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-01T02:00:13.323", "last_editor_user_id": "1065", "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "4512", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "Judging from the nuance of 'いつもいつも' and '迷惑' and the tone of '私の何を知っている。', I'd\nrather say it's the same as 馬鹿にするな = ふざけるな = Don't fuck with me'\n<http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=don%27t+fuck+with+me>", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-01T05:38:32.897", "id": "4516", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-01T05:44:38.100", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-01T05:44:38.100", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4512", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "`から` here takes a predicate and changes it so that it will mean a series of\nevents, with one of its arguments ranging over an ordered set of things.\n\n> 君を殺す \n> 'I will kill you.'\n>\n> 君から殺す \n> 'For x = x_1, x_2, ..., x_n, I will kill x in this order, where x_1 is you'\n\nThe difference between using `まず` is that `まず` takes a focus (which is the\nvariable part of the implied events to follow) that is not necessarily the\nnoun phrase adjacent to it. It can be the `を`-phrase, the verb, the whole\npredicate, the `が`-phrase, or whatever:\n\n> まず **君** を殴る [Focus: 君] \n> 'First, I will hit you, then I will hit your brother, ...'\n>\n> まず君を **殴る** [Focus: 殴る] \n> 'First, I will hit you, then I will kick you, ...'\n>\n> まず **君を殴る** [Focus: 君を殴る] \n> 'First, I will hit you, then I will go for shopping, ...' \n> 'First, I will hit you, then my friend will hit you, ...'\n\nDepending on the focus, `まず`-construction has several interpretation, and is\nambiguous. One of the interpretations will be the same one using `から`, so\nusing both will not cause conflict.\n\nA restriction on this usage of `から` is that the predicate has to be _telic_\n(has an end point) in the relevant usage. With predicates that are telic, the\nconstruction is grammatical:\n\n> おかずから食べる \n> あの建物から着工される \n> あの建物から建設され始める\n\nWhen the predicate is atelic, you cannot use this construction. The following\nare all ungrammatical:\n\n> × おかずから食べ続ける \n> × 太郎から存在する \n> × あの建物からそびえる\n\nFurthermore, it might be the case that for some speakers, the predicate also\nhas to have duration. In the grammatical examples above, the predicates had\nduration, but the following predicates do not have duration, and it seems they\nare not completely natural:\n\n> 太郎から現れる \n> その隕石から消滅する\n\nThey become more natural when duration is added to the predicates:\n\n> 太郎から現れはじめる \n> その隕石から消滅し始める", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-01T18:08:51.580", "id": "4519", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-02T20:25:47.027", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4518", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 }, { "body": "To me, から in まず君から殺す is like a declaration that you have to kill someone but\nwith a specific order (in this case, you must kill starting with the first, in\na presumably larger group of people).\n\nまず君を殺す is simply saying 'you have to kill first'. Somewhat like a time-\nconstraint. It does not designate an order in which you have to kill someone.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-02T06:36:19.853", "id": "4525", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-02T06:36:19.853", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1114", "parent_id": "4518", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "The ones you're looking for usually start with\n[「[初]{はつ・しょ・うい}」](http://jisho.org/words?jap=%E5%88%9D&eng=&dict=edict&tag=&sortorder=relevance)\nor\n[「[発]{はつ}」](http://jisho.org/words?jap=%E7%99%BA&eng=&dict=edict&tag=&sortorder=relevance).\n\n> 初荷 はつに first cargo of the year \n> 初音 はつね first warbling heard in a New Year \n> 発刊 はっかん publish; start (new) publication \n> 発会 はっかい opening a meeting; first meeting", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-02T03:14:13.723", "id": "4521", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-02T03:14:13.723", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "22", "parent_id": "4520", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "I would like to add [元]{がん} to Ignacio's answer.\n\n> 元旦 'the morning of the first day of the year' \n> 元年 'the first year of a calender system or an era'", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-02T04:53:29.123", "id": "4523", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-02T15:51:30.483", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-02T15:51:30.483", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4520", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "Just some random _very_ commonly used ones I thought of\n\n * 初産{ういざん} First birth\n * 初詣{はつもうで} First shrine visit of the year\n * ファーストキス First kiss\n * 初体験{はつたいけん} First experience\n * 初対面{しょたいめん} First time you meet someone\n * 初婚{しょこん} First marriage\n * 書初{かきぞ}め First calligraphy writing of the year\n * 馴{な}れ初{そ}め How you first met/got to know each other (used a lot at weddings)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-02T06:37:33.970", "id": "4526", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-02T06:37:33.970", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4520", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Some people use\n[おコーヒー](http://www.google.com/search?q=%22%E3%81%8A%E3%82%B3%E3%83%BC%E3%83%92%E3%83%BC%22&oq=%22%E3%81%8A%E3%82%B3%E3%83%BC%E3%83%92%E3%83%BC%22).\nBoth おトイレ and おコーヒー sound like words used in a certain idiolect to me, and\ntheir use is not limited to teenage girls, but I do not know exactly what kind\nof people use these words.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-02T12:47:05.190", "id": "4530", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-02T12:47:05.190", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "4529", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "おタバコ is heard all the time when restaurant staff asks you if you need a seat\nwhere you can smoke.\n\n> おタバコはお吸いになりますか Do you smoke?\n\nおビール, おソース, おタオル I've heard as well, but less often.\n\nI would say that 美化語 on 外来語 is not a phenomenon correlated with teenage girls,\non the contrary. It strikes me as something that mainly elder women say when\ntrying to sound elegant, although that is an obvious generalization.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-02T13:32:03.230", "id": "4531", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-02T13:32:03.230", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4529", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "Bikago does not seem to have much relation with gairaigo. I think what you\nreally meant is \"how often are gairaigo used as **euphemism**?\" From your\nexamples, I feel that. And if that is your question, I think the answer is,\nquite often.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-02T16:04:02.007", "id": "4534", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-02T16:04:02.007", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4529", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "The most typical Japanese comedy style (漫才) consists of\n\n 1. Someone saying/doing a silly thing (ぼけ) and\n 2. Someone pointing that out (つっこみ). \n\n(Confer my answer to [this\nquestion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/3316).)\n\nぼけ is the joking part as seen in jokes in many countries, but one difference\nform the commedy style often seen these days in Western countries is that the\nぼけ person himself/herself does not make it explicit that it is a joke. Rather,\nthey pretend that they are not aware of the funniness of what they are saying\nor doing (In Western commedy, a counterpart will be something like Mr. Beans).\nThe ぼけ person makes jokes at certain points in the talk, where the つっこみ person\nis expected/supposed to pause the talk and point out or explain to the\naudience what the joke was. These points are `突っ込みどころ` \"points where the 突っ込み\nis supposed to be done\". `満載` means \"loaded full of\". It is used here\nmetaphorically. Following Yadokari's suggestion, the English counterpart of\nthe person with the つっこみ-role will be \"the straight man\".\n\nSyntactically, `満載` is the predicate predicated of its argument `突っ込みどころ`,\nwhich is a compound noun consisting of `突っ込み` （verb stem used as a nominal）\nand `ところ` \"place\" (which underwent sequential voicing (連濁) to become `どころ`).\n\nRecently, this expression has evolved into meaning, outside of the commedy\ncontext, that someone's talk or act is so silly or stupid that there are full\nof points where one can point that out.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-03T03:53:15.880", "id": "4538", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-03T04:24:25.860", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:43.857", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4536", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "I think 文盲 would be the best translation to describe someone who can't read or\nwrite, and 無学 would be the best word for someone uneducated and ignorant. \n \nI don't think I've ever seen the words 無筆、一文不通、一文不知... I didn't even know how\nto read the latter two... (Maybe because I'm just so ignorant...) \n \nAs for 活字離れ, I think it's a rather new word, describing the tendency of\nJapanese younger generation's keeping away from all kinds of typed publication\nsuch as books, newspapers, novels etc. \n \nI know 識字 so I can infer from the kanji combination of 非+識字 what it would\nmean, but still it's not familiar to me...", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-03T04:53:36.513", "id": "4542", "last_activity_date": "2013-01-27T00:20:43.830", "last_edit_date": "2013-01-27T00:20:43.830", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4539", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "When illiteracy is discussed in formal/scientific/academic contexts, 非識字 is\nfar more common than 文盲 in my experience. This is probably mainly because it\nis in a much more obvious relationship with 識字. It's also worth noting that\nsome blind people find 文盲 offensive, making it less appealing especially in\nofficial contexts. However, as Chocolate's answer indicates, non-specialists\nmight be more familiar with 文盲 and not see anything offensive in the term.\n\nRe the first part of your second question, I don't think 非識字 is as easily used\nas an insult as English \"illiterate\" is (not least because it is scientific\njargon), but no doubt you could use it to insult someone if you wanted to. And\nof course very few people would appreciate being labeled illiterate even if it\nwas an impartial (and true!) scientific judgment.\n\nRe the rest of the questions, I'll leave that to someone else.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-03T08:09:00.453", "id": "4546", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-03T08:09:00.453", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "531", "parent_id": "4539", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "I believe it is neither a wilful act nor an incidental act. It is probably\nbetter described as a 'trend' or 'phenomenon', something that comes about for\nvarious reasons. 政治離れ could represent a rejection of politics, but it is just\nas likely to be a result of increasing apathy towards politics. テレビ離れ is\nsomething that happens when people find better things to do, not necessarily a\ndeliberate avoidance of television.\n\nEven in the everyday-life example of 乳離れ, there is no implication of\nintentionality on the part of the child. The weaning is usually something that\nthe mother initiates; the result is not an action on the part of the child,\nsimply a phenomenon.\n\nI think you have to keep in mind that the verb 離れる is similarly vague as to\nintentionality.\n\nFor example:\n\n> 離れて生活していると心も自然に離れてしまう。 \n> When you live apart, your feelings also naturally grow apart\n>\n> その人から離れた方がいい。 \n> You'd be best getting away from him / keeping some distance from him\n\nIn the first, the growing apart of feelings isn't deliberate. In the second,\nthe advice is to take deliberate action.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-04T00:12:34.457", "id": "4553", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-04T03:59:21.227", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-04T03:59:21.227", "last_editor_user_id": "1038", "owner_user_id": "1038", "parent_id": "4540", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "The best way to put it is that, it is no not necessarily willful. It is simply\nthe state of being detached from.\n\nThe root of this 離れる is an intransitive verb, meaning that it is something\nthat has sort of happened on it's own. That could mean it was willful, but it\ncould also mean it wasn't.\n\nIf you wish to make it clear that it was willful you can use ～離れをする.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-09T00:31:07.983", "id": "4608", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-09T00:31:07.983", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1129", "parent_id": "4540", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Excuse me for posting an answer without referring to any sources... \n \nWe usually use 理科 to refer to a school subject (which usually includes these 4\nfields: physics, biology, earth science and chemistry). We usually use the\nword 理科 in upper grades at elementary school, and in senior high we have\n[理科第１分野]{りかだいいちぶんや} (=chemistry and physics) and [理科第２分野]{りかだいにぶんや} (=earth\nscience and biology). In senior high we usually choose 2 to 4 from these 4\nfields and don't use the word 理科 anymore. I think we sometimes call these 4\nsubjects '[理科系科目]{りかけいかもく}...maybe it's like 'the group of scientific\nsubjects'/'one of the scientific subjects'. \n \nAnd as Paul-san said, we often say 'She is 理系/あの子は理系だよ。', 'I am\n文系[ぶんけい]/私、文系なの。' when we talk about which field of 理系 and 文系 someone\nmajors/majored in at college, and also 'あそこの大学は文系だ/That university is 文系',\n'ここの[学部]{がくぶ}・[学科]{かっか}は理系です/This faculty/department (at college) is 理系' etc.\nto talk about what kind of courses a college/faculty/department has. \n \nAs for 科学… sorry Dave-san, I still don't know what to write about it here...", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-04T08:57:09.153", "id": "4560", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-04T09:07:18.360", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-04T09:07:18.360", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4541", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "In my feeling, those sound quite different.\n\n世間 : the Japanese society.\n\nex. \"世間の常識\" = common sense of our society.\n\n世界 : the whole world on the globe. Particularly outside of Japan.\n\nex. \"世界のニュース\" = international news. \"世界一周\" = a round-the-world trip.\n\nIn short, \"世間\" sounds like more local stuff.\n\n> is it (浮世｛うきよ｝) strictly poetic and reserved for flowery ruminations?\n\nYes I think so. Never used in daily life.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-03T08:30:16.813", "id": "4547", "last_activity_date": "2017-12-04T20:14:33.377", "last_edit_date": "2017-12-04T20:14:33.377", "last_editor_user_id": "21684", "owner_user_id": "1116", "parent_id": "4543", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 }, { "body": "\"someone\" is \"he\" or \"she\" talking you.（Japanese language don't have to have\nsubject in sentence.So I buried it temporarily.）\n\n世間： 自分の身近にある世界。知り合いなどの直接やりとりできる人たちから感じられる世界（空気）。 A world that is familiar to\nsomeone.Atmosphere that can be felt from those who can communicate directly\nwith someone.\n\n世界： 日本も含まれるが「海外」というニュアンスが強い。 Japan is included, but the nuance \"overseas\" is\nstrong.\n\n例えば、「世界には悲惨な現実があります。」というように使われます。 For example, it is used like \"there is a\nmiserable reality in the world（世界）\".\n\nFor your info.You can watch thesaurus.\n\n世間の同義語 - 類語辞典(シソーラス) <https://thesaurus.weblio.jp/content/%E4%B8%96%E9%96%93>\n大衆 ・ 俗衆 ・ 世人 ・ 世俗 ・ 民衆 ・ 衆人\n\n世界の同義語 - 類語辞典(シソーラス) <https://thesaurus.weblio.jp/content/%E4%B8%96%E7%95%8C>\n分野 ・ 国 ・ 領域 ・ 現実", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2017-12-04T09:43:13.317", "id": "54936", "last_activity_date": "2017-12-04T09:43:13.317", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "26796", "parent_id": "4543", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "Two constructions spring to mind here.\n\n数{すう} can be used in place of a specific number, followed by a counter, to\nmean \"some\" / \"a few\" / \"several\" (it doesn't really make a distinction in\nthis respect...).\n\n> 数時間後、彼は試験を終わった。\n\nThis can be used in ways you might not expect:\n\n> 数十秒 some tens of seconds \n> 十数秒 ten-(and-some)-odd seconds (between 10 and 19) \n> 二十数年 twenty-(and-some)-odd years\n\nAlternatively, you can use 何 + counter + か.\n\n> 他の国に滞在するなら、[何ヶ月]{なんかげつ}かは開いておかなければなりません。\n\nThe same kind of uses seen above for 数 also apply to 何.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-03T22:06:03.863", "id": "4550", "last_activity_date": "2017-03-08T16:10:57.520", "last_edit_date": "2017-03-08T16:10:57.520", "last_editor_user_id": "4216", "owner_user_id": "315", "parent_id": "4549", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 }, { "body": "I think Hyperworm already did a good job of answering the question, so I'll\njust focus on saying \"later\"/\"before\".\n\nAdding `前{まえ}` or `後{ご}` after any of these to mean \"a few ... ago\" or \"after\na few ...\", e.g. `数{すう}分{ふん}前{まえ}` \"a few minutes ago\" or `数{すう}分{ふん}後{ご}`\n\"after a few minutes\":\n\n * `数{すう}秒{びょう}`: \"a few seconds\"\n\n * `数{すう}分{ふん}`: \"a few minutes\"\n\n * `数{すう}時{じ}間{かん}`: \"a few hours\"\n\n * `数{すう}日{じつ}`: \"a few days\"\n\n * `数{すう}週{しゅう}間{かん}`: \"a few weeks\"\n\n * `数{すう}[ヶ]{か}月{げつ}`: \"a few months\"\n\n * `数{すう}[年]{ねん}`: \"a few years\"\n\nI don't think you can say `数{すう}時{じ}（後/前）`. I'm not sure whether\n`数{すう}月{げつ}（後/前）` or `数{すう}週{しゅう}（後/前）` are valid or not, but `数ヶ月（後/前）` and\n`数週間（後/前）` seem to be much more commonly used.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-03T22:20:12.833", "id": "4551", "last_activity_date": "2012-03-08T06:08:20.037", "last_edit_date": "2012-03-08T06:08:20.037", "last_editor_user_id": "796", "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "4549", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

[ { "body": "風に揺れる sounds a bit poetic and literary to me. If I'm writing an essay, novel\nor poem, I'd write 風に揺れる. I think we usually say 風で揺れる in daily conversations.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-04T05:00:47.110", "id": "4556", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-04T05:00:47.110", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4554", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "I agree with user1016's answer. The slight difference in nuance (for me,\nwithout strong basis) is this:\n\n> Aにゆれる \n> 'swing against A' \n> 'swinging on its own as a reaction to A'\n>\n> Aでゆれる \n> 'swing {by/due to} A' \n> 'swinging, caused by A'\n\n`に` implies a slight spontaneity whereas `で` implies a strong cause-result\nrelation.\n\nSo when you say `風に揺れる`, it implies that it is an inherent property of a flag\nto wave against the wind, and the role of wind is just the trigger. `風でゆれる`\nmeans that the wind is solely responsible for the mechanism of waving.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-04T05:55:33.597", "id": "4558", "last_activity_date": "2018-06-27T19:09:11.440", "last_edit_date": "2018-06-27T19:09:11.440", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4554", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "If you ask why a flag is waving, then you use kazede (風で). But if you are\ndescribing a flag's movement, then you use kazeni yureteiru (風に揺れている).\n\n'De' is used for why/method etc.\n\n'Ni' is used for describing a situation/movement etc.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-04T13:04:45.267", "id": "4561", "last_activity_date": "2018-06-27T14:13:28.490", "last_edit_date": "2018-06-27T14:13:28.490", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "1007", "parent_id": "4554", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "I agree with user1016 that に is slightly more literary. But I think that both\nに and で mean a cause in this context, and に is not necessarily ruled out even\nin the daily conversation.\n\nI cannot pin down the exact difference between に and で, but I would like to\npoint out that there are similar sentences where both に and で are grammatical\nand have almost the same meaning just like your examples:\n\n * [雨]{あめ}(に/で)[濡]{ぬ}れる\n * [病]{やまい}(に/で)[倒]{たお}れる\n * [仕事]{しごと}(に/で)[疲]{つか}れる", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-04T13:43:27.810", "id": "4562", "last_activity_date": "2018-06-27T19:09:36.333", "last_edit_date": "2018-06-27T19:09:36.333", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "4554", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "Google Japan sells the Japanese version of \"Google Ngram\". Here is the site:\n<http://www.gsk.or.jp/catalog/GSK2007-C>\n\nBut the site is only in Japanese. There might be the same site in English,\nthough. I hope it helps.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-17T01:03:02.550", "id": "4701", "last_activity_date": "2015-04-12T07:31:46.000", "last_edit_date": "2015-04-12T07:31:46.000", "last_editor_user_id": "3437", "owner_user_id": "1164", "parent_id": "4555", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

[ { "body": "To answer your question simply, the two forms you are asking about do not mean\nthe same thing.\n\nYou've actually got two differences at work here.\n\nOne difference is the politeness level. ~てあった, is the plain form. ~てあります is\nthe polite form.\n\nThe other difference is the tense. ~てあった, is the past tense. ~てあります is the\npresent tense.\n\nI hope that helps clear it up.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-04T07:24:18.727", "id": "4559", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-04T07:24:18.727", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "119", "parent_id": "4557", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I don't think it did. I haven't encountered it with that meaning, I can't find\nthat meaning in a dictionary, and there was already the word \"sukisha\" or\n\"sukimono\" (spelt various ways) with that meaning.\n\nAll that is just negative evidence, but there is additional evidence re what\n\"好き\" means in this context if you look at the full version of the proverb.\n日本国語大辞典's oldest attestation is from 其角十七回 (1723), and is inside a poem, as\nfollows:\n\n> 器用さとけいことすきと三つのうちすきこそものの上手なりけれ、と口ずさみせられけるが\n\nThere are other websites that attribute the poem, or a very similar one, to\nSen no Rikyū (1522-1591), which would obviously predate Kikaku, but I haven't\nbeen able to find a reliable source for this. Here's an example of a slightly\ndifferent version attributed to SR:\n\n> 器用さと 稽古と好きの そのうちで 好きこそものの 上手なりけれ\n\nIn both of these you can see that 好き first appears in the same \"slot\" as 器用さ\n(skill) and 稽古 (practice), which are definitely abstract nouns. I guess the\nsecond appearance of 好き might be intended to mean \"a person who has 好き\", but\ninterpreting the なりけれ part more flexibly (or adopting dainichi's \"liking =\nexcelling\" suggestion) seems like a more natural strategy to me than forcing\n好き to behave that way.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-07T11:26:32.297", "id": "4593", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-09T04:58:53.543", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-09T04:58:53.543", "last_editor_user_id": "531", "owner_user_id": "531", "parent_id": "4563", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "I think that お疲れ様 is the safest option. If you want to make it more polite,\nyou can say お疲れ様です, although I am not completely sure how formal it is. 失礼します\nis also common when you leave some place. Saying ありがとうございます in that situation\nsounds a little too heavy to me.\n\nThe worst option is to tell the ladies that their use of\n[ご苦労様](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/1266/when-and-to-whom-\nshould-i-use-the-expression-%E3%81%94%E8%8B%A6%E5%8A%B4%E6%A7%98-gokurousama)\nis not very appropriate because it is often used when superiors talk to\nsubordinates. :)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-04T20:10:48.910", "id": "4565", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-04T20:10:48.910", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:43.857", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "4564", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "I wonder if the best option might not have been to say nothing at all.\nWesterners often feel the need to acknowledge such set greetings when Japanese\npeople often say nothing in return. While this is certainly true in stores,\nthis might have been a slightly more personal situation. Still, a light bow\nmight have sufficed.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-06T21:20:52.327", "id": "4582", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-06T21:20:52.327", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "801", "parent_id": "4564", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "The nuances of apologies can be quite subtle in Japanese, so many things are\nprobably up to personal interpretation, but here are my 2 cents.\n\nWhile you can definitely use かっこよくない to describe your attitude in that\nsituation (no offense :p), using it in your apology _could_ be taken as if\nyou're more concerned about your appearance than whether you offended the guy\nby being rude to him. I'm sure he appreciated your apology and that you got\nthe point across, but here are some expressions that might be safer in the\nsituation:\n\n> 大人気{おとなげ}なかった That was immature of me\n>\n> 口{くち}が過{す}ぎた I said too much", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-05T02:48:44.417", "id": "4567", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-05T02:48:44.417", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4566", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "Most typical are 温泉, 旅館, 温泉旅館, 宿, スパ, ヘルスセンター.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-05T03:20:53.523", "id": "4569", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-05T03:20:53.523", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4568", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "As you see, the article also mentions 美人系 and 可愛い系.\n\nIn casual speech, the Japanese sometimes divide the attractiveness of\ngirls/women into categories like\n\n> 美人系 The beautiful type\n>\n> 可愛い系 The cute type\n>\n> セクシー系 The sexy type\n\n'愛され系' is not typically heard (and this is probably why the article is using\n「」 around it), but it seems that this girl created this category to categorize\nher own attractiveness as well, namely as 'someone that is easy to approach,\nthat people feel comfortable talking to'.\n\nSo 系 here definitely means 'type'.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-06T03:27:18.130", "id": "4573", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-06T03:27:18.130", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4572", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "This usage of `系` is a recent slang (from about 1980s) initiated by the\ncommedian duo とんねるず, particularly in a TV show called ねるとん紅鯨団. It is one of\nthe various hedge words that young generation prefer. It means 'the ... kind'.\nThe most popular words are `体育会系` 'people who joined a club activity at school\nthat belongs to the 体育会 \"association of athletic-related clubs\" ',\n`[汗]{かん}キツ系` 'someone who stings like sweat' (汗きつ 'severe sweat' is a rhyme\nwith [柑]{かん}[橘]{きつ}). It is often used for mentioning an attribute of a\nperson, but it does not necessarily have to be about a person. Unlike what\ndainichi writes, it was used more often to classify boys/men rather than\ngirls/women.\n\nI don't know why, but young (and not-so-well educated) people use unnecessary\nhedge words all over the place in Japan as well as in other countries. Other\nexamples are: `...みたいな`, `...的`. Incidentally, many of these words were\nintroduced by とんねるず. In America, these kinds of people insert the word `like`\nall over the place in a sentence, which started in San Fernando Valley,\nCalifornia.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-06T04:48:59.683", "id": "4574", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-08T18:32:58.417", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-08T18:32:58.417", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4572", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "In colloquial speech, 「あるある」 is basically a way to respond to questions like\n\"Have you ever noticed how the more busy Jack gets, the more he sweats\". あるある\nmeans something like \"Yeah, I recognize that situation\" or \"Yeah, I've been\nthinking about that too\" or \"Yeah, I _have_ noticed that\".\n\nOne meaning of ネタ is 'humorous material' or 'joke material'. There's a term\nあるあるネタ, which basically means humorous questions like the above, which you can\nuse in conversation as jokes.\n\nHere, although I'm not familiar with Twitter lingo, I would guess that the\nposter is using 24あるある to refer to あるあるネタ about the TV show '24'. So basically\n\"In 24, have you noticed how [...]\".", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-06T09:03:41.990", "id": "4576", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-06T09:03:41.990", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4575", "post_type": "answer", "score": 14 } ]

[ { "body": "It's a contraction of `では` (particle `で`, which has various uses, and the\ntopic marker `は`). It is not particularly related to classical Japanese, and\nis not used only with negation.", "comment_count": 11, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-06T17:21:51.680", "id": "4579", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-06T17:21:51.680", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4578", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

[ { "body": "Just from syntactic clues, this sentence is ambiguous. Taking into\nconsideration that this is from the bible, it is very likely that the usage\nhere is subject honorification. If it were passive, then it would slightly\nentail that あなた (or you) is bothered by the God by being said that he is here.\nThat would be an impolite thing to write for a God.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-06T23:30:22.510", "id": "4583", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-07T02:59:32.220", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-07T02:59:32.220", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4580", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I agree with sawa that from syntactic clues this fragment is ambiguous, but\nthere are actually more syntactic clues if you look at the whole sentence,\nwhich is:\n\n> あなたが呼べば **主は答え** 、あなたが叫べば「わたしはここにいる」と **言われる** 。\n\nIt would be possible, but quite perverse (and impious, as Sawa notes!) to\ninterpret the 言われる in the second half as a passive rather than an honorific\nform parallel to 主は答え. Note that you can see the same construction, right down\nto the subject-dropping, in the Vulgate version, where \"dicet\" (\"(He) will\nsay\") is parallel to \"Dominus exaudiet\" (\"The Lord will hear\"):\n\n> tunc invocabis et **Dominus exaudiet** clamabis et **dicet** ecce adsum", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-07T03:41:23.370", "id": "4589", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-07T03:41:23.370", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "531", "parent_id": "4580", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "It does not change much. I see it like this:\n\n主人公が犯人だったのが一番面白かった。 The main character being actually the killer was the most\ninteresting part.\n\n主人公が犯人だったというのが一番面白かった。 The _fact_ that the main character was actually the\nkiller was the most interesting part.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-07T00:15:45.780", "id": "4584", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-07T00:15:45.780", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "4581", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "In The Structure of the Japanese Language, Susumu Kuno's treatment of `こと`,\n`の`, `ということ` and `というの` as complementizers separates them into two categories\n- one involving presupposition and one without.\n\nAll the four forms listed above can be used when there is presupposition of\ntruth. But `こと` and `の` cannot be used when the predicate does not contain\npresupposition.\n\nI'm going to attempt to summarise some of that here but his analysis is\nactually much more complete.\n\n* * *\n\nObserve this example taken from his book:\n\n> [1] It **is probable** that John hit Mary:\n>\n> a. ジョンがマリを殴った​｛こと・の｝はありうることだ。 (Unacceptable)\n>\n> b. ジョンがマリを殴った​｛ということ・というの｝はありうることだ。 (Acceptable)\n>\n> [2] It **is false** that John hit Mary:\n>\n> a. ジョンがマリを殴った​｛こと・の｝は嘘だ。 (Unacceptable)\n>\n> b. ジョンがマリを殴った​｛ということ・というの｝は嘘だ。 (Acceptable)\n\nWhat is observed is that in the 1a and 2a, `こと` and `の` cannot be used because\n\"is probable\" and \"is false\" indicates that the speaker does not presuppose\nthe event of \"John hit Mary\" to be true.\n\nI shall not include the complete analysis of `こと`, `の` and `と` but in summary:\n\n * `こと` and `の` assumes that the event is true, while `と` does not.\n\nAlso summarising the analysis of `こと` and `の`:\n\n * `の` represents a tangible action/state that is directly perceptible (by the five senses), while `こと` does not and instead represents a more abstract concept.\n\n* * *\n\nSo in fact there is a slight difference in meaning.\n\nComparing:\n\n 1. 主人公が犯人だった **の** が一番面白かった。 (主人公が犯人だった is presupposed to be true)\n\n 2. 主人公が犯人だった **というの** が一番面白かった。 (There is no presupposition) Or (主人公が犯人だった is presupposed to be true)", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-07T01:17:20.587", "id": "4585", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-26T04:06:16.683", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "542", "parent_id": "4581", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 } ]

[ { "body": "**Do Japanese prefer speaking in the passive voice as opposed to active\nvoice?**\n\nThis is actually an interesting question. I do not think that the Japanese\nactually consciously _prefer_ passive, but I think there are cases where\npassive is more idiomatic.\n\n**C1. To ease dropping**\n\nJapanese is pro-drop, so many things will be dropped if it's obvious from the\ncontext. For example, in non-question phrases when no explicit topic is\nspecified, the topic is typically the first person (although this can depend\non context, the nature on the sentence, sentence-ending particles etc.):\n\n> 先生にしかられた **I** was scolded by the teacher\n\nIn English 'The teacher scolded me' is slightly shorter and less complex than\n'I was scolded by the teacher', so all other things equal, the first _might_\nbe prefered. In Japanese, however, the above passive expression is by far the\nshortest and most idiomatic. '先生が私をしかった' is longer, '先生がしかった' doesn't make it\nclear who was scolded.\n\nLikewise in question phrases, often the second person is the implicit topic,\nso to say 'Did the teacher scold you?' or 'Were you scolded by the teacher?'\n\n> 先生にしかられたの？ Were **you** scolded by the teacher?\n\nis more idiomatic/precise than '先生があなたをしかったの？' or '先生がしかったの？'. So the passive\nconstructions work better.\n\n**C2. To ease free choice of topic**\n\nImagine a story about a mouse. One day our dear mouse is eaten by a cat (which\nis new to the universe of discourse). In English we can say both 'the mouse\nwas eaten by a cat' or 'a cat ate the mouse'. In this connection, the former\nmight be slightly more natural, but the second works as well. Let's look at\nthis in Japanese:\n\n> ある日、猫がねずみを食べた One day, a cat ate a/the mouse.\n\nThis is grammatically correct, but it doesn't make it clear that we're talking\nabout our protagonist mouse, it could be any mouse. Therefore, it's really\nmore natural to make the mouse the topic, since topics can only be things\nalready introduced to the universe of discourse. So let's proceed, trying to\nkeep the active voice:\n\n> × ある日、ねずみは猫が食べた (One day, it was the cat who ate the mouse)\n\nThis doesn't work. When a が is used after a topic-は like this, the が becomes\nan 'exhaustive が', meaning something like 'it was the cat who ate the mouse'.\nOthers on this site should be better than me at explaining the rules of when\nがs are neutral vs. exhaustive, it's a topic of its own. In either case, the\nonly option left is really the passive construction:\n\n> ある日、ねずみは猫に食べられた One day, the mouse was eaten by a cat.\n\nThere are probably other cases as well that I haven't thought of, and there a\nprobably cases where passive is more idiomatic in English, whereas active is\nmore idiomatic in Japanese.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-08T09:38:52.313", "id": "4603", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-08T09:38:52.313", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4588", "post_type": "answer", "score": 21 }, { "body": "Causative Conjugation Rules Here are the conjugation rules for the causative\nform. All causative verbs become ru-verbs.\n\n```\n\n For ru-verbs: Replace the last 「る」 with 「させる」.\n For u-verbs: Change the last character as you would for negative verbs but attach 「せる」 instead of 「ない」.\n Exception Verbs:\n 「する」 becomes 「させる」\n 「くる」 becomes 「こさせる」.\n \n```\n\nSample ru-verbs Plain Causative 食べる 食べさせる 着る 着させる 信じる 信じさせる 寝る 寝させる 起きる 起きさせる\n出る 出させる 掛ける 掛けさせる 捨てる 捨てさせる 調べる 調べさせる\n\nSample u-verbs Plain Causative 話す 話させる 聞く 聞かせる 泳ぐ 泳がせる 遊ぶ 遊ばせる 待つ 待たせる 飲む 飲ませる\n直る 直らせる 死ぬ 死なせる 買う 買わせる\n\nException Verbs Positive Causative する させる くる こさせる", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2017-04-10T06:32:25.950", "id": "46436", "last_activity_date": "2017-04-10T06:32:25.950", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "21665", "parent_id": "4588", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "「と」 in this situation is the inclusion particle. 「は」 is the topic marker as\nusual. So 「ＸとはＹ」 means \"as for with X, Y\".\n\n「の」 is the nominalizing particle, which turns a verb phrase into a noun\n(gerund). So 「ＸのはＹ」 means \"as for Xing, Y\". Likewise with 「が」.\n\n「こと」 is used when talking in a general, objective sense, whereas 「の」 is used\nwhen the sense is meant to be specific or subjective.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-07T05:39:39.840", "id": "4591", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-07T05:39:39.840", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "22", "parent_id": "4590", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "「とは」also has a special usage to show amazement of something unexpected or\nsurprising:\n\n> 80歳で富士山に登る **とは** ねぇ！ → How amazing that he'll climb Mt. Fuji at 80 (years\n> old)!", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-07T15:40:00.420", "id": "4596", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-07T15:40:00.420", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "4590", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "You should focus your question on は/が itself. Having an other particle before\nit does not change its meaning. And does not change the meaning of the article\nbefore, either.\n\nと can be _with_ or used for quotation.\n\nI think there is exceptions but at the moment, you can assume that it is ok to\nexchange こと and の when it is after a verb.\n\nThe question linked by Dainichi is what you are looking for: [Are there cases\nwhen two or more particles will occur next to each other without intervening\nlexical words?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/1548/are-there-\ncases-when-two-or-more-particles-will-occur-next-to-each-other-without)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-08T07:51:02.237", "id": "4602", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-08T07:51:02.237", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:43.857", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "4590", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I would recommend getting a book about particles... even something like [A\nDictionary of Japanese\nParticles](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/4770023529). _Which is\nonly about $15 (USD) at present._\n\nSomething to consider before getting into the particle combinations is the\nidea of は and が. There are a lot of different rules (sometimes seemingly-\ncontradictory rules,) for は and が. But for the sake of simplicity, just\nremember that **は** is **often the first, main subject of** a sentence. **が**\nis **kind of the second main subject (the \"newer subject\" or \"focus point\",)**\nof a sentence.\n\n_Now let's get into the combinations from the question._\n\n## とは\n\n_According to[A Dictionary of Japanese\nParticles](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/4770023529):_\n\n * とは is a combination of particles と and は\n * can mean: **\"the thing/concept/idea called\"** (i.e. ボタン **とは** なんですか。）\n * can mean: **with** (i.e. わたし、Aさん **とは** スポーツをしたり、勉強したりします。）\n * can mean: **\"surprise/shock about something\"** (i.e. あの人がそんなバカなことを言った **とは** ・・・）\n\nIn the first example, とは actually seems related to when って is used after\ndialog, like this: 「ボタン」って、何ですか。 _(\"Button\" <\\- pointing to subject, what\nis?)_ It's a sort of marker for the previous word... something that makes a\nsort of subject out of the phrase before とは.\n\n## のは\n\n * When のは is used, it often refers to a subject (placed in front of のは,) for example: \n * 勉強をする **のは** 難しいことです。(i.e. Studying is hard. -or- The **thing** of studying is hard.) Using のは like this effectively turns a subject (a noun or a concept,) into a subject of the sentence.\n\n## のが\n\n * のが is similar to のは. But the difference comes down to the difference between は and が (explained earlier.)\n * So if we go back to the example used for のは and replace のは with のが: \n * 私は勉強をする **のが** 難しいことです。(i.e. For me, studying is hard. -or- For me, the **thing** of studying is hard.) Here, the main subject of the sentence is \"私 myself\". But when のが is used like this, のが (like のは）still effectively turns a subject (a noun or a concept,) into a subject of the sentence, but here, のが is pointing to a \"new subject\" of the sentence _(the thing of studying.)_\n\n## ことが\n\n * With the example given with のが, ことが is essentially the same thing. It creates a concept from a given noun, verb, or phrase.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-27T06:35:17.153", "id": "4827", "last_activity_date": "2015-09-10T02:11:20.160", "last_edit_date": "2015-09-10T02:11:20.160", "last_editor_user_id": "1188", "owner_user_id": "1188", "parent_id": "4590", "post_type": "answer", "score": 17 } ]

[ { "body": "その is not always a demonstrative. When used anaphorically it does not obey the\ngeneral rule of:\n\n * こ~ nearer to the speaker than listener\n\n * そ~ nearer to the listener than the speaker\n\n * あ~ removed from both speaker and listener\n\nWhen the referent is known to the speaker but either unknown to the listener\nor the speaker thinks that the listener does not know the referent well enough\nthe speaker uses その.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-08T01:55:38.103", "id": "4601", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-08T01:55:38.103", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "542", "parent_id": "4598", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "There are definitely cases where it doesn't make sense to translate その into an\nEnglish demonstrative adjective.\n\n> アインシュタインとその人生 Einstein and his life ('his', I guess, is a possesive pronoun)\n>\n> まあ、その、なんていうか... Well, oh, you know... (filler word)\n\nAnother thing to point out: Japanese speakers tend to use personal pronouns\n(including possesive pronouns) less than English speakers. Sometimes Japanese\nspeakers might use その in cases where 'your' might be more natural in English.\n\n> そのケータイ、いいねぇ Your cell phone is cool!\n\nIf you're really asking whether, when translating to English, その should often\nbe translated to the article 'the' instead of 'that', then I would say\n_usually_ no. If there's a need to specify which object is referred in\nJapanese, there's a good chance the need is there in English as well. But\nthen, it really depends on the situation and context, so it's hard to give\nexact rules.\n\n> 仕事の一部を誰かにやってもらったほうがいい\n\nis gramatically fine per se, just as the job/that job/your job all work in the\nEnglish version. But その仕事 sounds more like 'the task you're working on right\nnow', where just 仕事 _could_ be taken as 'your job' (i.e. your position).\nAgain, hard to say exactly without more context.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-09T06:33:34.780", "id": "4610", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-09T13:00:59.927", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4598", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Isn't \"Doppelgänger\" (`ドッペルゲンガー`) commonly used to denote \"evil twin\"? Well,\nat least an evil version of someone.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-08T15:30:52.007", "id": "4605", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-09T02:27:03.043", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-09T02:27:03.043", "last_editor_user_id": "15", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "4604", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "The word \"trope\" didn't originally apply to stock characters/plot elements in\nthe way that it is now used in TV Tropes; this is a relatively new (as in past\n50 years) usage of the word. This may be why dictionaries come up short: even\nsome English dictionaries I checked didn't cover this meaning.\n\nThere is a Japanese wikipedia page for TV tropes, which uses the word トロープ,\nbut this doesn't seem to be a widely used term and the writer of the article\nfelt the need to explain it rather than just giving simple translation:\n\n> 創作物に見られる様々な慣例や趣向\n>\n> Various conventions and ideas seen in works of fiction.\n\nSo I don't think you will find a single word to cover this. お決まり (and お定まり?)\nmay work for \"cliche\" in some situations (お決まりの台詞, お決まりのパターン) although they're\nnot limited to fiction. Wikipedia uses 類型 for categorising some things, e.g.\nストーリー類型, but again this appears to be a phrase coined for convenience and not\nwidely used in general discussion.\n\nThere are some words that will cover some of the things covered by \"trope\".\nOne (relatively recently coined and probably more an internet slang term than\nsomething for academic discussion) is フラグ. I'll quote from wiki again as I\nthink this covers it:\n\n> 伏線（ふくせん）と同義であるものの、フラグは比較的単純で定型化された「お決まりのパターン」の含意があるとされる。\n>\n> Although it has the same meaning as 'foreshadowing', 'flag' implies a\n> relatively simple, fixed, \"stereotypical pattern\".\n\nThere are various types of flag (e.g. \"death flag\", 死亡フラグ). For more\ndescription of this term, check dic.nicovideo.jp/ for フラグ and other terms.\nThis site also probably functions as the closest thing to tvtropes in that\nalthough it wasn't created for that purpose, if you look up various\nmanga/anime you will find often find links to character types/phrases/story\ngenres associated with that work.\n\nAnother useful word is from 落語 originally and is 落ち (when dealing with\nmanga/anime, normally written オチ). There were various set ways of ending a\nstory. A classic one is まわり落ち (ending by returning to the beginning of the\nstory), and 夢オチ is the Japanese name for the \"and then he realised it had all\nbeen a dream\" ending.\n\nThe last one is 定番, often in the form (genre name/series)の定番. These are both\n2ch examples:\n\n> やめてほしいアニメの定番 (\"anime staples you want to stop\")\n>\n> ＲＰＧの定番モンスターの名前を貼っていくスレ (\"thread where we post names of typical RPG\n> monsters\")\n\nNot necessarily negative, it can also be used to refer to\nclassic/staple/standard examples of a genre, e.g. 定番のクリスマスソング (typical\nChristmas songs).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-12T14:07:07.120", "id": "4660", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-12T14:07:07.120", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "571", "parent_id": "4604", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "I just found another one, which is exactly what I was looking for:\n\n**べた - hackneyed, cliched [1]**\n\nIt's marked as \"slang\", though, and it might be just a version of べたべた.\n\"Sticky\" is quite close in connotation.\n\n[1]http://jisho.org/words?jap=beta&eng=&dict=edict", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-04-17T13:47:06.190", "id": "5227", "last_activity_date": "2012-04-17T13:47:06.190", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "84", "parent_id": "4604", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "The pattern is quite clear: digraphs are written as if the 'small' character\nwere full-sized. Hence for example ギョ is written -•-•• •• --: キ + dakuten + ヨ.\n\nThus, write the ッ as ツ.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-08T21:16:23.983", "id": "4607", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-08T21:16:23.983", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "627", "parent_id": "4606", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "おじいさん means both a grandfather and an elderly man. When written in kanji, it\nis written as\n[お祖父さん](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&p=%E3%81%8A%E3%81%98%E3%81%84%E3%81%95%E3%82%93&dtype=0&dname=0ss&stype=1&index=102536800000&pagenum=1)\nwhen it means grandfather, and written as\n[お爺さん](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&p=%E3%81%8A%E3%81%98%E3%81%84%E3%81%95%E3%82%93&dtype=0&dname=0ss&stype=1&index=102536900000&pagenum=1)\nwhen it means elderly man. The same applies to おばあさん\n([お祖母さん](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&p=%E3%81%8A%E3%81%B0%E3%81%82%E3%81%95%E3%82%93&dtype=0&dname=0ss&stype=1&index=102686200000&pagenum=1)/[お婆さん](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&p=%E3%81%8A%E3%81%B0%E3%81%82%E3%81%95%E3%82%93&dtype=0&dname=0ss&stype=1&index=102686300000&pagenum=1)).\n\nIt is natural to call an elderly man おじいさん. However, I have heard that some\npeople do not like the use of おじいさん and おばあさん which mean elderly man and\nwoman, and that in particular they do not like to be called that way. I guess\nthat the reason for this is that calling a person おじいさん or おばあさん may imply\nthat the most relevant attribute of the person is his/her age. Although I do\nnot find it reasonable, I may hesitate to call someone who I do not know at\nall おじいさん or おばあさん to avoid unnecessary conflict.\n\nBy the way, similarly to おじいさん and おばあさん, おじさん can mean an uncle or a middle-\naged man, and written as [伯父さん (elder brother of parent), 叔父さん (younger\nbrother of\nparent)](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&p=%E3%81%8A%E3%81%98%E3%81%95%E3%82%93&dtype=0&dname=0ss&stype=1&index=102547100000&pagenum=1),\nor\n[小父さん](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&p=%E3%81%8A%E3%81%98%E3%81%95%E3%82%93&dtype=0&dname=0ss&stype=1&index=102547000000&pagenum=1)\n(middle-aged man, but not commonly written in kanji). The same applies to おばさん\n([伯母さん,\n叔母さん](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&p=%E3%81%8A%E3%81%B0%E3%81%95%E3%82%93&dtype=0&dname=0ss&stype=1&index=102688900000&pagenum=1),\n[小母さん](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&p=%E3%81%8A%E3%81%B0%E3%81%95%E3%82%93&dtype=0&dname=0ss&stype=1&index=102688800000&pagenum=1)).", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-11T12:18:12.227", "id": "4641", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-11T12:18:12.227", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "4609", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "Note that you can also call middle-aged woman 奥さん and middle-aged man 旦那さん,\nご主人さん. (What I mean by middle-aged is 35~55+). Not really used by young\npeople, rather between middle-aged people or from staff to customer; さん\nbecomes さま then.\n\nAs well, you can call young people (15~30) おにいさん/おねえさん even if they are\nyounger than you. In Kansai, we call staff this way too (I believe it's not\ncommon in Tokyo area).", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-12T11:09:10.850", "id": "4657", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-12T11:09:10.850", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "4609", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "**Is ~を好く used and is it even grammatical?**\n\nIt's grammatical, but hardly ever used in the form 好く in standard modern\nJapanese.\n\nHowever, the passive form 好かれる is quite common in standard Japanese.\n\nDialectal negative forms 好かん or 好かへん are also quite common in certain parts.\n\n**If it is not used, why is it so?**\n\nThis is mostly me guessing, but I imagine that people shied away from the use\nwith the direct object marker を because it seemed a bit too... well... direct.\n\nWhy ～が好き instead of ～を好く? I think this might be for a similar reason that ～が嫌い\nexists next to ～を嫌う. However, maybe it's more acceptable to be direct about\nthings that you dislike than things that you like, so ～を嫌う survived.\n\nBut then why not ～が好く with が on the object like many other verbs that have to\ndo with emotion? (Incidentally, ～が好かん takes が so this would fit into the\npattern.)", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-09T12:54:04.647", "id": "4612", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-09T13:13:55.260", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-09T13:13:55.260", "last_editor_user_id": "1073", "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4611", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "`次数` (jisuu) seems to be \"degree\" in the [graph\ntheory](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degree_%28graph_theory%29) sense, not as\nin angles. I've never heard `ちょぼ` used for \"decimal point\", but perhaps I'm\nignorant here.\n\nThe terms I would use are `度` (do) and `点` (ten) respectively. `コンマ` (comma)\nis also heard as a decimal point separator (even when the symbol `,` is not\nused).\n\nNote that, as in English, numbers after a decimal point should be spelled out\nindividually, not using a place system:\n\nEnglish: `.688` is read e.g. `point six eight eight` not `point six hundred\nand eighty eight`. \nJapanese: `.688` is read e.g. `てん ろく はち はち` not `てん ろっぴゃく はちじゅう はち`.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-09T14:38:07.067", "id": "4614", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-09T23:20:57.647", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-09T23:20:57.647", "last_editor_user_id": "315", "owner_user_id": "315", "parent_id": "4613", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "~ちゃった is not particularly \"funny\", just female-tinged and rather casual. Note\nthat men can occasionally use it...\n\nThe rest sounds more like a standard (and many time answered) [male vs female\nspeech question](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/97/what-\ndifferences-should-i-look-out-for-between-male-vs-female-pronunciation).\n\n(note: taking a page from my own book and posting this as an answer instead of\na comment)", "comment_count": 11, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-10T00:01:07.287", "id": "4619", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-10T00:01:07.287", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:43.857", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "290", "parent_id": "4616", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "～ちゃった is not funny and is not girly.\n\nThe difference is mainly how you say it. It can also depends on where you\nlive.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-10T00:15:07.610", "id": "4620", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-10T00:15:07.610", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "4616", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "Lol... How about [持]{も}って[来]{き}ちまったぜ！ It should sound more manly at least. BTW\nI'm in Kansai and I think guys here would say more like [持]{も}って[来]{き}てもうた(わ)!\nDoesn't it sound sooo funny?", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-10T12:37:19.040", "id": "4628", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-10T12:37:19.040", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4616", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "In all of your examples, it means \"likely to, tend to\". It does not mean\n\"excess\".\n\n> 長所は見逃してしまいがちです \n> 'Pros tend to be (unwillingly) overlooked.'\n>\n> 飛行機や列車の中で『にわか講習会』が始まりがちです \n> 'In airplanes or trains, **\" pseudo-workshops\" are likely to start**.'\n> (Interpretation a) \n> 'In airplanes or trains, \"pseudo-workshops\" are likely to **start** , (not\n> likely to end).' (Interpretation b) \n> '\"Pseudo-workshops\" are likely to start **within airplanes or trains** ,\n> (not elsewhere).' (Interpretation c) \n> '\"Pseudo-workshops\" are likely to start **within** airplanes or trains,\n> (not in front them or behind them, etc.).' (Interpretation d) \n> '\"Pseudo-workshops\" are likely to start within **airplanes or trains** ,\n> (not within busses or cars, etc.).' (Interpretation e) \n> 'In airplanes or trains, **\" pseudo-workshops\"** are likely to start, (not\n> dance parties). (interpretation f)", "comment_count": 10, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-09T23:45:18.003", "id": "4618", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-10T00:24:37.807", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4617", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "I think your friends might have misunderstood your question and thought you\nwere asking about the slang term ガチ <http://zokugo-dict.com/06ka/gachi.htm>,\nwhich I believe originally came from the sumo lingo word がちんこ勝負 which means 'a\nserious match'.\n\nThis word has recently become quite popular among younger speakers to refer to\nnot only being serious about something, but also with a meaning/usage similar\nto `マジで(？)`, namely `ガチで(？)`. Both are similar to English \"Seriously!(?)\".", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-10T07:15:43.070", "id": "4627", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-10T09:02:15.800", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-10T09:02:15.800", "last_editor_user_id": "1073", "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4617", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "In your \"expectation created by me\" cases, the normal way to say it is:\n\n> やっぱり、いいです。 \n> 'After all, I'm okay (without your help)'.\n\nIn your \"expectation not created by me\" case, the normal way is:\n\n> けっこうです。 \n> 'No thank you.'\n\nBut depending on intonation, `けっこうです` may be heard as offensive, just as the\nEnglish \"no thanks\" is. So be careful. If you say it gently, it suffices.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-10T01:10:09.497", "id": "4622", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-10T01:10:09.497", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4621", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "As Sawa said, `やっぱりいいです` works when the expectation is created by you. `いいです`\nworks when the expectation was not created by you.\n\nIf you want to be more respectful, you can use `(やはり)結構{けっこう}です`.\n\nThere is also a variant `(やっぱり)大丈夫{だいじょうぶ}です` which is heard **a lot** , but\nsome insist that this use of `大丈夫` is wrong or strange.\n\nJust to warn you, `もう要らない` sounds quite rude. `もう` (anymore) could be taken as\nif you don't need the help anymore because the help wasn't given early enough.\n`要らない` sounds a bit like \"I don't need and I don't want\".\n\nThe いい/結構 variants are really the best, similar to English \"I'm fine, thanks\".", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-10T01:27:21.527", "id": "4623", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-10T01:27:21.527", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4621", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

[ { "body": "In a., -no is the genitive case marker that connects two noun phrases, and -wo\nis the accusative case marking the direct object of the verb. The problem that\nyou are likely having is in understanding the ellipse coming from the first\nsentence. You should interpret it as follows:\n\n> 彼は家を買った。しかも大きい庭付きの（家）を（買った）。 \n> \"He bought a house. In fact, a big **one** with a garden.\"", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-10T05:50:26.180", "id": "4625", "last_activity_date": "2015-11-20T10:53:02.383", "last_edit_date": "2015-11-20T10:53:02.383", "last_editor_user_id": "11104", "owner_user_id": "1141", "parent_id": "4624", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "It is a (pseudo) cleft sentence with the noun phrase and the topic ellided. I\nthought there was a variety among native speakers who accept `を` and who\ndon't.\n\n> しかも、かれは大きい庭付きの家を買った \n> 'In fact, he bought a house that has a large garden.' (Original sentence)\n>\n> しかも、彼が買ったのは大きい庭付きの家(を)だ \n> 'In fact, what he bought was a house that has a large garden.' ((Pseudo)\n> cleft)\n>\n> しかも、彼が買ったのは大きい庭付きの(を)だ \n> 'In fact, what he bought was one that has a large garden.' (Ellipsis of a\n> noun phrase)\n>\n> しかも、大きい庭付きの(を)だ \n> 'In fact, (what he bought was) one that has a large garden.' (Ellipsis of\n> the topic)\n\nIt is different from the other sentence, in which simply `家` is ellided:\n\n> しかも大きい庭付きだ \n> 'In fact, (it) has a large garden.'", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-10T05:55:15.653", "id": "4626", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-10T06:12:33.270", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-10T06:12:33.270", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4624", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "始:begining of something\n\n初:first time thing", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-10T15:09:40.773", "id": "4631", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-10T15:09:40.773", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "4630", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "You are confusing the two examples. Both of your examples are correct. Why do\nyou assume as if one in not? Only the first one is read as \"はじめます\".\n\nYou never use `初` to write \"はじめます\". A close usage I can think of is `初めまして`,\nwhich is a fixed expression and is not constructive. For writing `はじめます`, you\nalways write `始めます`.\n\n * `始める` verb 'start'\n * `初めて` adverb/noun 'for the first time'", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-10T15:24:57.850", "id": "4632", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-10T15:30:31.070", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-10T15:30:31.070", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4630", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 } ]

[ { "body": "I'm taking a risk here in that I'm not 100% sure, but, we're trying to do\n[answers not\ncomments](https://japanese.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/593/comments-are-\nnot-for-answers)...\n\nAnyway, a long time ago I used to work in animation at a Japanese company. One\nof my directors stressed to me the importance of `間{ま}`, which he described as\nthe pause a character takes just before a motion. Having just a fraction of a\nsecond of pause just before doing something, made characters appear much more\nnatural than just bursting into action.\n\nSo I think `間{ま}` might be the word you're looking for.\n\nNote that the kanji `間` is usually read `あいだ` when on it's own, and `かん` when\npart of a compound (for example, `時間{じかん}`). `ま` is a rarer reading.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-11T02:06:36.650", "id": "4634", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-11T02:06:36.650", "last_edit_date": "2017-03-16T15:48:25.793", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "119", "parent_id": "4633", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "Maybe one of these?\n\n> [一]{ひと}呼吸置く \n> 'take one breath'\n>\n> 一歩下がる \n> 'take one step behind'\n>\n> 思いとどまる \n> 'stop and think'\n>\n> [熟]{じゅく}[慮]{りょ}する \n> 'think intensively'\n\nOr maybe you meant these proverbs?\n\n> 石の上にも三年 \n> 'Stay three years on a rock (until it becomes warm enough to be\n> comfortable).'\n>\n> 石橋を叩いて渡る \n> 'Hit a bridge made of rock before crossing it (to make sure it does not\n> collapse).'\n>\n> 桃栗三年柿八年 \n> 'It takes as much as three years for a plum tree or a chestnut tree to\n> blossom, and eight years for a persimmon tree.'", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-22T23:28:02.250", "id": "4774", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-22T23:41:26.990", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-22T23:41:26.990", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4633", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "Couldn't this just be\n\n> 躊躇{ちゅうちょ}する、躊躇{ためら}う to hesitate\n\n? Or would that be too simple? I think it matches the description pretty\nwell... or was this supposed to be some concept very specific to Japan(ese)?", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-23T03:03:02.257", "id": "4776", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-23T03:03:02.257", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4633", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "In this case, I would suggest the idea of 「立ち止まる」（ _tachidomaru - coming to a\nstand still._ )\n\nI've seen this used by people when they are describing someone who is stopping\nto think about something; not yet acting (other than stopping whatever action\nthey had been doing beforehand.) It conveys a sense of stopping everything to\nponder about the next action one is to take. _Potentially for the sake of\nmaking a life changing decision._\n\n[Here is an example](http://wwwsoc.nii.ac.jp/jsse3/bbs/propose/48-3-2009.pdf)\nof this phrase in one type of context.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-25T07:21:41.880", "id": "4807", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-25T07:21:41.880", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1188", "parent_id": "4633", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "`てみる` is \"try out ...\".\n\n> 自転車に乗ってみる \n> 'try riding a bicycle'", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-11T03:30:17.853", "id": "4636", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-11T03:30:17.853", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4635", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "I think I vaguely know what you're trying to find out. You should be looking\nfor:\n\n * ～ことがある\n\nIt literally means something like \"to have (the experience of) ~\"\n\nVerbs:\n\n> Present: 走ることがある - \"There are times that (I) run\"\n>\n> Past: 走ったことがある - \"There was a time when (I) ran\"\n\nい-Adjectives:\n\n> Present: 高いことがある - \"There are times when (something) is expensive\"\n>\n> Past: 高かったことがある - \"There was a time when (something) was expensive\"\n\nな-Adjectives:\n\n> Present: 静かなことがある - \"There are times when (something) is quiet\"\n>\n> Past: 静かだったことがある - \"There was a time when (something) was quiet\"\n\n* * *\n\nNote that ~ことがある is [structurally ambiguous between being an appositive clause\nand a relative clause.](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/3978/542)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-11T04:33:20.453", "id": "4638", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-11T05:06:14.720", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "542", "parent_id": "4637", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "We usually do not say 'ワインに飲まれた'. It would mean 'Something was drunk by wine'. \n \n'ワインを飲まれた' sounds to me like 'Someone drank \"my\" wine'. \n \nI think 'ワインが飲まれた' just means '(The) wine was drunk./Someone or some people\ndrank (the) wine.' In this sentence the wine might not have been mine.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-11T07:29:30.687", "id": "4640", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-11T07:29:30.687", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4639", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "`や` is the copula in Kansai dialect. Its counterpart in standard Japanese is\n`だ`. `な` is a sentence final particle expecting agreement (to oneself or to\nother person). It is similar to `ね` except that it is masculine.\n\n**Added upon Flaw's suggestion** : `あり` used here is a slang term meaning \"an\nacceptable idea\", \"can be dealt with\", or \"cool\". Another slang expression\nwith a similar meaning is `いける`. The slang `なし` is the negation of `あり`. For\nusages of these, you can do a search with phrases like `ありかなしか`.", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-11T16:58:51.380", "id": "4643", "last_activity_date": "2012-07-01T12:05:49.610", "last_edit_date": "2012-07-01T12:05:49.610", "last_editor_user_id": "125", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4642", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Maybe, just add 願う 'hope' or 祈る 'pray'.\n\n> お店の繁盛を願っています/祈っています", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-11T17:38:44.857", "id": "4645", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-11T17:38:44.857", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4644", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "膣外射精 is the technical term. I wouldn't be worried about it being too dirty for\nconversation, because it is of a technical nature. However, I would worry\nabout it being too literary to be understood in converstion.\n\nYou might want to consider [外出]{そとだ}し instead.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-12T01:14:29.460", "id": "4650", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-12T01:14:29.460", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1129", "parent_id": "4646", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "It is a bad word, but is still only used in its literal sense. It is not used\nagainst a person who is not actually bald. It is different from words like\n`asshole`, which is used against a person who is neither an `ass` or an\n`asshole`. The word has no gender or age restriction, but is perhaps used more\nagainst male and/or the aged because of the reality.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-11T22:21:47.533", "id": "4648", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-11T22:21:47.533", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4647", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "I think [ハゲ](http://eow.alc.co.jp/%E3%81%AF%E3%81%92/UTF-8/) is often similar\nto the English words\n[baldy/baldie](http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/baldie):\n\n> 私に命令するな。何様だこのハゲ。 \n> Don't order me around! Who the hell does this baldie think he is?\n\nIn the absence of other sources, I'll refer to this [Kotonoha\npage](http://kotonoha.cc/no/215376) for whether it can be used for non-bald\npeople:\n\n> ハゲの人には言わないよ。ハゲてないからこそ言えるんだ! \n> You don't say it to people who are bald. They aren't bald so you can say\n> it!\n>\n> ...\n>\n> 「ハゲてねぇし!」と返ってくる \n> The response is \"I'm not bald!\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-11T22:39:59.780", "id": "4649", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-12T00:43:14.953", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-12T00:43:14.953", "last_editor_user_id": "796", "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "4647", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "[Yes, `悪い子` can be used for\nboys.](http://eow.alc.co.jp/%E6%82%AA%E3%81%84%E5%AD%90/UTF-8/)\n\n`子` means \"child\", and it can refer to girls or boys depending on the context.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-12T03:12:26.483", "id": "4652", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-12T03:12:26.483", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "4651", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "Using `半分` like that is completely fine. You can use other fractions as well\n(but in that case, you cannot use it adverbially and have to insert the\nparticle `を` or `は` after it like `三分の二を`). But if you do not particularly\nneed to emphasize the act of writing, simply `書きました` is more natural than\n`書いていました`.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-12T05:29:16.490", "id": "4654", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-12T05:29:16.490", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4653", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I think that\n\n> 半分英語で半分日本語で\n\nis fine. I think you could also say:\n\n> 半分英語、半分日本語で", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-12T05:30:36.653", "id": "4655", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-12T05:30:36.653", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "4653", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "It's a sentence ending that makes the sentence formal or polite. These\nsentences are called 候文. It does not have contentful meaning. It became pretty\nmuch archaic.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-12T14:09:10.953", "id": "4661", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-12T15:54:36.357", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-12T15:54:36.357", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4659", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "候 is an antiquated predicate meaning “be, is, am, are” as Waley translated. It\nwas commonly used in literature and letters just up until the early part of\nShowa Era. It is usually used in the statement addressed to your senior, like:\n\n> …にて候、 \n> [御座]{ござ}候、 \n> …の[次第]{しだい}にて候、 \n> …[致]{いた}して候、 \n> …と[思案]{しあん}[仕]{つかまつ}り候、 \n> [之]{これ}あり候、 \n> [有間敷事而]{あるまじきことにて}候、 \n> 思い[悩]{なや}み候、 \n> ..の[料簡]{りょうけん}にて候、 \n> [暇]{ひま}を取らせ候、 \n> [確]{しか}と[承]{うけたまわ}り候、 \n> [武士]{ぶし}の[一言]{いちごん}、[金丁]{きんちょう}にて[誓約]{せいやく}[申上]{もうしあ}げ候、 \n> [切腹]{せっぷく}申し[渡]{わた}し候,\n\nand so on.\n\nActually I’ve written letters in 候文 (statements finishing the end of sentence\nwith 候) in my high teens in place of my father who didn’t like to write by\nhimself, in such a way as:\n\n>\n> \"[拝啓]{はいけい}、[叔父上]{おじうえ}他御一統様[如何]{いかが}[被遊]{あそばされ}候や。[当方]{とうほう}一同[恙無]{つつがな}く[打越]{うちこし}[罷居]{まかりお}り候[間]{あいだ}[何卒]{なにとぞ}[御放念]{ごほうねん}[被遊]{あそばされ}[度]{たく}[願上]{ねがいあ}げ候\" \n> -- meaning “Hello my uncle. How well are you and all your family faring\n> off? Our family are all doing well. So please feel at ease.\"\n\nSo I don’t find any difficulty in writing a letter in 候文 even today.\n\nThe use of 候 is completely obsolete today, but you may find it being used\nubiquitously in the literature and private letters written before the Showa-\nTaisho era, and sometimes in the speeches of 能狂言 today.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2016-04-28T22:29:31.017", "id": "33852", "last_activity_date": "2016-04-30T07:10:31.923", "last_edit_date": "2016-04-30T07:10:31.923", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "12056", "parent_id": "4659", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "[1] The causative affix `-(s)ase-` (your `せる`) is productive and can be used\neither as let-causative or make-causative.\n\n> 太郎に音楽を聞かせる \n> 'let Taro listen to music' \n> 'make Taro listen to music'\n\nThe causative affix`-as-` (your `す`) is not productive, and can only mean\nmake-causative.\n\n> 太郎に音楽を聞かす \n> 'make Taro listen to music'\n\n[2] `聞く` is already transitive.\n\n[3] At least, you can extract the morpheme, so it probably was productive\nuntil some point. They are changing intransitives into transitives, not\ncausatives.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-12T17:28:00.333", "id": "4664", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-12T17:28:00.333", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4662", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "You are considering both of these words from the point of view of\ni-adjectives, but think differently.\n\n> 赤 noun \n> → 赤い/赤く adjective derived from a noun by attaching \"-i/-ku\"\n>\n> 近い/近く adjective \n> → 近く noun derived from an adjective by [zero-\n> nominalization](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/4489)", "comment_count": 9, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-13T01:22:53.320", "id": "4666", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-13T01:22:53.320", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4665", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "There is often more than one way to turn adjectives into nouns. 赤さ and 近さ are\nnouns too.\n\nThe semantic relationship between 赤い and 赤 is quite different from the one\nbetween 近い and the noun 近く.\n\nWhen learning about related words in different classes, I would learn the\nproductive derivations (～さ is productive), and then deal with the fact that\nthe rest have to be memorized. Sure, there are \"sub-regularities\" (赤→赤い, 青→青い,\n白→白い) but you still have to memorize their limitations, since (following the\nexample) there is no 緑い.\n\nMaybe off topic, but for what it's worth: The artificial language Esperanto\ntried to make derivations like these completely regular and consistent, but in\nthe language there are so many different derivational morphemes that many\nclaim it's more bad than good.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-13T02:58:09.003", "id": "4667", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-13T02:58:09.003", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4665", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "The best way to think of this is that there are 2 types of words here.\n\nOnes such as 近い that are adjectives being transformed into nouns and ones such\nas 赤 that are nouns being transformed into adjectives.\n\nIf you look at Japanese there are tons of words that are often used as nouns\nthat can be made into adjectives just by adding い, for example 四角 -> 四角い、 黄色\n-> 黄色い、 エロ -> エロい.\n\nThe groupings are also fairly patternistic. Colors are nouns, feelings are\nadjectives, shapes are nouns, distances are adjectives, etc.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-13T04:14:28.223", "id": "4668", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-13T04:14:28.223", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1129", "parent_id": "4665", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "You could say `(noun)が必要【ひつよう】だ` or `(verb plain form)必要がある`.\n\n> その仕事には{協力/協調}が必要だ → That work requires cooperation. \n> 彼に話す必要がありますか → Is it necessary to tell him?\n\nHowever, this would probably sound patronizing if you were asking someone like\n\"Do you need help with that?\" Might just be better to ask if you can help them\ndo the thing.\n\n> それを手伝いましょうか → Shall I help you with that?\n\n\"Need\" can also be interchangeable with \"must\" depending on the context, so\nyou can use the `{なければ／なきゃ／なくては／ないと}＋{ならない／いけない／だめ}` form.\n\n> 4時までにプレゼントを買う必要がある → I need to buy a gift by 4:00 \n> 4時までにプレゼントを買わないといけない → I must buy a gift by 4:00 (lit., \"It won't go over\n> if I don't buy a gift by 4:00\")", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-13T17:53:52.433", "id": "4670", "last_activity_date": "2020-08-31T01:10:28.833", "last_edit_date": "2020-08-31T01:10:28.833", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "4669", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "Indeed `だ` is the copula. And `から` means 'from'. In many languages, the word\nthat corresponds to 'from' is often used as 'because'. `って` is contraction of\n`といって`, which originally meant 'saying', but has lost that meaning.\n\n> 馬鹿だからって知らないわけじゃない \n> 'It is not the case that I don't know it because (they say) I am stupid.'\n\nAnd in this construction, `P から` 'because P' introduces a presupposition that\n`P` is true. That is why you can also translated it as:\n\n> 'I know it even though (they say) I am stupid.'\n\nBoth you and your friend's translations are not correct. If you want to say\nsomething along the translation you give, then it has to be like:\n\n> 馬鹿だということを{知らない/分かっていない}わけじゃない \n> 'It is not the case that I do not know that I am stupid.'", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-13T22:24:42.140", "id": "4672", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-13T23:13:47.600", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-13T23:13:47.600", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4671", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "The って in からって is the quotative って, and there is a longer version which makes\nthis clearer, から **と** 言って. These are interchangeable in all cases that I can\nthink of. For some reason って is used in the short version, and と is common in\nthe long version.\n\nThe below sentence might make it clearer how to understand/parse the phrase:\n\n> 「 **馬鹿だから** 知らないだろう」 **って** 言っても、 **知らないわけじゃない** You might say that I won't\n> know because I'm stupid, but it's not the case (that I don't know).\n\nNote the the object of knowing could be any fact, not necessarily the fact\nthat \"I'm stupid\"\n\nThe phrase means something like \"It might be the case that ... , but ... \".\n\nSome other usages:\n\n> 暑{あつ}いからと言って[裸]{はだか}になるな It might be hot, but don't get naked.\n>\n> お客{きゃく}だからって態度{たいど}が悪{わる}すぎる He might be a guest, but his attitude is still\n> too shitty.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-14T02:16:19.043", "id": "4673", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-14T02:29:27.877", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4671", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "The most idiomatic way to say it in English while avoiding the troublesome\n\"but\" would be\n\n```\n\n Just because I'm stupid that doesn't mean I don't know.\n \n```\n\nIn fact I think the whole expression should be taken as `だからって…ない` with the\nnegation being crucial (though sometimes implied*), and corresponds exactly to\nthe English expression `\"Just because … doesn't mean … \"`. It expresses that\n\"Your assertion that A is a sufficient reason for B is not valid\".\n\nIf you look at `だからって` as `だから` (because) `と` (so) `いって` (saying), you can\nunderstand it as \"saying it is so because\". The `ない` then negates that\nassertion of causality: \"Your saying that B is so because of A is not valid.\",\nor \"Just because of A (which is what you say) is not a valid reason for B.\",\nwhich is equivalent to the English expression.\n\nAs sawa writes above, even in Japanese the meaning of って as \"you say\" is\nsomewhat extraneous. I think it more easily becomes extraneous when expressed\nin English.\n\nSo your original sentence says that your being stupid is not a sufficient\nreason for (one's assumption of) your not knowing [some fact].\n\n```\n\n A asserts: You are stupid, therefore you don't know that fact.\n B: That's not so. While I am indeed stupid, I do know that fact. \n Therefore my being stupid does not imply that I do not know the fact. \n \n```\n\nor\n\n```\n\n Just because I am stupid does not mean I do not know the fact.\n \n```\n\n * In dainichi's example お客だからって態度が悪すぎる I find the negative in the すぎる where \"excessive\" implies \"not appropriate\"; \"his attitude is too shitty\" is the same as \"his attitude should _not_ be so shitty\". Though I may be reaching here.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-14T07:49:48.607", "id": "4681", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-15T02:28:55.543", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-15T02:28:55.543", "last_editor_user_id": "1059", "owner_user_id": "1059", "parent_id": "4671", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "苦手 has a nuance which is something like 'not good at' 'weak point' 'hard to\ndeal with', thereby hinting that your dislike for something/someone is not\nentirely their fault, but perhaps also partially yours.\n\nThis makes 苦手 softer and safer than 好きじゃない.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-14T03:29:02.200", "id": "4677", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-14T03:29:02.200", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4674", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "東西二つに分けて just means _east and west separated in two_.\n\n> 分ける：to separate/devide\n>\n> 東西: east and west\n\nThe festival will take place in the sectors of Azuki separated in two, east\nand west.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-14T03:41:41.573", "id": "4678", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-14T03:41:41.573", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "4675", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "`阿月地区を東西二つに分けて` means \"separate the Azuki district into two parts, east and\nwest\".\n\nYou could insert a の, making it `東西の二つ`, but the adverbial use without it is\nnot uncommon for these \"listing\"-jukugo like `東西`, `優劣`, `大小` etc.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-14T03:42:33.587", "id": "4679", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-14T03:42:33.587", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4675", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

[ { "body": "I think a simple 「大丈夫です。」would fit nicely in this situation.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-14T22:00:05.110", "id": "4686", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-14T22:00:05.110", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "624", "parent_id": "4683", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "A rather straightforward sentence might work:\n\n> 他に何かありますか。\n\nLiterally asking if there's anything else.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-15T08:34:42.600", "id": "4691", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-15T08:34:42.600", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "542", "parent_id": "4683", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "No. Many of my male friends in Osaka/Kansai use キモい, especially the emphatic\n`キモッ！`.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-14T21:28:30.560", "id": "4685", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-14T21:28:30.560", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "4684", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "I have heard university age males in Hokkaido use きもい in a very emphatic way.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2015-08-06T00:40:37.360", "id": "26212", "last_activity_date": "2015-08-06T00:40:37.360", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "10832", "parent_id": "4684", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "> 昔は違っていた。=> It was different a long time ago. (for a period)\n>\n> 昔は違った。=> It was, once, different a long time ago. (for a moment)", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-15T06:12:27.800", "id": "4689", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-15T06:12:27.800", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "4688", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "According to\n[wikipedia](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%8A%B6%E6%85%8B%E5%8B%95%E8%A9%9E),\n違う is a **stative verb** and generally cannot take the continuous/progressive\naspect (\"一般には進行形をとることはできない\").\n\nJudging by this, 違っている in the example should be 違った. This also sounds better\nin my subjective opinion.\n\nHowever, the article does mention that the 進行形 can be used for emphasis or to\nexpress that the situation is temporary. This is quite common, as in\nexpressions 見えている, 思っている etc.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-17T02:21:25.303", "id": "4702", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-17T02:21:25.303", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4688", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "`よかった` means that the speaker was glad that the lost person was found.\n\nI'm not sure that `ありがとうございました` is a direct response to `よかった`, rather it's\nexpressing gratitude for the other person showing concern about the lost\nperson.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-15T12:07:19.463", "id": "4695", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-15T12:07:19.463", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4694", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 }, { "body": "よかった is used here to express a feeling of relief ( Thank goodness! ). \nIntonation is important for this use: ああ、よかった!\n\nSome situations where you can use the expression: \n\\- you lose the wallet but you find it \n\\- nobody is hurt in a traffic accident \n\\- the goalkeeper of your soccer team stops a penalty kick", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-15T23:27:20.910", "id": "4696", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-15T23:27:20.910", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1103", "parent_id": "4694", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "You would probably want to know that よかった is the accomplished form of\n[良]{よ/い}い that you know from simple sentences like _いいです_. This word did not\ncame out of nowhere.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-16T02:52:26.967", "id": "4697", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-16T02:52:26.967", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "4694", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "That is called 形声. About 90% of all kanjis are created in this way. In this\ncase, the left side `言` is responsible for the meaning, and the right side,\n`吾` is responsible for the pronunciation. In turn, `吾` is composed of the\nupper part `五`, which is responsible for the pronunciation and the lower part\n`口`, which is responsible for the meaning. Why is `五` included in `語`? Because\nit was created so. Why is this way of creating kanji so popular? Because it\nwill be a mess if thousands of kanjis were all pictograms, and if the\npronunciation and the meaning are combined, it will be easy to both remember\nits meaning and the pronunciation.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-16T06:53:43.547", "id": "4699", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-16T06:53:43.547", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4698", "post_type": "answer", "score": 27 }, { "body": "In Middle Chinese and a reconstruction of Old Chinese, 吾 and 五 have the\nfollowing readings (Baxter):\n\n> 五: wu3 < ngu < *nga\n>\n> 吾: wu2 < nguX < *ngaʔ\n>\n> 語: yu3 < ngjoX < *ng(r)aʔ\n\nIn modern Mandarin, 語 (yu3) and 五 (wu3) have diverged in pronunciation, but\naccording to reconstructions they were pronounced similarly in antiquity.\n\nThere are other cases of 形声 where the phonetic does not apparently match the\npronunciation -- some of these are because of this divergence.", "comment_count": 9, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-16T09:53:36.100", "id": "4700", "last_activity_date": "2021-04-07T08:23:53.103", "last_edit_date": "2021-04-07T08:23:53.103", "last_editor_user_id": "816", "owner_user_id": "816", "parent_id": "4698", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 } ]

[ { "body": "This is pretty common in restaurants etc, both by staff and by customers.\n\nI think it's just to make counting easier.\n\nFor example, ビール is counted with 杯{はい} when seved in a glass, but 本{ほん} when\nserved in a bottle. If rice is served in a chawan, it would be 杯{はい}, but when\nserved on a plate, it would be 皿{さら}.\n\nSo ～つ is just being used as a generic \"X servings of ...\"", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-17T04:14:47.310", "id": "4705", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-17T04:14:47.310", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4703", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

[ { "body": "**Update:** This might interest you: [On the Phonological Derivation and\nBehavior of Nasal Glides](http://mitwpl.mit.edu/catalog/trig01) (R. L. Trigo\nFerre, 1988). _(PDF\navailable[here](http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/14408/20150378.pdf),\nI assume legally.)_\n\n> I claim that nasal ‘absorption’ occurs when the occlusion of a nasal stop is\n> removed or weakened considerably **to the point where it is a glide**. A\n> **nasal glide** without any place features, [N], is shown to derive by a\n> process which simultaneously reduces obstruent stops to glottal stops in\n> **Japanese** , Choctaw and Malay.\n\nI do not have the background to evaluate the whole of Trigo Ferre's argument,\nbut my understanding from scanning the parts that relate to Japanese is that\nshe would argue that the \"y\" you are hearing _is_ the intervocalic /N/, or at\nleast all that remains of it (apart from some vowel nasalization) in the word\n/seNeN/.\n\n* * *\n\n_Original comment:_ I am not an expert on Japanese phonetics, but [this\npage](http://www.cjk.org/cjk/samples/jpd_e.htm) has some data on similar words\nthat suggests that **nasalization** is the key here (edit: which, of course,\nyou did bring up; but I'm suggesting that it is the cause of what you're\nasking about).\n\n * 真一 /siNiti/ → [ɕiĩtɕi]\n * 本 /hoN/ → [hõ] or [hoɴ]\n * 翻案 /hoNaN/ → [hoãɴ]\n * 本意 /hoNi/ → [hõĩ]\n * 電話 /deNwa/ → [deẽwa]\n\nMaybe what you are hearing is not a glide, but rather the onset/release of\nnasalization (in [seẽɴ] or [seẽeɴ] or whatever).\n\nOr, to restate sawa's suggestion in comments, it could be that the rule \"/N/\nturns into a nasalized vowel\" is leading to a two-vowel sequence like [eẽ] or\n[ẽe], and people are inserting a glide to keep the two vowels apart (prevent\n\"hiatus\").\n\nThe difference between 千円 and 田園調布 could be due to accent as sawa says, or\nother factors (e.g. 千円 is arguably two words, 田園 is not; 千円 is very common, 田園\nis not; etc.)\n\nIncidentally, although I am not a native speaker... when I listen closely to\nmyself saying 千円 what I hear is a narrowing (but not a stop!) in the uvular\nregion, which is then released back into something more like a regular [e],\nand it is that release which sounds something like a \"y\". But it is definitely\ndistinct from the palatal [j] in, say, 矢 /ya/.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-17T06:53:15.480", "id": "4706", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-17T14:19:12.340", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-17T14:19:12.340", "last_editor_user_id": "531", "owner_user_id": "531", "parent_id": "4704", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "I think a word like sen does have some nasalisation, but I also think there is\na bit of a velar approximant (a faint ng) at the end, and it's this slight\nmovement of the tongue that cause a subtle palatal y to come up, though not\nthe full one found in English.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-07-21T20:20:41.417", "id": "6217", "last_activity_date": "2012-07-21T20:20:41.417", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "801", "parent_id": "4704", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "As you surmised, it is just an sound change: the long vowel shortened. This is\nmade clear by recorded early citations. Earlier citations for okiagari kobōshi\n--with the long vowel--may be found from mid-Muromachi texts. (For example\n\"Jippon Ōgi\" 十本扇.) Early citations for okiagari koboshi--with the short vowel\n--may be found from early Edo period. (For example \"Kyōgonki\" 狂言記.)\n\nThe word kobōshi also exists. Early citations from the 10th century. Note that\nthere does not seem to be a corresponding *koboshi, though. That may give a\nhint as to why okiagari koboshi came about: to distinguish this self-righting\ndharma doll from \"a young monk\" (kobōshi). But that is only a guess.\n\nIn modern Japanese, the version with the short vowel is most common. That is\nwhy you will likely find in regular dictionaries.\n\nFor the record, you may also find the following expressions as well: okikaeri\nkobōshi and okiyagari / okyagari koboshi, all with the same meaning.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-27T15:46:19.437", "id": "4833", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-27T15:46:19.437", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1141", "parent_id": "4707", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "That is actually a valid question. I did some reading and here's what I found\n(from Wikipedia):\n\n[Moraic Nasal](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_phonology#Moraic_nasal)\n[Neutralisation, Archiphoneme and\nUnderspecification](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archiphoneme#Neutralization.2C_archiphoneme.2C_and_underspecification):\n\n> Some analyses of Japanese treat the moraic nasal as an archiphoneme /N/.\n> However, other, less abstract approaches take its uvular citation\n> pronunciation as basic, or treat it as a regular coronal /n/. Even when the\n> nasal coda is proposed as /N/, it is in a complementary distribution with\n> the nasal onsets within a syllable. In any case, it undergoes a variety of\n> assimilatory processes. Within words, it is variously:\n>\n> * uvular [ɴ] at the end of utterances and in isolation.\n>\n> * bilabial [m] before [p], [b] and [m]; this pronunciation is also\n> sometimes found at the end of utterances and in isolation. Singers are\n> taught to pronounce all final and prevocalic instances of this sound as [m],\n> which reflects its historical derivation.\n>\n> * dental [n] before coronals /d/, /t/, [ɾ] and [n]; never found utterance-\n> finally.\n>\n> * **velar [ŋ] before [k] and [ɡ].**\n>\n> * [Ṽ] (a nasalized vowel) before vowels, approximants ([j] and [w]), and\n> fricatives (/s/, /z/, and /h/). Also found utterance-finally.\n>\n>\n\n>\n> Some speakers produce [n] before /z/, pronouncing them as [ndz], while\n> others produce a nasalized vowel before /z/ (see Akamatsu 1997). The\n> assimilation occurs beyond word boundaries.\n>\n> * * *\n>\n> Phonemes that are contrastive in certain environments may not be contrastive\n> in all environments. In the environments where they don't contrast, the\n> contrast is said to be neutralized. In English there are three nasal\n> phonemes, /m, n, ŋ/, as shown by the minimal triplet,\n>\n> * /sʌm/ sum\n>\n> * /sʌn/ sun\n>\n> * /sʌŋ/ su **ng**\n>\n>\n\nI think the reason is because in English, we subconsciously group and\ndistinguish \"m\", \"n\", and \"ng\" but for Japanese, the distinction among them is\nnot as strict. So it may seem to be entirely different for \"English-\nconditioned\" minds while it's only a little variation for \"Japanese-\nconditioned\" minds.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-18T00:41:16.853", "id": "4709", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-18T00:47:31.900", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-18T00:47:31.900", "last_editor_user_id": "542", "owner_user_id": "542", "parent_id": "4708", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "**I've heard sound like: Haru na kimasu. So why is that?**\n\nI'm going to be very frank here. I think it's because you're not yet able to\ndistinguish intervocalic [ŋ] from [n] and [m]. Incidentally, listening to the\npassage you link to, I hear [ŋ] in the first, [ɡ] in the second ocurrence of\nしごと.\n\n**Do the Japanese not like the g sound (g as in gorilla)?**\n\nIt's not that they don't like it. But the fact is that the phone [ɡ] is just\none of the ways that the phoneme /ɡ/ is realized in Japanese. Have a look\n[here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_phonology#Weakening). Often\nintervocalic /ɡ/ is realized as [ɣ] or [ŋ]. Also, intervocalic /b/ is often\nrealized as [β], but this might not catch your attention as much, since this\nis less likely to cause confusion with other consonants.\n\nIf by the first question, you meant to ask why /ɡ/ it is pronounced\ndifferently from [ɡ], one way to answer that would be that [ɣ] or [ŋ] require\nless effort to pronounce intervocalically. [ɡ] is a _stop_ , meaning that you\nhave to stop the airstream while articulating, while [ɣ] or [ŋ] are a\n_fricative_ and a _nasal stop_. In the former, the airstream is not stopped\nalthough the channel that the air goes through is made narrower. In the\nlatter, the air stops going through the mouth and is directed through the\nnose.\n\nThis phenomenon, known as _weakening_ , happens in other languages as well,\ne.g. in Castillian Spanish, where intervocalically (and in certain other\npositions) /ɡ/ -> [ɣ], /b/ -> /β/ etc.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-18T02:59:44.690", "id": "4710", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-18T03:19:01.497", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-18T03:19:01.497", "last_editor_user_id": "1073", "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4708", "post_type": "answer", "score": 16 }, { "body": "This is not always the cases but I have encountered it. Japan has many\nregional dialects and they can speak with a regional accent. What you're\nobserving is that some with some accents, they pronounce these words (and the\nparticle が) differently.\n\n> /ɡ/ is nasalized fully to [ŋ]\n\n_This is a feature of dialects in the Tōhoku region_. While they learn\nstandard Japanese, some of them (especially older people) still speak with a\nstrong accent.\n\nThis nasalized sound is distinct to [n] or [m] (and is not confused with ん by\nJapanese speakers) but can be confused with them by English speakers that are\nunaccustomed to distinguishing it. This is not specific to Japanese and this\nsound is used in other languages including French and Portuguese.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2018-11-17T01:30:54.063", "id": "62878", "last_activity_date": "2018-11-17T13:18:53.993", "last_edit_date": "2018-11-17T13:18:53.993", "last_editor_user_id": "14608", "owner_user_id": "14608", "parent_id": "4708", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "I'm sure it is pronounced as Un~\n\nI lived in ibaraki and they used \"un\" when we discussed it in benkyoukai.\nHaven't heard \"an\" used before.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-18T04:50:52.110", "id": "4713", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-18T04:50:52.110", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "786", "parent_id": "4711", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "In this case, you might somehow use `返金`.\n\n * `返品` focuses on the merchandise being returned from the customer to the shop.\n * `返金` focuses on the money being returned from the shop to the customer.\n\nOften, two things happen at the same time, but depending on what kind thing\nwas sold, it is more appropriate to focus on one or the other. In addition,\nfor things like train tickets, they are not reused by another customer; they\nwill be probably just become void, and/or thrown out. In that case there is no\nprocess that will be described as `返品`, so it is better to use `返金`.\n\nIn Japan, customers are generally considered to be in a socially higher status\nthan the shop clerk (of course only in that temporaral situation), so you\ndon't have to be too polite, but may use the polite form. But note that in\nJapan, returning things is not done as frequent as in U.S. For things like\ntickets, there should be a clear policy somewhere regarding refunding.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-18T05:29:06.223", "id": "4714", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-18T05:59:32.117", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-18T05:59:32.117", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4712", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "In ordinary life, people may use both types of sentences, as you wrote. But\nthere is a subtle difference, and using `ので` here is wrong if you are strict.\nThe book well describes this point, and so is a good book.\n\n`ので` connects a cause-effect relation, and probably, it does not prefer a\nlogically narrower scope than the inflection or the compounded part of the\nverb. And if the scope of it is not a proposition but is a command, request,\nsuggestion, or invitation, it will not make sense semantically.\n\n> あしたのショーはおもしろいので[ぜひ見に来て下さい] \n> a. 'As for tomorrow's show, [please come to see it] because it is\n> interesting.'\n\nHere, `ぜひ見に来て下さい` or `please come to see it` is a request, and does not have a\ntruth value like a proposition. You cannot say that it is true or false\nbecause of another fact. In order for it to make sense, the logical connection\nhas to be done in a position lower than the request:\n\n> b. 'As for tomorrow's show, please [come to see it because it is\n> interesting].'\n\n`come to see it` is a proposition that will reveal its truth value when the\ntime comes (tomorrow), and there is nothing wrong with it having a\ncause/motivation `because it is interesting`. `ので` seems to only allow\ninterpretation a., not b. That is the reason you cannot use it.\n\nOn the other hand, with `から`, expresses motivation, and as you can tell from\nits form, it is just a postposition phrase, and can take scope within the verb\nphrase.\n\n> あしたのショーは[おもしろいからぜひ見に来て]下さい\n\nIt allows the interpretation b., so that is why you can use it.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-18T16:02:46.093", "id": "4716", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-18T16:13:12.037", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-18T16:13:12.037", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4715", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "I did not know that claim and I do not agree to it, but judging from several\nweb pages I found from search, it seems that the difference between から and ので\nhas been one of the most controversial topics in Japanese linguistics. The\nusage may have changed over time, but it was controversial even at the time of\nthe publication of the book from which you quoted the claim.\n\nThe explanation which you quoted is based on the theory by Masaru Nagano (永野賢)\nin 「から」と「ので」とはどう違うか (1952). According to his theory, から explains a subjective\nreason whereas ので describes a cause-result relationship in an objective\nmanner, and because of this difference, ので cannot be used to state a reason\nfor a request.\n\nHowever, Nagano admits that ので is sometimes used to state a reason for a\nrequest when the sentence is in the polite form. He explains it as follows:\nbecause から describes a subjective reason, it can make the sentence sound more\nstrongly opinionated. Using ので instead softens the expression. According to\nNagano, using ので to state a reason for a request in a non-polite sentence is\nungrammatical.\n\nNot everyone agrees on this explanation. For example, Tsutomu Miura (三浦つとむ)\nclaims that it is nonsense in\n[日本語の文法](http://web1.nazca.co.jp/hp/nzkchicagob/NBunpo3.html#NBUNPO38) (1975).", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-18T16:23:01.320", "id": "4717", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-13T05:54:16.477", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-13T05:54:16.477", "last_editor_user_id": "706", "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "4715", "post_type": "answer", "score": 26 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes, you are right.\n\nFor 拾う and している, I think everybody pronounces them with _ou_ and _ei_.\n\nFor 姪, I would pronounce it _mei_ , but I'm not convinced that some people\nwouldn't pronounce it _mee_. In the case of 姪御{めいご}, which is sonkeigo for 姪,\nI think even I would pronounce it _meego_.\n\nI don't know if there are strict rules about when to pronounce it either way,\nbut here are some guidelines that I think might help:\n\n**Hiragana and kanji**\n\n 1. Pronounce them as written if part of different words/morphemes/kanji, i.e. している, 乗っていく, 子牛{こうし}. I put 拾う under this rule as well, considering ～う a present-tense ending.\n\n 2. Pronounce kun-yomi as written, but on-yomi (when it doesn't go across 2 kanji) as long vowels, i.e. 名 _mee_ , but 姪 _mei_. 塔 _too_ , but 問う _tou_. In the middle of morphemes, though, like in 儲{もう}かる _mookaru_ , pronounce as long vowel, even for kun-yomi. Not sure if 姪御 as _meego_ would fall under this exception as well, though.\n\n 3. Certain common words, like もう, こう, そう, どう are pronounced with long vowels.\n\n**Katakana**\n\nSimple, pronounce as long vowel when using ー, otherwise separately, i.e. スペイン\n_supein_ , but ページ _peeji_\n\nSorry for being wishy-washy, but I think with these guidelines, you should be\nOK in 99% of the cases. I'm curious too if there are any standard rules for\nthis.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-20T14:58:30.313", "id": "4742", "last_activity_date": "2019-05-06T06:56:41.243", "last_edit_date": "2019-05-06T06:56:41.243", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4718", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "I think your guess is right that `両方` has a wider meaning. `双方` means \"mutual\nsides,\" so it is used only when the two objects are in some relation to one\nanother. You can use either one when there is some relation between the two\nobjects (people):\n\n> 被害者と加害者の両方から事情を聞く \n> 'hear about the case from both the victim and the perpetrator'\n>\n> 被害者と加害者の双方から事情を聞く \n> 'hear about the case from both the victim and the perpetrator sides'\n\nbut when there is no particular relation between the two objects, it is\nawkward to use`双方`.\n\n> 田中と鈴木の両方から授業のノートを借りる \n> 'borrow class notes from both Tanaka and Suzuki'\n>\n> ?? 田中と鈴木の双方から授業のノートを借りる \n> 'borrow class notes from both Tanaka and Suzuki sides'", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-18T21:41:26.510", "id": "4720", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-18T21:41:26.510", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4719", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I had never heard this idiom, but as you said, some people use it on the web.\nI suspect that it is dialectal. This post is not really an answer, but here I\nwould like to list some usages on the web. It seems to me that there are\nseveral different usages.\n\n### Person is too tall for something, or body is not fully utilized\n\n<http://hoshikaze1.blog56.fc2.com/blog-entry-153.html>\n\n> 身長160センチの私では特に問題はなかったが、標準的な成人男性の体格だとシートに対して体が余ることがありそうである。\n\n<http://homepage1.nifty.com/tamotu/review/2011.11-2.htm>\n\n>\n> 私は今まで「曽根崎心中」の道行が面白いと思ったことがなかった。たしかに近松の道行は名文に違いない。人形浄瑠璃もいい。しかしそれは文学として読むから、あるいは人形だからこそである。生身の人間がやるとどうしても浄瑠璃の文句に対して役者の体が余る。\n\n### To feel that body is excessive\n\n(I cannot get hold of this meaning.)\n\n<http://www.jcc-mib.com/knowledge/19/1132554221.html>\n\n> 足が苦しい、体が余るような気がするという友人の症状について友人の話なのですが\n\n(The same text also contains “体をもて余したようなかんじになり、疲れているのに寝付くのに少し時間がかかるということです.”)\n\n### To get bored\n\n<http://melma.com/backnumber_29580_57704/>\n\n>\n> 私は、退屈な状態とか、やりたいことが見つからずに鬱々としている状態を指して「体が余る」というのだが、これは通じない人もいるのできっと方言なんだろう。標準語なら「体を持て余す」といえばいいのだろうか。\n\n<http://mysnappy.exblog.jp/8147526/>\n\n> 家の中で退屈になり，体が余ってくるといろいろ悪戯を始めて，テーブルの下で足に戯れついてきたり，かあさんに挑戦して，反対にやっつけられたりしています。", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-22T14:03:30.147", "id": "4773", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-22T14:03:30.147", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "4721", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "Just like there are both bulleted lists and numbered lists in English, so are\nthere in Japanese. Repeating like `一、一、...`, or `一つ、一つ、...` corresponds to a\nbulleted list, and couting as `一、二、...` or `一つ、二つ、...` corresponds to a\nnumbered list. Nothing special. Listing is called 箇条書き in Japanese.\n\nModification to your translations:\n\n> 一つ、... \n> 姫ゆかり (name of the cracker?), a bite of which spreads a thick/bold flavour\n> of shrimp within your mouth.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-19T03:20:24.373", "id": "4723", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-19T03:26:16.687", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-19T03:26:16.687", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4722", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "For `2.26事件` or `5.15事件`, I remember learning them to be read as \"にいにいろくじけん\",\n\"ごういちごうじけん,\" but I also hear people reading them as \"にいてんにいろくじけん\",\n\"ごうてんいちごうじけん.\" Other than these two, as far as I know, incidents written like\nthis seem to be read simply as if you read a number with a decimal point, like\n\"さんてんいちいち.\"", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-19T07:05:25.870", "id": "4725", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-19T07:05:25.870", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4724", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "The standard way is to say `A,Bの少なくとも一方`, `AとBの少なくとも一方` \"at least either out\nof A and B\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-19T15:36:42.753", "id": "4729", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-19T15:36:42.753", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4726", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Looks like it means to wind up in an undesirable situation. Some of the\ndefinitions for the kanji 羽目{はめ} are difficult/awkward situation; bind; mess.\nThe になる is the common suffix\n[になる](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/739/54).\n\nIn all of the examples I've seen it attaches to the plain form of verbs (not\nnecessarily the dictionary form, but a form of the verb that ends in an u).\n\nHere's a couple from Ejiro:\n\n> 結局何もかもやるはめになる \n> end up doing everything\n\n(as opposed to one's coworkers, teammates, etc.)\n\n> If those roads had been finished then, Pakistan would have been a little\n> more developed by now, but Bhutto, the Prime Minister who took up office\n> after that, cancelled the construction because if the roads had been\n> completed, the credit would only have gone to\n> Sharif.（それかできていれは、今頃パキスタンはもう少し発展していたと思うのですか、次に首相に就任したフットさんか、道路が完成したらシャリフ氏の手柄になってしまうということで、建設を中止してしまったのです。） \n> Owing to Bhutto, not only were the roads not finished, but the people were\n> put in the nasty situation of having to shoulder an enormous\n> debt.（おかけで、道路が完成しなかったどころか、莫大な借金を抱える **はめになった** のです。）", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-19T15:26:31.287", "id": "4728", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-19T15:26:31.287", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.157", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "54", "parent_id": "4727", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "Contrary to your guess, the last example is fine without 対して whereas it is\nungrammatical to omit 対する in the first two example. (I would say 彼が好き instead\nof 彼を好き in the last example, but that is not the main point of the question.)\n\nThe important rule here is that the case particles other than の cannot\ndirectly modify a noun. これが私の手紙に彼の返事だ is ungrammatical because 私の手紙に cannot\nmodify 返事. Similarly, 自分の中の彼に気持ちをどう表現していいのか分からないの ~~is ungrammatical~~ does\nnot mean what you want it to mean because 彼に cannot modify 気持ち. (The latter\nsentence means something like “I do not know how to tell my feelings to ‘him\ninside me’” because it is parsed as [自分の中の彼に][気持ちを][どう]表現していいのか分からないの where\neach of the three bracketed parts modifies 表現して. This is a totally different\nstructure than that of the original sentence.)\n\n[対する](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&p=%E5%AF%BE%E3%81%99%E3%82%8B&dtype=0&dname=0ss&stype=0&pagenum=1&index=111786900000)\nhas many meanings. When it signifies a target of an action, に対して is almost\nsynonymous to just に. The only difference I can think of is that に対して can put\nmore emphasis on the target than に.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-19T18:36:59.467", "id": "4732", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-19T19:15:14.333", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-19T19:15:14.333", "last_editor_user_id": "15", "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "4730", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "As Tsuyoshi Ito answers, when you modify a noun, you can put a genitive\n(の)-marked noun phrase, or a relative clause. Notice that `対する` retains the\nmorphological form of a verb (although it does not fully inflect as with real\nverbs). Thus, at least etymologically, you can consider the `対する`-phrase as a\nrelative clause.\n\n> [(それが)手紙に **対する** (ところの)]返事 \n> 'a response [such that it **aims** against the letter]' \n> 'a response that is aimed against the letter'\n\nHere, the `に` phrase is an argument of the verb `対する`. You cannot omit the\nverb and retain its argument. The `(それが)手紙に` in the following will be a\nstrange syntactic object; it has an argument but not the predicate, and is\nstill intended to function as a relative clause. That is why it is\nungrammatical.\n\n> * [ **(それが)手紙に** ](ところの)返事\n\nIf you want to say it short, you can use `へ` in front of the genitive case\nlike this:\n\n> ? 手紙 **への** 彼の返事 \n> 自分の中の彼 **への** 気持ち\n\nalthough the first example is awkward because `へ` can be used only against\nthings that will be affected by the action.\n\nIn your last example, the `に`-phrase simply functions as an argument.\n\n> 彼 **に** 気持ちをどう表すか", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-19T19:51:40.947", "id": "4733", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-19T19:57:02.673", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-19T19:57:02.673", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4730", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "> １ Did you go to the store today?\n>\n> ２ You went to the store today?\n>\n> ３ 今日、店{みせ}には行った(か)？ (I took the liberty of adding `は`)\n\n(1) is a normal English question; you've been taught that (3) is the way to\nform normal questions in Japanese; so therefore, the equivalent of (1) in\nJapanese is (3), right? Then surely, you have the answer to your question\nalready?\n\nMaybe I can get closer to what's troubling you, though.\n\nThe questions you're asking in Japanese, such as (3), would normally be\nstructured in English as (1) and not (2) -- yet the Japanese grammatical\nstructure resembles (2) more closely than (1), since the word order doesn't\nchange at all from an ordinary statement. This makes you want to look for a\ndifferent structure, maybe one that is closer to (1) instead.\n\nHowever, you can't hope for Japanese and English sentence structures to align\nin this way. Even though (3) seems to be structurally very similar to (2), it\n**does not mean (2)**.\n\nThe sentence (2) in English sounds like it's seeking \"confirmation\", or is a\nsurprised statement. To represent its equivalent in Japanese, you need to add\nの:\n\n> ４ 今日、店{みせ}に行ったの(か)？\n\nThis indicates that the speaker is seeking an explanation of some aspect of\nthe context/environment (for instance, maybe he saw some shopping bags lying\naround in an unexpected place).\n\nThis question illustrates the dangers of attempting to directly compare\nJapanese and English sentence structures. When you realize that (3) looks\nsimilar to (2) and you start thinking about how to translate (2), you should\nconsider that as its own problem, starting by asking yourself \"what are the\nnuances of this sentence in English?\", rather than assuming that (2)\ncorresponds to (3) because it looks similar.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-20T00:06:44.900", "id": "4735", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-20T00:17:53.810", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "315", "parent_id": "4731", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "@Tsuyoshi & @sawa - I understand how you'd be confused as to how these are\ndifferent in English. But the latter example is a question that is surprising\nto the one who asks it. It has the nuance of \"Oh really?\" attached to it.\n\nSo for @dotnetN00b, here's how they are different in Japanese\n\n### Did you go to the store today?\n\n`今日、スーパーに行った（か）？` is just the basic question structure as you had it.\n\n### You went to the store toay?\n\nThis question makes it sound as if during the conversation the asker found out\nthat the askee (?) went to the store today. So the asker is asking like a\nsurprised, rhetorical question. \"(Oh!) You went to the store today?\" This\nwould require the `～んです` form. So it would be `今日、スーパーに行ったの（か）？` or\n`今日、スーパーに行ったんですか？`", "comment_count": 10, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-20T00:08:04.527", "id": "4736", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-20T00:08:04.527", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "4731", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "There are many ways to create questions in non-polite Japanese, and the exact\ndifferences in nuance depend on a lot of things, including personal\ninterpretation. I'll list some of them here and try to give _my_\ninterpretation.\n\n> 今日、スーパーに行った？\n\nThis seems to me the most neutral way to ask. \"Did you go to the supermarket\ntoday?\"\n\n> 今日、スーパーに行ったの？\n\nThis sounds fairly neutral too, but might carry the nuance that the asker did\nnot expect the askee to have gone.\n\n> 今日、スーパーに行ったか？\n\nAlthough this might be the most \"textbook\" way to ask, I feel this is rarely\nused. It sounds a bit strict, like something a father might ask his son.\n\n> 今日、スーパーに行ったのか？ \n> 今日、スーパーに行ったんだ？\n\nI feel that these are fairly similar. As similarly stated by others, these\nsound like \"Oh, so you went to the supermarket\". The の somehow connects the\nquestion to some context, i.e. the asker might have deduced from\ncontext/environment that the askee went to the supermarket.\n\n> 今日、スーパーに行ったのかよ？\n\nThis one is fairly rude. \"What!? You went to the supermarket?\" or something\nlike that.\n\nThere might be others too, and other people might interpret them slightly\ndifferently.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-20T10:00:39.213", "id": "4740", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-20T10:00:39.213", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4731", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes, a cathedral can be referred to as a 寺. Here's [Nogami Toyoichiro doing\njust that](http://www.aozora.gr.jp/cards/000963/card43101.html). Forgive\nchoppy translation, please:\n\n>\n> ノートル・ダームの大寺はローマ時代にはユピテルの神殿のあった位置で、イル・ド・ラ・シテが「パリの目」なら、ノートル・ダームはその「瞳」だといってもよい。ここに寺の建てられたのは四世紀の半ば過ぎで、初めは聖エティエンヌと呼ばれていた。それを聖母（ノートル・ダーム）に捧げる寺にしたのはいつ頃からかよくわからないが、ヴィクトル・ユーゴーに拠れば、シャールマーニュ帝が最初の礎石を置いたというから、そうすると八世紀の末か九世紀の初めであっただろう。\n>\n> The **大寺** of Notre Dame is located where the ancient Roman **神殿** to\n> Jupiter was, and if the Île de la Cité is the \"Eye of Paris\", we can surely\n> call Notre Dame the \"Pupil\". It was the latter half of the fourth century\n> when the first **寺** was built here, which initially was called Saint-\n> Etienne. It is not clear when that was made into a **寺** to the Holy Mother\n> (\"Notre Dame\"), but, according to Victor Hugo, Charlemagne laid the first\n> foundation stone, and so it must have been in the late eighth or early ninth\n> century.\n\nNogami's chronology doesn't match up with the Wikipedia explanation, but as\nyou can see there is clearly precedent for using this sort of terminology for\nChristian churches and even Notre Dame itself. I've seen 本山 used for people-\nof-the-book religious buildings, and I've seen 教会 used to refer to \"the\nChurch\" (the organization) and 寺 for \"church\" (the building). And let's not\nforget terms like\n[南蛮寺](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8D%97%E8%9B%AE%E5%AF%BA) (\"Barbarian\ntemple\") from the early Christian era in Japan...\n\nHowever, as dainichi says, in _contemporary_ Japan (Nogami's piece apparently\ndates from 1941) we would generally expect \"church\" to be translated 教会. This\nis I think a reasonable observation. The reason for this is that Japanese\nculture is becoming more familiarity with Christianity and other \"world\nreligions,\" which means two interrelated things: (1) increasing awareness of\nthe distinction between them and Buddhism (i.e. they aren't just \"corrupt\nsects\" of the same everything-except-Shinto \"religion\", they are a _different_\nreligion); (2) increasing specialization of and familiarity with vocabulary,\nso that even non-Christians know that Christians call their place of worship a\n教会 and believe it distinct from a 寺 (which is also \"sharpening\" as a concept\nbecause of cultural self-consciousness).\n\nSo, why use 寺 in this translation if it is \"possible but marked\"? This is\nsomething I cannot answer, although someone else might be able to. I can think\nof several possible explanations, though, one or more of which might be true:\n\n * Timing. /tera/ is two morae shorter than /kyo:kai/. This might have been important.\n * Mood. In this story in particular, Notre Dame is not a modern, well-lit place of worship, but rather an ancient and foreboding place of worship. The translators may have felt that the implications of 教会 were too tied in with modernity and so on, while 寺 feels more \"old\"\n * Characterization. This is sort of tied in with \"mood\", but perhaps the translators wanted to make the characters and situation seem more old-fashioned and picturesque. Here too using 寺 could help.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-21T05:32:39.067", "id": "4753", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-21T05:32:39.067", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "531", "parent_id": "4737", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "In Kansai-ben ですよ can, according to [Ikue Shingu's Kansai Grammar\nIndex](http://www.kansaiben.com/9.Index/2index.html), become\n\n * どすえ\n * どっせ\n * だっせ\n * でっせ\n\nbut I would consider it as _raw_ Kansai-ben. You almost never hear it (I never\ndid) and it can stay as ですよ. Kansai-ben is also the intonation, choice of\nwords and in other parts of the sentence than the end copula.\n\nだよ on the other hand becomes in the most general way やで.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-20T05:59:29.993", "id": "4739", "last_activity_date": "2012-09-24T06:00:25.330", "last_edit_date": "2012-09-24T06:00:25.330", "last_editor_user_id": "501", "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "4738", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "The `そう` that takes an appositive clause is a formal noun (although in\ntraditional grammar, it is not called so). It has reference to a general\nsituation that one heard from someone else. Or, it may be considered a\nsentence ending. This happens in **syntax**.\n\n> [寒い]そうだ \n> 'What I heard is that it is cold.'\n>\n> [食べた]そうだ \n> 'What I heard is that she ate it.'\n>\n> [静かだ]そうだ \n> 'What I heard is that it is quiet.'\n>\n> [日本人だ]そうだ \n> 'What I heard is that the person is a Japanese.'\n\nThe `-そう` that attaches to a verb stem, adjective stem or an adjectival noun\n(a.k.a. na-adjective, 形容動詞語幹) is an affix that derives a na-adjective that\nmeans `just about to`. `likely to`, `it looks like`. This happens in\n**morphology**.\n\n> [寒そう]だ \n> 'It looks cold'\n>\n> [食べそう]だ \n> 'She is just about to eat it.'\n>\n> [静かそう]だ \n> 'It seems to be quiet.'\n\nIt does not attach to a noun. In order to express a similar meaning with a\nnoun, you can use `っぽい`.\n\n> 日本人っぽい \n> 'The person looks like a Japanese.'\n\nSince that latter `-そう` derives a adjectival noun, it can be used to modify a\nnoun.\n\n> [寒そう]な部屋 \n> 'a room that looks cold'\n>\n> [食べそう]なもの \n> 'things that she is likely to eat'\n>\n> [静かそう]な物件 \n> 'a real estate in a quiet environment'", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-21T01:05:25.213", "id": "4744", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-21T01:25:06.070", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-21T01:25:06.070", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4743", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "**The first そう** comes after 終止形 of verbs and adjectives. All 終止形 forms,\nnegatives, passives, causatives, present and past etc are possible.\n\nThis means \"I hear(d)/read that... \" (not looks/seems like as assumed in the\nquestion).\n\n> 彼は死んだそうだ I heard he died \n> あのケーキは美味しいそうだ I hear that cake is declicious \n> 彼は嫌われていなかったそうだ They say he wasn't hated.\n\nThis そう is often listed as a particle, but it really behaves like a noun, and\nis almost always followed by copula. It has no 連体形, i.e. 静かだそうな is\nungrammatical (unless な is the sentence-ending particle). Also, the following\ncopula is not used in the past tense, i.e. 静かだ(った)そうだった does not exist, but\n静かだったそうだ does.\n\n**The second そう** comes after the 連用形 of verbs and the stem of adjectives.\n良い(いい) and 無い have irregular forms 良さそう and 無さそう. Negative verb forms ～ない\nbecome ～なそう, but ～なさそう is often heard, although it's considered incorrect.\n\n> 濃{こ}そう, 静かそう, 行きたそう, 食べなそう looks dense, seems quiet, looks like _sby_ wants\n> to go, looks like _sby_ won't eat\n\nThe result of this is a na-adjective meaning \"looks ...\" or \"seems ...\". For\naction and state-change verbs, it can also meen \"about to ...\" or \"looks like\n_sby_ will ...\".\n\nBeing a na-adjective, this form can be used both in the 終止形 and 連体形 forms (and\nnegative forms etc.),\n\n> 美味しそうなケーキ a delicious-looking cake \n> このケーキは美味しそうだ this cake looks declicious\n>\n> 死にそうな人 a person (looking like he's) about to die \n> 彼は死にそうだ (he looks like) he's about to die", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-21T01:35:32.513", "id": "4745", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-21T02:12:56.430", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4743", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]