Datasets:

---

p1atdev

/

japanese-stackexchange

like 3

[ { "body": "As a generic you can't go wrong with こんにちは. For example on Facebook or twitter\nI see posts by companies often that start with こんにちは. It depends on the\ncontext, of course, so if there's a situation where time of day is just\nunderstood then you can use that greeting. Or you can give a twist to it and\nstart with ハロー！", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-19T06:06:02.823", "id": "8157", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-19T06:06:02.823", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "8156", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 }, { "body": "Greetings on the internet are largely the same as those that would be done on\nthe phone or in person.\n\n> こんにちは with be fine for a friend etc. \n> お疲れ様です would be fine for a work colleague \n> はじめまして for someone you are meeting of the first time. \n> うっす is even acceptable for very casual situations.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-19T06:09:54.963", "id": "8158", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-06T02:13:16.893", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-06T02:13:16.893", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "1805", "parent_id": "8156", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 }, { "body": "I have seen some youtube videos that consistently begin with 「今日は今晩は」.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-19T20:03:48.050", "id": "8170", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-19T20:03:48.050", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1695", "parent_id": "8156", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I've seen a few bloggers start with this generic combination of all three\nstandard greetings:\n\n> おはよう、こんにちは、こんばんは。いつみてるか分からないから、あいさつぜんぶ。", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-20T02:15:30.830", "id": "8172", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-20T02:15:30.830", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "706", "parent_id": "8156", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "To be independent of the time of day (though こんにちは would generally be fine in\ninternet conversations), another greeting you could use is\n\n> お元気ですか？ロドリゴです。\n\nwhich is equivalent to \"how are you guys doing? This is Rodrigo.\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-20T07:08:28.247", "id": "8174", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-20T07:08:28.247", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1692", "parent_id": "8156", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "A good reference for you would be a Japanese podcast.\n\nEvery Japanese greeting with new people, whether business, audience or casual\nencounter, involves,\n\n 1. Salutation Ex: こんにちわ、おはようございますetc.\n\n 2. Self introduction, where you belong, your connection to the group or what you do. Ex: ＡＢＣサイト中国語担当の田中と申します。宜しくお願いします。\n\nCan you be more specific? Keep in mind, for every situation or season, there's\na set routine Japanese people do things. Context is king in speaking Japanese.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-22T02:39:57.083", "id": "8185", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-22T02:39:57.083", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1808", "parent_id": "8156", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "Everything depends on the audience.\n\nIn Japanese there are two distinct types of speech:\n\n- **Formal speech** , to be used with strangers, people older than you and family members you do not know well.\n\n- **Informal speech** , to be used with close friends, family members and those who are the same age or younger than you. \n\nSource: <http://www.japanesepod101.com/2011/01/03/absolute-beginner-1-say-\nhello-in-japanese-no-matter-what-the-time-of-day/>\n\nIn a blog or video you might want to break the ice with the reader/viewer and\nmight adopt an informal tone so おはようございます will be おはよう and so...", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2016-03-22T05:58:37.620", "id": "33044", "last_activity_date": "2016-03-22T05:58:37.620", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "13936", "parent_id": "8156", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "I can't comment yet, but agree on just using こんにちは.\n\nThat's the simplest one, and you see it a lot in written form. On videos or\npodcasts, it's a bit more common for people to get more creative with the\ngreeting.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2016-03-22T16:17:19.303", "id": "33060", "last_activity_date": "2016-03-22T16:17:19.303", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "13942", "parent_id": "8156", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "I would try:\n\n> イギリス生まれのカナダ人\n\nIt's a bit longer, but should be clear that you were born in England but are\nCanadian (if this is the case).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-19T17:13:31.900", "id": "8166", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-19T17:13:31.900", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1804", "parent_id": "8159", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "I'd say the best way is\n\n> イギリス系カナダ人\n\nif your nationality is Canadian but you are of British descent. Using の in\nbetween is okay and perfectly makes sense, but in many cases it will lead to\nan excessive use of の. For example, if you are an British Canadian engineer,\nthen\n\n> イギリス系のカナダ人のエンジニア\n\nsounds a bit awkward but\n\n> イギリス系カナダ人のエンジニア\n\nis pretty much perfect.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-19T17:51:26.307", "id": "8168", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-19T17:51:26.307", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1692", "parent_id": "8159", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "You can also use っけ with です・ます, as in\n\n> そうでしたっけ\n\nIf you want to avoid っけ for its familiarity (as when talking with your boss),\nI would use よね instead of っけ, which can also be used in conjunction with both\nthe です・ます forms and the \"dictionary\" forms, e.g.\n\n> そうでしたよね \n> そうだったよね\n\nThere are also (の)か, かな or かね, which can be used in a similar way.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-19T10:31:20.507", "id": "8164", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-19T10:31:20.507", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "8163", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "The original question basically comes down to finding an \"honorific\" way (yes,\nthat dreaded 敬語 thing) of saying だっけ？ or でしたっけ？\n\nI would say a good and polite alternative would be to replace those\nexpressions with でしょうか？ To say\n\n> テストは次の月曜日{げつようび}だっけ？\n\nyou say\n\n> テストは次の月曜日でしょうか？\n\nOf course depending on what comes before だっけ and also to whom you are talking,\nthe politer expressions would take slightly different forms. My example above\nis not the politest but is generally good enough to sound not rude.\n\nEdit after the OP added a few more examples:\n\nI see what you mean. Your understanding of different nuances for all those\nexample cases is correct (mostly in line with mine, that is... and as you\nabundantly know those nuances can change slightly in different contexts and\nfor different people). As I see, you are trying to find an equivalent of っけ\nwhen used to remember something and doing so by directing a question to\nsomeone else.\n\nWhile I still think my answer above would be \"safe\" (since it is a 敬語\nexpression, though not the most 丁寧 one) and can achieve the same thing, I\nthink the reason why you may be having harder time (as I have browsing\nGoogle先生) looking for an equivalent of っけ is that, within the social context\nin which accurate use of 敬語 is very important, it might be that asking a petty\nquestion for the purpose of getting a simple confirmation from someone above\nyou in status could even be considered somewhat indecent already.\n\nAm I over-thinking? Perhaps, and obviously in daily communication it is your\nintention and mutual respect that really matters, less your 敬語 word usage\n(reason why even でしたっけ can be fine in some contexts), but there's a reason why\nthe politest form of 敬語 often demands you to explicitly express appreciation\nfor the time and effort on the part of superordinate.\n\nSo in such a situation, I could even go like\n\n> よろしければお伺{うかが}いしたいのですが、テストは次の月曜日と記憶{きおく}しております。ご確認{かくにん}いただけますか？\n\nThis is certainly much politer, but you kind of feel the excessive politeness\nin view of the insignificance of the question itself. Or just even\n\n> ご確認させて頂{いただ}きたいのですが、テストは次の月曜日でしょうか？\n\nwould be okay.\n\nIn both cases, the major difference is the explicit concern for the\ninconvenience that you asking question could cause. Such an expression for\nthat concern is often enough.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-20T06:50:06.353", "id": "8173", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-20T18:20:25.603", "last_edit_date": "2012-10-20T18:20:25.603", "last_editor_user_id": "1692", "owner_user_id": "1692", "parent_id": "8163", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

[ { "body": "> \"そのぼうし[の, を, か, ね] ください\"\n>\n> well for example the customers line of \"excuse me, that shirt ___ _ please,\n> I'm hazy on which participle to put there.\n\nDon't translate word-for-word. Better yet, try not to translate _at all_ , as\nfar as is possible. Japanese word order is very different to English word\norder, and the functions of the words differ too - some things that are verbs\nin English are adjectives in Japanese, and so on. Not to mention that English\ndoesn't _have_ case particles, so translating into English to figure out which\nparticle to use is a really strange idea! Trust me - understand the Japanese\nsentences as they are and you will save yourself huge headaches later.\n\nI'll explain this one in detail. ください can indeed mean \"please\". This is the\nreason you got tied up a little bit - the English word \"please\" isn't\nobviously any word that can take a noun _at all_. So how are you supposed to\nknow which particle it's correct to attach to the noun that \"please\" takes,\nwhen \"please\" doesn't take a noun?! Of course, the answer is simply that\nEnglish and Japanese are incredibly different things, and ください and \"please\"\nare incredibly different things. They just happen to be good translations of\neach other sometimes.\n\nRamble aside. You should examine the Japanese - the whole reason it comes to\nbe translated as \"please\" is that it is _actually_ the imperative form of\nくださる, meaning \"to give\" (usually \"to me\"; hence it can also mean \"do (for\nme)\"; and it's a so-called 'humble' word, so it has polite connotations). So,\nyour translation should start \"Give me...\". Is it now obvious that そのぼうし\n(\"that hat\") is the direct object of your sentence? The correct particle is を.\n\n> \"たけしさん [か, の, よ, or no particle] せんもんはれきしです\"\n\nTakeshi-san ... specialty: history.\n\nThis sentence is probably intended to mean \"Takeshi-san's specialty is\nhistory\". That is, the noun \"Takeshi-san\" is modifying \"history\" - we would\nnormally think of this in English as a _possessive_. The Japanese particle\nthat is going to do the job is の.\n\nAs a few rules of thumb: よ and ね will usually be found at the end of a\nsentence, and so will か (when it's a question marker); you don't usually find\ntwo nouns next two each other without a particle joining them (though you do\nin long names of organisations and so on); and a noun will normally need\nparticles like を, で, に if it is somehow an object of a verb (unless that verb\nis する, and except in very casual speech). But don't let any of this think\nyou're off the hook - learn it properly, or it will plague you for as long as\nyou're learning Japanese!", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-21T00:33:23.090", "id": "8179", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-21T00:33:23.090", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1699", "parent_id": "8171", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Here is my guess, but please forgive me if it contains mistakes:\n\n> X: What are you doing right now?\n>\n> Y: I'm doing the flower arrangements for tonight.\n>\n> X: 今、何してんの？\n>\n> Y: 今晩のため、生け花をしています。\n\nBut if you are interested in a more ambiguous meaning:\n\n> Y: I'm doing flower arrangements for tonight.\n>\n> (could mean practicing them for later tonight or actually doing them for\n> tonight)\n>\n> Y: 今晩の生け花をしています。\n\nEdit: I had suggested 今晩の生け花をしておきます as a possible translation, but upon\nhearing other opinions, I think this would mean \"I will do the Ikebana\narrangement for tonight.\" For further examples of ~ておきます see:\n<http://j-learning.com/diapo//L30diapo.pdf>\n\nIn your quoted example, します can mean \"practice,\" but does not explicitly mean\nthis. 生け花をします can also mean \"to do Ikebana flower arranging.\" For a more\nexplicit expression of practice, one can use 練習.\n\nAs per Taro Sato's example:\n\n> 今夜の生け花の練習をしています。\n>\n> I am practicing Ikebana for tonight.", "comment_count": 14, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-20T19:48:00.600", "id": "8178", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-20T22:36:38.003", "last_edit_date": "2012-10-20T22:36:38.003", "last_editor_user_id": "706", "owner_user_id": "706", "parent_id": "8177", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "There is a difference between doing the flower arrangements for an event and\npractising the art of 生け花 which is also known as 華道. Based on the the\nwikipedia definition (below) I suspect that referring to making the flower\narrangements for a concert/event/room/church (or even the Chelsea flower show)\nas 生け花 is akin to describing a visit to Buckingham Palace for tea with the\nQueen as 茶道 (the tea ceremony).\n\nWhen arranging flowers as a decoration but not practicing 生け花 the more correct\nexpression is probably:\n\n> テーブルに花を飾る , To adorn/decorate a table with flowers\n\nWhen referring to the flower arrangements in say a church or a room the\ncorrect expression for the flower arrangements is 花の装飾\n\nBased on the the following sentences in Space ALC:\n\n> しかし、花を飾るのはすべて独学です。\n>\n> However, his flower arranging was completely self-taught.\n>\n> 私はもっとクリエイティブな花の装飾をやりたかったんです。\n>\n> I wanted to do more flower arranging that required more creativity.\n\nThere are a number of ways of saying \"I am now doing the flower arrangemnents\nfor tonight.\" depending on the context and scale of the operation but if this\nis a small event (say a table at a party) then the following would suffice:\n\n> 今、今夜の花の装飾をしています。 \"I am now doing the flower arrangemnents for tonight.\"\n\nIf you are practicing Ikebana for some event (possibly a demonstration) then\nthe following would be appropriate:\n\n> 今夜の生け花の練習をしています。 I am practicing Ikebana for tonight.\n\n**Definition in wikipedia:**\n\n> More than simply putting flowers in a container, ikebana is a disciplined\n> art form in which nature and humanity are brought together. Contrary to the\n> idea of floral arrangement as a collection of particolored or multicolored\n> arrangement of blooms, ikebana often emphasizes other areas of the plant,\n> such as its stems and leaves, and draws emphasis toward shape, line, form.\n> Though ikebana is a creative expression, it has certain rules governing its\n> form. The artist's intention behind each arrangement is shown through a\n> piece's color combinations, natural shapes, graceful lines, and the usually\n> implied meaning of the arrangement.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-22T02:00:23.310", "id": "8184", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-22T02:00:23.310", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "8177", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "髪 is possibly related to 上 (but not 神, see Dono's comment below), something\nthat is at the top. 髪, then, refers to the head (i.e. top of the body), so\nthat 髪の毛 is the hair on your head. Similarly, 腕の毛 would be the hair on your\narms, 脚の毛 the hair on your legs.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-21T12:28:46.357", "id": "8181", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-21T22:07:10.387", "last_edit_date": "2012-10-21T22:07:10.387", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "8180", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "I haven't personally seen or heard ぬくい as often, though I know it is used\noccasionally. That's probably because it's a dialect, likely from the western\npart of Japan (according to [this\nentry](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E5%BE%AE%E6%B8%A9%E3%81%84)).\n\nSince ぬるい and ぬくい are just different ways of pronouncing 温い and 微温い, I think\nit doesn't really make sense to put all four in order. Perhaps it is the\ndifference between 温い and 微温い you wish to know.\n\nMy impression by just looking at these 漢字 is that the latter, 微温い, means less\nwarm than 温い, since the character 微 signifies that there is only a little\namount of something (i.e., warmth in this case).\n\nAs for the difference in sounds, I cannot say for sure for ぬくい since I'm not\nfrom the region in which the dialect is prevalent, ぬるい certainly is used to\nmean \"not as warm as desired.\" However, it is probably right that ぬくい is used\nin a more \"positive\" manner. For example, ぬくぬく is an expression that can be\nused to describe the state of feeling pleasant warmth, being worry-free, etc.,\nso the connotation in general is positive (although ぬくぬくと育つ can mean the kid\nhas been raised spoiled, so it is used like that as well).", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-21T19:32:01.270", "id": "8183", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-21T19:49:44.170", "last_edit_date": "2012-10-21T19:49:44.170", "last_editor_user_id": "1692", "owner_user_id": "1692", "parent_id": "8182", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "> is there an \"official\" position on 温い, 微温い, ぬくい and ぬるい?\n\n\"Official\" according to whom? If you mean according to the standard dialect.\nぬくい is perfectly fine 標準語 _although_ it is much more commonly used in other\nparts of Japan, which is why some people think it is 方言. Now, in my experience\nぬるい is used to be negative, that something is not warm enough, so I don't\nthink you can use it to mean just \"warm\". I also hear ぬくとい sometimes instead\nof ぬくい.\n\n> Does \"微温い\" have an alternative reading (e.g. that Anthy would map to 微温い)?\n\nBoth are generally written in hiragana and the 漢字 forms are not as common. 微温い\nand 温い can be read as ぬるい or ぬくい, although ぬくい is not as commonly used as ぬるい,\nso most of the time it should be read as ぬるい unless otherwise specified. If\n微温い is ever read as ぬくい, there will probably be ruby text showing you since it\nwould be an irregular reading. Also, you may see 微温い used instead of 温い in\nnovels, etc. because the characters 微温 signify that it is not very warm.\n\n**Side Note**\n\nI have found may mistakes in WWWJDIC. I suggest using a better dictionary like\n広辞苑, etc.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-22T02:56:02.640", "id": "8186", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-22T03:22:11.283", "last_edit_date": "2012-10-22T03:22:11.283", "last_editor_user_id": "1217", "owner_user_id": "1217", "parent_id": "8182", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "[One of the dictionary entries the OP\ncited](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/170059/m0u/) elaborates on the\ndifference:\n\n>\n> [用法]ねじる・[用法]ひねる――「体をねじる（ひねる）」「水道の栓をねじる（ひねる）」など、ひねって回すの意では相通じて用いられる。◇力を入れて回すときは「ねじる」、指先で軽く回すようなときは「ひねる」と使い分けることがある。「びんのふたをねじって開ける」「スイッチをひねる」◇「転んだはずみに足首をひねって痛めた」「腰をひねって医者にかかる」などでは「ねじる」を用いない。◇「ひねる」の方が意味の範囲が広い。「頭をひねる」「首をひねる」「俳句をひねる」「強敵にあっさりひねられた」などの使い方は「ねじる」にはない。◇類似の語「よじる」も「腹をよじって笑う」など、使い方は限られている。\n\nIn short, (1) they both mean the same when used for \"twisting\" something; (2)\nIf the twisting is done with force, ねじる can be more suitable over ひねる; (3) In\nsome cases only ひねる is used, e.g., 足首をひねる, 腰をひねる; (4) ひねる has a wider variety\nof meaning, e.g., 俳句をひねる (I create a haiku poem); (5) A similar word よじる sees\neven more limited usage, e.g., 腹をよじって笑う.\n\nSo basically your understanding is fine.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-22T18:21:41.317", "id": "8202", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-22T18:21:41.317", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1692", "parent_id": "8187", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "ひねる is to twist, ねじる is to twist (into a coil-like, or with the coil-like\nshape as an implicit objective). And I guess the amount of strength used is\nimplied because generally more force is required to twist it into a coil\nshape.\n\nThe (poorly drawn) picture represents my interpretation of the difference:\n\n", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-23T04:38:23.743", "id": "8212", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-23T04:38:23.743", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "542", "parent_id": "8187", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "I can't be sure, but I would estimate that this is preserving the distinction\nbetween the noun form and verb forms of the word. They operate in pretty\nisolated spaces in the Japanese language (I can't speak toward their sino\nroots).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-09T06:23:54.543", "id": "9390", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-09T06:23:54.543", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1769", "parent_id": "8188", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "Ultimately the reason is the remnants of verbal morphology in Old Chinese.\n(Recently every time I post on japanese.SE it seems to be about Old\nChinese...) Modern Chinese is a very low-morphology language, but\nreconstructed Old Chinese had some derivational morphology which is\nresponsible for noun/verb pairs with different readings on the same character\n(for instance, 長 has a verbal reading _zhang3_ and an adjectival reading\n_chang2_ ).\n\nMost reconstructions of Old Chinese posit a morpheme *-s which, among its\nfunctions, nominalises a verb. Just as 塞 has the two readings サイ and ソク in\nJapanese, it has two readings _coi3_ and _sak1_ in Cantonese (I use Cantonese\nbecause, unlike Mandarin, it preserves the syllable final _-k_ which was still\npresent at the time the reading was borrowed into Japanese).\n\n[Baxter's reconstruction](http://crlao.ehess.fr/docannexe.php?id=1200) of the\nverb 塞 is * _s?ək_ , and the nominalised form (understood as _a built up\nthing_ ) with the nominalising suffix is * _s?ək-s_. Middle Chinese sound\nchanges caused the verb to retain its coda, while in the form with the suffix,\nthe coda became a glide. As such, when these were borrowed into Japanese, they\nalready existed as a noun/verb pair differing in the coda.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-09T12:21:41.520", "id": "9395", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-09T12:21:41.520", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "816", "parent_id": "8188", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "My wife also has somewhat specialized characters for her maiden name but she\nhas never objected to the use of standard characters (jouyou kanji) and, as\nlong as it is typical assumption (\"abbreviation\", generalisation\") then I\nthink most are quite prepared to accept it.\n\nThe sensitive area is when names get recorded in public datebases for\nwealthfare records. There was big problem several years ago when (if I\nremember correctly) it became apparant that peoples records for pensions etc\nhad been lost because the inputters had been assuming the wrong readings.\nSeveral colleagues of mine made a point of obtaining their orange\nkokuminnenkin book and going to the ward office to ensure their records were\ncomplete.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-22T09:34:53.447", "id": "8192", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-22T09:34:53.447", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "8189", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "This site about [wedding manners](http://wedding-ceremony-\nmanner.org/weddingceremony4/post-35.html) specifically says it _is_ rude to\nmistake the characters of people's names.\n\n> 名前を書く際は、旧字体、人名外字などを間違えて失礼とならないように何度もチェックしてください。\n\nAlso, if you are willing to accept this as evidence:\n[人名外字1500V4](http://www.est.co.jp/fe/jinmei/)\n\nThis is a program and collection of fonts specifically for rare/old kanji\nnames. It costs ￥50000. I don't think they would be able to charge that if no\none thought it mattered.\n\nAlso, as I said in my comment to Tim's answer\n\n> When I worked in Kochi City Hall I saw somebody using a font editor to\n> modify 告 into the character known as つちよし (吉 in which the 士 is 土). I think\n> it was going to be printed on an invitation or something like that so they\n> went through the trouble of manually editing the font.\n\nHowever, all the information I could find was about weddings, funerals, and\ninvitations to formal events. So, it seems to me that in a general, everyday\ncontext 常用漢字 have been acceptable in informal correspondence. But as phones\nand other devices become able to display more characters, this attitude may\nchange.\n\nThat leaves business correspondence. If I had to send an email to someone I\nknew on a business level only, I would be sure to write their name with the\ncorrect character. Where that is not technologically possible, I would use a\ncharacter that is displayable and ask them about it later.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-27T13:55:18.360", "id": "8258", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-27T14:42:10.003", "last_edit_date": "2012-10-27T14:42:10.003", "last_editor_user_id": "1761", "owner_user_id": "1761", "parent_id": "8189", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "丁寧 (ていねい ) is an \"na-adjective/adverb\" with two meanings, (1) polite (as you\nknow) and (2) careful or conscientous.\n\nThe second meaning can apply to the way something is made, prepared or\nwrapped. I imagine your friend was referring to the way the ramen was made but\nfor food (in general) there could be situations when any one of those three\ncould apply.\n\nHowever, these two meanings shouldn't be considered to be completely\nunrelated. The following examples illustrate how when you are being polite,\nyou are paying close attention to details to make special consideration for\nsomebody, etc.\n\n> **1\\. Polite/courteous sense 〔礼儀正しいこと／丁重で親切なこと〕**\n>\n> 丁寧な口のきき方をする｜He has a polite manner of speaking.\n>\n> 彼は丁寧に名刺を受け取った｜He took my card courteously.\n>\n> 心のこもったものの言い方ではないが，少なくとも丁寧だ｜\n>\n> There is no warmth in his manner of speaking, but he is at least civil.\n>\n> 丁寧にさよならを言って出て行った｜Saying good-bye politely, he went out.\n>\n> **2 Careful, conscientious sense〔注意深い，念入りな〕**\n>\n> 人形を丁寧に紙に包んだ｜She carefully wrapped the doll in paper.\n>\n> 彼は丁寧に説明してくれた｜He gave me a detailed explanation of it.\n>\n> 彼は何事も丁寧にする｜He is conscientious in everything.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-22T09:27:24.597", "id": "8191", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-22T11:10:18.837", "last_edit_date": "2012-10-22T11:10:18.837", "last_editor_user_id": "1556", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "8190", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "In this case 丁寧 means taking care, carefully and can be with love.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-22T10:41:49.213", "id": "8193", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-22T10:41:49.213", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1007", "parent_id": "8190", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "I heard this expression once again, from another group of Japanese people. \nThey were discussing passionately which ramen shop they should head to. \nI asked them the definition of 丁寧なラーメン and they gave me a full definition:\n\nRamen that can be called 丁寧 are さっぱり, either 醤油 or 塩 (豚骨 can never be 丁寧). \nThey are usually 細麺 and in served in small quantity (上品).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-07-01T12:49:27.157", "id": "12265", "last_activity_date": "2013-07-01T12:49:27.157", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "107", "parent_id": "8190", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "This is basically conjecture on my part as I don't have an authoritative\nanswer, but from what I've observed, saying を見られる tends to place more emphasis\non the seeing part whereas が見られる tends to emphasize the thing being seen,\nhowever they may be virtually interchangeable. Despite the rules on using を\nwith potential verbs it's still something that happens pretty regularly. You\nalso need to be careful not to mix up the potential and passive forms of 見られる,\nas 手紙（など）を見られた is a grammatical sentence.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-22T12:49:14.707", "id": "8195", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-22T12:49:14.707", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "8194", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "In this case you CAN use ため depending on the grammar that you use with it.\nSpecifically you could say 楽しみのため, or \"for the purpose of fun,\" or you could\nsay 遊びで, meaning just to have fun (rather than out of obligation). So a full\nsentence would be like 子供の時楽しみのために本を読みましたか？\n\nAs for the second example you gave, スパに行く食べ物を買う means that you will buy food\nthat goes to the spa. スーパーに行って食べ物を買う, using the te form, will express the idea\nof going to the store and buying food, but NOT going to the store for the\npurpose of buying food. In that case you would also use ために, as in\n食べ物を買うためにスーパーに行った。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-22T14:18:43.533", "id": "8198", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-22T14:18:43.533", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "8196", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "To say \"As a child, Did you/I read books for fun\" I would use\n\n> 子供の時、趣味で読書をしていましたか？\n\n〜で is simpler and the sentence flows better than 〜のために, which can be used to\nmean the same thing. However, when I say\n\n> 子供の時、趣味のために読書をしていましたか？\n\nactually sounds a bit awkward, since 〜のために (or ため in general) literally\ntranslates to \"for\" but it has a tiny bit of connotation to indicate whatever\nis done is a requirement, or something purposefully done. The reason why the\nspecific example above sound a bit awkward to me is that your hobby is not\nnecessarily something you have to do; you naturally do it out of enjoyment. So\nusing 〜のため to indicate your purpose, I think, has an effect of emphasizing\nyour will to do that thing.\n\nIf instead the sentence is\n\n> 昨日、仕事のために読書をしていましたか？\n\nthen the awkwardness goes away, since the reading was a requirement for the\njob, something needed to be done by will.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-22T20:32:15.623", "id": "8203", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-22T20:32:15.623", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1692", "parent_id": "8196", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "Your initial Japanese sentence doesn't make sense.\n\nAnyway, for \"before\" or \"used too\", you can use `昔【むかし】` (long ago), `昔々` (if\nyou really want to emphasize that it was long ago). Or you can simply say\n`前（は）` or `以前（は)` for a more \"recent\" period of before.\n\n> 以前はこのバンドが好きじゃなかった（けど）。\n\nYou could also use `かつて` to mean \"at one time/formerly\", but I'm not too\nfamiliar with its syntax. I think like\n\n> かつての好きじゃないバンド", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-22T14:30:08.607", "id": "8200", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-22T22:49:39.673", "last_edit_date": "2012-10-22T22:49:39.673", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "8197", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "> このごろまで、このバンドは好きではありませんでした. or\n>\n> このごろまで、このバンド（が）好きじゃなかった|\n>\n> I did not like this band until recently.\n\nYou can replace このごろまで with 前は (before) but somehow this feels more natural.\n\n(Given the Japanese predilection for double negatives, there may well be an\nequivalent way of saying \"I did not used to\" and still convey the same meaning\nas \"I didn't [like___] before but now...\" but you might find the parallel\nconstruction is used by people of a different age/time or the equivalent\nexpression used by the age/group you have in mind uses completely different\ngrammar.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-22T14:35:55.303", "id": "8201", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-22T14:35:55.303", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "8197", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I've seen 元【もと】に used in this manner before. It's usually used in contexts\nalong the lines of \"originally\" or when talking about how things used to be.\nFor example:\n\n> 大学の頃、*元に*医学を専攻したかった(orを専門にしたかった)けど、１年後経営学に変更した。 \"When I was in college I\n> _originally_ wanted to study medicine, but after 1 year I switched to\n> business management.\"", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-14T05:49:34.570", "id": "15409", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-14T06:44:09.043", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-14T06:44:09.043", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4914", "parent_id": "8197", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "Given that Japanese natives have commented without mentioning it, perhaps I'm\nwrong, but it seems like そもそも would make sense.\n\nTrying to estimate the context using your English example, eventually you came\nto like the band, but originally you did not like it, correct? So, そもそも would\nsee usage like:\n\nそもそもこのバンドあまり好きじゃなかったけど。。。\n\nor maybe\n\nそもそもはじめから好きではありませんでした。\n\nAt any rate, I think the lesson from the disparate answers/discussion is that\n\"it's complicated to express this concept, and depends on the situation and\ncontext.\" :D", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-14T08:31:23.347", "id": "15410", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-14T08:39:12.233", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-14T08:39:12.233", "last_editor_user_id": "271", "owner_user_id": "271", "parent_id": "8197", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "\"I didn't used to like this band.\" = 「私は元々{もともと}このバンドが好{す}きではありませんでした。」 \n\"元々\" means \"from the beginning/Originally\" and the nuance of the sentence has\nsomething negative against the band **still now**.\n\n\"Before, I didn't like this band. \" =「以前{いぜん}、私はこのバンドが好{す}きではありませんでした。」 \nOn the contrary, this sentence describes his/her evaluation of the band in the\npast time. However, he/she is changing his/her mind and get to like the band\nnow. The person say the following sentence like 「以前、私はこのバンドが好きではありませんでした。\n**でも、今はとても好きになりました。** 」. So, the sentence may be a leading line (sentence)\nthat the person have turned into positive or different point of view to the\nband at present.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2018-05-08T07:47:49.183", "id": "58450", "last_activity_date": "2018-05-08T07:47:49.183", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "29836", "parent_id": "8197", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "This is the kind of expression for which I would rather phrase with \"at first\"\nsuch as \"At first, I didn't like this band,\" for which you'd use **最初**.\nConsider this construction:\n\n> 最初はこのバンドはあまり好きじゃなかった（けど、でも今好きです。） \n> At first, I didn't like this band (but now I do).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2018-06-07T17:19:23.097", "id": "59297", "last_activity_date": "2018-06-07T17:19:23.097", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "21684", "parent_id": "8197", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "JSL comes to the rescue here. The below is quoted directly from chapter 29A of\n_Japanese: The Spoken Language, Part 3_ (emphasis and rewriting ローマ字 into\nJapanese script is my own):\n\n> A /predicate + mono da/ denotes regularly recurring activities and states.\n>\n> ...\n>\n> When the predicate preceding mono（もの）is perfective, the pattern describes an\n> activity or state that used to occur on a regular basis. Thus:\n>\n> 子供の時は、お菓子をよく食べたものです。'When I was a child, I **used to** eat lots of sweets.'\n>\n> 京都にいた時には、お寺や神社を見に行ったものです。'When I was in Kyoto, I **used to** go to see the\n> temples and shrines.'\n>\n> **前は、魚が嫌いだったものですが、ここへ来てからは、好きになってきました。 'In the past I used to dislike fish,\n> but since coming here, I've come to like it.'**\n\nin brief: modify もの with the perfective.\n\nAlso, JSL is still underappreciated as a textbook series.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2018-06-08T14:36:59.590", "id": "59314", "last_activity_date": "2018-06-08T15:11:36.417", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "27987", "parent_id": "8197", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "I am going to assume OP isn't asking for direct translation but is asking for\nways to say\n\n> Previously didn't like the band (but like them now)\n\n * 前はそのバンドが好きじゃなかった\n * 以前はそのバンドがすきじゃなかった\n * もともとはそのバンドが好きじゃなかった\n * むかしはそのバンドが好きじゃなかった\n\nA bit more complex:\n\n * 最初からそのバンドが好きだった分けではない\n * そのバンドが好きじゃなかった時期があった\n * そのバンドが好きになったのはあとからだ。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2018-06-13T07:32:39.483", "id": "59410", "last_activity_date": "2018-06-13T07:32:39.483", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "18608", "parent_id": "8197", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "This may be as much pedagogy as Japanese, but here we go, trying to answer\nyour points in turn.\n\n * 君・ちゃん is the best allrounder choice. Surname is not essential, even when you are on surname basis (as is very likely) with the parents, who you will address with さん. I personally only like to use [君]{きみ} with children I know pretty well already. You could either ask the parents or the child for their (first) name, remember it and use it with 君・ちゃん. If that is not an option, I would revert to あなた first.\n * You can use plain form +(の)です to be both understood by the child and avoid being impolite, as appropriate. I see no harm in being a good example by using proper, polite Japanese (です・ます forms) with children you hardly know, especially when you are talking about their parents. Commands I would phrase as ～てくれる? (with rising intonation), because you are in no good position to give commands (especially when the parents are around); ～て might be appropriate as well, but ～なさい is best reserved for parents.\n * When trying to be polite, parents should definitely be お父さん et al. If the child calls his dad パパ, using the same word like a name might work as well, though.\n * When talking to the child, everyone gives with あげる and everyone gets with くれる. Again, やる is best reserved for parents.\n * I would start addressing _girls_ with さん as early as third grade (9 years), but this really depends on how well you know them. 君 can be used much longer; maybe さん for sixth grade (12 years old) _boys_ would sound natural to me.\n * When talking to the children, I would use 僕. Too many foreigners use 私 when they should use 僕, and the children know it and they won't forgive you.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-22T22:00:04.757", "id": "8205", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-22T22:05:13.937", "last_edit_date": "2012-10-22T22:05:13.937", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "8204", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "I'm only writing this as an answer because I don't have enough reputation\npoints to write comments.\n\nI'm not a native Japanese speaker but I've been living in Japan for 9 years.\nThere's no 100% objective answer to your questions. That said, I agree with\npretty much all of @user1205935's answer.\n\nThe only item I'd expand is the one about さん/ちゃん/くん. There's no cuttoff point\nfor the usage of ちゃん and くん based on age alone. It really depends on relative\nage, status, context and familiarity. Examples:\n\n * I was a grad student in Japan, and my advisor (and other professors in the same lab) would address male students with -くん, not -さん. \n * If I were to address a friend's 10-year-old daughter, I'd probably use -ちゃん, as -さん sounds way too formal. On the other hand, if I've just met a boy or girl of that age at the go parlor, I'd use -さん.\n * Young adult women will often address their close female friends of the same age or younger using -ちゃん. \n\nThe part about using ～てくれる instead of ～なさい is on the spot (assuming you're not\na teacher), but note you can also use ください, and can soften it as くださいね if you\nwant.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-31T13:11:17.143", "id": "8286", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-31T13:11:17.143", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1854", "parent_id": "8204", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "I've listed up some forms here for you.\n\n```\n\n 食べませんか？　- Won't you eat (with me) [as in an invitation]\n 食べようか - Shall we eat\n 食べるのだろうか　- I don't think I have ever heard this said \n but I guess it would be equivalent to the the below.\n 食べようかな - I wonder if I will eat\n \n```", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-23T01:03:16.107", "id": "8207", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-23T01:03:16.107", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1805", "parent_id": "8206", "post_type": "answer", "score": -1 }, { "body": "There are many ways to make requests/suggestions in Japanese, but (some of)\nthe prototypical ones would be:\n\n1 Requests (in order of increasing politeness/formality):\n\n> 食べてもらえる？ \n> 食べてもらえますか？ \n> 食べていただけます(でしょう)か？\n\nOf course you could just say 食べてください, which would be the polite way to express\nan imperative.\n\n2 Suggestions (in order of increasing politeness/formality):\n\n> 食べたらどう？ \n> 食べたらどうですか？ \n> 食べたらいかがでしょうか？\n\nbut I would be careful about using these when it's really not a suggestion,\nbut a request that I'm making, since that could sound sarcastic and rude.", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-23T10:14:58.423", "id": "8213", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-23T10:14:58.423", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "8206", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "> Is it common to say \"食べるのだろうか？\".\n\nIt sounds to me like: \n\"I wonder if (someone) is going to eat (something)\"/ \n\"Is (someone) going to eat (something)?\" or \n\"I wonder if (someone) regularly eats (something)\"/ \n\"Does (someone) regularly eat (something)?\" \n食べるんだろうか / 食べるのかな would sound more casual. \n\n> You could also say \"食べようか？\". First off, is that conjugating it right;\n> second, is that something you would say; finally, how is it different from\n> -の+だろう?\n\n 1. Yes. \n\n 2. Yes, you would say this to mean \"Let's eat, shall we?\" or \"Shall I eat?\" depending on the context. \n\n 3. Hmm... I think だろう is like \"I think ~~ will ~~\" and よう is like \"I'm going to~/intend to do~\" or \"Let's~\". \n\n> \"Would you...?\" or \"Why don't you..?\"\n\nFor requests I would say:\n\n> 食べてくれる？(casual) \n> 食べてくれますか？(polite) \n> 召し上がっていただけます？(politer) etc. \n>\n\nFor suggestions I would say:\n\n> 食べたら？/ 食べれば？(very casual) \n> 食べない？(casual) \n> 食べません(か)？(polite) \n> 召し上がりません(か)？(politer) etc. \n>", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-12T08:51:11.000", "id": "14466", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-12T08:51:11.000", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "8206", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Yup. You hear correctly\n[おまる](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/index/%E3%81%8A%E3%81%BE%E3%82%8B/)\n(Omaru) means potty (baby toilet) or bedpan.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-23T02:30:55.837", "id": "8209", "last_activity_date": "2016-11-24T04:53:09.263", "last_edit_date": "2016-11-24T04:53:09.263", "last_editor_user_id": "11104", "owner_user_id": "1805", "parent_id": "8208", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "Firstly, your name cannot be pronounced in Japanese. It would be approxiamated\nas \"omaru\". The -r- here will be very different than what you are likely used\ntoo, though.\n\nAs for the word omaru, yes, it does indeed mean a portable toilet used for\nbabies (and sickly people). If you read Japanese, you can read the definition\n[here](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/33018/m0u/%E3%81%8A%E3%81%BE%E3%82%8B/).\n\nAs explained in the definition, the verb mar-u meanings to excrete feces or\nurine.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-23T02:33:20.183", "id": "8210", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-23T02:33:20.183", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1141", "parent_id": "8208", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "If I might add a dissenting interpretation to the existing answers....I think\na minor change in pronunciation might alleviate your concern.\n\nNote that, in the other answers, your name is being converted to romanized\nJapanese as 'omaru.' The 'o' at the beginning of this pronunciation would be\nvery short and not accented.\n\nI live in the US, and the gents I've known named Omar have generally\npronounced their name with a bit of an accent on the 'O' at the beginning.\nPersonally, I would romanize this as 'oumaru,' where the 'u' really just\nindicates a slightly elongated 'long O' sound at the beginning.\n\nIf you find yourself at Google Translate again, you might try listening to the\ndifference in pronunciation between おまる (omaru) and おうまる (oumaru). (Note that\nthe difference is simply how quickly the 'o' sound is spoken.)\n\n'Oumaru' is the name of a city in Japan, I believe. And according to the\nJapanese/English dictionary I use, it is also seen as a surname in Japan.\n[oumaru defined on\njisho.org](http://jisho.org/words?jap=%E3%81%8A%E3%81%86%E3%81%BEru&eng=&dict=edict)\n\nTherefore, I'd suggest that, with a slight modification to how you pronounce\nyour name, you can diffuse any misinterpretations. ^-^\n\nAlso, in the interest of full disclosure, I'm probably one of the ~less~\nfluent people on this site. So if anyone strongly disagrees with what I say,\nI'd suggest you take their word over mine. (-.-);", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-23T03:36:43.187", "id": "8211", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-23T03:36:43.187", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1789", "parent_id": "8208", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "It's saying \"There are _even_ people who say...\" Since it's not really the\nnorm to think that spiders are a good thing, it's emphasizing that there _are_\nsome who do think so. が would work fine as well, but the も gives it the\nemphasis that even though this thing is unexpected or in the minority, there\nare some people who take that side.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-23T15:43:34.257", "id": "8215", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-23T15:43:34.257", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "8214", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "も is used instead of が to add the meaning of \"even\" or \"also.\" See for\ncomparison the following examples:\n\n> 日本ではクモを見ると良いことがあると言う人がいますよ\n>\n> In Japan, there are people who say that seeing a spider is a good thing.\n>\n> 日本ではクモを見ると良いことがあると言う人もいますよ\n>\n> In Japan, there are also people who say that seeing a spider is a good\n> thing.\n\nDepending on context, one can also translate も as \"even,\" as Istraci does:\n\n> In Japan, there are even people who say that seeing a spider is a good\n> thing.\n\nSo も introduces an element of comparison, implying that there are people who\nthink that seeing a spider may be a good thing, as well as those who think\nthat it is a bad thing. In natural colloquial English, perhaps one could drop\nthe \"even\" or \"also,\" as these seem somewhat stilted in the context of a\nconversation, and introduce a word like \"well\" instead:\n\n> 部屋でクモを見て、怖かった！\n>\n> 日本ではクモを見ると良いことがあると言う人もいますよ。\n>\n> I got scared because I saw a spider in my room!\n>\n> Well, in Japan there are people who say that seeing a spider is a good\n> thing.", "comment_count": 12, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-23T16:27:28.973", "id": "8217", "last_activity_date": "2018-05-22T02:25:01.667", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "706", "parent_id": "8214", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

[ { "body": "I think studying radicals is a good thing. However there are lists that are\nmore specifically geared towards Japanese then Chinese. If you use a number of\nsources, you can see commonalities between scholarly interpretations, and\nthese will help you get a firmer grasp of the concepts at hand. For instance,\nI think that unfortunately the names of radicals often differ in Japanese,\nChinese and English--they might have similar concepts but they will not be\ndirect, correlating translations.\n\nHere are some useful websites:\n\n<http://www.memrise.com/set/10005705/japanese-kanji-radicals/>\n\n<http://kanjidamage.com>\n\n<http://www.yookoso.com/pages/kanji.php>\n\n<http://www.kanjinetworks.com/index.cfm>\n\n<http://www.mahou.org/Kanji/>", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-23T16:58:33.867", "id": "8218", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-23T16:58:33.867", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "706", "parent_id": "8216", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "What is meant by a \"reliable translation\"? Let's look at 彳:\n\n 1. In Japanese, it is given the _nickname_ ぎょうにんべん. This is customarily translated to \"going man\". If you want a translation of these customary _nicknames_ , you can find them in the New Nelson dictionary.\n 2. But whoops--that's just a _nickname_! How about a _definition_? Well, that depends on what you mean:\n\n * Possibility A: What does the character mean _on its own_? My dictionary says it means 進み出る, \"to step forward\". That seems to fit with the \"radical step\" meaning on Wikipedia! But that's not terribly useful, because you're unlikely to ever come across 彳 as an independent character. For characters that _are_ used on their own, any good character dictionary should suffice.\n * Possibility B: What does the element mean _as part of another character_? Unfortunately, this is not reliably answerable for all characters; see [Is there an objective source of the origins of kanji?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/871/is-there-an-objective-source-of-the-origins-of-kanji) for details on why not. However, there are many good books on character etymology you might enjoy, such as Henshall's _A Guide to Remembering Japanese Characters_.\n\nWhere does that leave us? Personally, I'd say to learn the customary names for\ncommon radicals, and investigate character etymology when you find it helpful\nor interesting, on a character-by-character basis.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-23T17:55:52.827", "id": "8219", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-23T17:55:52.827", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:43.857", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "8216", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "My $0.02:\n\nI would not worry too much about trying to find a definitive list so much as\ntext/list that works for you. It might even be worth taking several lists and\ncherry picking the definition that you can remember most easily.\n\nI once tried to learn kanji via the radicals. After a while, for time it was\ntaking and the return obtained I decided I was better off just learning the\nkanji. The early kanji are often parts of larger kanji so you'll still be\nlearning by radicals but also real characters and words that you read and\nwrite for yourself.\n\nNot that there is anything wrong with learning the radicals if you feel it is\npaying off. But, once the returns diminish I would suggest you start looking\nfor your next approach. I'd be surprised if anyone really has learnt 1500 once\nfrom start to finish with one textbook/approach. It is a knowledge accumulated\nthrough many trying out all sorts of different ways.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-24T11:58:24.887", "id": "8226", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-24T13:09:27.037", "last_edit_date": "2012-10-24T13:09:27.037", "last_editor_user_id": "1556", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "8216", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "イギリス is used to refer to the United Kingdom which consists of four main\ncountries, England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. It is also sometimes\nreferred to as 英国 which used more for official names (such as the Embassy). It\ncan be seen alongside similar names such as 米国. The character also gets used\nin newspapers/convenient abbreviations (eg 日英同盟 is the expression often used\nto refer to the Anglo Japanese Naval Treaty).\n\nイングランド refers to England. it is used as when referring to the\ncountry/institutions designated at that level such as the national football\nteam.\n\nThe origin of the use of 英 (and ultimately イギリス）dates back to the name given\nto British people by Chinese. It was pronounced YING and used phonetically to\nreplicate the Portuguese name of Ingles. (This character's meaning of \"great\"\nor \"superior\" and the name \"Great Britain\" is coincidence. For the record,\nGreat Britain is the term used to refer to the largest island of \"the British\nIsles\" which is a geographical name for the islands occupied by the UK and the\nRepublic of Ireland. \"Great\" is used in the same sense that people refer to\n\"Greater China\", to include Hong Kong and Taiwan, or Greater London.) This\nmust date back more than 300 years, before the union of Scotland with England\nand Wales so the confusing (and for some, annoying) tendancy to refer\nBritain/the UK and its people as England/English goes back such a long way it\nwould even seem to have been ingrained into Asian languages several hundred\nyears ago.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-24T00:17:32.213", "id": "8222", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-09T13:59:09.240", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-09T13:59:09.240", "last_editor_user_id": "1556", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "8220", "post_type": "answer", "score": 19 } ]

[ { "body": "I've heard people say:\n\n * (person)が[早]{はや}く[快復]{かいふく}することを[お祈]{おいの}りしています。 \n\nLiterally, \"praying for (person)'s quick recovery.\" I get the feeling this\nisn't terribly colloquial though.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-24T00:44:19.990", "id": "8223", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-24T00:48:12.293", "last_edit_date": "2012-10-24T00:48:12.293", "last_editor_user_id": "1575", "owner_user_id": "1833", "parent_id": "8221", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "I think your original idea was good.\n\n * 奥さんにお大事にと伝えてください\n\nbut I would change the word order a bit\n\n * お大事にと奥さんに伝えてください", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-24T01:02:15.863", "id": "8224", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-24T01:02:15.863", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1805", "parent_id": "8221", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "To say \"I am proud of my sister,\" my personal preference is\n\n> （私は）姉を誇りに思う。\n\ninstead of using 自慢. The word 自慢 can have the same connotation as \"bragging,\"\nand as such I feel it deflects the attention away from what you are trying to\ncommend. 自慢する sounds as if you are only self satisfied (something that can be\na target of scorn).\n\nFor \"his beautiful wife is his pride,\" I might rephrase as\n\n> （彼女は）彼自慢の美人妻だ。\n\nI guess the sentence is structurally different, but it's another way of saying\nthe same thing.\n\nFor the swimming example,\n\n> 彼女は水泳（をする能力）に自信を持っている。\n\nI feel the use of 自信をもつ implies a meaning closer to what \"being proud of\"\nconveys in this case.\n\nAll the examples in the OP do make sense, and I don't think there is anything\nparticularly wrong, but 自慢だ is probably one of those words for which a better\nwording can be found, given that \"being proud of\" is not always synonymous in\nconnotation as 自慢.\n\nI suppose I didn't directly address the OP's question, to list more examples\nof the usage of 自慢... well I think the reason why some of the OP's examples\nmight sound confusing is that they aren't particularly descriptive by\nthemselves. For example\n\n> 彼女は息子が自慢だ。\n\nis a bit awkward in the same the OP's first examples are a bit confusing, but\nwhen you are more explicit like\n\n> 彼女は息子が東大卒であることが自慢だ。\n\nit sounds much better to me.", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-24T21:56:02.053", "id": "8228", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-24T21:56:02.053", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1692", "parent_id": "8227", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "では is not modifying います or 言う. That is just one of the definitions of では:\n`「...の場所で」`; for/at a place.\n\n> 京都ではもう春だ。 → It's already spring in Kyoto.\n\n`日本では` is just setting the stage for the rest of the sentence; \"In Japan\", and\nthen leave it at that. The rest of the sentence doesn't relate grammatically\nto it at all. It's not indicating the location where people talk about the\nspiders. And you don't indicate where someone exists with で (see my answer\n[here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/105/78) for details on that).", "comment_count": 9, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-25T02:56:08.687", "id": "8230", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-25T02:56:08.687", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.157", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "8229", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "In my opinion,\n\n日本では connects to the action クモを見る。 日本に goes to the 人がいる。 So you can say\n\n日本ではクモを見るといい。 日本には人がいる。\n\nI think you can use both で and に、but what you wanna stress out in the sentence\nis different.\n\nFor で、You wanna focus on クモを見ること For に、You wanna focus on 人がいること", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-27T02:12:38.320", "id": "8255", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-27T02:12:38.320", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1844", "parent_id": "8229", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "The reason why で is used instead of に here can be attributed to two reasons:\n\n 1. There is large distance between います and 日本では.\n\n 2. The part separating them (クモを見ると良いことがあると言う) uses verbs which represent action which would make it more natural to use で because they are closer. When making sentences, people have a tendency to match the particles with verbs that are closer.\n\nBecause of the above, で is used although you are correct in believing that に\nshould be used with いる.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-29T23:40:43.147", "id": "8268", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-29T23:40:43.147", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1217", "parent_id": "8229", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "仕方がない should be fairly evident meaning-wise. しょうがない is a variation of 仕様がない,\nand 仕様 effectively has the same meaning as 仕方, so they are virtually identical\nin meaning, however しょうがない is more used in spoken language while 仕方がない can be\nused formally.\n\n仕方あるまい is the same as well, except it uses the あるまい construction, which is\nessentially a more formalized way of saying it. It could also mean ないだろう, but\nbasically you're looking at three phrases that mean the same thing.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-25T06:47:20.237", "id": "8232", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-25T23:47:36.767", "last_edit_date": "2012-10-25T23:47:36.767", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "8231", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "**仕方がない**\n\n仕方：し is the conjunctive form of する (to do) and 仕 is 当て字. 方 means way or\nmethod. \n仕方がない：(lit.) する手段・方法がない There is no way to do a thing. \nFrom this idea comes these idiomatic meanings:\n\n> 1) やむを得ない - Unavoidable, inevitable. (Hence, It can't be helped. Nothing can\n> be done about it.) \n> 2) どうにもならない - A thing for which it is not possible to do anything about. No\n> matter what one does, it is not possible to make it work. (Thus this\n> definition of 仕方ない is also rendered \"It can't be helped\" in English) \n> 3) はなはだしく悪い、改めようがない (as in 仕方ない奴) - A person that nothing can be done about\n> (context determines severity, often used relatively lightly.)\n\n**仕様がない＝しようがない＝しょうがない**.\n\nBreaking 仕様 down: \nIn the same way as for 仕方がない, し is the conjunctive form of する (to do) and 仕 is\n当て字. Originally しよう, people pronounced it しょう enough that it became acceptable\nto write it that way too (as a matter of notation, not spoken word vs written\nword). \n仕様： the way a thing is done. The method by which an action is taken. \n仕様がない： (lit.) There is no way/method by which action can be taken.\n\nThus we get these idiomatic meanings:\n\n> 1) なすすべがない - There is no means by which to accomplish a thing \n> 2) よい方法がない - There is no worthwhile/plausible way/method in which to do a\n> thing \n> 他に良い手段がない、やむを得ない - There is no other way, inevitable \n> 3) あきれるほどひどい、手に負えない - Be uncontrollable; be incorrigible; be beyond one's\n> control; defying authority (from the idea that \"Nothing can be done about\n> such a person\")\n\n**So the answer to your question for these two is in the difference in the\nidiomatic meanings derived from these expressions.** Judging by my literal\ntranslations of the definitions, they overlap quite a bit, so much that it\nmight be considered futile to try and separate them. It requires a thorough\nunderstanding of each of the idiomatic expressions used to define 仕方がない and\n仕様がない to really see and feel the difference. However, it is my opinion that in\npractice one would be hard pressed to identify the nuances of these\nexpressions in the usages of 仕方がない and 仕様がない。\n\nAs for **仕方あるまい** , technically it _is_ 仕方があるまい, just like 仕方ない is 仕方がない. It\nis simply an abbreviation of the particle. So the difference from the others\nboils down to ない and あるまい which is the difference between declaring \"there is\nnone\" and stating with less certainty \"there is most likely/probably none\"\n(simplified translation, I don't think there is a precise way to render だろう・まい\nin English)\n\nThis information was compiled from the [広辞苑]{こうじえん}, [日本国語大辞典]{にほんこくごだいじてん},\nand [大辞林]{だいじりん} dictionaries.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-26T07:31:42.073", "id": "8244", "last_activity_date": "2018-12-22T14:46:53.683", "last_edit_date": "2018-12-22T14:46:53.683", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "1761", "parent_id": "8231", "post_type": "answer", "score": 15 } ]

[ { "body": "打ち合わせの前に内容をちょっと知りたいので資料があれば見せていただけますか？\n\n慣れ親しむ in this case is an understandable mistake, but 慣れる is to be familiar in\nthe sense of being used to something, and 親しむ is familiar in the sense of\nfamiliarizing yourself with a friend, a word used generally with\nrelationships. Apparently I could be wrong on this, but 共有 as a word means\n\"share\" in the sense of joint ownership rather than the English sense of\nletting someone know something. Checking Alc shows that you can use it in the\nsense of sharing files, though.\n\nMy version says something more along the lines of \"I want to know what the\nmeeting will be about beforehand, so if there are any documents (info) could\nyou please let me see?\"", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-25T10:15:58.207", "id": "8237", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-26T02:29:08.537", "last_edit_date": "2012-10-26T02:29:08.537", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "8233", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "ssb's answer explains how 慣れ親しむ is unsuitable here pretty well, so I'll just\nlist up some more expressions you can use.\n\nTreat \"to familiarize oneself beforehand\" as a single concept:\n\n> XXXについて予習{よしゅう}しておきたいので、資料などあればお願いします。\n\n * 予習する: to prep\n\nBreakdown the notion of \"to familiarize oneself\" into several words:\n\n> XXXの概要{がいよう}を把握{はあく}しておきたいので、...\n\n * 概要: overview\n * 把握: grasp, understand\n\nCombination of the above:\n\n> XXXについて予備知識{よびちしき}を仕入{しい}れておきたいので、...\n\n * 予備知識: background knowledge\n * 仕入れる: get (by extension of \"buy\", \"stock up on\")", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-26T06:26:32.147", "id": "8243", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-26T06:26:32.147", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "128", "parent_id": "8233", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "No, it's not really used in everyday speech. \"Everyday writing\" is a little\nambiguous because it's mostly the form of the writing that determines the\ntone. To address your edit, it would be weird to use まい in a message to your\nfriend, but I wouldn't be surprised to see it in work correspondence if only\nbecause that tends to be more formal in general. The more formal it is the\nless unusual it is for a term like まい to appear. Generally it's just not a\nspoken term and is reserved for more formal situations, however if you were to\nuse it in conversation you wouldn't be misunderstood or anything.\n\nIn my experience though it is a term that just isn't used much at all\nregardless. You should be able to recognize it, of course, but I don't think\nI've ever seen it used outside of writing, and even then I think I usually see\nit as a line from a character with a particularly formal speaking style or\nsomething of that sort. As the comments note, it has a very old fashioned sort\nof feeling, although it does make some modern appearances in the phrase\n～じゃあるまいし.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-25T09:47:09.647", "id": "8236", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-26T07:52:59.353", "last_edit_date": "2012-10-26T07:52:59.353", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "8234", "post_type": "answer", "score": 13 } ]

[ { "body": "The only place you would find morphemes that span multiple kanji are in gikun\nor in reformed words, simply because \"morpheme\" in Japanese is defined as the\nsound a single kanji or kana has/makes.\n\n> 「[海鷂魚]{えい}」\n>\n> 「[今]{け}[日]{ふ}」 -> 「[今日]{きょう}」", "comment_count": 16, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-25T15:24:57.493", "id": "8240", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-25T15:24:57.493", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "22", "parent_id": "8239", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "Chinese is a lot neater with regard to its characters; one character equals\none word (now morpheme) equals one syllable. In theory at least. 葡萄 being a\ntwo syllable morpheme, Chinese would rather adhere to a policy of one\ncharacter per syllable than one per morpheme if it has to choose. In ancient\nChinese there were prefixes and suffixes as well, but they could be added\nwithout changing the number of syllables, so one character per syllable held\ntrue. All of your examples look like borrowed words where this happened.\nJapanese is a bit messier. Niwatori is evidently 庭＋鳥、but since in Chinese\n\"chicken\" is just one word, Japanese follow suite and uses 鶏. I know there are\ncases of the opposite, where the word has more kanji than morphemes, or even\nsyllables sometimes, but my Japanese isn't great, so I wouldn't be able to\ngive any examples. Someone mentioned 百舌鳥.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2018-05-12T17:18:57.497", "id": "58602", "last_activity_date": "2018-05-12T19:07:05.527", "last_edit_date": "2018-05-12T19:07:05.527", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "29913", "parent_id": "8239", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "All I can tell you is that I've only seen 錆 before.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-26T09:45:45.643", "id": "8246", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-26T09:45:45.643", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "404", "parent_id": "8245", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "Let's put these in two conceptual buckets:\n\n * **錆** : This one's relatively common. It can be used to write the verb さびる, or the derived noun さび. Of the four, this is the only one I imagine you need to know. (Note that the lower-right element of 錆 can be written either 月 or 円.)\n\n * **銹・鏥・鏽** : These are a lot less common. 銹 and 鏥 both appear to be simplifications of 鏽, replacing the phonetic 肅 with 秀 and 宿 respectively. (Note that all three have シュウ as an ON reading!) All three are available to write the noun さび. The latter two can be treated as variants of 銹.\n\nA few less common compounds customarily use 銹, such as 不銹鋼{ふしゅうこう} and\n銹病{さびびょう}. Aside from that, I'd expect 錆 to be used most of the time.\n\nThere doesn't appear to be any real difference in meaning, at least according\nto my dictionaries. I could be mistaken, of course.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-26T10:35:27.070", "id": "8247", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-26T10:56:25.660", "last_edit_date": "2012-10-26T10:56:25.660", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "8245", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "錆 is the standard for 'rust' in Japanese (it appears to have a different\nmeaning in Chinese)、although you may see さび in kana as it is not 常用\n\n銹 is the Chinese for 'rust', and 鏽 a variant of it. 銹 does appear to be used\nin some words, like 銹病{さびびょう} in Japanese but it is not common (looks to me\nlike wikipedia often replaces it with kana rather than using 錆).\n\n鏥 seems to be very unusual, there are a couple of placenames using it.\n\nGenerally speaking, there are often multiple kanji variants which have been\nused historically, of which only one is now common, in the same way as English\nhas had multiple ways of spelling certain words, which are now mostly\nconsistent (regional variations and changes in spelling for effect aside).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-26T10:52:10.280", "id": "8248", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-26T10:52:10.280", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "571", "parent_id": "8245", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "* 鏽, 銹 and 锈 are [the same word](http://www.nciku.com/search/zh/detail/%E9%94%88/1317163) in increasing order of simplification.\n\n * [鏥 is the variant form of 銹](http://zh.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E9%8F%A5)\n\n * 錆 is has a different meaning in Chinese.\n\nNone of them are in the list of 常用漢字, I would expect さび to be used instead of\nits kanji. In this case, it is not so important to differentiate them.\n\nI surmise that any differences would be etymological, and obscure. And there\nwould be virtually no difference in the context of everyday usage.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-26T10:53:32.200", "id": "8249", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-26T10:59:23.083", "last_edit_date": "2012-10-26T10:59:23.083", "last_editor_user_id": "542", "owner_user_id": "542", "parent_id": "8245", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "The character most commonly used for rust is 錆 (written with 月 instead of 円 in\nthe 漢字源 dictionary) and it originally meant: \n1) 金属の澄みきった色 - the pure, clear color of metal \n2) 金属の澄みきった音の形容。また、その音。- adj. describing a clear metallic sound, or n., the\nsound itself\n\nBut a misunderstanding of the Chinese caused people to think this character\nmeant rust. \n日本では誤解して、金属のさびの意に用いる。\n\nThere is also the character 鉎. It is the character that originally meant rust\nand is said to be the character that became 錆。 The 漢字源 states:\n日本では錆を金属のさびの意に使うが、鉎が本字である。\n\n銹 means rust in Chinese and is equivalent with 錆 in terms of meaning rust as\nfar as Japanese dictionaries go, but 銹 is not in common usage. 鏽 and 鏥 are 異字体\nor variants of the same character. There is no explanation in the 広辞苑、新漢語、or\n漢字源 dictionaries of any differences between 錆 and 銹, or of why these variants\nexist. But I think it is common knowledge among people studying Japanese that\ndifferent eras produced different characters for the same meanings in both\nChinese and Japanese, so this isn't out of the ordinary.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-26T10:56:13.350", "id": "8250", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-26T11:05:24.933", "last_edit_date": "2012-10-26T11:05:24.933", "last_editor_user_id": "1761", "owner_user_id": "1761", "parent_id": "8245", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "I would say both うん and ううん are pronounced often without opening the mouth,\nううん even more so than うん. I think (う)ん and (う)んん comes closer to the\npronunciation; or even ん and んんん, like you suggested.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-26T15:03:18.003", "id": "8252", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-26T15:03:18.003", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "8251", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "[とは限らない](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/srch/all/%E3%81%A8%E3%81%AF%E9%99%90%E3%82%89%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84/m0u/)\nis a fixed expression meaning \"not necessarily\", and if I were you I would\nmemorize it as such. I'm not sure there's an intuitive way to understand it\nlogically. For example, there's no とは限る.\n\nAs for your bonus question, your two sentences mean pretty much the same.\n[必ずしも](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/43572/m0u/%E5%BF%85%E3%81%9A%E3%81%97%E3%82%82/)\nis an expression which needs to go with some negative expression after it, and\nalso means \"not necessarily\". It is different from 必ず, and you cannot use it\nto mean \"necessarily\" or \"definitely\".\n\nHere 必ずしも...とは限らない uses both of the above expressions for extra emphasis.\n\n必ずしも is a bit confusing in the sense that other grammatical elements can come\nbetween it and the negative that needs to follow. The below sentences pretty\nmuch mean the same:\n\n> 必ずしも長生きしない \n> 必ずしも長生きするとは限らない \n> 必ずしも長生きするわけではない \n> 必ずしも長生きするとは言えない\n\nFor comparison, your sentence \"Living a long time is not just limited to\npeople who exercise a lot\" could be translated as:\n\n> 長生きは運動をよくする人に限られない", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-27T17:49:46.323", "id": "8259", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-27T17:57:56.953", "last_edit_date": "2012-10-27T17:57:56.953", "last_editor_user_id": "1073", "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "8253", "post_type": "answer", "score": 19 }, { "body": "The expression \"とは限らない\" is used when we negate a _general_ statement.\n\nIn your example, the statement we want to negate is:\n\n> 運動をよくする人は必ず長生きする\n\nYou should not interpret the verb \"限る\" as \"limit\" in this case. This verb has\na meaning \"can't be asserted\" with a negative word.\n\n\"しも\" after \"必ず\" is not necessary but emphasizes the negation.\n\nHere are some examples using \"とは限らない\":\n\n> 雷が鳴ったらいつも雨が降るとは限らない。 \n> 多数の意見が常に正しいとは限らない。", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-28T13:30:44.457", "id": "8262", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-28T13:30:44.457", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1849", "parent_id": "8253", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 }, { "body": "The と particle turns whatever is before it into a statement... Sort of like\nhow の turns it into a noun phrase... と turns it into a sort of.... adverbial\nstatement.\n\nThe は is key\n\nそれが正しいとは限らない\n\nそれが正しいと is the statement\n\nは makes that statement the subject.\n\n限らない is the action performed by the phrase. It is a verb, so something must be\ndoing something, right?\n\nNotice how it is Intransitive... and thereby more or less descriptive of the と\nphrase\n\nTherefore, it is saying\n\nそれが正しいとは... the phrase of それが正しい is a non limiting phrase...\n\nIn other words... それが正しい isn't self evident... It isn't restrictive. It is not\nthe only possible phrase.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2015-02-04T12:16:23.477", "id": "21626", "last_activity_date": "2015-02-04T12:16:23.477", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3754", "parent_id": "8253", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "背 more literally means your spine/backbone and someone with a long, erect\nspine is someone who is tall, but that doesn't mean that his spine is 190cm\nlong. (背骨 is the actual word for spine.)\n\n身長 is literally the length of the body and is the standard way of talking\nabout your height. So, just like you suggested, 僕は身長が190cmです.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-27T09:43:05.533", "id": "8257", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-27T09:43:05.533", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "8256", "post_type": "answer", "score": 15 } ]

[ { "body": "As a native speaker, I would say:\n\n> 剣道をがんばっている。\n\nor\n\n> 剣道でがんばっている。\n\nBut, these are a little bit colloquial. When I want to be more formal, I will\nsay:\n\n> 剣道に励んでいる。\n\nor, simply,\n\n> いっしょうけんめい剣道をしている。", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-28T03:13:11.590", "id": "8261", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-28T08:59:02.097", "last_edit_date": "2012-10-28T08:59:02.097", "last_editor_user_id": "1849", "owner_user_id": "1849", "parent_id": "8260", "post_type": "answer", "score": 20 }, { "body": "The other answer covers \"I'm trying my best at X\", but \"try\" in English has\nanother meaning, I would say the most common meaning in fact, of \"attempt\"\n[something that may not succeed or even get off the ground]. For this meaning,\nwhat I've heard is volitional + とする, like this:\n\n> 剣道をしようとしている。 I'm trying to do Kendo [but I'm not sure if I'll be able to\n> find an instructor, etc.]\n>\n> 魚を取ろうとすると、消えちゃった。 When I tried to catch the fish, it disappeared.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2017-08-14T15:13:36.067", "id": "52319", "last_activity_date": "2017-08-14T15:13:36.067", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "15760", "parent_id": "8260", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "This is purely anecdotal and based on my own experience and confusion with\nthis, but ううん has generally been a negative interjection, as in definition 1,\nand うーん has a meaning in English like \"mmmm\" or \"ummm\" or \"hmmm\" or something\nlike that, conveying reluctance. I figured this out after some confusing\nsituations wherein I would suggest going somewhere or eating something and\nmeeting うーん as a reply (in textual correspondence) and thinking they were\nsaying no when they really weren't outright negating what I suggested.\n\nThis dictionary entry seems to back up this idea of ううん as a mostly negative\nword when used outside of a generic sort of thinking \"hm\" or painful noise:\n\n<http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/17463/m0u/%E3%81%86%E3%81%86%E3%82%93/>\n\nParticularly the third.\n\nSo where ううん and うーん both can be general \"noises\", ううん has a negative\nconnotation while うーん has a connotation of reluctant acceptance.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-29T08:11:19.967", "id": "8264", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-29T08:11:19.967", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "8263", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "`不運にも` could be considered a set phrase. However, technically the も there puts\nmore emphasis on the phrase (強調を加える). ( **EDIT** : After reading [the\nreferenced book mentioned by\nTsutomu](http://books.google.co.jp/books?id=0eprLex8sr0C&pg=PA382&lpg=PA382&dq=%E6%96%87%E5%89%AF%E8%A9%9E+%E4%B8%8D%E9%81%8B%E3%81%AB%E3%82%82&source=bl&ots=4JIjy3ADmC&sig=o8VQtWTzA1jJoa9vfC6nNOzDLYs&hl=ja&sa=X&ei=eEeUUIaQMaSImQXC4IDYCg&ved=0CCQQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=%E6%96%87%E5%89%AF%E8%A9%9E%20%E4%B8%8D%E9%81%8B%E3%81%AB%E3%82%82&f=false)\nit can be concluded that this usage is fixed for certain words. I suggest\neverybody to read the linked page from google books.)\n\nPerhaps other examples would make it more clear:\n\n> 日本の[財政赤字]{ざいせいあかじ}が９００兆円にも上る\n\nThe `も` in the above sentence emphasizes just how bad the debt is getting.\n\nAnother example of `にも` is when you want to emphasize どうしてもできない:\n\n> 歩くにも歩けないほど人が多い (There are so many people I can't even walk)\n\nThis will always be in the form ～にも～ない or ～にも～ず.\n\nAnd yet another example is when lining things up (列挙)\n\n> 日本にもアメリカにもメリットがあります (There are benefits for both America and Japan)\n\nThere are perhaps other examples of the usage also not mentioned above.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-29T23:15:54.067", "id": "8267", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-02T22:32:48.563", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-02T22:32:48.563", "last_editor_user_id": "1217", "owner_user_id": "1217", "parent_id": "8266", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "[『中上級を教える人のための日本語文法ハンドブック』](http://www.amazon.co.jp/gp/product/4883192016)\nexplains the expression `不運にも` on p. 382 as _a sentence adverb_ (文副詞).\n\nSome adjectives like `不運な`, `幸運な`, `意外な`, `皮肉な`, `勇敢な`, `卑怯な`, etc. can take\n`も` after their conjuntive form to add some _evaluation, criticism, or\ncommentary_ of speaker to the whole sentence.\n\nFor example, the sentense\n\n> 意外にも、彼は集会に現れた。 (Surprisingly, he showed up to the assembly.)\n\nexpresses _indirectly_ that the speaker did not expect that he would show up.\nThis _unexpectedness_ is not the main topic of this sentence, but a kind of\ncommentary from the speaker's point of view.\n\nHere is another example:\n\n> その警察官は勇敢にもギャングから人質を救出した。 (The policeman bravely rescued the hostages from\n> the gang.)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-01T13:02:53.733", "id": "8289", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-02T11:57:18.660", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-02T11:57:18.660", "last_editor_user_id": "1849", "owner_user_id": "1849", "parent_id": "8266", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

[ { "body": "The main difference is probably the nuance of the sentence.\n\nは is used as emphasis on どようび as the topic of the sentence. \"On _Saturdays_ I\nwill read books.\" (Only Saturday, and not any other day of the week.) It may\nimply that reading books on Thursday is a habit of the speaker.\n\nには is acceptable as well and means the same thing because は already indicates\nemphasis on どようび. に helps to clarify that it is when the action takes place,\nbut it is quite clear even without it that どようび indicates the time of action.\n\nIf only に is used, however, it means that \"On Saturday I will read books.\"\n(Presumably the coming Saturday.) The action, _to read books_ , and not when\nit is done, is emphasized. It does not imply that it is a habit or routine, it\njust so happens that the speaker plans to read books on a Saturday.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-30T05:17:42.823", "id": "8270", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-30T17:35:01.050", "last_edit_date": "2012-10-30T17:35:01.050", "last_editor_user_id": "1791", "owner_user_id": "1791", "parent_id": "8269", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "With most time references, you can choose to omit に.\n\n> 1. [土曜日]{どようび}[本]{ほん}を[読]{よ}みます。 \n>\n> 2. 土曜日に本を読みます。 \n>\n> 3. 土曜日には本を読みます。 \n>\n> 4. 土曜日は本を読みます。\n>\n\nare all grammatical sentences and roughly mean the same thing. 1 and 4 have\nchosen to omit に. 3 and 4 make Saturday the topic of the sentence, when は is\nthought of the topic marker, but は could also be the contrast particle, as in\n\n> [今日]{きょう}[勉強]{べんきょう}しますか? \n> 今日は勉強する[暇]{ひま}がないんです。土曜日_は_本を読みます。\n>\n> Are you going to study today? \n> Today I don't have time for studying, _but_ on Saturday I will read the\n> book.\n\nSimilarly,\n\n> [来週]{らいしゅう}は[京都]{きょうと}へ行きます。 \n> Next week I will go to Kyoto.\n\nwould be a sentence analogous to your sentence, where 来週 is the time\nreference, which (as time reference) can be strengthened with に, or (simply as\npart of the sentence) can be made the topic with は.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-30T10:16:15.297", "id": "8274", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-30T10:16:15.297", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "8269", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "> どようびは ほんを よみます。 -> I read books on Saturdays OR I will read a book on\n> Saturday.\n\nは, as the topic marker, can be used to refer to Saturdays in general or the\nnext Saturday from the time the sentence is spoken, in which case it indicates\na point in time without specifically having that function.\n\n> どようびに ほんを よみます。 -> I will read a book on Saturday.\n\nに marks the Saturday you are talking about as a specific point in time.\nWithout context this means the next Saturday from the time this is spoken.\n\n> どようびには ほんを よみます。 -> I will read a book on Saturday.\n\nWhen には is used, は directs the listeners attention to the specific time\nindicated by に as opposed to simply stating a specific time. **It is a matter\nof the feeling/nuance delivered to the listener**. In this case, it sets\nSaturday apart from other days of the week and (according to a native\nspeaker※) gives the listener the impression that this content is something\nthat you haven't been doing thus far. So the entire meaning rendered in\nEnglish would be something like\n\n> \"I will read a book on Saturday which is something I have not been doing\n> thus far and may or may not do again.\"\n\nAlso, remember that the option of どようび、ほんを よみます is an omission of particles,\nmaking it more vague as it leaves the interpretation up to the listener. In a\ngeneral context this usually results in a straight transmission of\ninformation, which is probably why it is used so much.\n\n※I think it is safe to say that different people would get different\nimpressions depending on the context of the conversation. My goal in\nexplaining what a native speaker told me was to give an idea of the kind of\nnuance that can be conveyed and not to say that this is the only meaning\nassociated with this usage. Also, in reality there are myriad ways to get は by\nitself to refer to a specific point in time. For example, こんどの どようびは ほんを よみます。\n-> I will read a book this Saturday. And as with any structure, に、は、and には can\nusually all fit grammatically and all three will convey the correct\ninformation. The difference is in the feeling and nuance conveyed.\n\nHere is a Japanese website for Japanese people studying to be Japanese\nlanguage teachers that I based part of my answer on.\n[助詞「に」と「には」の違い](http://nihon5ch.net/contents/bbs-study/old/mie-bbs.cgi?s=137)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-30T16:51:42.450", "id": "8281", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-01T04:28:44.567", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-01T04:28:44.567", "last_editor_user_id": "1761", "owner_user_id": "1761", "parent_id": "8269", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I presume this habit stems from times, when Japanese was written in 漢文. To\nmake sure that 夢橋 is read with the Japanese reading, you would write a ノ in\nthe column, resulting in 夢ノ橋 read as ゆめのはし. You would never read that as\nむのきょう, whereas 夢橋 could be read as either ゆめばし or むきょう. The only reason for\nthe ノ being written in カタカナ is that annotations were customarily done all in\nカタカナ. (This is really the origin of カタカナ—annotations in margins, which were\ndone with [万葉仮名]{まんようがな} were simplified to カタカナ.)\n\nGood typography respects the origin of the ノ as a margin note and typesets the\nノ smaller, like a small つ, や, etc. But since that can't be achieved on the\ncomputer, yet (there is no Unicode for a small ノ, only for ヶッャュョ), the ノ is\njust a standard-size ノ. There is also\n[[御茶ノ水]{おちゃのみず}](http://30min.jp/image_proxy%3Furl%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fstat.ameba.jp%252Fuser_images%252F20100702%252F08%252Fnatsugou%252F3f%252Fd7%252Fj%252Fo0560042010619260491.jpg),\na JR/Tokyo Metro station in central Tokyo, and also the circle line\n[山ノ手]{やまのて}線 is (or was) sometimes written with a (small) ノ.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-30T09:58:04.717", "id": "8272", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-31T09:15:35.010", "last_edit_date": "2012-10-31T09:15:35.010", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "8271", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "You are probably confusing とかく and とにかく. ともあれ and とにかくare in fact quite close\nin their meaning. They are both used to carry the conversation forward, like\nbelow:\n\n```\n\n 結果はどうかわからないが、ともあれ試験は終わった\n 結果はどうかわからないが、とにかく試験は終わった\n \n```\n\nBoth roughly mean \"I don't know what the results will be, but the exam itself\nhas finished\". Both imply that the speaker had underwent some hassle, but that\nthat hassle has now finished. Another examples:\n\n```\n\n 渋滞で大変だったが、ともあれ首都圏からは出た\n 渋滞で大変だったが、とにかく首都圏からは出た\n \n```\n\nとかく is quite different though and means that something has a strong\n(excessive) tendency to do something. For example,\n\n```\n\n アメリカ人はとかく炭酸飲料を飲む\n あの子はとかく悲観的になりやすい\n \n```", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-12-02T02:50:45.043", "id": "9649", "last_activity_date": "2012-12-02T02:50:45.043", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "8273", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "There are many, many examples of this kind. There are always different ways of\nsaying the same thing. The 漢語 (Chinese-derived word) plus する verb is often the\nmore formal version, whereas the simple native Japanese word is less formal.\nWhen comparing 車を直す and 車を修理する, 直す and 修理する both mean \"to repair\", but the\nlatter sounds a tad more technical, but probably only because it is more\nformal. It's something like\n\n> 車を修理する \n> to perform a car maintenance operation\n>\n> 車を直す \n> to repair the car\n\nbut both can involve human efforts. In general, however, なおす means more than\njust 修理する:\n\n> [椅子]{いす}を **直して** ください \n> **Put** the chair **back** where it was.\n>\n> 病気を **[治]{なお}す** \n> to **cure** an ailment\n>\n> 作り **直す** \n> to **re** make\n>\n> この文章を **直して** ください \n> Please **correct** this sentence.\n\n(See Tsuyoshi Ito's comment below.)", "comment_count": 10, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-30T11:58:43.257", "id": "8277", "last_activity_date": "2012-12-12T03:16:12.647", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "8276", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 }, { "body": "`修理` means \"fix/repair\" and almost, if not always refers to fixing something\nthat is physically broken.\n\n`直す` can also mean \"fix\" as in something broken, but has more metaphorical\nuses. \"Fix\" as in correct a mistake (often seen as a compound verb `〜なおす`:\n`書き直す` to rewrite); \"fix\" as in straighten out, put right, etc.; \"Fix\" as in\nchange/alter (a plan, etc.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-30T14:35:12.007", "id": "8279", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-30T19:11:19.940", "last_edit_date": "2012-10-30T19:11:19.940", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "8276", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 }, { "body": "`直す` is a verb, and `修理` is a noun.\n\n`修理` can be made into a verb by adding `する`, as in `修理する`, or into an\nadjective by adding `の`, but it's still a noun at heart. Likewise, `直す` can\nalso be made into a noun by adding `こと`, but it is still a verb. Just because\na language allows you to modify words into different forms shouldn't trick you\ninto thinking they are the same thing. They have different grammatical\npurposes and usages.\n\nSo `直す` is \" ** _to_** fix\", whereas `修理` is \" ** _a_** repair\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-30T19:18:33.163", "id": "8282", "last_activity_date": "2012-12-10T05:55:31.743", "last_edit_date": "2012-12-10T05:55:31.743", "last_editor_user_id": "119", "owner_user_id": "119", "parent_id": "8276", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I looked the at the use of 感じる a few months ago. I came to the following\nconclusions:\n\n> 1. The verb is usually transitive (他動詞) ; it takes を with a noun\n> (including embedded noun phrases with の）but\n>\n> 2. It can also be intransitive (自動詞): Space ALC list it as both and give\n> the example ～が退屈に感じる (feel bored ［uninspired］).\n>\n> 3. It can also take と to mark a \"quotation/sound or manner adverbial\"\n> phrase, in which case the と seems to follow a verb (and I think we can say\n> 感じる here is intransitive).\n>\n> 4. When it appears to take に, the に particle is actually marking an\n> adverb. This happens with transitive and intransitive uses of the verb.\n> 5. It also communicates three different ways of \"feeling\".\n>\n\nI have tried to explain #5 below with carefully chosen examples of 1-4 which\ncan be picked out with little difficulty:\n\nI classify the three feelings as Physical, Emotional and \"Spider\" (because the\nlast is somewhat intuitive, similar to the way that Spiderman can sense\ndanger). Examples of each are as follows:\n\n> 1. _Physical sense (五感で刺激を受ける)_ ：\n>\n> 家が揺れるのを感じた｜I felt the house shake.\n>\n> 2. _Emotional sense (eg to be moved ｟by｠; be impressed ｟by｠):_\n>\n> その時，初めて母の愛を深く感じた｜I had never felt my mother's love so strongly.\n>\n> そんなにいい仕事をやめたなんて何か感じるところでもあったのですか｜ \n> Did you have some special reason of your own for giving up such a good job?\n>\n> 3. _Spider-sense (eg to sense ｟that｠):_\n>\n> 彼は生命の危険を感じた｜He sensed that his life was in danger.\n>\n> 彼ががっかりしているのを感じた｜I [was aware of / sensed] his disappointment.\n>\n> 彼は何かを隠していると感じた｜I felt that he was keeping something from me.\n>\n>\n\nThe follow-up question to this explanation might be what is the difference\nbetween expressions taking と and を？ Very briefly:\n\n> (i) Some verbs such as 思う always takes と (another example would be jumping\n> to a conclusion, 早合点する）\n>\n> (ii) Some verbs such as 忘れる and 思い出す never take と because you can only\n> remember/forget facts not beliefs!\n>\n> (iii) Some verbs such as 考える ＆ 分かる take both because they can take two\n> meanings: You can either just think (ie believe) or think about something\n> (ie consider facts), either is possible.\n\n感じる falls under category (iii), as can be seen from the examples above.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-31T13:22:37.607", "id": "8287", "last_activity_date": "2018-12-06T14:56:59.403", "last_edit_date": "2018-12-06T14:56:59.403", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "8278", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 } ]

[ { "body": "As you may already know は is considered the topic marker. Adding は puts\nemphasis on the denial aspect and what becomes before ではなく is generally the\ntopic of the sentence, omitting は makes _what comes after_ でなく the focus of\nthe sentence.\n\nA more literal translation of your sentence would be:\n\n> If I ever go abroad, I don't want to travel for just pleasure, I would like\n> to go to study.\n\nThe emphasis is on the denial aspect.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-31T00:48:40.960", "id": "8283", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-03T22:05:59.730", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-03T22:05:59.730", "last_editor_user_id": "1217", "owner_user_id": "1217", "parent_id": "8280", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 }, { "body": "Wa is not just used as a topic marker, but also to suggest alternatives among\nmany other options that might be possible. When ga is used, the emphasis is on\nlimiting the options and making a declarative statement about the particular\nsubject matter.\n\nIn your examples, the only real difference is a matter of distality, in which\ncase the de[wa]naku drops the wa when the conversion is less formal, such as a\nconversation between close friends.\n\nDakedenaku is one of many \"pattern\" phrases in Japanese, where it is almost\nexclusively used to convey a certain emotion. As such, it has undergone a lot\nof changes over the years and rather than base it on formalities, it is a\nresult of colloquialism amongst the newer generations of Japanese speakers.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2017-12-05T00:31:36.003", "id": "54953", "last_activity_date": "2017-12-05T00:31:36.003", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "26815", "parent_id": "8280", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "Numbers and sometimes short Latin alphabet words (like abbreviations) escape\nthis rule. Even in 割注, I would always read numbers and Latin-alphabet words\nthe \"usual\" way (which I think of as left-to-right and top-to-bottom, in this\norder).\n\nI make sense of it like this:\n\nFor vertical writing it is `top-to-bottom -> right-to-left`. \nFor horizontal writing it is `left-to-right -> top-to-bottom`.\n\nFor horizontal writing, `left-to-right` comes first, so two characters should\nbe typeset next to each other, read from left to right.\n\nFor vertical writing,`top-to-bottom` comes first, so two characters should be\ntypeset one on top of the other first.\n\nBreaking the column after a single character to type the next character in a\nseparate column doesn't make much sense, so if text is typeset in a single\nline, it should be read left-to-right. If text is typeset in a single column,\nthere is no confusion. In both vertical and horizontal writing, only the rule\ntop-to-bottom applies.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-10-31T09:25:53.340", "id": "8285", "last_activity_date": "2012-10-31T20:50:05.563", "last_edit_date": "2012-10-31T20:50:05.563", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "8284", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "The twelve signs of the Zodiac are called the\n[十二支{じゅうにし}](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8D%81%E4%BA%8C%E6%94%AF), which\nis sometimes translated as the twelve \"[Earthly\nbranches](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthly_Branches)\". Each of these\n\"branches\" is normally written with a particular kanji, and each has an\nassociated animal. Although they have both ON and KUN readings, the normal\nreading for each (according to my 岩波{いわなみ}国語辞典{こくごじてん}) is the KUN reading.\n\nIn eight of these characters, the KUN reading is the same as the regular word\nfor the associated animal:\n\n> `丑{うし}（牛）` `寅{とら}（虎）` `辰{たつ}（龍）` `午{うま}（馬）`\n>\n> `未{ひつじ}（羊）` `申{さる}（猿）` `酉{とり}（鳥）` `戌{いぬ}（犬）`\n\nFor these eight words, if you add the character 年 representing the word とし, I\nwould expect there to be only one common reading apiece:\n\n> `丑年{うしどし}` `寅年{とらどし}` `辰年{たつどし}` `午年{うまどし}`\n>\n> `未年{ひつじどし}` `申年{さるどし}` `酉年{とりどし}` `戌年{いぬどし}`\n\nHowever, in the other four characters, the KUN reading differs from the normal\nname for the animal:\n\n> `子{ね}（[鼠]{ねずみ}）` `卯{う}（[兎]{うさぎ}）` `巳{み}（[蛇]{へび}）` `亥{い}（[猪]{いのしし}）`\n\nIn these cases, you could form two words. First, you could do the same thing\nwe did earlier, and combine the words represented by the KUN readings of both\ncharacters: 子{ね} + 年{とし} = 子年{ねどし}。 Following this pattern for all four\ncompounds, we get these words:\n\n> `子年{ねどし}` `[卯年]{うどし}` `[巳年]{みどし}` `[亥年]{いどし}`\n\nHowever, ね・う・み・い, while not uncommon, are somewhat less common words than\nねずみ・うし・へび・いのしし. It's possible you might want to combine these words with とし\ninstead, in which case you get these compounds as a result:\n\n> `ねずみどし` `うしどし` `へびどし` `いのししどし`\n\nAlthough these aren't the same _words_ as in our earlier list, they have\npretty much the same _meaning_. So, we could probably write them using the\nsame kanji, even though ねずみ・うし・へび・いのしし aren't among the normal KUN readings\nfor those characters. (And indeed, Japanese speakers did just that.) We end up\nwith these compounds:\n\n> `[子年]{ねずみどし}` `[卯年]{うさぎどし}` `[巳年]{へびどし}` `[亥年]{いのししどし}`\n\nAnd as a result, we have four compounds which can be read either way.\n\nAre both versions used? Yes. Which is more common? I can't say, but based on\nmy attempts to research the question, I would guess the shorter versions (such\nas ねどし) are more common. Perhaps someone else will be able to provide you with\nan answer to the frequency question.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-02T06:03:56.457", "id": "8293", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-02T07:04:01.857", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "8288", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "You're probably thinking of the word\n[menkui](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?p=%E3%82%81%E3%82%93%E3%81%8F%E3%81%84&stype=0&dtype=0&dname=0ss)\n(面食い).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-02T00:17:30.287", "id": "8291", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-02T00:17:30.287", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1141", "parent_id": "8290", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "If you're sure about み, it could be 見た目重視, or maybe some other phrase starting\nwith 見た目.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-02T05:08:53.987", "id": "8292", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-02T05:08:53.987", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "8290", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "[Answer has been edited to incorporate comments.]\n\nasikarazu is the negative form of the adjective\n[asii](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?p=%E3%81%82%E3%81%97%E3%81%84&stype=0&dtype=0&dname=0ss),\nnot a verb. That being the case, adjectives acquire much of their conjugation\nvia suffixation of the verb ar-. This is asiku + arazu, and the u drops. arazu\nis the verb ar- in irrealis + negative -zu.\n\nAnother example of this construction would be 必ず ie 仮 + ならず which also fits\nthis 形容動詞 + ならず pattern\n\n> [Bonus question: What is the kanji and literal meaning of すみません？]\n\nI answered this\n[recently](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/8121/explanation-of-\nthe-\nexpression-%E6%B0%97%E3%81%8C%E6%B8%88%E3%81%BE%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84/8122#8122).\nPlease check the comments.\n\n(Note: When used to apologize, sum-i-mas-e-n means \"(I have done something\nrude to you, and my feelings) are not at rest\". When used to be thankful, the\nsense is \"(I am unable to return the favor, and my feelings) are not at rest\".\nIt was not my intention to say that all sumimasen is a contraction for ki ga\nsumanai / sumimasen. Phonologically that is not very likely. Rather,\ngrammatically, a single adjective or verb can be a complete sentence. Many\nthings are not said when unneeded. As such, I was filling in the missing\nblanks to assist with compression. If it helps to interpret asikarazu, think\nof it as 気を悪くしないで or 悪く思わないで. )", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-02T11:00:34.717", "id": "8295", "last_activity_date": "2013-01-12T16:04:00.777", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.740", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1141", "parent_id": "8294", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "It is read as sekidō and means\n[equator](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equator).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-03T01:33:10.167", "id": "8297", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-03T01:33:10.167", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1141", "parent_id": "8296", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "Firstly, 大辞泉 is known to have a number of issues. You should get a second\nopinion on much of what it says. I'm away from most of my resources for the\nweekend, but below are quotes from several more reliable dictionaries at hand.\n\n大辞林: 〔補説〕 「仮(かり)ならず」からできた語か\n\n時代別国語大辞典：上代編：\nズは、おそらく否定の助動詞、カナラは活用語の未然形であろう。名義抄に「必（カナラジ）」とあるのも参考になる。そのカナラに関して、（イ）仮（かり）ナリの略、（ロ）兼ぬから派生した自動詞カナルを想定する、という説がある。（イ）は、仮でなく\n---ほんとうに、という意味変化の経路を（ロ）は、兼ねられてしまわずに---\nそれだけが一すじに、というところからと考えるのであるが、いずれも決定的な根拠はない。\n\n角川古語大辞典:\n活用語の未然形に打消の「ず」の付いた形と考えられ、「必カナラジ（名義抄）」もこの推定を支える。「仮ならず」の転とする説、「彼ならず」の意とする説、「兼ぬ」から派生した動詞「かなる」を推定して、二道かけず一筋に、の意とする説などがある。\n\nI am not strongly opposed, per se, to kari + narazu. A good argument may\nconvince me. However, the evidence is lacking. Why does the medial -ri-\ndisappear completely? Also, semantically, the relevance of 仮 to 必ず is\nquestionable. Anyway, people have argued various etymologies over the years,\nbut as above 「いずれも決定的な根拠はない」.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-03T15:19:37.217", "id": "8300", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-28T06:29:19.467", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-28T06:29:19.467", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "1141", "parent_id": "8298", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "Judging from your reply to Gradius’s comment on the question, I am afraid that\nyou have trouble understanding relative clauses.\n\n * 人間は生き物である。 Human is a creature.\n * 人間は **教訓を忘れる** 生き物である。 Human is a creature **which forgets lessons**.\n\nIn addition, …てしまう adds the meaning of “regrettably” or “unfortunately.”\n\n * 人間は **教訓を忘れてしまう** 生き物である。 Human is a creature **which, regrettably, forgets lessons**.\n\nI will not try a translation of the whole sentence, but I hope that this gives\nyou a small nudge in the right direction.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-03T18:53:28.177", "id": "8301", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-03T18:53:28.177", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "8299", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "A little investigation has led me to believe that the usage of 命あっての in this\nsituation MAY, however unlikely, be related to the phrase 命あっての物種, or at least\nthat we can extrapolate the meaning of 命あって in this sense from that phrase.\nThis particular phrase means that something is not worth risking your life\nover, as can be seen\n[here](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E5%91%BD%E3%81%82%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6) and\n[here](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/14529/m0u/%E5%91%BD/).\n\nHowever on Google and alc I cannot find any other natural use of the term\n命あっての outside of this set phrase. Therefore it seems like an unusual way to\nuse this particular grammar, but if 命あっての物種 is any indication, then we may be\nable to translate that sentence as something like:\n\nEvery time I read disaster reports from the mountain I can only lament the\nneedless risk of life.\n\nHowever this is entirely speculation because, as you said, あっての doesn't mean\nthat in general. That said, I think it's a bad sentence to begin with and\nyou're probably understanding あっての just fine. The \"natural\" way to interpret\nthat sentence would be like... 命がないと登山できないのに…っていう残念さを言ってる\n\nSo in conclusion, just erase this sentence from your life and move on.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-05T05:16:07.513", "id": "8309", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-06T04:18:21.997", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-06T04:18:21.997", "last_editor_user_id": "921", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "8303", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I think AあってのB is used here the same way it's normally used. According to the\n日本語文型辞典:\n\n> 「XあってのY」の形で、「XがあるからYも成り立つ」という意味を表す。「XがなければYは成り立たない」という含みをもつ。\n\nSo XあってのY means \"because there is X, Y also holds true\" with the connotation\nthat \"if there isn't X, Y doesn't hold true\".\n\n* * *\n\nI think it is similar to the proverb 命あっての物種, which looking at [kotowaza-\nallguide](http://kotowaza-allguide.com/i/inochimonodane.html) could literally\nbe something like \"there can be no origin if there isn't life\" (where 物種\nrefers to something that things can stem from) and can be translated as [\"be\nnot worth risking one's\nlife\"](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E5%91%BD%E3%81%82%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6%E3%81%AE%E7%89%A9%E7%A8%AE).\n\nFrom this I think 命あっての登山 could mean \"there can be no mountain climbing if\nthere isn't life\", and that it could also be translated as \"it's not worth\nrisking (your) life mountain climbing\".\n\n* * *\n\nWhen I Google that phrase, I came up with a couple of results like [the\nfollowing](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1292497672):\n\n> ...ヤバそうならやめる事ですね。命あっての登山ですし、来年も富士山はそこにあります。\n>\n> \"If it looks dangerous you should give up. You can't mountain climb if\n> you're not alive, and Mount Fuji will be there next year as well.\"\n\nSo I think it could translate to something like the following:\n\n> 山での遭難記事を読むたびに命あっての登山なのにと悲しく思う。\n>\n> \"Whenever I read articles about accidents in the mountains, I sadly think\n> 'it's not worth risking your life mountain climbing'.\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-05T12:51:50.150", "id": "8312", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-05T18:14:28.013", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "8303", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "(This is a \"draft\" answer because with more thought I can probably improve\nit.)\n\nAs Cypher says, use of あっての here is the same as that in the common Japanese\nsaying:\n\n> 命あっての物種[だ。]｜While there's life, there's hope. / It's not worth risking my\n> life for.\n\nUnfortunately this expression itself is, if not idiomatic, not gramatically\nintuitive either. もんだね is not directly translated in my dictionary but if we\napply the Japanese definition I used in my answer to your previous question:\n\n> N1あってのN2＝N1があるから N2が成立する\n\nto\n\n命あっての物種\n\nWe get:\n\n> Because we have life we exist ~>\n>\n> ~> Something that exists because we have life ~>\n>\n> ~> [in the case of 登山・mountain climbing]\"We would not be able to climb\n> mountains if we were not alive\" ~>\n>\n> ~> \"life is more important that climbing mountains\"\n\nNow, rather than agonising over this expression further, I would suggest we\nlook at the rest of the sentence:\n\n> ..なのにと...\n\nsounds like the conjunction for a \"fact => an unexpected result\" followed by a\n\"quotative と”: The \"unexpected result\" appears to have been omitted because it\ncan be inferred from the context of the passage from which this sentence has\nbeen taken. Without knowing the rest of the passage (see note 3 below), I\nwould guess this omission is something along the lines of \"people still do\nit\", \"people still do it without the proper equipment\" or even perhaps \"I\ncould not bear to give it up\".\n\nIf we put this all together we get:\n\n> \"Everytime I read about people getting killed in the mountains, I am sadly\n> reminded that even though mountain climbing is not worth risking your life,\n> [people still do it without the proper equipment].\"\n\n_Notes_ :\n\n 1. The omission is in [square parentheses].\n\n 2. I have taken a little literary license to translate \"悲しく思う” as \"sadly reminded\".\n\n 3. This sounds like a sentence from a JLPT N1 exercise, in which case, this might be a stand alone sentence rather than an extract from a passage because the examiner wants you to go through the same thought process I have just taken you through here. (And, by the way, this is a great question.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-05T15:38:59.697", "id": "8316", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-05T15:38:59.697", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "8303", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "いかがですか is a more formal way of saying どうですか, and similar to どうされますか. Saying\nコーヒーはいかがですか can also mean \"Would you like some coffee?\" Context should clarify\nit of course, but I think that どうですか would be preferred for asking _about_ the\ncoffee, and if you really wanted to drive the point home you can say something\nlike コーヒーの味はどうですか？\n\nTo make it more casual you can just use どう, as in コーヒーはどう？", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-05T03:41:32.240", "id": "8307", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-05T03:41:32.240", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "8306", "post_type": "answer", "score": 23 } ]

[ { "body": "Your first hunch is the correct one.\n\nIt'd be like saying in English, \"It would be great if we could meet again\nsomewhere.\"\n\nThe way it's phrased sounds like the person doesn't know when-and particularly\nwhere-you will be able to meet again. If it were the latter of your guesses it\nwould probably be emphasized for clarity, like ～素敵なところですね", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-05T05:23:26.043", "id": "8310", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-05T05:23:26.043", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "8308", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "どうする is more general than 何をする. The latter is more related to a specific\nevent, whereas the former asks for a general course of action.\n\nI would thus say that you could translate the sentence as\n\n> 母親の気持ちに対して、住友君はどうしましたか？ \n> How did Sumitomo-kun react to his mother's feelings?\n\nrather than\n\n> What specifically did Sumitomo-kun do with regards to his mother's feelings?\n\nMaybe the difference between 何を and どう is like the difference between a\ncountable and an uncountable quantity, if that makes any sense.\n\nFor example, \"What do you want to do?\" would usually be translated as どうする?,\nbecause you are asking for a general course of action. 何をする comes closer to\n\"Which one do you want to do?\". E.g., imagine a situation in an amusement\npark.\n\n> どうする?もう帰る?また乗り物に乗る? \n> What do you want to do? Go home? Or go on another ride?\n>\n> 何をする?乗り物に乗る?それとも、先にポップコーンを食べる? \n> (Given that we are in an amusement park) What do you want to do (here)? Do\n> you want to go on a ride or eat some popcorn first?\n\nYou should also be aware that there is the _fixed expression_\n\n> どうした? \n> What's wrong (with you)? _or_ \n> What's up?\n\nwhich is very common in conversational Japanese.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-05T14:28:04.700", "id": "8314", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-07T12:56:18.377", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "8313", "post_type": "answer", "score": 24 } ]

[ { "body": "Well, it's _always_ safe to use the hiragana. You could technically write\nJapanese entirely in kana, although it would become very difficult to read and\nlack the context clues provided by kanji.\n\nIf `海山` is someone's (family) name, first make sure it is really pronounced as\n`うみやま` because [it could have some other\npronunciation](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/5532/78). Secondly,\n[depending on the context for which you're writing the\nname](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/5316/78), you have several\ndifferent options.\n\nIf you're using `海山` to just mean \"the sea and mountains\" (or the phrase\n`海山の恩`), you can, and probably should use kanji.\n\nSo what's the rationale for replacing kanji with hiragana? Well, if you don't\nknow how to write the kanji, you can always fall back to hiragana as I\nmentioned. Another rationale would be writing something like a children's\nbook. Since young children may not know kanji, or how to read a certain kanji,\nthe author may use hiragana (although I believe `海` and `山` are likely taught\nat a young age).\n\nAnd although you didn't ask the inverse question, I'll answer it anyway.\nWhat's the rationale for using kanji instead of all kana? As I said, ease of\nreading. Once you start learning kanji, reading anything written in all kana\ncan be \"difficult\"; not that it's hard, but certainly can take longer. Kanji\nalso gives context. Japanese has **many** homonyms, so seeing something\nwritten in kanji can give you a reasonable, if not exact understanding of what\nit means. For example, if I write the word `いし`, you don't know if I mean\n\"rock\" (`石`), \"doctor\" (`医師`), \"will/volition\" (`意志`), or any of the many\nother words with that pronunciation.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-05T15:59:53.243", "id": "8317", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-03T02:48:28.403", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.260", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "8315", "post_type": "answer", "score": 25 }, { "body": "Hiragana is a script, which in normal Japanese texts is used alongside kanji\nand katakana.\n\nHiragana is usually used for grammatical functions (e.g., particles, verb\ninflections, etc.) and for words for which there doesn't exist kanji, or for\nwords whose kanji are non-standard.\n\n海山 would usually be written in kanji. However, 海山 could in principle also be\nread かいさん (or かいざん, see dainichi's comment below), which may be a reason for\nwriting it with furigana (like so [海山]{うみやま}) or with hiragana alone, for\nexample in books for primary school kids.\n\nDoes this answer your question?", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-05T16:04:08.567", "id": "8318", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-03T02:46:03.073", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-03T02:46:03.073", "last_editor_user_id": "125", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "8315", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "We generally do not deal with [resource\nquestions](https://japanese.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/796/what-\nquestions-are-not-allowed-on-japanese-language-and-usage/797#797) on JLU.\n\nThese sorts of questions are relatively common, though, and to provide a\nstarting point, a number of us have created a [resource\nlist](https://japanese.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/756) on the meta site\nas a part of this site's FAQ.\n\nIn this particular case, you will find a few sites like what you're looking\nfor in the Japanese section of the\n[Websites](https://japanese.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/756/resources-\nfor-learning-japanese/767#767) section.\n\nFor questions like this, as well as the other types of questions considered\n[offtopic](https://japanese.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/796), feel free\nto drop by the [chatroom](http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/511/japanese-\nlanguage-and-usage), although you may need to link your account to another\nstackexchange site to get enough rep to chat freely.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-05T20:05:11.460", "id": "8320", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-05T20:05:11.460", "last_edit_date": "2017-03-16T15:48:25.793", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "29", "parent_id": "8319", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "The whole sentence basically translates to something like\n\n> (I) Tried to verify the memories of the related parties of/at the time, but\n> I was surprised to learn that when it comes to the \"holes\" in the human\n> memory, their recollections of the same/shared experience were inconsistent\n> with each other, almost as if it was all setup -- (the memories) fabricated\n> to complement one another.\n\n * `関係者何人か` means \"several of the people related to <whatever the context is about>\".\n\n * The `驚かされた` is referring to whoever \"speaking\" that sentence; presumably the person that questioned these people about their memories of whatever happened.\n\nI know what `〜にあたって` means when it has the sense of `〜の時`, but that doesn't\nmake sense here. So I'm not sure why it is used in this sentence.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-05T20:42:34.400", "id": "8323", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-05T20:42:34.400", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "8321", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "To supplement @istrasci's answer:\n\nあたる here is [the 4th entry in the article on goo\n辞書](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/4694/m0u/%E3%81%82%E3%81%9F%E3%82%8B/),\nbasically \"investigate\" or \"observe\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-06T00:51:06.000", "id": "9329", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-06T00:51:06.000", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "8321", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "The answer here summarises my feelings on the matter as someone who's grown up\nwith both languages:\n\n<http://japanese.about.com/blqow13.htm>\n\nI'd strenuate the use of the English \"L\" noise when attempting Japanese words,\nI've never really understood why learning systems adopted \"R's\" when \"L's\"\nseem closer in sound.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-05T21:59:52.977", "id": "9325", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-05T21:59:52.977", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1866", "parent_id": "8324", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "The problem with L and R is that niether of them exist in Japanese. The\nJapanese sound is more of a cross between the English R and L, so it's very\ndifficult to distinguish the two, hence Engrish. A proper hard R is actually\njust as difficult to pronounce as an L for Japanese speakers, and the hardest\nwords to pronounce are those with both sounds (for example, parallel).\n\nIt might be hard to understand from an English speaker's viewpoint, because\nthe difference is as clear as day, but go ahead and try to distinguish the\nChinese X and SH", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-05T22:48:05.030", "id": "9327", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-05T22:48:05.030", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "921", "parent_id": "8324", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "Because [l] simply isn't in the native phonetic inventory of Japanese. The\nlack of phones in your native phonetic inventory is the reason for most\npronunciation difficulties.\n\nJust to add an observation, though:\n\nWhen trying to explain the [l] sound to native Japanese speakers, I usually\ntell them that it's like an [n] sound, except you should point your tongue a\nbit to allow air to escape on both sides of it. But it seems that this can be\nharder than it sounds. And thinking about it, no Japanese sound requires you\nto point your tongue. Doing things with your tongue you're not used to\nrequires muscle training, and native Japanese speakers would probably lack\nthis training.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-06T00:33:34.383", "id": "9328", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-06T00:33:34.383", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "8324", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "If you ask a Japanese person to say a word like renraku fast, and then\ngradually ask them to say it more and more slowly, you will notice that what\ninitially sounded like an r becomes an l as they slow down (usually earlier on\nfor women). So the claim that l and r don't exist is simply wrong -- they both\ndo, but as variants (allophones) of the same sound (phoneme).\n\nIf you tell them that they first said an r and then an l, you will surprise\nthe heck out of them as they usually have no idea about this and will probably\nbe unable to tell the difference. The reason is fairly simple: it's the same\nsound in Japanese. The only difference between the Japanese l and the Japanese\nr -- not the English r, which is quite different -- is mostly the duration of\nthe contact between the tongue and the roof of the mouth and while this\nfeature allows the two sounds to be distinguished in European languages, it is\nNOT a distinguishing feature in Japanese.\n\nSimilarly, English speakers fail to distinguish many sounds. Some languages\nhave nasal vowels (French, Portuguese, Polish, etc.): when the soft palate is\nlowered to allow air to pass through the nose as a vowel is produced, it\nchanges a vowel to a nasal vowel and this is a distinguishing feature -- but\nnot in English. So in a word like bank, the a is nasal because it is following\nby a \"ng\" sound, and if you ask English speakers what vowel is it, they'll say\nit's an a, while for a speaker of Portuguese, it's a nasal vowel, not an \"a\".\nAnother example is how English t, p and k sounds are aspirated (there is a\npuff of air) at the beginning of words or between vowels, but not after an s,\nfor instance. English speakers usually have no idea about this, but in other\nlanguages, such as Korean, aspirated and unaspirated t's are two very\ndifferent consonants. So if you want some insight into how it feels to not\ntell l and r apart, ask yourself why you, as an English speaker (if you are),\ncan't distinguish nasality or aspiration.\n\nSo the first problem is that Japanese people have a hard time hearing whether\nan l or an r is being produced because they are two possible realizations of\nthe single phoneme to them, and consequently, they have a very difficult time\nremembering which is which. You'll find the same thing with z/dz. Ask a\nJapanese if you should say zettai (with a z) and they'll say yes. Ask again if\nit's dzettai (with dz) and they'll also say yes. Ask which they prefer and\nthey'll tell you they only heard one pronunciation, even though you clearly\nsaid z in one case and dz in the other.\n\nTo make matters worse, they start out learning English using the wrong kind of\nflapped r (as in Spanish or Italian), while the English r is not flapped, but\nis rather a retroflex r where the tongue is curled back and doesn't touch any\npart of the mouth. To make matters even worse, the way English words are\nborrowed into Japanese interferes with their perception of English words, ie.\nthey are spelled in a way that doesn't distinguish l and r (love=rabu), final\nr's are turned into a's (computer=kompyuutaa), etc. They really need to stop\nusing katakana transcriptions. Note also that the English r involves lip-\nrounding, but since this isn't used in Japanese -- and they start learning to\npronounce English without ever using lip-rounding -- they fail to see this as\nan important feature of English r.\n\nThe second problem is that even if they remember which is which, production is\nvery difficult because the brain is used to treating both sounds as one, and\nthey usually spent a fair bit of their lives as learners of English in a\ncontext where you simply said l and r the same and that's how everyone did it.\nIt's a bit like relearning to walk after an injury.\n\nSo, while it's true that some Japanese people have a difficult time saying the\nEnglish r, most can usually make l and r in isolation once they've understood\nhow the sounds work. The biggest problem is that they have a hard time telling\nl and r apart when hearing it in speech, remembering whether a given word\nactually has an l or an r (and they often misspell words containing these\nsounds), and then producing either sound with regularity is ultimately the\nmost difficult exercise.\n\nOne final note: to make it easier to explain, I left out some details. For\ninstance, the English l is sometimes curled and English l and r are sometimes\ndevoiced (compare ray and pray). These are small details that also make the\nsounds harder to produce accurately.", "comment_count": 9, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-06T12:35:27.647", "id": "9333", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-06T14:29:33.627", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-06T14:29:33.627", "last_editor_user_id": "801", "owner_user_id": "801", "parent_id": "8324", "post_type": "answer", "score": 41 }, { "body": "There is a very good article in the Scientific American Mind magazine:\n<http://www.scientificamerican.com/magazine/mind/2014/07-01/> (pages 24-25).\n\nThe authors also talk about an experiment that was developed at Carnegie Melon\nUniversity, which teaches native Japanese speakers to learn the difference\nbetween L and R sounds with reinforcement learning.\n\nThere is also a free app which utilses the same reinforcement learning\ntechnique discovered by the scientist at Carnegie Melon University at:\n<http://www.lirril.co>", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-09-01T15:42:17.117", "id": "18528", "last_activity_date": "2014-09-01T15:42:17.117", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "7189", "parent_id": "8324", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "Same reason English native speakers have problems with the Spanish /r/ (both\nversions) They don't exist in the language. The Japanese ら、れ、etc is a\ncombination of /r/ and /l/ (it's actually quite similar to the soft Spanish\n/r/) It is possible for Japanese people who have been studying the language\nfor a long time and have traveled abroad to pronounce them correctly, but for\na beginner, or somebody who just studied the basics (in a very deficient way)\nat high school, it's probably difficult. Same happens with English natives\nlearning Spanish, and vice versa. And obviously, it's also difficult for us to\npronounce correctly the Japanese ら、れ、etc (among others)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2015-02-21T11:55:01.397", "id": "22922", "last_activity_date": "2015-02-21T11:55:01.397", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5423", "parent_id": "8324", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "They are very similar, however there is a slight difference in nuance. げ\nimplies a stronger sense of _uncertainty_ compared to そう.\n\nSo, in your first example, you are not certain whether he wanted to say\nsomething or not, while in the second example, you are _almost_ certain that\nhe wants to say something.\n\nAnother example:\n\n> 彼が楽しそうに話している //#1\n>\n> 彼が楽しげに話している //#2\n\nIf you saw the person and noticed that they were laughing, smiling, etc. You\nare most likely to use version #1 and not version #2 because you are confident\nabout your conjecture.\n\nHowever, although in standard dialect there is the distinction I mentioned\nabove, in some dialects (and in young people's slang) they do no make this\ndistinction and げ is used commonly to mean そう.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-05T22:00:05.910", "id": "9326", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-05T22:00:05.910", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1217", "parent_id": "9324", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "に応じる usually means in relation to what ever is happening before the phase.\n\nFor example:\n\n * 必要に応じて would be \"As necessary\" \n * XYZの進行に応じて would be along the line of \"as XYZ progresses\"\n * XYZの結果に応じて would be \"according to the consequences of\"\n\n(I'll add more if question becomes popular)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-07T08:48:11.340", "id": "9340", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-07T08:48:11.340", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1805", "parent_id": "9330", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "e does not become a. Rather, it is the other way around: a becomes e. More\nspecifically, there are two forms of e: e1 and e2. (See 上代特殊仮名遣) The rule is a\n+ i > e2. Both e1 and e2 merge into e after Nara period.\n\nFor reference, these pairs are termed 被覆形 and 露出形. The form without the -i\nsuffix is 被覆形 while the -i suffixed form is 露出形.", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-06T05:18:21.563", "id": "9332", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-06T05:24:52.693", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-06T05:24:52.693", "last_editor_user_id": "1141", "owner_user_id": "1141", "parent_id": "9331", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "As far as I understand them, 準備 seems like doing something concrete as\npreparation to do something, or preparing for something to happen.\n\n覚悟 is more of a mental readiness for something (心に用意のあること). The best way I\nremember this is that in the Street Fighter games, Chun Li often says this in\nher pre-fight intro\n([覚悟はいい？](http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=hP4wUl2kPb0#t=6s)\nー Are you ready?).\n\n用意 seems to overlap the two, but more with 準備 than 覚悟.\n\nAnother word to consider is [支度]{し・たく}. I've never heard of it before now, but\napparently it is mainly used only in speech, and often just relating to\nfood/clothing.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-06T16:04:00.077", "id": "9335", "last_activity_date": "2017-01-24T00:00:25.033", "last_edit_date": "2017-01-24T00:00:25.033", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "9334", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "* Between `準備` and `用意`, they're both used for preparing in advance, but `用意` puts emphasis on preparing things in advance so they can be used when the time comes, so is used more when e.g. baking a cake in advance, and `準備` is used in a more general way, like preparations for an athletics carnival or something.\n\n`準備` is also used in the expression `心の準備はできている`, which is used for mental\npreparedness in a similar way that `覚悟ができている` is.\n\n * `覚悟` is used when bracing oneself for something which is going to be unpleasant, or preparing for something that will be dangerous/difficult etc.\n\n * `支度` is particularly used in reference to meals e.g. preparing dinner (`夕飯の支度をする`), and preparing for the execution of something that's planned/done as a matter of course e.g. preparing for a trip (`旅行の支度をする`) or preparing for school (`学校へ行く支度をする`).\n\nI believe `夕飯の用意をする` is also used, so I think there's a bit of overlap.\n\n * `備える` is used for preparing for a disaster etc, or for preparing furniture or electrical appliances and whatnot so they can be used whenever they need to be.\n\n * `できている` can often mean something is in a prepared state (\"ready\", \"completed\" or \"done\" etc), and `Xでできている` means that something is made of `X`.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-06T23:36:29.650", "id": "9336", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-07T06:49:55.403", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-07T06:49:55.403", "last_editor_user_id": "796", "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "9334", "post_type": "answer", "score": 20 }, { "body": "[From here](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E6%BA%96%E5%82%99):\n\n>\n> [用法]準備・用意――「食事の準備（用意）が整った」「外出の準備（用意）をする」「研究発表の準備（用意）をする」など、前もって整える意では、相通じて用いられる。◇「準備」は、「大会の準備をする」といえば、必要な物をそろえるだけでなく、そのための組織を運営することをも含み、総合的であるといえる。◇「用意」は「大地震にそなえて十分な用意をする」「当日は上履を御用意ください」のように、必要なものを前もってそろえておくことに意味の重点がある。◇類似の語「支度」は、必要な物をそろえる具体的な行動をする意に用い、「支度金」は必要品を買いととのえる金銭であり、「食事の支度をする」は、材料をそろえて調理することである。\n\n**Translation (I broke it up so it would be easier to read)**\n\n> [Usage] 準備・用意 - In the examples meaning to prepare in\n> advance,「食事の準備（用意）が整った]、「外出の準備（用意）をする」、「研究発表の準備（用意）をする」, etc. **both** can\n> be used.\n>\n> ◇「準備」in sentences like 「大会の準備をする」 does not mean just to prepare necessary\n> materials (things), but **includes the idea that you are managing an\n> organization (event), and can be considered more general (encompassing).**\n>\n> ◇「用意」as seen in 「大地震にそなえて十分な用意をする」 and 「当日は上履を御用意ください」 **puts the focus on\n> collecting (preparing) the necessary goods (materials) in advance.**\n>\n> ◇Also the very similar 「支度」is used for the **specific action** you are doing\n> in order to prepare the necessary materials (things). 「支度金」 is the money\n> used to buy the necessary goods (materials) > and 「食事の支度をする」means to collect\n> the necessary goods and prepare food.\n\nSo, `準備`, `用意` and `支度` are similar. `覚悟` can be considered different from the\nabove, as it means \"mental preparation for a dangerous, difficult or\ndisadvantageous situation\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-06T23:55:38.047", "id": "9337", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-07T00:50:21.020", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1217", "parent_id": "9334", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "The kanji is 掻. Let me describe how you can check.\n\nWhen you type the expression in with your IME, often a dictionary with appear\nwith usage information. On my system, when I type かく, to the side a window\nwith details on 掻く, 書く, 描く, and 搔く appears. For 掻く it says:\n（頭・あぐら・汗・いびき・裏・寝首・恥・べそを）⇒かく ＊掻く：常用外 ＊簡易慣用字体\n\nNote arrow suggesting that it be written in hiragana. Also note the * which\nindicates that it is not included in basic kanji, and hence is not typically\nwritten in kanji.\n\nAlso, the\n[dictionary](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?p=%E6%8E%BB%E3%81%8F&stype=0&dtype=0&dname=0na)\nis often useful. Quote:\n\n> か・く【×掻く】\n>\n> ② 涙や汗などをからだの外に出す。「寝汗を―・く」「べそを―・く」\n\nNote the × before the headword. This indicates that it is not generally\nwritten in kanji. Same details as above.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-07T09:04:42.680", "id": "9341", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-07T09:22:04.100", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1141", "parent_id": "9339", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "If you were to ask me 何の映画を見ました, I would respond with the name of the movie.\nIf you were to use どんな, I would respond with a description of the movie. In\nthe broadest terms it's the difference between \"which/what\" and \"what kind\nof.\" 何の is asking for something specific where どんな is asking for a\ndescription.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-07T11:55:23.593", "id": "9344", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-07T11:55:23.593", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "9342", "post_type": "answer", "score": 20 }, { "body": "I would say it's a description of content (`何の`) vs. description of\ncharacteristics (`どんな`)\n\n> * それは何の本ですか。 (What/which book is that? / \"What is the content of that\n> book?\") → これは生物学の本です。 (It's a biology book.)\n> * それはどんな本ですか。 (What kind of book is that? / \"How would you describe that\n> book?\") → これは分厚くて、重い本です。 (It's a thick, heavy book.)\n>", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-07T15:25:22.850", "id": "9346", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-07T15:25:22.850", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "9342", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "It is kind of a simple grammar actually... you use どんな in order to say: _How?_\n, _What kind of?_ and, generally speaking, something related to type. On the\nother hand 何{なん} is used in order to specify characteristics of the modified\nterm. However it gets a little bit more complicated sometimes, because it\nmight be unclear where the difference is depending on the context. So, here we\ngo with examples.\n\n## Describing content\n\nAs someone else pointed out, 何 is used to describe content. Consider the\nfollowing:\n\n> それは何の本ですか。 => That book, what is it about?\n>\n> この雑誌はファッションの雑誌ですよ => That megazine is a fashion one.\n\nWhen content is involved, it is really easy because we are talking about\nbooks, megazines. But this will work for videos as well:\n\n> 見た映画は何の(映画)でしたか。 => What was it about, the movie you saw?\n\nEverytime you need to say some like _to be about of..._ , no problems, use 何.\n\n## Describing places and people\n\nIt happens quite often to ask something like:\n\n> What kind of place is that?\n\nOr:\n\n> What kind of town is it?\n\nSo, we can have the following:\n\n> Q) 東京はどんな町ですか。 => What kind of town is Tokyo?\n>\n> A) あの、東京はすごく大きな町ですよ。 => Well, Tokyo is a really big city.\n\nThe same goes for people, have you ever asked someone something like: \"What\nkind of guy is he?\". Well, here we go:\n\n> Q) えと、前川さんの友達はどんな人ですか。 => Ehm, The friend of Maekawa-san, what kind of guy\n> is he?\n>\n> A) あのね、その人は優しいし、けいけんがあるし、いい人だと思う。 => Well, considering he is very kind and\n> experience, I think is a good guy.\n\nThere is also the typical sentence about weather:\n\n> What's the weather like in Japan? => 日{に}本{ほん}はどんな天{てん}気{き}ですか。\n\n## Describing characteristics in general\n\n何 is used also to specify elements that belong (physically or in an abstract\nway) to something. Consider the following:\n\n> その車は何色ですか。 => What color is that car?\n>\n> 何と言う意味ですか。 => What is the meaning of this? (quite an idiomatic sentence\n> though)\n>\n> 何のためですか。 => What is this for? (asking about the purpose of a certain action)\n\nPlease note that here you want to have some sort of clear answer and a brief\none as well. What color my car? Red! And that's it. I am pointing this\nbecause, in the next lines, I am going to give you a little hint about the\ngood times when it is appropriate to use どんな.\n\n## In general\n\nNot easy sometimes, but one general rule might be the following: Use どんな\nwhenever you want a description of something, when you want to know something\nmore about a man, a place, a woman, an object. When you use どんな always expect\nyour interlocutor to provide a brief/long description which will never be\nlimited to few words. When using どんな you want to take some time and consider\nsomething more detailed.\n\nUse 何for the rest.\n\nJapanese language sometimes is not easy to grasp, and sometimes trying to be\nvery firm and not flexible (trying to achieve a generic strict rule) is a\nwrong approach. I was among thos ones who tried that way, had to give up...", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-09T18:54:49.580", "id": "9398", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-14T15:00:45.257", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "12", "parent_id": "9342", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "へと is used when you are directing your audience's attention to the content\nthat comes after the と for emphasis. 「やや強意の副詞的表現に属することを表す」 \nExample:\n\n> 透【す】き通【とお】るような青【あお】空【ぞら】の中【なか】へと白【しろ】いボールが吸【す】い込まれていく \n> The white ball disappeared into the crystal clear blue sky\n\n透き通るような青空の中 へ 白いボールが吸い込まれていく \nWithout the と it is simply a statement of fact. \nQ: \"What did the ball disappear into?\" \nA: \"The blue sky.\" \nThe end. \nBut with the と, the \"crystal clear blue sky\" is emphasized in the mind of your\naudience.\n\nOf course this means that the same sentence without the と would be\ngrammatically correct, be understood by native speakers, and most likely not\nbe thought of as unnatural or needing correction of any sort. The difference\nis in the imagery you paint in the mind of your audience along with the\nassociated feelings.\n\nOf the examples in the question I think this is easiest to see with\n\n> ～へと先送りされる : to be postponed to ~\n\nIf we say \n7月15日へ先送りされる。 Then something has been postponed until July 15. A simple\nstatement of fact. But if we say \n7月15日へと先送りされる。Then something has been postponed until July 15 and we are\nletting our audience know that we feel this is far away and is going to be a\nlong wait.\n\nWhich leads to another usage of へと. By breaking the flow of the sentence with\nと, you indicate that the content that comes next did not happen easily or\nwithout effort. 「へ」より「へと」のほうが「長い道のりを経て」 This is probably easiest to see with\n\n> ～へと旅立つ : to make a trip to ~\n\nIf we say 北海道へ旅立つ。 Then all we are saying is that we made a trip to Hokkaido. \nBut if we say \n北海道へと旅立つ。 Then we imply a journey that required effort and the imagery painted\nfor the audience takes on a whole new depth.\n\n**Conclusion** \n`へと seems to be equivalent to へ or even に.` \nIt is, in terms of meaning, but as you can see above the feeling can be quite\ndifferent. \n`How is へと different from へ?` \nThe difference is in the emphasis that と brings to the sentence. \n`How is へと different from に?` \nThere are many cases where へ and に are the same. The 広辞苑 dictionary uses に in\ndefinition 2 of the particle へ. So since the と is adding emphasis, the answer\nto this question lies in the difference between へ and に, which is beyond the\nscope of this Q&A. On a side note though, に and と also have such a\nrelationship. (～となる and ～になる) \n`What does と do and what nuance does it add?` \nI hope the above answer has made that clear by now. (^_^)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-07T18:55:45.720", "id": "9359", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-07T19:01:13.283", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-07T19:01:13.283", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "1761", "parent_id": "9343", "post_type": "answer", "score": 30 }, { "body": "I expect to see/hear「税率が10パーセントへと下がる」on newspaper or TV news. I'd\nsay「税率が10パーセントに下がる」in normal conversation. (I'm not sure if we\nsay「税率が10パーセントへ下がる」.) \n \n「来年度へと先送りする」「来年度へ先送りする」are what I expect to see/hear on newspaper or TV news.\nI think I use「来年度に先送りする」in daily conversation, and I wouldn't say\n「来年度へと先送りされる」when I talk casually. \n \nTo me,「旅客機は東京へと旅立った」sounds more literary than「旅客機は東京へ旅立った」,\nand「旅客機は東京へ旅立った」sounds more literary than「旅客機は東京に旅立った」.「~~へと旅立った」sounds a bit\nelegant and poetic too. I think we normally say 「旅客機は東京に\"出発し\"た」when we talk\ncasually. \n \nAmong「～～へと広がっている」「～～へ広がっている」「～～に広がっている」, the first sounds most literary and\nthe last sounds most colloquial to me, but「～～に広がっている」can also mean\n\"(something) has spread throughout~~\" \"(something can be seen) all over~~\"\nwhile 「～～へと広がっている」「～～へ広がっている」sound more like \"Something is spreading TO~~\".\n(For example, you might see the difference between 「大空に広がる雲」 and 「大空へと広がる雲」.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-18T23:00:56.083", "id": "9498", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-18T23:00:56.083", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "9343", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "The sentence is complete and _grammatically correct_ without ようだ. (Please also\nsee Tsuyoshi Ito's answer.)\n\n…ようだ adds \"It seems that ...\".\n\nIn this case,\n\n> 父はデジタルカメラの講習を受けに行ったが、あまりの難しさにびっくりしたようだ。 \n> My dad went to take a short course on digital cameras, but it seems that he\n> was surprised at just how difficult it was.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-07T15:48:12.493", "id": "9347", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-07T16:25:58.840", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-07T16:25:58.840", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "9345", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "This `〜ようだ` means \"it seems\", and means you are making the statement as\nconjecture based on some kind of information. The first sentence says \"It\nseems he was surprised by how difficult the course was\". You might say this\nafter seeing him confusingly tinkering around with the camera even after the\ncourse. If you leave off `〜ようだ`, it's saying that he was _definitely_\nsurprised by how difficult it was; maybe he told you, or your mother told you\nhe said that, etc.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-07T15:53:45.917", "id": "9348", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-07T15:53:45.917", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "9345", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "> 父はデジタルカメラの講習を受けに行ったが、あまりの難しさにびっくりした。\n\nThis sentence is correct only in limited contexts.\n\nIt states the _definite fact_ that the father got surprised. As Derek Schaab\nstated in [this\nanswer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/2524/when-to-\nuse-%E6%AC%B2%E3%81%97%E3%81%8C%E3%82%8B-instead-\nof-%E6%AC%B2%E3%81%97%E3%81%84/2538#2538) accurately,\n\n> Japanese has a curious unwritten rule which states, in essence, that you\n> cannot presume to know the intimate details of a third person's mental\n> state.\n\nTherefore, if the author of the sentence _is_ the father and using 父 as a\nfirst-person pronoun, then the sentence is fine, but otherwise you need ようだ.\n\nBy the way, for some reason, the sentence becomes natural if it ends with\nびっくりしていた instead of びっくりした when 父 refers to the author’s father. I do not know\nwhy.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-07T16:13:16.237", "id": "9350", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-07T16:43:18.720", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.863", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "9345", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "From The Structure of The Japanese Language, Susumu Kuno (1980, p. 274-278)\n\nThe words in parenthesis and the bolding are my additions.\n\n> What is at issue here is not the presence or absence of the syntactic\n> negative but the presence or absence of the semantic negative in questions.\n> In other words, the deciding factor here is whether the questioner is\n> expecting a negative answer or not from the hearer.\n>\n> The issue, then, is whether, given a negative question, there are any\n> syntactic clues to distinguish a semantically neutral question from one that\n> contains the questioner's expectation of a positive answer.\n>\n> Q: 何も買いませんでしたか。(without expectation of positive answer) \n> A1: はい、何も買いませんでした。 \n> A2: いいえ、本を買いました。\n>\n> Q: 何か買いませんでしたか。(with expectation of positive answer) \n> A1: はい、本を買いました \n> A2:いいえ、何も買いませんでした \n>\n>\n> When a question involves the ... _no/n desu_ 'it is that ...' pattern, it\n> appears to be a neutral question if the negative is in the clause preceding\n> no/n, **but a question with the expectation of a positive answer if the\n> _desu_ is negated**.\n>\n> Q: 行か **な** かったのですか。(without expectation of positive answer) \n> A1: はい、行かなかったのです。 \n> A2: いいえ、行きましたよ。 \n>\n>\n> Q: 行ったのではあり **ません** か。(with expectation of positive answer) \n> A1: はい、行きましたよ。 \n> A2: いいえ、行かなかったのです。 \n>\n\nYour question ends with `～のではないか。` It is a case of a のです pattern with the\nnegation in the です instead of in the clause preceding の・ん.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-07T16:43:37.617", "id": "9353", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-07T16:50:20.910", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "542", "parent_id": "9349", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "There is ~て+おく, e.g.\n\n> そのままにしておいてください。 \n> Please leave it the way it is.\n\nThe rationale is you do something and then you leave it that way ([置]{お}く\nmeans to put/leave). In informal situations ~て+おく is oftened shortened to ~とく,\ne.g.\n\n> ドアを開けといてください。 \n> Please leave the door open. ( _lit._ Please open the door and leave it that\n> way.)\n\nSimilar constructions are\n\n * ~てみる \"to try to do sth.\", or\n * ~てしまう \"to do sth. (with a negative connotation)\"", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-07T16:22:47.800", "id": "9352", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-07T16:31:53.077", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-07T16:31:53.077", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "9351", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "`〜ておく` means to do something in advance as preparation/expectation for\nsomething happening. That is to say, the thing is not yet done.\n\n> * パーティーのため、ケーキを作っておく。 → I'll make a cake (ahead of time) for the party.\n>\n\nHowever, if the action is already done and you want it to continue to remain\nin that state, use `〜たまま`.\n\n> * ドアを開けたままにしてください。 → Please leave the door open (as it was already open).\n> / \"Please let the door remain as opened.\"\n> * (Facebook login in Japanese) ログインしたままにする → Keep me logged in.\n>", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-07T16:44:01.513", "id": "9355", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-08T04:41:45.703", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-08T04:41:45.703", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "9351", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "For completeness, another way might be to use `〜っ放{ぱな}し` on the end of the\n`連用形` (conjunctive form) of verbs, but in contrast to `〜たまま` it tends to have\na negative nuance, e.g. `ドアを開けっ放しにしないでください` \"Please don't leave the door\nopen\".", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-08T05:47:50.860", "id": "9370", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-08T05:47:50.860", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "9351", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "How about using 放る as in 放っておく.\n\n[まま と 放る](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/9368/769)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-08T06:33:49.397", "id": "9371", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-08T06:33:49.397", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:43.857", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "769", "parent_id": "9351", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "This may not be the answer your looking for. But maybe if you're looking for\nan easier way to remember that. We do have a phrase in English kind of like\nthat: \"it got to me.\" If you tried to explain that, you'd run into the same\nproblem.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-07T18:03:01.970", "id": "9357", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-07T18:03:01.970", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "2876", "parent_id": "9356", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "Perhaps the body is imagined as a vessel that can contain things, frustration\nand anger being some of those things, and the theoretical limit is when we're\nfilled up to the head.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-07T18:24:22.737", "id": "9358", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-07T18:24:22.737", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "542", "parent_id": "9356", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "I think of it as blood rushing to my head when I am angry.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-08T10:06:58.763", "id": "9375", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-08T10:06:58.763", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "9356", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "楽しい is more like \"that is fun\" or \"that is enjoyable\"\n\n面白い is more like \"that is interesting\" or \"that is captivating\".", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-07T19:21:48.490", "id": "9362", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-07T22:20:47.767", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-07T22:20:47.767", "last_editor_user_id": "769", "owner_user_id": "769", "parent_id": "9360", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "`楽しい` is more like \"fun, enjoyable\", like a trip to the zoo.\n\n`面白い` is more like \"interesting, amusing\", like a good movie.\n\nOf course, watching the movie could be `楽しい`, and all the neat things you\nlearn at the zoo could be `面白い`, so the meanings are indeed close.\n\nA _funny guy_ would use 面白い.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-07T19:22:59.253", "id": "9363", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-07T19:35:15.420", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-07T19:35:15.420", "last_editor_user_id": "921", "owner_user_id": "921", "parent_id": "9360", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "* A child on a roller coaster exclaims 楽しい!\n * A physicist sees an unexpected factor in the equations describing the speed at the top of the third hump and muses 面白い.\n\nThose are the extremes. There are quite a few things which can definitely be\ndescribed by both, including people with slightly different nuances.\n\n楽しい人 does not mean \"interesting/fun person\" for a rather curious reason. Since\nit relates to internal emotional state, 楽しい defaults to talking about the\nspeaker's emotions. 楽しい人 translates to \"person I find fun/enjoyable-to-be-\nwith\". It can have a romantic connotation, or a meaning close to \"person I\nenjoy chatting with\".\n\n面白い人 similarly means \"Person I find interesting\", not \"Person who is\ninterested\". It also has the implication of \"person who is humorous\", but only\nif the speaker enjoys that humor. This is probably what you are looking for,\nbut realize that neither is really making an objective statement.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-07T20:02:31.940", "id": "9366", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-07T21:11:20.387", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-07T21:11:20.387", "last_editor_user_id": "29", "owner_user_id": "29", "parent_id": "9360", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "In English we sometimes talk about \"funny-peculiar\" and \"funny ha ha\". 面白い is\na bit like \"funny ha ha\" and \"interesting, with possibly shades of peculiar\".\n楽しい is enjoyable. A 楽しい人 is fun to be with.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-08T10:05:23.570", "id": "9374", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-08T10:05:23.570", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "9360", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "口の中で is probably the Japanese idiomatic equivalent of \"under one's breath.\"\nLiterally, neither idiom makes sense, but both sort of convey the same\nconcept.\n\n> 彼は口の中で唸った。// \"He groaned under his breath.\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-12T09:48:08.197", "id": "9409", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-12T09:48:08.197", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "974", "parent_id": "9361", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "ssb hinted at the answer, but basically 中 implies a closed-off space. So in\nyour example 口の中 is used metaphorically to mean that the person is groaning\n(making a sound) with there mouth closed to imply someone is thinking deeply\nabout something, expressing there displeasure about something, etc.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-12T21:57:17.310", "id": "9410", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-12T21:57:17.310", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1217", "parent_id": "9361", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "I think the following are all valid\n\n * 剣道で頑張って \nDo your best (while) at Kendo (practice)\n\n * 剣道は頑張って \nDo your best for Kendo (generally)\n\n * 剣道を頑張って \nDo your best in Kendo\n\nThe last two are equivalent up to the difference in nuance between は and を. Of\ncourse all could be used in the same situation. The difference in usage is\nprobably biggest between the first and the last two. The first implies you\nshould give your best (only) when you are doing Kendo. The last two imply you\nshould give your best for Kendo, even when you are currently not practising,\ne.g. you should attend practice more regularly.\n\nAs far as I can see\n\n * 剣道、頑張ってください\n\ncould be short for any of them, although I would probably understand it as an\nomission of は.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-07T20:40:15.753", "id": "9367", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-07T20:40:15.753", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "9364", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "I believe that 頑張る by itself is a 自動詞 but in TOEICを頑張る it becomes 他動詞。\n\nA bit confusing, but many verbs can be used in both constructions, just like\nin English.\n\nThe distinction between 自動詞 and 他動詞 only really matters when there's an\nalternating pair like 開ける and 開く。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-09T06:14:03.327", "id": "9389", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-09T06:14:03.327", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1769", "parent_id": "9364", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "I'll venture to say that adding the は simply emphasizes yesterday. Without it\nit just feels like the fact that it was yesterday is a little less important.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-09T00:24:58.833", "id": "9385", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-09T00:24:58.833", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "9365", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "There is no grammatical need for は in that sentence.\n\nは is used for topic/comment constructions and this sentence isn't making a\ncomment on the topic of \"yesterday\" at all.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-09T05:53:02.873", "id": "9388", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-09T05:53:02.873", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1769", "parent_id": "9365", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "I think this は is a \"topical は\" or \"contrastive は\". 昨日初めてお寿司を食べました sounds to\nme like you're just reporting that you ate sushi for the first time the day\nbefore, and 昨日\"は\"初めてお寿司を食べました sounds to me like \"Speaking of yesterday, I ate\nsushi for the first time,\" (probably someone's just asked what you did\nyesterday, like 昨日、どこに行ったの? or 昨日、京都で何したの？etc.), or \"(The day before yesterday\nI went to eat sukiyaki, and) as for yesterday, I ate sushi for the first\ntime\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-13T13:15:44.083", "id": "9413", "last_activity_date": "2016-05-22T06:56:29.107", "last_edit_date": "2016-05-22T06:56:29.107", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "9365", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "まま and 放っておく are quite different in meaning and function. The dictionary\ndefinition is similar in the same way that the dictionary definition for the\nEnglish words \"Conclusion\" and \"Finished\" are similar.\n\nまま is used in constructions like:\n\n> 開いたまま = Opened and left that way \n> \n> 窓は開いたままでかまいませんか？ = Is the window alright left open? (i.e. does it need to\n> be closed?) このままでいいです = It's fine the way it is. \n> \n> 袋に入れましょうか？ Shall I put it in a bag? \n> いや、このままでいいです。No it's fine the way it is.\n\n放っておく is a construction of the base word ほうる \"to abandon\" or \"to leave alone\",\nwith お meaning roughly, \"on purpose/for the future\".\n\nIn short, they are similar in lexical domain, but very different in usage.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-09T05:38:14.380", "id": "9387", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-14T11:53:45.613", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-14T11:53:45.613", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1769", "parent_id": "9368", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "A translation should make this clear:\n\n( _このまま_ ) **放っておけば** 村は全滅するかもしれん…。\n\n**If left** ( _to itself / this way_ ), the village would surely go to ruin.\n\nSo まま really only means \"as it is\", only with 放っておけば it composes to \"left as\nit is\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-21T15:33:31.687", "id": "9532", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-21T15:33:31.687", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1537", "parent_id": "9368", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes it is used all the time. Perhaps the best tip is that if you don't want to\ndirectly express your preferance (\"I want\") or direct tell somebody that they\nare wrong or something else is better you can make a more gentle suggestion\nusing this expression.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-08T09:55:14.800", "id": "9372", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-08T13:37:07.170", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-08T13:37:07.170", "last_editor_user_id": "1556", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "9369", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "Yes, absolutely! One year in Japan and during that time I heard them using\nthese kinds of sentence all the time. So, yes, it is a common issue.\n\nI will provide a broader view for your question. You are actually asking about\nthe following pattern:\n\n> (Noun)のほう(...)\n\nWhose meaning is the one of pointing out something whenever two options are\nconsidered.\n\n## When two options are involved\n\nSo, just start from the fact that `ほう` is put after a noun (using particle\n`の`) in order to say: `This one is better`. Or to indicate that the noun\nmodified by `ほう` is the better choice.\n\nWhen a question is giving you two options, generally it is necessary to\nexpress a preference. So the question can be:\n\n> 1) (Noun-A)と(Noun-B)と、どちらが速いですか。 => Between (Noun-A) and (Noun-B), which one\n> is fast? \n> 2) (Noun-A)と(Noun-B)と、どちらのほうが速いですか。 => Between (Noun-A) and (Noun-B), which\n> is the fastest? \n> 3) (Group)で、どれが速いですか。 => In (Group), which is fast? \n> 4) (Group)で、どれのほうが速いですか。 => In (Group), which is the fastest?\n\nPossible answers can be (respectively):\n\n> 1) (Noun-A)が速いです。 => (Noun-A) is fast！ \n> 2) (Noun-A)のほうが速いです。 => (Noun-A) is the fastest! \n> 3) (Group)で、(Noun)が速いです。 => In (Group), (Noun ) is fast! \n> 4) (Group)で、(Noun)ほうが速いです。 => In (Group), (noun) is the fastest!\n\nAs you can see, there are always two options! In the first two Qs and As it is\nobvious, but also when a group is involved there are two options. Consider the\nfollowing example:\n\n> あの学{が}校{っこう}の先{せん}生{せい}の中{なか}で、だれのほうが優{やさ}しいですか。 => Among the teachers in\n> that school, who is the nicest one?\n\nIn this case there are many teachers, but you are asking to consider only one\nand the rest, this makes two options out of many more!\n\n### Remarks\n\nSentences 1 and 3 (both Q and A), you see that I did not use `のほう`. In such\ncase you are not pointing out the best, the most appropriate, so you are just\nasking for the one that is fast, that's it. You are not stressing on the fact\nthat you need, among all, the fastest! It is an important difference. In Q and\nA 1 and 3 you simply want a fast one, anyone can do! But in Q and A 2 and 4\nyou are asking for one particular, the fastest. It is a matter of stressing on\nyour needs!\n\n## Understanding 一番 => Having more options\n\n`一{いち}番{ばん}` is used, on the other hand, when more options are involved. This\nwill let you understand when using `のほう` and when something else. So, as I\nsaid, many options. Consider the following questions:\n\n> 1a) (Noun-A)と(Noun-B)と(Noun-C)と、どれが一{いち}番{ばん}いいですか。 => Among (Noun-A),\n> (Noun-B) and (Noun-C), which one is the best?\n\nThe answer:\n\n> 1a) (Noun-A)が、一{いち}番{ばん}いいです。 => (Noun-A) is the best!\n\nAs you can see, when you have many options, you use `一{いち}番{ばん}`. But also in\nthis case, you can use `のほう`. The previous example can be translated like\nthis:\n\n> 1a) (Noun-A)と(Noun-B)と(Noun-C)と、どれのほうがいいですか。 => Among (Noun-A), (Noun-B) and\n> (Noun-C), which one is the best?\n\nThe answer:\n\n> 1a) (Noun-A)のほうがいいです。 => (Noun-A) is the best!\n\n## So, which one to use?\n\nThe general rule is that when you have two options, you use `のほう`, while, when\nyou have more options, you use `一{いち}番{ばん}`.\n\nHowever, in the context of many options being involved, if you wish to remark\nthat one option in particular the most appropriate one, you can use `のほう`.\n\nBe careful! You cannot use `一{いち}番{ばん}` when two options are involved!\n\nFinal tip: when comparison is involved you have `より`. In these cases you use\n`のほう`.\n\n## Some examples\n\nSince I used patterns a lot, here are some examples:\n\nFormal language:\n\n> 吉野さん (Yoshino-san) >> この本とそれと、どちらのほうが安いですか。 \n> 吉川さん (Yoshikawa-san) >> あの、この本のほうが安いと思いますよ。 \n> \n> 吉野さん (Yoshino-san) >> ごめんね、ちょっとペンを貸してもらえませんか。 \n> 吉川さん (Yoshikawa-san) >> ん！もちろん、どちらのほうが好きですか。 \n> 吉野さん (Yoshino-san) >> えと、右のほうが好きですよ。ありがとうね。\n\nPlain style:\n\n> エミちゃん (Emi-chan) >> ねぇ、宿題が難しかったんだよ、困っちゃったぜ〜。 \n> ケンちゃん (Ken-chan) >> ええ、そんなに難しくなかったぞ、やっぱエミちゃんは何も出来ねぇ。 \n> エミちゃん (Emi-chan) >> ひどいよケンちゃん！１ページのほうが難しかったよ。ケンは出来た？ \n> ケンちゃん (Ken-chan) >> えと、それだけ出来なかったんだ〜 \n> エミちゃん (Emi-chan) >> ほら！！！何も出来ないのはどっちのほうだ？ \n> ケンちゃん (Ken-chan) >> 分かった、分かったよ！ごめん！", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-08T10:01:14.477", "id": "9373", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-14T11:17:23.597", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-14T11:17:23.597", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "12", "parent_id": "9369", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "I will just add some information on this phrase, as I think the other answers\nare adequate for your question.\n\nのほう。。。is also used just to express preference or likes, without much of an\nemphasis on comparative meaning.\n\nSee for example, at 0:38 of this video, how this girl answers a question on\nwhere she lives:\n\n[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJ8f5JwLkwM&feature=plcp](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJ8f5JwLkwM&feature=plcp)\n\nのほう。。or ほうが。。。is a very common phrase also used to express when one \"should do\nsomething\"=\n\n> 家へ帰ったほうがいいよ\n>\n> We better go home.\n\nAnd in the example in your question, one could even answer the question \"\nAとBとどちらが速いですか？ \" with the brusque reply, \" Aのほう。\" (this would be an extremely\ncolloquial and informal response.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-08T16:44:13.357", "id": "9381", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-08T16:50:20.383", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "706", "parent_id": "9369", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "For your first question, the directions for mail expressly request 書留 through\n郵便. Regardless of whether or not it's allowed by mail, they do ask for that\n簡易書留 which is not there in answer 3. I would be more confused about #2 then\n#3. Generally, though, I would interpret 郵便 to be post and 宅急便 to be Sagawa or\nsomething.\n\nFor your second question, it says right in the first option 払い戻し手続きをお願い致します.\nBy going there you can get a refund for your ticket.\n\nAnd just for fun let's break down each of the answers:\n\n 1. This is valid as explained in the first option, as you know.\n 2. Incorrect because you need to send the letter to ANTONIO\n 3. Incorrect because it's not 書留 through 郵便\n 4. Incorrect because the answer says he will not be reimbursed for mailing\n\nHope this makes sense.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-09T00:18:30.573", "id": "9384", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-09T06:03:29.693", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-09T06:03:29.693", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "9377", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "@ssb explains answers the first question well.\n\nAs for your second question, ３・１９のチケットと引き替えにお手続きをいたします just means \"we will do\nthe procedure in exchange for the tickets\". The context that this is the\nprocedure of refunding you comes from the previous sentence.\n\nBut in effect, this is just a reminder to bring the tickets when you go for\nthe refund. It's just a \"sophisticated\" way of saying \"bring the tickets, and\nwe'll pay you back\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-09T04:41:08.143", "id": "9386", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-09T04:41:08.143", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "9377", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "Are you sure 意見 and 力 are the examples used as highly abstract objects?\n\nIn these examples it is the possessive and adjectives that determine the use\nof の vs な, and the possibility of using の by itself.\n\nFor example,\n\n日本の町人は経済的な **意見** を持っていたが、政治的な **意見** は持っていなかった。\n\nis also correct, but\n\n日本の町人は経済的 **の** 意見を持っていたが、政治的 **の** は持っていなかった。\n\nis wrong. Although to me it seems that this is only because 政治的 can be an\nadjective or a adverb, but not a noun, and not because of a 'one' meaning as\ndainichi pointed out.\n\nThe cases where の is used as one might look more like this\n\nどっちのがいい？ (which one)\n\n赤いのがいい (the red one)\n\nIn that case it seems informal and more likely to be used with physical\nobjects. I don't know if you can use it with 'highly abstract objects' or not\nbut it seems possible for some. Maybe someone can comment.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-08T14:53:16.070", "id": "9380", "last_activity_date": "2015-01-21T16:24:32.850", "last_edit_date": "2015-01-21T16:24:32.850", "last_editor_user_id": "3437", "owner_user_id": "878", "parent_id": "9379", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "I think the key here is that the noun to which の is referring in the second\nexample is a \"fuzzy concept\" noun (a term that I've coined myself after\ncontemplating this answer.)\n\nIn your comment to jlptn1's answer, you mention that because \"strength can be\nmeasured,\" it's not definitively a \"subjective\" concept. Firstly, I think\ntranslating 力 as \"strength\" is a mistranslation. There isn't a single word in\nEnglish that accurately encompasses what it really means; 力 is best defined\nusing a range of terms, and only one of those is \"strength.\" Others include\nability, power, fortitude, etc. As a result of this range of definitions, 力 as\na noun takes on a sort of protean character, in that its definition varies\ndepending on the context.\n\nI think that this context dependency, coupled with its \"fuzzy\" meaning,\nprevents 力 from being used in the construction you've shown above. The\nsemantic crux of the above construction is that in both halves of the\nsentence, the noun being referred to remains essentially identical. Let's take\nthis example:\n\n> 私は青い猫は好きですが、赤いのは嫌いです。// \"I like blue cats, but I hate red ones.\"\n\nIn both halves of the sentence, \"cat\" is just that: \"cat.\" Whether it is blue\nor red, a cat is still semantically a cat, and therefore we can eschew\nreferring to it explicitly in the second half and use the pronoun の. This\ncriterion—that the noun in question remains identical in both the pronoun and\nantecedent cases—is not met in the last example you gave. The \"力\" in 経済的な力 and\n政治的な力 most likely cannot be equated in Japanese grammar. Why? Well, economic 力\nand political 力 might be fundamentally different concepts. The former may\nrefer to more of a fortitude, while the latter is more of a power or ability.\nI cannot definitively say what the difference between both sorts of 力 is, but\nI do recognize that this difference exists. The 力 being used in the first half\nof the sentence is not replaceable with the 力 being used in the second half;\ntherefore, one cannot replace one with a pronoun that refers to the other.\n\nThat's probably why it's grammatically incorrect to use の to refer to \"highly\nabstract nouns\": they've got multiple definitions, and their meaning in a\nparticular context is highly influenced by that context, so they're not as\ninterchangeable as everyday nouns. A few nouns which I am willing to bet fall\nunder this \"highly abstract\" umbrella are 幸せ (happiness, elation, etc.), 苦しみ\n(suffering, pain, hardship), and 快楽 (pleasure). There's surely many more.\n\nI hope this explanation made some sort of sense to you; it's mostly just\nspeculation on my part, but I think it at least sort of gets at what the real\nanswer may be.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-12T09:39:52.967", "id": "9408", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-14T09:47:44.220", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-14T09:47:44.220", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "974", "parent_id": "9379", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "Well, this is not something easy and I had to take some of my grammar books\nback from shelf. Actually I also asked some Japanese teachers of mine in order\nto better understand this, and the answer is something I expected.\n\n## Just some grammar check\n\nIn order to provide some theory, here is grammar explanation for particle の\nusages (the two most important one):\n\n 1. To specify something more about an object.\n 2. To specify ownership.\n 3. To take up some topic in the sentence without any need to repeat it.\n\n### 1) Detailing and providing more info\n\nIn the first case the pattern is quite simple:\n\n> (Noun-1)の(Noun-2) => (Noun-1) is a characteristic of (Noun-2)\n\nExamples are:\n\n> 1.1) この雑誌は車の雑誌ですよ。 => This magazine is a magazine about cars.\n>\n> 1.2) この気温のセンサーは本当に大切な物なので、気をつけて下さい。 => This temperature sensor (sensor of\n> temperature) is very important, please be careful.\n>\n> 1.3) コンビニの人は優しいです。 => Workers in convenience stores are really nice.\n\n### 2) Ownership\n\nIn the second case, we have the following:\n\n> (Person|Company|Group|Abstract-Concept)の(Noun) =>\n> (Noun)'s(Person|Company|Group|Abstract-Concept)\n\nIn this context, almost all times, it is possible to intend this usage as\npossession and translate it using Saxon Genitive. Examples are:\n\n> 2.1) それはバットマンの車ですよ。 => That's Batman's car!\n>\n> 2.2) このペンはあなたの物じゃないよ！すぐ返せ！ => That pen is not your stuff! Return it\n> immediately!\n\n### 3) Avoiding redundancy\n\nThis usage is the most complicated. For this reason I going to be very clear.\nFurthermore I want everyone to be sure that this information is reliable; for\nthis reason I am going to copy the exact words from my Japanese grammar book:\n_Minna no Nihongo II - Translation and Grammatical Notes_ (みんあの日本語 -\n初級II翻訳・文法解説英語版). Following is the exact definition that you can find in the\nbook I mentioned at page 81.\n\nFollowing my copy of the pattern shown in the book (I edited it to make it\nsimilar to my pattern style).\n\n> (Verb:PlainForm)のは(Noun)です\n>\n> (い-Adj:PlainForm)のは(Noun)です\n>\n> (な-Adj:PlainForm)のは(Noun)です\n>\n> (Noun)なのは(Noun)です\n\nThe explanation is:\n\n> This pattern is used when a noun representing a thing, a person, a place,\n> etc., is replaced with の and then taken up as the topic of the sentence. In\n> examples 3.1 and 3.2, \"The place where my daughter was born\" and \"The\n> busiest month of the year\" are taken up as topics, and the speaker gives\n> related information in the latter half of the sentence.\n\nFollowing are both the examples in the book:\n\n> 3.1) 娘{むすめ}が生{う}まれたのは北{ほっ}海{かい}道{どう}の小{ちい}さな町{まち}です。 => My daughter's\n> birthplace is a small town in Hokkaido.\n>\n> 3.2) １年{ねん}でいちばん忙{いそが}しいのは12月{がつ}です。 => The busiest month of the year is\n> December.\n\nI also tried to find something more in other books (for example the official\n_Nihongo Somatome_ for learning N3), but could not find any specific detail\nabout your issue.\n\n## The answer to your question\n\nSorry to keep you waiting. As you can see from my grammar book, it is not\nreally true that highly abstract objects cannot be used in such patterns.\n\nQuestioning to some Japanese folks I know, they say that the highly abstract\nstuff was some sort of old grammar rule which no longer applies in written and\nspoken language. There are contexts where these grammars are considered, but\nthey do not apply to informal documents (not even formal ones). Let us say\nthat if you are about to write a Japanese poem in ancient style, probably it\nwill work.\n\nIn one year that I have been living in Japan I heard Japanese people using\nthis grammar and using abstract, real and more than touchable entities... So\ndo not really worry about this.", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-13T23:23:25.083", "id": "9418", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-14T08:31:44.920", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-14T08:31:44.920", "last_editor_user_id": "12", "owner_user_id": "12", "parent_id": "9379", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "My grammar book (日本語文型辞典) says that (when used to mean \"one\"):\n\n * noun+`の` = noun+`のもの`\n * na-adjective+`なの` = na-adjective+`なもの`\n * (i-adjective/verb)+`の` = (i-adjective/verb)+`もの`\n\nso:\n\n * > 大きい車は高いが、小さい **（の・もの）** は安い。 \n> A big car is expensive, but a small _one_ is cheap.\n\n * > 田中さんの意見は面白いが山田さん **のもの** はちょっと問題がある。 \n> Tanaka's opinion is interesting, but Yamada _'s one_ has a bit of a\n> problem.\n\nThough I'm not experienced enough to be sure about about this `の`, this\nsentence sounds like it might be incorrect/unnatural to me in both Japanese\nand English, so I think it may well be a different usage indicating a\npossessive, i.e:\n\n> 田中さんの意見は面白いが山田さん **の** はちょっと問題がある。 \n> Tanaka's opinion is interesting, but Yamada _'s_ has a bit of a problem.\n\n * > 日本の町人は経済的な力を持っていたが、政治的な **（の・もの）** は持っていなかった。 \n> Japanese merchants had economic power, but didn't have an economic _one_.\n\nI think this sentence wouldn't work in either English or Japanese.\n\nFor reference, here are some of the examples it gives:\n\n * > この電話は壊れてますので、隣の部屋 **の** をお使い下さい。 \n> This telephone is broken, so please use the _one_ in the next room.\n\n * > ラーメンなら、駅前のそば屋 **の** が安くておいしいよ。 \n> If it's Ramen you're after, you can get _[some/it]_ at the soba noodle shop\n> in front of the station where it's cheap and tasty.\n\n * > ...もっと小さくて便利な **の** を探さなくてはならない。 \n> ...(I) need to search for a smaller and more convenient _one_.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-14T02:10:27.973", "id": "9421", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-15T00:01:56.890", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-15T00:01:56.890", "last_editor_user_id": "796", "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "9379", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I think the main verb is the 伸ばす part. The phrase 手を伸ばす is used to mean \"reach\nour your hands.\" Then the 蠢き that precedes it describes the way these hands\nare coming toward (that's where くる comes in) the indirect object who is not\nmentioned.\n\nSo basically the compound 蠢き伸ばしてくる would mean to come reaching out in a kind\nof creepy shaking/wiggling way.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-08T23:37:54.070", "id": "9383", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-08T23:37:54.070", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "2876", "parent_id": "9382", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Often when you see -niwa, you can expect a final ar-u or i-ru. It expresses\nexistence. While English \"at\" is fine for a translation, you should rather\ninterpret it as \"in... are\". The example 1) fits this pattern just fine.\n\nIn contrast, with -dewa you can expect to find an action. This is \"at\" rather\nthan \"in\". In 2), the action is learning.\n\nBonus: There are multiple -de so this will not always work, but the one here\nis a contraction of -nite. As such, if it helps you, you can try to place a\nverb between -ni and -te and see if the sentence still makes sense. In this\ncase sentence, the following is not too obscure: \"watasi no gakkou ni [itte]\nwa (=ikeba), tyuugokugo ga naraemasu\" (Go to my school and you can learn\nChinese.)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-09T07:18:13.760", "id": "9392", "last_activity_date": "2018-06-27T23:58:10.293", "last_edit_date": "2018-06-27T23:58:10.293", "last_editor_user_id": "1141", "owner_user_id": "1141", "parent_id": "9391", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "Your question is about two different things:\n\n * The usage of particle で and particle に to express place vs. action.\n * The usage of particle は to highlight a matter in the sentence.\n\n## Understanding particle で vs. particle に\n\nWhen you want to express where a certain action is taking place, you use\nparticle で. Consider the following examples:\n\n> 1a) My mom bought an apple in the supermarket. =>\n> お母{かあ}さんはスーパーでりんごを買{か}いました。\n>\n> 2a) I am studying Japanese in Naganuma School. =>\n> ナガヌマ学校で[日]{に}[本]{ほん}語{ご}を勉{べん}強{きょう}しています。\n>\n> 3a) I had a fight with that guy in a restaurant. =>\n> あの人{ひと}とレストランで喧{けん}嘩{か}をした。\n>\n> 4a) Where can I buy an apple? => どこでりんごを買{か}ったらいいですか。\n\nI am using particle で, here, because I want to describe the place where an\naction took place.\n\nConsider now these sentences:\n\n> 1b) There is a kid there. => あそこに子{こ}どもがいます。\n>\n> 2b) Place that bag over here please. => そのカバンをここに置{お}いて下{くだ}さい。\n>\n> 3b) I am in a restaurant now. => 今{いま}、レストランにいます。\n>\n> 4b) Where are you? => どこにいるんですか。 or どこにいる？\n>\n> 5b) Ms Shimura is in her office now. =>\n> 志{し}村{むら}さんは自{じ}分{ぶん}の事{じ}務{む}所{しょ}にいます。\n>\n> 6b) There is a bag in that room. => あの部{へ}屋{や}にカバンがあります。\n>\n> 7b) Pay attention to the boxes on the table please. =>\n> テーブルにある箱{はこ}に気{き}をつけて下{くだ}さい。\n\nIn this case I used particle に because, although I am specifying a place where\nsomething is happening, I am actually describing a place where things are.\nWhere things do exist.\n\nConsider the sentences 1a and 1b. Sentence 1a is actually telling you: _Ok my\nfriend, my mom bought an apple. Where does this action took place? = > In the\nsupermarket!_. Sentence 1b, on the other hand, is telling you: _Ok my friend,\nthere is a kid. Where? = > There is a kid over there!_. The latter is not\ntelling you when an action is taking place. The kid is _existing_ in a certain\nplace, I am not telling you what he is doing, just telling you where is\nexistence is located. The same goes for all my examples.\n\nA particular example is sentence 2b. Here There is a man that is telling you\nto put the bag in a certain place. Of course you need to specify a place where\nto put it, but particle で is to be avoided. Here you are not describing where\nthe action of dropping the bag is being performed (probably in a room). In\nsentence 2b, verb 置{お}く necessarily needs a place which implies a movement of\nsomething.\n\nThis should explain you when using particle で and when using particle に.\n\n## Understanding particle は\n\nThis particle is terrible for beginners because it is so versatile and\nflexible that you will end up finding it in every damn place.\n\nProbably they tell you, in the first lessons, that particle は is used to mark\nthe subject of the sentence. It is true, but too specific. Actually particle は\nhas two important usages:\n\n * It is used to mark the argument of the sentence. Pay attention, the argument of the sentence is not necessarily the subject.\n\n * It is used to underline something and put emphasis on it.\n\nSince it is better proceeding by examples, here we go.\n\n### As subject marker\n\nIn the following sentences, the particle marks the subject of the sentence:\n\n> Where is mom? => 母{かあ}ちゃんはどこにいる？\n>\n> I am here! => 僕{ぼく}はここにいる。\n>\n> I am watching a movie with my brother. => 僕{ぼく}はお兄{にい}さんと映{えい}画{が}を見{み}ています。\n>\n> Ishikawa-san went out to buy some fruit. =>\n> 石{いし}川{かわ}さんはスーパーへ果{くだ}物{もの}を買{か}いに行{い}きました。\n\n### To mark the argument\n\nIn the following conversation, the particle does not mark the subject, but the\nargument.\n\n> Aさん: Soon it is Christmas! => そろそろクリスマスになるよ！\n>\n> Bさん: Yes! About the present for your brother, what will you buy? \n> => そうね！ああ、お兄{にい}さんのギフトはどうする？\n\n### Conclusions\n\nParticle は can also be used next to other particles in order to act as some\nsort of remarker. Consider the following sentences:\n\n> The kid is in that place (saying with anxiety) => あそこには[子]{こ}どもがいるよ！\n>\n> The entrance ceremony will take place in the school gym, students will\n> gather there! =>\n> 学{がっ}校{こう}のジムで入{にゅう}学{がく}式{しき}があるから、あそこでは学{がく}生{せい}が集{あつ}まる！\n\nBoth sentences use particle に and particle で as I told you, and also use\nparticle は to remark something. Just like your examples!", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-09T08:58:02.180", "id": "9393", "last_activity_date": "2021-01-30T17:25:32.573", "last_edit_date": "2021-01-30T17:25:32.573", "last_editor_user_id": "40980", "owner_user_id": "12", "parent_id": "9391", "post_type": "answer", "score": 30 }, { "body": "Short answer: each one has a different verb, hence a different particle.\n\nThe lesson and examples are probably about when to use は or が, not when to use\nに or で so the explanation does not make much sense because the topic it\nexplains is not what you have doubts about.\n\nParticles are always dependent on the verb they refine, so the question of the\ndifference between に and で only makes sense if you specify a verb as the\ncontext for both possibilities. Do not compare two particles each one refining\na different verb, and do not wonder what meaning a particle conveys\nirrespective of the verb it refines.\n\nある/いる are verbs special and frequent enough that you can take it as a hard\nrule that they will always use に to determine place, without putting more\nthought into why. Consider it an exception to what I explain below if you\nwill, just because.\n\nFor other verbs, when **the verb** has a nuance of direction, に will usually\nexpress that direction (hence usually translated as \"to\"); when the verb\ndescribes an action/state happening at a static location, で will express that\nlocation (hence usually translated as \"at\"). 習う is a verb without any nuance\nof movement whatsoever, so the place where you \"learn\" is expressed with で\n(\"at the school\").\n\nNot that it is easy to establish a rule on this, as sometimes besides に you\nmay also use へ (ロンドンへ行きます／ロンドンに行きます／I am going to London). Thinking if a verb\nimplies either direction or a static location is fuzzy enough and culturally\ndependent that you will still sometimes have doubts about what applies in each\ncase such as, maybe:\n\nいすに[座]{すわ}っている。 : She's sitting on a chair..\n\nあそこで[停]{と}めてください。 : Please stop there _(when on a taxi)_\n\nテーブルに[置]{お}いてください。 : Please leave it on the table.\n\nAgain, note that it is the verbs that are mandating the use of a specific\nparticle, and both things cannot be disassociated.\n\nSo sometimes, when the correct way sounds opposite to the explanation above,\nconsider how the verb may have a nuance of direction for Japanese people when\nit does not have it in English, and try to put yourself into that way of\nthinking to remember. Or just memorize them as they come.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-09T11:23:49.517", "id": "9394", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-11T00:01:55.450", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-11T00:01:55.450", "last_editor_user_id": "2886", "owner_user_id": "2886", "parent_id": "9391", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "This is what you're looking for: [International Phonetic\nAlphabet](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPA)", "comment_count": 9, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-09T16:17:45.910", "id": "9397", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-09T16:17:45.910", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1141", "parent_id": "9396", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "1)Yes, an international standardized character alphabet exists for\ntranscribing the sounds of all human Languages. It's called the [International\nPhonetic\nAlphabet](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Phonetic_Alphabet) and it\nis maintained by the [International Phonetic\nAssociation](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Phonetic_Association)\n(both are acronymized as IPA). The most recent version of the alphabet was\ncreated 1969 and their most recent and currently operative handbook, first\npublished in 1999, is the [Handbook of the International Phonetic Association:\nA Guide to the Use of the International Phonetic\nAlphabet](http://www.amazon.ca/Handbook-International-Phonetic-Association-\nAlphabet/dp/0521637511/ref=sr_1_sc_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1352521673&sr=8-1-spell).\nAlthough as a guide, it's rather useless as I explain below, and certainly is\nnot for beginners. If you need to learn the IPA, pick up a good introductory\nlinguistics textbook, it should teach you the IPA and any background info you\nneed to understand the alphabet, like articulatory nomenclature. If you aren't\nalready familiar with baisc linguistics terminology, then the Handbook will be\na very difficult read.\n\n2) There is a concept called [orthographic\ndepth](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthographic_depth) which is a measure of\nhow well a language's orthographic symbols are in 1-1 association with the\nlanguage's phonemes. Phonemes are the finite discrete combinatorial units of\nsound that are unique to a given language, though all languages draw their\nphonemic inventory from essentially the same superset of phonemes since all\nhumans have the same speech organs (tongue, larynx, alveolar ridge, etc.) and\nit is our speech organs which define what sounds are even possible. The entity\nbeing represented and transcribed by an IPA symbol is a phoneme. It is\nsomewhat a curious thing how every language, including Japanese, possesses a\nhighly intricate and constantly changing set of rules that govern how these\nphonemes can combine to produce the verbal form of words. This set of rules\ndescribing how the phonemes pattern to form the words of a given language is\ncalled a [phonology](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonology) for that\nlanguage. Languages with the same inventory of phonemes can have different\nphonologies ie different rules in how those phonemes are combined to produce\nwords. IPA symbols representing phonemes are concatenated and placed in\nbetween two '/' characters to represent the phonemic representation of words.\nSo, <今日は> is phonemically transcribed as /koNːit͡ɕiɰa/ using the IPA. A\nsequence of phonemic characters is called a string, a term borrowed from\ncomputer science.\n\nHowever, even though there is a standardized alphabet, the transcription for a\ngiven phoneme, sound, or word can differ depending on how you use the\nalphabet. The IPA is only an alphabet, it doesn't tell you how to interpret\nand transcribe what you hear. It is still left to devise a scheme for\nassociating the IPA symbol to the phoneme you are hearing. And there is\nusually several mutually contradictory schemes that you could define for\ntranscribing the phonemes of a given language's phonemic inventory that are\nall consist with the IPA. It usually comes down to how you segment the speech\nstream. When you study phonetics, you'll know what I mean. If you look in the\nHandbook at the languages they exemplified, you'll notice it's referred to as\nan \"illustration of the IPA for language X\". This is because there are\ndifferent ways to transcribe with the IPA. For example, sometimes you can add\ndiacritic marks to make the transcription more accurate, but only if you\nreally need that extra detail.\n\nThe IPA is only for transcribing phonemes, it says nothing about how a\nlanguage is to combine those phonemes to form words. In other words the IPA is\nagnostic to any particular phonological theory.\n\nMost kana are in 1-1 correspondence with pairs of phonemes, but several kana\nare 1-1 with singular phonemes. So, <む> corresponds to the phoneme pair /mɯ/\nbut <あ> corresponds to the phoneme /a/. <ん>, however, is a little more\ncomplicated to describe. It correlates with an underspecified phoneme, a\nspecial type of phoneme that the IPA doesn't accommodate because it's a\nlanguage dependent phonological conception. There's no room to explain that\nhere. Because most kana are in 1-1 correspondence with a single or pair of\nphonemes, kana is said to have a shallow orthographic depth, but it isn't\nperfect 100% 1-1 correspondence when considering the entire Japanese script\nand it also depends on how you define orthographic depth. These technical\ndefinitions are important if you are trying to do something like getting a\ncomputer program to read Japanese text and synthesize speech. Such a task is\ncalled grapheme to phoneme (G2P) conversion.\n\nKanji on the other hand is more or less arbitrarily associated with phonemic\nstrings. In other words, when you encounter a novel kanji for the first time,\nyou cannot predict its phonemic correlate ie how it is pronounced. Because of\nthis Kanji is said to have a deep orthography.\n\nYou can type out IPA symbols then copy and paste them however you like using\nthis website <http://westonruter.github.com/ipa-chart/keyboard/> . This is how\nI type IPA to include in web pages. You need to set your browser to view UTF\ncharacter encoding to see IPA characters. Do that if the IPA characters are\nnot rendering.\n\nSince kana is orthographically shallow you can construct a list that maps kana\nto IPA phoneme strings rather easily. But you need to establish your\ntranscription conventions beforehand, and to what level of detail you need to\ntranscribe. For these reasons, a phoneme to kana implementation is usually\ncreated only for the application at hand.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-10T05:21:34.200", "id": "9399", "last_activity_date": "2012-12-02T00:43:34.003", "last_edit_date": "2012-12-02T00:43:34.003", "last_editor_user_id": "1454", "owner_user_id": "1454", "parent_id": "9396", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

[ { "body": "さよなら is a [shortened version of\nさようなら](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?p=%E3%81%95%E3%82%88%E3%81%AA%E3%82%89&stype=0&dtype=0),\nwhich in turn comes from [[左様]{さよう}ならば.](http://gogen-\nallguide.com/sa/sayounara.html)\n\nBoth\n[さよなら](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?p=%E3%81%95%E3%82%88%E3%81%AA%E3%82%89&stype=0&dtype=0)\nand\n[さようなら](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?p=%E3%81%95%E3%82%88%E3%81%86%E3%81%AA%E3%82%89&stype=0&dtype=0)\ncan be used as interjections meaning \"farewell\" or \"goodbye\". However, さよなら\ncan also be used as a noun meaning \"parting\" or \"coming to an end\".\n\nHere's how I'd describe the uses of さよなら:\n\n 1. さよなら（を）する can express literal or metaphorical parting.\n\n * 「[青春]{せいしゅん}にさよならする」 literally \"saying goodbye to youth\"\n 2. さよなら can be placed directly before another noun. This expresses parting, or expresses that something is ending:\n\n * 「さよならパーティー」 A farewell party\n * 「さよなら[公演]{こうえん}」 A farewell performance\n 3. In particular, さよなら can be used to express the end of a baseball game:\n\n * 「さよならホーマー」 A walk-off home run\n * 「さよならゲーム」 A baseball game in the bottom of the ninth\n\nSometimes 1 and 2 can be expressed with さようなら, but it's less common. Note that\nit's always さよなら in baseball and in さよなら公演.\n\nKeep in mind that さようなら is the older and more \"proper\" form of the word, and\nさよなら may not always be appropriate.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-10T12:56:20.477", "id": "9401", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-10T12:56:20.477", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "9400", "post_type": "answer", "score": 17 } ]

[ { "body": "Trying to break this apart a bit:\n\n * > 俺が威嚇射撃する\n\n\"I will fire a warning shot.\"\n\n * > ゴーを出したら \n>\n\n\"when (I) give the signal to go\" (note the `を` which points to an implicit\nsubject, here which I think is almost certainly \"I\". Also note the second\ndefinition at Daijirin for\n[`ゴー`](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&p=%E3%82%B4%E3%83%BC&dtype=0&dname=0ss&stype=0):\n`「進め」の信号。` or \"a signal of 'advance!'\")\n\n * > 突入だ \n>\n\n\"it's storming in\" (where `突入` is a noun), which I don't think you can\ndirectly translate into English but I think has the meaning of \"we'll storm\nin\" in this context.\n\nI don't think that `威嚇射撃するゴー` could work, as that'd be \"the go (signal) that\nwarning shots\", so I think there is an implied `。` where the space is, as is\nfairly common in manga and in many subtitles etc (see also [Why do TV\nsubtitles use spaces (instead of\ncommas)?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/5669/why-do-tv-\nsubtitles-use-spaces-instead-of-commas) for an example of how punctuation can\nbe omitted). So putting it all together:\n\n> 《俺が威嚇射撃する ゴーを出したら 突入だ》 \n> \"I'll fire a warning shot. When I give the signal to go, we'll storm in\"", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-12T00:15:51.787", "id": "9407", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-12T00:15:51.787", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:43.857", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "9402", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "I have not particularly noticed this [ɛ] or [ɔ:]. So I cannot comment on them.\n\n> What is the history of these vowel variants (if any)? Are they by any chance\n> remnants from historical phonemic mergers, or are they just one-off\n> phenomena?\n\nIn Middle Japanese, there were both [ɔː] and [oː]. The former derive from /au/\nor /eu/ (-->Note), while the latter from /ou/ and /oo/. While kana does a poor\njob of distinguishing them, the Portuguese in the 15-16 century regularly\ndistinguished them in their works on Japanese language.\n\nDuring Early Modern Japanese, [ɔː] further reduces to [oː], and are no longer\ndistinguished. Perhaps what you are hearing is a remnant of this. Note that そう\nwas originally さう, so it would have developed as sau > sɔː > soː.\n\nNote: While /eu/ results in an long vowel, it is prefixed with an initial\napproximant: [joː].", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-11T04:09:33.143", "id": "9405", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-11T04:26:23.940", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-11T04:26:23.940", "last_editor_user_id": "1141", "owner_user_id": "1141", "parent_id": "9403", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "You have such a good ear, don't you?\n\nAccording to my personal observation, in this case it's not that like free or\nconditional variants, but rather loose (lax) pronunciation of interjections.\nAnd I suspect what you heard are not **more open** but **more mid-\ncentralized** (there may be generation gaps, but I'm not sure...).\n\nWhile the regular //e// and //o// in Japanese are the (true-)mid vowels,\npeople tend to utter ねえねえねえねえ closer to\n[[[ɘ]]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Close-mid_central_unrounded_vowel) or\n[[[ɜ]]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-mid_central_unrounded_vowel), and\nそうそうそうそう or おいおいおいおい, [[[ɞ]]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-\nmid_central_rounded_vowel) (for //o//). Emphasized ねーえ may indeed become\ncloser to [[ɛ]] as you said (or even to [[æ]]), but this usually gives\nflirting impression. A very impassioned そう as in そうなんだよ！ would rather go more\nclosed but more tense (more like true [[o]]), that may strike you \"more open\"\nor \"deeper\".\n\nCompared with them, え？ is more likely to be pronounced like [[ɛ]], but it\ngenerally sounds rude. I remember a friend of mine is always saying え～？ (very\nreluctantly) as [[ɛ̃ː]].\n\nI also remembered expressions of joy such as やったー or わーい are usually fronted\nbeing [a] instead of usual [ɐ].", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2016-04-19T14:19:16.463", "id": "33660", "last_activity_date": "2016-04-19T14:19:16.463", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "7810", "parent_id": "9403", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "For the following sentence:\n\n> イノセンス、それはいのち。\n\nThis sentence divided in [文節]{ぶんせつ} will be:\n\n * [独立語]{どくりつご}: イノセンス\n * [主語]{しゅご}: それは\n * [述語]{じゅつご}: いのち\n\nSo イノセンス will be a 独立語.\n\nAnd to be more precise, 独立語 are divided in 4 categories:\n\n * [感動]{かんどう} (eg: **おお** 、びっくりした。)\n * [呼]{よ}びかけ (eg: **おい** 、行かないでください。)\n * [応対]{おうたい} (eg: **はい** 、そうです。)\n * [提示]{ていじ} (eg: **イノセンス** 、それはいのち。)\n\nSo in this case イノセンス will be a [提示独立語]{ていじどくりつご}.\n\n提示独立語 can be easily confused with the 主語 but they are not, most of the time\nthey will be followed by a [指示語]{しじご} like 'それは'.\n\n独立語 are weakly tied to other 文節 and can be separated in different sentence\nlike in your BMW example.\n\nThe main purpose of this construction is to put emphasis on the topic. That\nexplains why it is mainly used for advertising and speechs.\n\nI suppose it can assimilated to English constructions like:\n\n> Freedom! It is what we are fighting for.\n\n体言止め seems a little different regarding the Wikipedia page you linked, it is\nabout inverting the order of 主語 and 述語 and is used when there is a verb or an\nadjective in the sentence.\n\nSo inspired by the example sentence, 'いのちであるイノセンス。' will be a 体言止め (normal\nsentence being 'いのちはイノセンスです。').", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-23T06:15:17.210", "id": "9549", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-23T06:15:17.210", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1868", "parent_id": "9406", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "I think you can try using:\n\n * 累積合計 - cumulative sum\n * 中間結果 - interim result (in your case a sum)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-13T04:22:08.627", "id": "9412", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-13T04:22:08.627", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "542", "parent_id": "9411", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "I cannot be sure of my answer because Japanese Language is strongly dependent\nby context. However, this is a possible explanation.\n\nActually I am sure to say that うんたらかんたら belongs to spoken Japanese. It is not\nan expression being used in books or serious stuff. Actually it is high\nprobable for you to find such an expression into a manga or said by a\ncharacter in the context of a Japanese anime.\n\nIt does not have a meaning, it is rather used in order to depict the situation\nor one's feeling. Generally you use it when:\n\n 1. You are thinking to something and you are taking your time.\n 2. You want to make a sarcastic sentence.\n 3. You are talking with friends and want to [hyperbole](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole) and put strong emphasis onto something. \n\n### Thinking to something: mumble mumble...\n\nYou can use that expression in order to point out that someone is taking time\nto do something.\n\n> A)ああ、ヒトミちゃん！久しぶりなんだね〜 => Aaa, Hitomi! Long time no see...\n>\n> B)ケン君、久しぶりですよ！お元気？ => Ken! I guess so long time! How are you?\n>\n> A)ん、元気だよ！昨日はヒトミを見たんだよ、駅の近くに〜。何をやっていたん？ => Yeah, fine! Last day I saw you by\n> the station... What were 'ya doing there?\n>\n> B)あの〜えとな〜なんだっけ〜 (time passes...) => Well... What did I do?... Mmmm\n>\n> A)まじでうんたらかんたらね、覚えていなさそう！ヒトミちゃんオバア！ => For real, you mumbling about it. Looks\n> like you don't remember... You grandma!\n\n### Being sarcastic or hyperbolic\n\nうんたら alone is also used to be sarcastic or funny:\n\n> お前は１００うんたら才のオジイさんだよ！ => You are some sort of 100 years old grandpa.\n\nIn this example you can see that there is no honorific language... it is\nreally plain... I would actually say terribly plain language, something that\nin real life you will never end up using. Probably in animes and mangas.\n\nWhen living in Japan I did not hear people use this expression even in \"easy\ncontexts\" (for examples when going to drink something together with friends).\nI suppose that, possibly, kids might use this expression (since I did not talk\nmuch with kids, I cannot really say whether they use such expressions or not).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-13T15:43:30.243", "id": "9416", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-13T22:30:03.447", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-13T22:30:03.447", "last_editor_user_id": "12", "owner_user_id": "12", "parent_id": "9414", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "So far the only viable explanation I can think of is that テラス is a contracted\nform of テラワロス.\n\n * [ニコニコ[百科]{ひゃっか} entry for テラス](http://dic.nicovideo.jp/a/%E3%83%86%E3%83%A9%E3%82%B9) defines it as: `3. テラワロスの略`\n * 3rd sense: Contraction of \"terawarosu\"\n * [a 2ch.net post](http://2chnull.info/r/train/1273323743/901-1000) says:`「法テラス」（ﾃﾗﾜﾛｽじゃないぞｗ）`\n * \"Law-terrace\" (and no, it's not \"terawarosu\" lol)\n * [a blog post](http://blog.kanjosen.com/?eid=1006137) writes: `「針テラス（テラワロスではない。2ちゃんの見過ぎ）」`\n * \"[Hari Tea-time Resort Station](http://hari-trs.com/haritrs.html) (to 2ch addicts: it's not \"terawarosu\")\"\n\nAs to why you'd want to \"roll on the floor laughing\" in the context of\ndeclining an invitation, I don't have a definitive answer, but maybe one of\nthese:\n\n * She's laughing at the unexpected coincidence of the event and her work.\n * She's laughing at herself for having to work when everyone else is able to attend the event. Perhaps the time of the event is normally considered overtime?\n * She's softening the request to hold another event for her by adding a laugh.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-14T00:14:45.237", "id": "9419", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-14T00:14:45.237", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "128", "parent_id": "9415", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "I'm Japanese, but I've never heard Japanese people using テラス. That's not even\nslang. I don't understand its meaning.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-15T13:18:08.947", "id": "9445", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-15T19:01:37.763", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-15T19:01:37.763", "last_editor_user_id": "162", "owner_user_id": "2897", "parent_id": "9415", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "From [`Yahoo`](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch/0/0ss/118679100000/)\n\n```\n\n 見覚える： \n 1. 見て覚える。\n 2. 前に見て覚えている。\n \n```\n\nSo you see something and memorize it. I think you can associate to visual\nmemory.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-14T04:08:32.060", "id": "9423", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-14T04:08:32.060", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "9417", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "After some discussions, I decided to remove my previous answer and put it into\na question I created on my own: [Possible ways to express remembrance and\nrecall](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/9534/possible-ways-to-\nexpress-remembrance-and-recall/9535#9535).\n\nI did this because that answer is wider than the one required here.\n\nYou can check the question, it might be useful.\n\n### Talking about 覚{おぼ}える and 見{み}覚{おぼ}える...\n\nI came up looking at a question were someone asked the difference between\nverbs 覚{おぼ}える and 見{み}覚{おぼ}える. Since it is pertinent, I will spend some lines\nabout this as well.\n\nSomehow these two verbs are interchangeable but I am not sure about this\nbecause I never heard in my experience people using 見{み}覚{おぼ}える. On the other\nhand I heard them using a lot 覚{おぼ}える. Both mean \"to remember\" as I specified\nin the first paragraph.", "comment_count": 13, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-15T21:44:14.307", "id": "9449", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-28T21:42:21.143", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "12", "parent_id": "9417", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "覚える is like remember and 見覚える is like recognize. As mentioned in the a above\ncomments the phrase 見覚えがある is a clue to this. That being said I'm not sure if\n見覚える as a verb gets any real contemporary use. Some Googling shows that the\nphrase 見て覚える turns up occasionally, however this has the meaning of \"learn by\nwatching.\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-16T09:17:55.613", "id": "9455", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-16T09:17:55.613", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "9417", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "葉{は}っぱ is a word. It means leaf!", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-14T02:19:24.427", "id": "9422", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-14T02:19:24.427", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "9420", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 }, { "body": "As snailplane says, for practical purposes, just think of 葉っぱ as a word\nmeaning 'leaf'. In colloquial speech 葉っぱ is probably more common than 葉.\n\nI haven't been able to find decisive evidence, but I conjecture that the っぱs\noccuring in (at least) the below words\n\n> 葉っぱ \n> 原っぱ \n> 下っ端 \n> 木端微塵{こっぱみじん}\n\nis the same morpheme, meaning \"something unimportant\", \"edge\", \"small piece\"\netc. Maybe someone else can confirm this.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-14T08:17:10.910", "id": "9431", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-15T01:11:17.267", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-15T01:11:17.267", "last_editor_user_id": "1073", "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "9420", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 } ]

[ { "body": "Well, I found the [following\nquestion](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1411588604)\nwhich includes some pretty long words/names:\n\n 1. タウマタファカタンギハンガコアウアウオタマテアポカイフェヌアキタナタフ \n 2. 愛知県海部郡飛島村大字飛島新田字竹之郷ヨタレ南ノ割 \n 3. ランヴァイル・プルグウィンギル・ゴゲリフウィルンドロブル・ランティシリオゴゴゴホ \n\nAnd a site with some more (though it's based on kanji): [Long 1-kanji\nwords](http://f7.aaacafe.ne.jp/~kanji/long.html)\n\nsorry for not linking, not enough rep...\n\nAccording to the link you gave リュウグウノオトヒメノモトユイノキリハズシ is a name of a sea weed,\ncompromised of more then one word, so I guess some of the stuff here pass...\n\nEdit: The [Japanese wiki\npage](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%95%B7%E5%A4%A7%E8%AA%9E) for really\nlong words have some more really long words like 英国国教会の廃止に反対する主義. it's one\nword in English (\"antidisestablishmentarian-ism\"), but I'm not sure it can be\nconsidered as such in japanese.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-14T08:48:17.590", "id": "9434", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-14T08:57:42.513", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-14T08:57:42.513", "last_editor_user_id": "2884", "owner_user_id": "2884", "parent_id": "9424", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "One can always recursively create infinitely long Japanese verbs by sticking\non agglutinative markers:\n\n> 食べられられられられられられられられ...られる\n>\n> おいしくなくなくなくなくなくなくなく...ない\n>\n> 連れていってきていってきていってきて...いく\n\nObviously they don't mean anything useful but since phrases like `he is going\nto go to go to go to go` or `it is not not not not not not bad` is one word in\nJapan word length is theoretically unbounded.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-08-08T14:58:24.890", "id": "12509", "last_activity_date": "2013-08-09T01:49:55.007", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "2960", "parent_id": "9424", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "My friend, when teaching Japanese in English, found out about a long verb,\n\"arawaresasewaremashta\" in an old book. It means \"the river spontaneously\nappeared\", but I'm not sure if it is still used.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2015-07-02T08:45:39.017", "id": "25471", "last_activity_date": "2015-07-02T08:45:39.017", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "10511", "parent_id": "9424", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "One of the cast name of the traditional Japanese comedy 落語：\n\nじゅげむじゅげむごこうのすりきれかいじゃりすいぎょのすいぎょうまつうんらいまつふうらいまつくうねるところにすむところやぶらこうじのやぶこうじぱいぽぱいぽぱいぽのしゅーりんがんしゅーりんがんのぐーりんだいぐーりんだいのぽんぽこぴーのぽんぽこなーのちょうきゅうめいのちょうすけ", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2018-09-12T13:38:24.280", "id": "61463", "last_activity_date": "2018-09-12T13:38:24.280", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "31242", "parent_id": "9424", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "\n\nThis is probably the longest word I found in the Kanji application Kanji Tree.\nIt describes the phase \"no use to cry over spilled milk\"", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-06T04:50:16.373", "id": "91492", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-06T04:50:16.373", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48901", "parent_id": "9424", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "Is it from [this song](http://www.kasi-time.com/item-9022.html) by ALI\nProject?\n\nIf so, the Kanji is 者 \"person\", not 物 which means \"thing\", as Oldergod said in\na comment:\n\n> ...あなたを迎える者がある。 \n> ...there is someone who will greet you.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-14T08:30:15.660", "id": "9433", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-14T08:30:15.660", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "9425", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "your theory breaks down at 億。 億億 != 兆 （兆 ＝ 万億） （億億 ＝ 京）\n\nIt would to be necessary to have every increment of power of 10 up until 10\n000 under the Japanese system. Things would be akward without the 1000 unit as\nwell.\n\nI do think it looks weird though when I see a number like 56000 written as\n５万６千", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-14T06:55:51.463", "id": "9429", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-14T06:55:51.463", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1805", "parent_id": "9426", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "The Japanese number system (which I believe is derived from the Chinese one)\nis pretty similar to the western one (just to call it something), except it\nbreaks at every 4 digits instead of every 3 digits.\n\nJapanese:\n\n> 0-9999 兆 0-9999 億 0-9999 万 0-9999\n\nEnglish:\n\n> 0-999 billion 0-999 million 0-999 thousand 0-999\n\n(assuming you're from a part of the English speaking world which doesn't use\nmilliards or \"thousand million\"s).\n\nThe confusing thing about the Japanese system, though, is that when written\nwith digits, it still puts commas at every third digit. This is most likely\nfrom western influence.\n\nSlightly off topic, but...\n\nYour idea is interesting, since it would be theoretically possible to have a\nnumber system where digits break in a \"binary\" fashion:\n\n0-99999999 億 0-9999 万 0-99 百 0-9 十 0-9\n\nI don't know if any language breaks digits in this way, though.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-14T07:44:38.383", "id": "9430", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-14T09:05:07.710", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-14T09:05:07.710", "last_editor_user_id": "1073", "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "9426", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "For ものがある:\n\n * (plain form verb/i adjective/na adjective+な)+ものがある (Kanji 物がある, but I think it's usually written in Hiragana), can mean: \n\n> * とても〜だ\n> * なんとなく〜感じる\n> * 〜という感じがある\n> * 〜ように感じられる\n\nand is used in regards with things the speaker felt, for expressing feelings\nwhile describing the characteristics of something, or that a certain\ncharacteristic can be seen, for example:\n\n> 半年前にいなくなったねこが帰ってきた。わたしにとって特別うれしいものがある。 \n> \"The cat which disappeared half a year ago has returned. To me it's\n> special, and I feel very happy.\"\n>\n> この文章はまだまだ未熟だが、しかし随所にキラリと光るものがある。 \n> \"This sentence has still got some way to go, but it twinkles at every\n> turn.\"\n>\n> この絵には人を引きつけるものがある。 \n> \"This painting feels like it pulls a person into it.\"\n\nYou can also use 見られる, 認められる etc in place of ある here.\n\n(Sources: 日本語文型辞典, どんな時どう使う日本語文型辞典500, the Kanzen master JLPT 2 grammar book).\n\n * It can also mean \"there is a thing (generally a tangible thing)\" (with the Kanji 物がある).\n\n * ものがある can also mean \"there is a person\" (written with the Kanji 者がある)\n\nFor ことがある:\n\n * It can mean \"there are times when...\" when expressed as plain form verb+ことがある and \"there are times when it doesn't\" when expressed as plain negative verb+ことがある\n\n * It can express that something has been experienced when expressed as plain past+ことがある, and that something hasn't been experienced when expressed as plain past+ことがない.\n\n * It can also mean \"there is a thing (generally abstract)\" as well. [(It is structurally ambiguous between an appositive clause and a relative clause)](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/3978/542)\n\nThe question you [linked\nto](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/3977/the-different-usages-\nof-%E3%81%93%E3%81%A8%E3%81%8C%E3%81%82%E3%82%8B) describes these usages in\nmore detail, so I think I might leave those for now.\n\nThere are probably many other different usages too, but the two are generally\nquite different to each other as far as I know. I think as a (possibly broad\ngeneralization) that ものがある tends to be about feelings and tangible things and\nことがある tends to be about abstract things, experiences and occurrences etc.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-14T08:26:58.463", "id": "9432", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-14T10:25:38.553", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:48.447", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "9427", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "You can translate inter- and intra- to ～間 and ～内 respectively.\n\n(Note that they become suffixes rather than prefixes in Japanese.)\n\nReferences:\n\n * I read [dainichi's comments](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/9428/inter-and-intra-prefix#comment19819_9428) above;\n * I found [this answer](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1172462851) on ye olde Bag o' Wisdom;\n * I looked for patterns in the inter- and intra- words in my Kenkyusha J-E dictionary; and\n * I briefly checked Google to see if the patterns seemed correct.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-16T20:44:49.800", "id": "9456", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-16T20:44:49.800", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.740", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "9428", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I think using \"want\" in this way sounds weird even in English. Some better\nwords to use would be \"tends\", \"apt\", or \"inclined\". This can be expressed as\n`〜傾向がある`. Or if it is a negative tendency, `〜嫌いがある`.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-14T16:04:33.730", "id": "9436", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-14T16:04:33.730", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "9435", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "You can definitely personify objects in Japanese.\n\n> 慣性のある物体は運動状態を維持したがる\n\nis not _wrong_ per se, but firstly, it's obvious to the listener that a\npersonification is going on, and secondly, the colloquial feeling that the\npersonification creates might not go well with the scientific feel of the rest\nof the sentence. A more natural translation might be\n\n> 慣性のある物体は運動状態を維持しようとする\n\nWhen objects are personified in Japanese, it's probably more obvious to the\nlistener than is the case in English, and therefore more restricted to\ncolloquial/jocular use. But that doesn't mean it's uncommon. For example, it's\nquite common to use こいつ to refer to things, and somebody trying to be funny\nmight even say このおっさん.\n\nIn the company where I work, I wouldn't find it strange if somebody complained\nabout some software causing trouble by saying\n\n> こいつはいつも問題を起こしたがるんだよ\n\nbut the statement would be obviously jocular.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-15T01:43:03.343", "id": "9443", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-15T01:43:03.343", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "9435", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "> 結局今日はゲームやらなかったよ！ また、暇なときに開けよう\n\nA quick google search found the quote (from an SKE48 member). First a little\nbackground: After reading her other posts, it seems like she plays the game\n[おいでよ どうぶつの森](http://www.nintendo.co.jp/ds/admj/) on her Nintendo DS, I don't\nknow anything about the game, but perhaps you can interact with other people\nonline? If this is the case, then she didn't have a chance to open up her DS\nto play the game.\n\n> I ended up not playing the game today! I'll open it (my DS) up when I have\n> some free time\n\nNote that she is addressing this message to her fans, so it has the subtle\nimplication of \"let's play the game together\".\n\nHave you ever heard 開けましょう? That is the formal version of 開けよう, you could\nthink of it as \"Let's\".\n\nAlso, your question about に, usually specifies a point in time, so in the\nsentence 暇なときに specifies that the action 開ける will happen at this point in\ntime.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-14T23:28:02.173", "id": "9441", "last_activity_date": "2022-08-06T11:57:20.167", "last_edit_date": "2022-08-06T11:57:20.167", "last_editor_user_id": "9971", "owner_user_id": "1217", "parent_id": "9437", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Well, your question is very good and the answer is NO! You cannot use all\nthree forms interchangeably because they have different meanings. I am sorry I\ndo not know the third form in your question, and although I spoke a lot of\nJapanese, I never encountered a situation where such an expression was\nnecessary (but this is my experience).\n\nThat being said, I would like to consider your question and provide a wider\nanswer by explaining the forms that I know in Japanese to express when some\naction is performed or occurs before another one.\n\n## Using (V:て-Form)から〜 expression\n\nUsually this is the first expression taught when learning Japanese Grammar. It\nis the one used the most because it is really versatile and quite easy\n(although it requires knowledge of the て-Form which is not always mastered in\nthe early days of Japanese lessons). The pattern is the following (please note\npunctuation):\n\n> (V:て-Form)から、(...Sentence)\n\nHere are some examples:\n\n> 1a) 毎{まい}日{にち}シャワーを[浴]{あ}びてから、朝{あさ}ご[飯]{はん}を[食]{た}べている。 \n> => Everyday after taking a shower, I have breakfast.\n>\n> 2a) 昨日{きのう}は[洋]{ヒロ}[子]{コ}ちゃんと[遊]{あそ}んでから、帰{かえ}った。 \n> => Yesterday after playing together with Hiroko, I returned home.\n>\n> 3a) 明日{あした}はちょっと[忙]{いそが}しいんだよ。学{がっ}校{こう}をでてから、すぐアルバイトに[行]{い}かないと！ \n> => Tomorrow is quite busy. After leaving school, I must go to my part-time\n> job.\n\nYou use this form every time you want to describe an action which takes place\nafter another one. The sentence using the て-Form is the one whose action\nhappens first. After a comma, you then specify what happens next.\n\n## Using (V:た-Form)あとで〜 expression\n\nYou use the following pattern whenever you want to specify that a certain\naction has been **completed** and then you moved on:\n\n> (V:た-Form)あとで、(...Sentence)\n\nConsider the following examples:\n\n> 1b) 宿{しゅく}題{だい}をしたあとで、遊{あそ}んでもいいよ。 \n> => After you finish homework, you can play and have fun!\n>\n> 2b) 小{しょう}説{せつ}を[書]{か}いたあとで、立{た}ちあがって「やった」と[言]{い}ったんだ。 \n> => After writing the novel, he stood up and said \"Done!\".\n>\n> 3b) クラスが[終]{お}わったあとで、友{とも}達{だち}と[遊]{あそ}びに[行]{い}った。 \n> => After classes finished, he went playing somewhere with friends.\n\nAs you can see, here are situations where a certain activity has been\ncompleted, performed, or finished once and for all. When you want to express\nthis concept, you should use this form. Sometimes it might be incorrect to not\nuse it.\n\nAlso please note that you should use あとで and not 後で. This is a grammar rule in\nJapanese that my teachers always told me (since I had a bad habit of using\nkanji everywhere): in grammar patterns, you should use hiragana, not kanji.\n\n## Using (V:辞-Form)と〜 expression\n\nAnother expression to express sequential situations is the following:\n\n> (V:辞-Form)と、(...Sentence)\n\nYou use the jisho form (base form) in order to say that after a certain thing\nhappens, then inevitably, the next sentence occurs. I have chosen these terms\n( _happens_ and _occurs_ ) not by chance. Consider the following examples:\n\n> 1c) 右{みぎ}へ[曲]{ま}がると、パン[屋]{や}が[左]{ひだり}側{がわ}にあります。 \n> => Once you turn right, there will be a bakery on the left.\n>\n> 2c) ８時{じ}３０分{ぷん}になると、クラスが[始]{はじ}まる。 \n> => When it is 8:30, classes will start.\n>\n> 3c) 二{は}十{た}歳{ち}になると、何{なん}でも[出]{で}来{き}るようになるよ。 \n> => Once you turn 20, you can do anything.\n\nIn this situation, the sentence should always be translated as following:\n\n> (V:辞-Form)と、(...Sentence) \n> ==> (Sentence-1)と、(Sentence-2) \n> ==> Once (Sentence-1) then (Sentence-2)\n\nIt is important to point out that this pattern should be used when giving\ndirections and when describing actions, matters, or situations. The grammar\nrule actually use the word _inevitable_ in order to describe when to use this\nstructure. So when some actions is performed or some event _occurs_ , it is\ninevitable that a consequence occurs as well. This connection cause-\nconsequence is depicted perfectly by this grammar structure.\n\n## Conclusion\n\nAs you can see, there are several options. I described the ones I know and\nthat I think are the most used. As you can see, you cannot interchange these\npatterns. Hope it helps.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-15T14:26:38.483", "id": "9446", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-15T19:28:37.920", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-15T19:28:37.920", "last_editor_user_id": "12", "owner_user_id": "12", "parent_id": "9438", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "> ①カレと[別]{わか}れてから、[妊娠]{にんしん}が[発覚]{はっかく}した。 \n> ②カレと[別]{わか}れた[後]{あと}で、[妊娠]{にんしん}が[発覚]{はっかく}した。 \n> ③カレと[別]{わか}れた[後]{のち}に、[妊娠]{にんしん}が[発覚]{はっかく}した。 \n>\n\nAll of these sentences make sense and are grammatical, and they mean the same\nthing. \n(I think ③ is also read as 「～あとに～」.) \n「[後]{のち}に」sounds literary, so we rather use 「てから」/「[後]{あと}で」in daily\nconversation. \n\n> カレと[別]{わか}れた[後]{あと}から、[妊娠]{にんしん}が[発覚]{はっかく}した。\n\ndoesn't sound very natural. (To be honest, I don't even know if 「～～た後から」 is\ngrammatically correct...) I googled \"た後から\" and it seemed to me like 「～～た後から」\nis used more for an event that \"starts/started\" after another event, and that\nis often \"continuing\". Eg;\n\n> 「[手術]{しゅじゅつ}した[後]{あと}から、ずっと[頭痛]{ずつう}が[続]{つづ}いている」.\n\nI think 手術してからずっと頭痛が続いている/手術して[以来]{いらい}、ずっと頭痛が続いている would sound more natural.\nI wouldn't say 手術した後で、ずっと頭痛が続いている or 手術した[後]{のち}に、ずっと頭痛が続いている, though. \nI also suspect that た後から is often used to mean「～～した[後]{あと}になって」.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-18T23:48:03.173", "id": "9500", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-19T05:11:07.800", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-19T05:11:07.800", "last_editor_user_id": "1141", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "9438", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Looking at [this page](http://www.geocities.jp/tomomi965/ko-jien03/sa19.html)\nwhich references the 日本語大辞典（小）, それはそれとして／それはそう／それはそうと mean:\n\n> \"それはそれで置いておいて。それはそれで良いとして。そのことは兎も角。\"\n\nWhich I think could be paraphrased as \"leaving that at that\"/\"leaving that in\nthat way\" etc, and is used in reference to putting aside the previous topic of\ndiscussion for the present and shifting to another.\n\nI'm guessing, with the phrases related, that the と might take on the meaning\nof the 2nd definition for として at\n[Daijisen](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&p=%E3%81%A8%E3%81%97%E3%81%A6&dtype=0&dname=0na&stype=0&pagenum=1&index=13319400),\nwhich is used for shifting from the current topic of conversation to another\n(I can't find a direct ref in the dictionary for that meaning of と for the\ntime being, but I think it's likely it has that meaning).", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-16T00:52:08.310", "id": "9452", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-16T00:52:08.310", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "9440", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "Note that you shouldn't be using ご here because you are doing the 確認, not the\nother person. Never use ご確認 for something that you will be doing. _However_ ,\nyou can use ご for 連絡、報告, etc. when directing the action towards someone else.\n\nFor your example though, I might say:\n\n> いつもお世話になっております。 \n> XXの書類、本日確かに受領いたしました。 \n> 内容を確認後、改めてご連絡いたします。 \n> よろしくお願いいたします。\n\nAlso, out of the examples you made, the second one sounds fine if you take off\nthe ご:\n\n> 確認の上、改めてご連絡致します\n\nTaken from [here](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch/0/0na/05874300/):\n\n> １ 他人の行為や持ち物などを表す語に付いて、その人に対する尊敬の意を表す。「―覧」「―殿」「―出勤」「―馳走」「―両親」(Used for\n> actions done by other people, things that other people possess, etc.)\n>\n> ２ 他人に対する行為を表す語に付いて、その行為の及ぶ相手に対する敬意を表す。「―先導申し上げる」「―あいさつにうかがう」「―案内いたします」(Used\n> for actions directed towards other people (anybody know a better translation\n> for 他人に対する行為?))\n\nAs doing 確認 yourself does not fullfill definitions `1` or `2`, ご cannot be\nused.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-15T03:41:08.620", "id": "9444", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-15T07:27:48.730", "last_edit_date": "2012-11-15T07:27:48.730", "last_editor_user_id": "1217", "owner_user_id": "1217", "parent_id": "9442", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 } ]

[ { "body": "gogen-allguide says that for the 'いさ’ part of いさぎよい, there are suggested\norigins of いた (甚) or 勇{いさ}む・勇{いさ}. The exact origin appears unclear.\n\nAt any rate, it suggests that the modern meanings to do with character reflect\nthe meaning of 勇, not 甚.\n\n[This blog](http://blog.livedoor.jp/kannon_bosatsu/archives/50111115.html) has\nit as 勇・清い as well, and defines it as 勇ましく清らかな\n状態{じょうたい}を保{たも}つ決意{けつい}を表{あらわ}す.\n[This](http://www.bl.mmtr.or.jp/~isamutg/komimi/24.htm) gives the same origin,\nalthough it's more complaining about people mistaking it as being いさぎ・よい and\nsaying things like いさぎがよい・いさぎがわるい.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-17T16:26:04.157", "id": "9481", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-17T16:26:04.157", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "571", "parent_id": "9447", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]