Datasets:

---

p1atdev

/

japanese-stackexchange

like 3

[ { "body": "It's [掴]{つか}まえる to capture, seize, catch, arrest, hold, etc., also written as\n捕まえる (or 捉まえる). (See [大辞泉 dictionary\nentry](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E6%8D%95%E3%81%BE%E3%81%88%E3%82%8B?dic=daijisen)\nfor more information.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-02-26T02:57:36.377", "id": "11333", "last_activity_date": "2014-08-02T19:23:13.113", "last_edit_date": "2014-08-02T19:23:13.113", "last_editor_user_id": "6840", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "11332", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "摑まえようとする is read as tukamae-you to suru. It means to try to\n[catch](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&stype=0&dtype=0&dname=0ss&p=%E3%81%A4%E3%81%8B%E3%81%BE%E3%81%88%E3%82%8B).\nYou may notice that the non-radical part is 國. In modern Japanese orthography,\nthis is written as 国. Knowing this, you should be able to surmise that this is\nequivalent to 掴.\n\nOther ways to look this up:\n\n * Most 漢和辞典 should include this character. Search by the radical (手) and then count the remaining number of strokes.\n * Most modern IMEs (including those in Windows) allow you to draw the character and it will match this.\n * [Unihan](http://www.unicode.org/cgi-bin/GetUnihanData.pl?codepoint=6451&useutf8=true) has similar search functionality by radical + remaining stokes.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-02-26T02:58:04.713", "id": "11334", "last_activity_date": "2013-02-26T04:27:22.140", "last_edit_date": "2013-02-26T04:27:22.140", "last_editor_user_id": "1141", "owner_user_id": "1141", "parent_id": "11332", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 } ]

[ { "body": "It sounds to me like it's just an idiosyncrasy of this particular game show.\nSometimes, using the very formal form elicits a certain charming feeling, or\nperhaps sarcastic formality (I am not Japanese so am still unsure of all the\nnuances of the formal form).\n\nSo in this case, I would think the \"it is\" would convey plainly stating the\nfact (a straight です） and the \"is not\" would be using a more theatrical (?) or\ninteresting way to say the negative (でございません）. This is my theory based on my\nalbeit limited experience with the two forms in real life settings and\nwatching Japanese TV.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-02-27T00:03:18.220", "id": "11347", "last_activity_date": "2013-02-27T00:03:18.220", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3128", "parent_id": "11341", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Your question doesn't really give detailed context to the situation and her\nsentence is ambiguous in general, but I can surmise that she means she wants\nyou to send her the lyrics in Japanese. It's possible that she doesn't know\nthey are lyrics and just wants to know what you are writing in English, or\nit's possible that she wants a translation. So in this context, 送って would mean\nto \"give\" a translation. You can think of it akin to \"sending\" e-mail which is\nwhy in Japanese they would use that word for electronic communication.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-02-26T19:25:53.043", "id": "11343", "last_activity_date": "2013-02-26T19:25:53.043", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3128", "parent_id": "11342", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Your original sentence sounds better as\n\n> 敬語は凄く長くなる可能性がある。\n\nI guess that means that in Japanese it sounds more natural to say\n\n> Keigo can _get_ very long.\n\nrather than\n\n> Keigo can _be_ very long.\n\nTo make that less formal, you could try to omit 可能性, i.e.\n\n> 敬語は凄く長くなるよね。 \n> Keigo gets really long (sometimes).\n\nOther ways of saying the same thing (plagiarised from @istrasci) would include\n\n> 敬語は凄く長いことがある。 \n> Sometimes keigo is very long.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-01T23:12:52.183", "id": "11368", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-02T00:12:40.760", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-02T00:12:40.760", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "11348", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "`媒介にして` means `as the medium`\n\n```\n\n 血液を媒介にしてのみ真祖は継承されるの\n \n```\n\nmeans\n\n```\n\n use the blood as the medium to become the 真祖\n \n```\n\nit think the sentence means if a `真祖` bites another person or vampire, then\nthe blood of the `真祖` will flow into the person, then he will also become the\n`真祖`\n\nPS: this is a pretty common setting appears in many ACGs, like\n[Tsukihime](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsukihime),\n[Tsukuyomi](http://anidb.net/perl-bin/animedb.pl?show=anime&aid=2478)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-02-27T13:14:05.773", "id": "11351", "last_activity_date": "2013-02-27T13:26:49.867", "last_edit_date": "2013-02-27T13:26:49.867", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3227", "parent_id": "11350", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "This is not a 'productive' grammar. There are certain cases (e.g.\n近い・近くの、多い・多くの) where there are both noun and i-adjective forms, but you don't\ngenerally see \"高くの\". Where the noun form exists it will generally have a\ndictionary entry as well. And of course, there are only a few basic colours\nwhich even have the i-adjective form.\n\nFor the colours, I'm referencing from\n[色彩名詞と色彩形容詞の対立](http://www.gsid.nagoya-u.ac.jp/fujimura/gyoseki/iro.pdf) (pdf)\nwhich is basically a corpus study of the usage of colour words.\n\nTheir hypothesis was that the noun forms are unnatural when used to describe\n\"natural\" (non-artificially coloured) things.\n\nThey took a large corpus (text from newspapers and literature), stripped out\nthings like set phrases (赤の他人), names of places and titles of movies, and\nterms that were overrepresented in the data set (there was a newspaper column\ntitle, 青い山脈). They also removed compound words (青白い, 赤茶色の ), cases where the\nnoun form was preceded with an adjective (深い青の), and cases like 赤や黄色のミニトマト and\n赤青黄のおはじき referencing multiple colours.\n\nThen they split the remaining cases by what was being described:\n\n 1. Natural things (things that are not artificially coloured), including things like hair/eyes, sea/sky, flowers/birds\n 2. Artificially coloured things (particularly clothing)\n 3. 2D objects e.g. \"line\" or \"letter\" (文字)\n 4. Unspecified (generic terms like もの and 部分)\n 5. Colourants (ink, dye)\n\nThe colours they looked at were 白、黒、青、赤、黄色 and 茶色. In the texts they looked\nat, the adjective forms were much more common than the noun forms for the\nfirst four, 黄色い was more common than 黄色の but not by as much, and 茶色の was more\ncommon than 茶色い by more than 3:1.\n\nWhen it came to the five types, the noun forms were primarily used to describe\nthings in their \"artificially\" coloured set, not natural objects. When they\nsplit it by colour, though, 黄色の and 茶色の are used for natural things.\n\nThere's a lot more in here and on page 21 there's a sort of table summarising\nthe differences - basically the adjective forms are natural, more vague,\n\"analog\" and the noun forms are artificial, more precise/scientific, \"digital\"\n(the analog/digital thing is their analogy).\n\nI don't think this covers everything because they've specifically removed\ncases like \"深い青の\" and \"青と赤の\" where the noun versions might be more in use.\n\nAs mentioned in the comments, google counts are only estimates, and can be\nskewed by various other things (most of the first hits I get for 白の鳥 are about\na book, 白の鳥と黒の鳥).\n\nJust to add something to the pot, there's also sometimes specific additional\nnoun forms, such as 青空.\n\n* * *\n\nFor the 近くの vs. 近い example, there are differences in usage and in meaning (or\nrange of meaning). For example, when talking about places, you would normally\nuse 近くの when it appears at the start of a sentence.\n\n> 近い店 (☓)\n>\n> 近くの店 (○)\n>\n> 家に近い店 (○)\n\nAnd then there are specific cases where 近い has meanings that 近く doesn't,\nbecause 近く tends to be only used for physical distances. A specific example:\n\n> 近くの親戚 (relatives who live close by)\n>\n> 近い親戚 (relatives who are close blood relations)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-10T13:04:54.583", "id": "11423", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-10T13:04:54.583", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "571", "parent_id": "11352", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "You're not parsing your sentence correctly. It should be\n\n> _人の身で_ **灯りも無く** 深夜の森を行くのはあまりに過酷な作業である。 \n> _A living human being_ going to the woods late at night **without a light**\n> is quite a serious undertaking.\n\nwhere the bold and italic parts correspond to one another.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-02-27T21:30:22.990", "id": "11354", "last_activity_date": "2013-02-27T23:03:48.117", "last_edit_date": "2013-02-27T23:03:48.117", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "11353", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "パンドラの箱を開ける\n\nSorry if you expected something cooler. You can say this in Japanese and be\nunderstood, however the norm might be to phrase it in a more direct way.\n\n[http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=Pandora%27s+box&ref=sa](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=Pandora%27s+box&ref=sa)\n\nIf you want a more Japanese equivalent, this entry from the link above has a\nfew alternatives:\n\n> open a Pandora's box\n>\n> パンドラの箱を開ける、厄介な問題を引き起こす、災いを呼ぶ、収拾のつかない事態を引き起こす\n\nIt's possible that there are other Japanese idioms that capture this same\nmeaning that I don't know about. You'll also be totally fine avoiding the\nidiomatic use and just saying it directly (so for example talk about how you\nmade Jane upset or whatever problem happened as a result of asking about her\nproblems).", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-02-28T00:04:32.127", "id": "11356", "last_activity_date": "2013-02-28T02:10:44.853", "last_edit_date": "2013-02-28T02:10:44.853", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "11355", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 }, { "body": "In case anyone (1 yr later) should reference this, one good idiomatic\nexpression is \"yabuhebi\", not quite Pandora's box, but a dangerous snake that\nlies in the grass and should not be stirred up -- because once stirred it will\nnot ignore you. This expression is used very commonly in Japanese, e.g.\n\"それを言い出したらやぶへびだよ。やめたほうがいい。”", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-25T02:35:45.067", "id": "15574", "last_activity_date": "2016-12-04T01:00:50.380", "last_edit_date": "2016-12-04T01:00:50.380", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "5222", "parent_id": "11355", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "> What is the origin of these uses?\n\n 1. Instrumental: contraction of case particle -ni and particle -te. In many cases (*), you can interpret this as ni + verb + -te. In your example, it could be 車に乗って大阪に行った.\n 2. Locative: contraction of case particle -ni and particle -te. In many (*) cases, you can interpret this ni + verb + -te. In your example, it would be 図書館「に来て」数学を勉強している.\n 3. Te-form of copula: contraction of 連用形 of copula -nari (-ni) + the particle -te. More precisely, -nari itself is a contraction case particle -ni + verb ar-, so while not direct, the etymology is essentially the same as #1 and #2.\n 4. Reason: This is not the te-form of the copula. Rather, it expresses reason. It is a contraction of case particle -ni and particle -te.\n 5. 連用形 of copula: Same as #3.\n\nNote (*): I have not done a survey of this, nor am I aware of any such\nstudies. So I will refrain from saying 'always'. But it is a tendancy that I\nhave noted numerous times over the years.\n\n> Do all these でs historically come from one thing?\n\nYou would be safe to split them into two groups: (#1, #2, #4) and (#3 and #5).\nThough as I wrote, an argument could be made that they are all ultimately of\nthe same etymology.\n\nThere is another de that you are missing. As in a conversation a person can\nsay \"de? (dou natta? nani ga atta?)\" to help continue the topic. This is an\nabbreviation of \"soko de\" or \"sore de\".\n\nThere is also de found in various Kansai dialects. \"iku de\", \"koute kita de\".\nThis is thought to be a variation of \"ze\" (~zo).\n\nBoth of these would be in their own etymology groups as well.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-09T15:52:02.893", "id": "11419", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-09T15:52:02.893", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1141", "parent_id": "11357", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

[ { "body": "The \"correct\" translation for 迷宮 is indeed \"labyrinth\" in the sense of the\nstructure from ancient times, and it's basically from here that you get the\nreal \"differences\" outside of medical terminology, etc. If you look on\n[wikipedia](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%BF%B7%E5%AE%AE#.E8.BF.B7.E8.B7.AF.E3.81.A8.E8.BF.B7.E5.AE.AE.E3.81.AE.E9.81.95.E3.81.84)\nthere is a whole section devoted to the qualities that make a 迷宮 different\nfrom a 迷路. It might be an overly technical distinction, but here is the\nrelevant part:\n\n> 迷宮は以下の点で迷路とは区別される。\n>\n> 通路は交差しない。\n>\n> 一本道であり、道の選択肢はない。\n>\n> 通路は振り子状に方向転換をする。\n>\n> 迷宮内には余さず通路が通され、迷宮を抜けようとすればその内部空間をすべて通ることになる。\n>\n> 中心のそばを繰り返し通る。\n>\n>\n> 中心から脱出する際、行きと同じ道を再び通らなければならない[1](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%BF%B7%E5%AE%AE#.E8.BF.B7.E8.B7.AF.E3.81.A8.E8.BF.B7.E5.AE.AE.E3.81.AE.E9.81.95.E3.81.84)。\n\nSo in a 迷宮, if I may briefly translate:\n\n * Paths do not cross\n * There is only one long, winding road (i.e. no choosing different paths)\n * The path moves back and forth like a pendulum (look at the picture in the article to see what this means)\n * The path fills the entire area\n * It winds around the center\n * If you escape from the center, you have to leave the same way you came\n\nThis explanation deals with 迷宮 as a strict translation of the term\n\"labyrinth,\" while 迷路 is generally a maze. You can see a 迷宮 as a special case\nof a 迷路 that follows the above rules. Like English, however, we don't really\nuse labyrinth with such strict rules, and the same is true in Japanese. For\nexample if you go through a dungeon in an RPG that happens to be called 迷宮 it\nlikely won't follow these rules. In fact a good alternate translation for 迷宮\nmay very well be \"dungeon\" in the video game sense, since I have a feeling\nthat outside of describing \"actual\" labyrinths it gets most of its usage from\ngames. The key to note is that a 迷宮 is primarily a _structure_ with a spooky\natmosphere designed to be complicated and keep people out (or in?) while a 迷路,\nlike snailplane mentions, is just a maze, a tricky path or a game you played\non paper as a kid. There are different connotations to 迷路 and 迷宮 like this in\nJapanese just as there are connotations between labyrinth and maze in English.\n\nFor the record, this is what wikipedia technically describes as a 迷宮\n\n", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-02-28T04:54:14.993", "id": "11359", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-01T00:50:46.230", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "11358", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "Besides the previous answers about the grammatical difference being adjective\nor not, I think they are slightly different in some meaning. While both refers\nto blue color, 青い is simply describing what it looks like, 青色をしている is more\nfocusing of the color itself.\n\nFor example,\n\n * あの自転車は青い = the bike is blue. (where the information of bike and blue are equally important to me)\n * あの自転車は青色をしている = the bike is in the color of blue/that bike has a blue color to it. (where the color is what I want to bring your attension to)", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-07T06:27:12.723", "id": "11405", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-07T06:35:44.767", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-07T06:35:44.767", "last_editor_user_id": "706", "owner_user_id": "3251", "parent_id": "11360", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "**[EDIT]** I only 'heard' that にっぽん was overused during WWII to encourage\npatriotic feelings. After Jesse Good comment I tried findind document backing\nup this but as I didn't found anything it's probably better not to remember\nthis point !\n\nAlso I remembered that Japan was officialy read as にっぽん according to the\nGovernment, I haven't had time to check it yet but this [link linsting words\nwho are mainly read as にほん or にっぽん](http://hiramatu-\nhifuka.com/onyak/nippon.html) tends to say the two form are reckognize by the\ngovernment.\n\nFinally, I find Tim answer better than my original answer, so I adwise you to\nscroll down if it still appear after mine.\n\n**[ORIGINAL ANSWER]**\n\nFrom what I heared, 日本 was read にっぽん but was 'overused' during WWII to suggest\npatriotism toward the country. In order to take distance with this meaning,\npeople switch to a softer reading which is にほん.\n\nStill, 日本 is still 'officially' read as にっぽん, but from what I observed people\nwill mostly prefer the softer version except if you want to explicitly affirm\nyour attachment toward the country, some simple example could be a footbal\nmatch, some really 'official' context (I'm mostly thinking of politicians,\nsuch as the right orientied parties you can find on saturday in Shibuya).\n\nSo I think you will mostly never be wrong using にほん in normal cases. And if\nyou find yourself wanting to cheer for Japan (as a team) feel free to use にっぽん\nif you feel like it.\n\nThere is probably other situation to use にっぽん but I prefer to base me reply on\nsituation I actually saw happen.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-02-28T09:16:56.680", "id": "11362", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-06T22:59:44.327", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-06T22:59:44.327", "last_editor_user_id": "3229", "owner_user_id": "3229", "parent_id": "11361", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 }, { "body": "I think it helps to understand why we have two ways to say 日本、Nihon and\nNippon. Nippon comes from the south of Japan and was used by the Choshu-\nSatsuma alliance (薩長同盟（さっちょうどうめい)）that overthrew the Tokugawa shogunate (aka\nthe 幕府 (ばくふ)) in the mid-19 century. We can still see this influence on the\ninstitutions that came out the the Meiji Restoration such as the Bank of Japan\nwhich uses Nippon Ginko on its bank notes. The alliance led the modernisation\nof Japan in the Meiji period ultimately acquiring an empire through military\nexpansion and establishing the country as one of the so-called \"Great Powers\"\nthat dominated the world politics of 100 years ago.\n\nHence, Nippon tends to be used in nationalistic/patriotic situations such as\ncharging in to battle and firing up the crowd at a political rally. It is a\nonly small (harmless) extention to hear it being used at a football match or\nany other situation where the intention is to encourage patriotism.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-02T12:06:07.080", "id": "11369", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-02T23:38:08.547", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-02T23:38:08.547", "last_editor_user_id": "1556", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "11361", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "Essentially it's emphasis, and while it is often used to express opinion, it\nisn't always. J-J dictionaries will give the definition as\n[徹底的](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%82%E3%81%8F%E3%81%BE%E3%81%A7) or\nsomething. So in general it's a very neutral word that I don't think changes\nthe tone too much. Rather it's what it's connected to that determines the\ntone.\n\nIn the example that you give, I don't think that it necessarily makes the\nsentence more humble as much as it is trying to make oneself not appear\narrogant or overly assertive. Maybe this is a small distinction, but given the\nnature of あくまで I don't think we can say it makes something more humble. Like\nyou say, it's very similar to saying, in English, \"It's _only_ my opinion,\"\nand I think it carries the same nuance in this situation. That is, you're\noffering up an opinion that could potentially be controversial or seem overly\nassertive, so you try to distance yourself from that interpretation by\nemphasizing the fact that it is, in the end, just your personal opinion, and\nnot necessarily _the_ opinion.\n\nHere are some examples from alc that show some of the different uses:\n\n> あくまで迷信だ\n>\n> be all just superstition\n\nThis one is a more neutral one that just has the meaning of \"to the end\"\n\n> あくまで〔that以下〕と主張する\n>\n> consistently maintain that\n\nThis one would be the opposite of what your example is, mostly because it's\nconnected to 主張, an explicit statement of assertiveness and 'persistence.'\n\nSo to address your two points once again, in the context of your question, it\nhas an effect like making the sentence more humble, but it can be the opposite\nas well depending on the context. With regard to persistence, it doesn't\nnecessarily mean (in your example) that this person is strongly suggesting\nthis or that it's a long-held belief or anything. It's just an emphasis on the\nfact that it is a personal opinion rather than fact.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-01T04:07:50.470", "id": "11364", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-01T04:07:50.470", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "11363", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "あくまで comes from the verb 飽{あ}く plus the particle まで. The verb 飽{あ}く became\n飽{あ}きる in modern Japanese, so if you can understand 飽きる and まで, then you can\nunderstand how it came to describe doing something \"to the end; persistently;\nthoroughly\" as in the edict gloss you gave above. This sense can be seen in\nthe example 「あくまでもがんばる」 \"to persist until the bitter end\".\n\nFrom here, we can make a small leap to \"thoroughly; completely\". In the phrase\n「あくまで青い」 \"thoroughly blue\", あくまで doesn't describe any _action_ being carried\nout to the very end. It just means thoroughly or completely, which is a\nslightly more figurative sense.\n\nNow, let's look at your example, 「あくまで私個人の意見です」. There's no action being\ndescribed, so it can't be \"to the end; persistently\". You could say it means\n\"[it's] entirely my personal opinion\", but what does _entirely_ mean here?\nIt's unlikely it means \"entirely, as opposed to partially\", because \"it's\n_partially_ my personal opinion\" doesn't make much sense.\n\nInstead, we can conclude あくまで has made one more figurative leap: it's being\nused as an _intensifier_ (a word that shows emphasis). Therefore, we can\nprobably translate it as \"[it's] _only_ my personal opinion\" or \"[this is]\n_purely_ my personal opinion\", because in these sentences _only_ and _purely_\nfunction as intensifiers in much the same way as あくまで does in Japanese.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-01T05:49:55.517", "id": "11365", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-01T05:49:55.517", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "11363", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "Similar to @istrasci, I can't think of any other explanation except that\n`涼しい所` is being modified by `直射日光の当たらない`, and that there isn't any \"and\" in\nthis sentence, in this case I think the noun phrase `涼しい所` is being modified\nby the relative clause `直射日光の当たらない`:\n\n> **直射日光の当たらない** 涼しい所 \n> \"A cool place **_[which/that]_ isn't exposed to direct sunlight**\"\n\nOn the other hand, I think `直射日光の当たらなくて涼しい` would be:\n\n> **直射日光の当たらなくて涼しい** 所 \n> \"A place **_[which/that]_ isn't exposed to direct sunlight and is cool**\"\n\nWhich I think sounds more clunky in English, I think it might in Japanese too.\n(BTW, `直射日光の当たらない涼しい場所に保管してください` is on\n[ALC](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E7%9B%B4%E5%B0%84%E6%97%A5%E5%85%89%E3%81%AE%E5%BD%93%E3%81%9F%E3%82%89%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84&ref=sa)\nas \"Store in a cool place avoiding direct sunlight\", and I think it's pretty\nstandard.)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-01T21:35:31.717", "id": "11367", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-01T21:35:31.717", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "11366", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "> ように見える\n\ncan often be translated as \"looks like\". In your case,\n\n> あの人にそんな秘密があるようには全く見えないがな \n> He really didn't look like somebody, who was keeping such a secret.\n\nThis よう would be [this\none](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&p=%E3%82%88%E3%81%86&dtype=0&dname=0na&stype=0&pagenum=1&index=18849000),\nwritten 様 and meaning amongst others \"look, appearance\".\n\nThere are [lots of\nquestions](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/search?q=%E3%82%88%E3%81%86)\nabout よう（に）. Reading some of them might be helpful as well.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-02T15:41:17.280", "id": "11371", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-02T15:51:33.337", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.157", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "11370", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "I do distinguish their meaning.\n\n 1. Since there already is a topic, には must be the contrastive marker, suggesting that _for children_ their parents' high expectations make them miserable. At the same time it also makes room for other people not being affected by high expectations.\n 2. にしたら in a sense suggests putting yourself into the shoes of the children to conclude that they feel miserable.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-03T11:21:21.670", "id": "11380", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-03T11:21:21.670", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "11373", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I think you've more or less got the meaning of the words right. I would say\n近{ちか}寄{よ}る means 親{した}しくなるようにする in this context ([sense 2 in\n大辞林](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&stype=0&dtype=0&dname=0na&p=%E8%BF%91%E5%AF%84%E3%82%8B)).\n親しくなる is similar to the figurative meaning of \"get closer [to]\" in English, so\nyour literal translation works pretty well: \"hard to approach\".\n\nLook at this definition for\n[気さく](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&stype=0&dtype=0&dname=0ss&p=%E6%B0%97%E3%81%95%E3%81%8F).\nIn particular, it says 親{した}しみやす[い], which seems to directly contradict\n近寄りがたい. The best translation probably depends on context, and there isn't much\ncontext to base a choice on, so I'll choose the first translation from the\nKenkyusha J-E, which highlights the contradiction: \"approachable\".\n\nSo, we're trying to put these two meanings together:\n\n * Hard to approach\n * Approachable\n\nI checked a number of dictionaries, but I couldn't figure out a way to make\nsense of this contradiction. So, based on comments from @Chocolate and others,\nas well as the seeming contradiction between the words, I believe:\n\n**The sentence doesn't really make sense.** Sorry!", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-03T16:13:01.743", "id": "11381", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-07T06:46:44.980", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-07T06:46:44.980", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "11374", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "The other commentators probably understand these words better than I but I\ndon't find the concept of a boss who is both friendly (気さく) but able to put\nsome distance between himself and his staff (近寄りがたい) for the purposes of\nmanaging them that difficult to grasp.\n\nHowever I just asked a native speaker who tells me, as have the others above,\nthat the two expressions are complete opposites of each other!", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-04T21:44:02.257", "id": "11386", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-06T14:21:10.857", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-06T14:21:10.857", "last_editor_user_id": "1556", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "11374", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "It's just one word with more than one definition. [See for\nyourself](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E5%87%9D%E3%82%8B) (or\n[here](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/82723/m0u/%E5%87%9D%E3%82%8B/)).\nYour first example falls under the first definition (趣味に夢中になる) while your\nsecond example falls under the second definition (意匠をこらす). Kanji usage seems\nirrelevant here, it's the same word and you can use the kanji or not with no\nchange in meaning. Context should give you an idea for which meaning you need\nto use. So for example, if a building has a \"こった造り\" then you can probably\nsurmise that it's not referring to someone being absorbed in something.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-03T10:19:13.267", "id": "11378", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-03T10:19:13.267", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "11375", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "I recognise the expression and traced the question in the book (総まとめ語彙n１？）. I\nalso see I had flagged the question when I studied it. This is how I think you\nwere supposed to approach this:\n\nThe question asks you choose between こった and こりた. Both 懲りる and 凝る were part of\nthat chapter and you are being asked to choose between the two.\n\nThe other meaning of 凝る in my dictionary is 工夫を凝らす, one example is 「凝った庭園｜an\nexquisite garden」. 8 pages earlier in the book we had to learn this expression\nas \"come up with ideas\" and learn the expression「これは特別な工夫をこらして作りました。」There is\nalso one meaning of こった、stiff as in stiff shoulders which you are possibly\nexpected to know anyway.\n\nIf you don't know the specific meaning in the question then my guess is that\nif you have picked up all the other words in the book mentioned in the last\nparagraph, and you know your kanji, then you might know 懲りる is a rare word\nwith only one meaning but there some variations on the use of 凝る and therefore\nit is probably the best fit.\n\nStrange? Maybe but, as I expect you know, it is probably difficult for even a\nnative speaker to answer all the questions in the real JLPT N1 correctly in\nthe allotted time. Us non-native speakers have to think laterally using what\nwe do know to make intelligent guesses, and this is this book's way of getting\nus used to it.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-06T15:04:12.053", "id": "11394", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-08T12:44:29.760", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-08T12:44:29.760", "last_editor_user_id": "1556", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "11375", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "I find that all too often these kinds of questions stem from people trying to\ntranslate a word into English rather than investigating the nuances in a J-J\ndictionary. Borrowing from snailplane's advice, we will avoid translation into\nEnglish and look at the nuances as explained directly in Japanese.\n\nFor [まとも（に）](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E7%9C%9F%E9%9D%A2), we see the\nfollowing definition:\n\n> (2)道理にかなっていて、他人から非難される点のないこと。きちんとしていて、いかがわしい点のないこと。また、そのさま。\n> 「―な商売」「挨拶すら―にできない」\n\nSee an alternate definition\n[here](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/209100/m0u/%E3%81%BE%E3%81%A8%E3%82%82/).\n\nThis is a word that deals with correctness or fairness. It refers to something\nthat is logical, something that cannot be criticized, something that is done\ncarefully and with nothing fishy about it. It's proper in the sense that it\nis. If you go from the second link, it basically describes a process that is\ndone straight and with no monkey business. No bullshit, just get it done. This\nisn't the kind of meaning that you normally associate with something as simple\nas inspecting a car, and especially in your example sentence there's no real\ncomplicated meaning going on; it just refers to checking your car before you\ndrive. If there were some well-established social procedure involved in\nchecking your car, and it was imperative to some sort of business venture or\nsomething, or otherwise connected to something for which other people are\ndepending on you, then maybe you could say まともに. But you just want to say to\ncheck your car carefully, _not_ with this sense of cosmic correctness. If you\nlook at the examples in the definition, it includes business and greetings. If\nbusiness is done まともに, you can expect that it's by the books and a smooth\nprocess. If someone _can't even_ give a proper aisatsu, though, you know\nthey're probably messing a lot of stuff up beyond just saying hello. Also of\nnote is that there is another definition for this word that involves facing\nsomeone or something squarely, so you might be able to think of the more\nmetaphorical meaning of this as an extension of the act of looking someone in\nthe eye, or something along those lines.\n\nNow, if we look up\n[念入り](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E5%BF%B5%E5%85%A5%E3%82%8A) on the other\nhand:\n\n> 細かい点までよく注意すること。念を入れること。また、そのさま。入念。 「―な仕事ぶり」「―に点検する」\n\nIt's exactly what you're looking for, and even the example sentence includes\n念入りに点検する. The meaning isn't nearly as ambitious: it's just paying attention to\ndetails. You could probably translate your example to \"careful inspection\" in\nEnglish.\n\nThe moral of this story is that if you are trying to translate two very\nnuanced words into English and compare them based on their English\ntranslations then you are easily setting yourself up for confusion. Use\nJapanese dictionaries as much as you can.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-03T10:54:33.067", "id": "11379", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-03T10:54:33.067", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "11376", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "I like this question because I have never really seen these two words as\nsimilar and often struggled to remember the nuances in the use まともな／に. The\nabove advice to look at the definitions in Japanese is correct but if you want\na more English oriented explanation, my understanding of these words for JLPT\n(with some analysis of the kanji) was as follows.\n\n> 念入りに：thoroughly/with special care [or literally **\"with some thought put\n> into it\"** ]\n\nFor example:\n\n念入りな 計画 is a \"well-prepared plan\"\n\n> まとも:\n>\n> 1:〔正面〕〔じかに〕directly; 〔まっすぐに〕straight; 〔面と向かって〕to one's face\n>\n> 2: 〔誤りのないこと〕〔正直な〕honest; 〔妥当な〕proper; 〔ちゃんとした〕respectable\n\nThe examples in my notes were:\n\nまともな生活をする: live a decent life\n\nまともな人間なら、そんなことはしない: a decent person would never do that\n\nまともな 仕事：a decent (or proper) job\n\n風を まともに 受ける：face the wind\n\nHopefully from the above next time you will choose \"b\" as I did when I read\nyour OP.\n\n_References: Most of these examples came from 総まとめ語彙N１._ *The definition of\nまとも from the Apple dictionary which seems to borrow from the Progressive J-E*", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-04T21:30:56.830", "id": "11385", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-05T11:55:50.507", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-05T11:55:50.507", "last_editor_user_id": "1556", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "11376", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "There are a few phrases that are commonly used.\n\n * 「分からなくなってきた」（e.g. 何を信じればいいのか分からなくなってきた、自分の気持ちが 分からなくなってきた、あなたのことが分からなくなってきた）\n\n * 「自分探し」 (e.g. やりたい事が見つからないので、自分探しにいってきます）\n\nYou could also use\n葛藤、e.g.「自分がやってきたことが正しかったのか、すごく葛藤した時期」、「どちらの道に進むべきか分からず、葛藤し続けた」", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-05T03:30:40.050", "id": "11387", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-05T03:30:40.050", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "11382", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "Depending on the context, you might also be able to use 疑心暗鬼（ぎしんあんき）, meaning\ndoubt begets doubt, which is commonly used to express a sort of negative\nmomentum in one's thinking.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-06T05:20:21.617", "id": "11391", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-06T05:20:21.617", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3247", "parent_id": "11382", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "I think `から` here is \"a particle which indicates a starting point or a source\"\n(A Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar, p.176). `顔面から` is describing a verb\nof motion\n([コケる](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/detail?p=%E3%81%93%E3%81%91%E3%82%8B&stype=0&dtype=0),\nto fall).\n\n\n\n(My apologies for the bad drawing _and_ handwriting! It's supposed to say\n[顔面]{がんめん}から・[先]{さき}に・[地面]{じめん}に like in @Chocolate's comment.)\n\nSo the motion described by `コケる` is from the face, toward the ground. 先{さき}に\nand 地面{じめん}に aren't part of your original sentence, but I think you can use\nthem to describe the motion.\n\nI don't think you can use `に` here. I think you're trying to understand by\nsubstituting English words for Japanese ones. If you do that, your sentence\nsounds like \"I fell _from_ my face\", and you're wondering if you can\nsubstitute `に` because you think the English phrase \"I fell _on_ my face\"\nsounds more natural. Unfortunately, this doesn't work, because although `コケる`\nexpresses falling, it doesn't do it in quite the same way as the English word\n\"fall\".", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-04T19:19:09.853", "id": "11384", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-04T19:45:28.157", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-04T19:45:28.157", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "11383", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "申し伝えます is used when you are telling a customer, your boss or someone else\nabove you (目上の人) that you will let your coworker know about something.\n\n```\n\n Does it depend on Tanaka's position relative to me?\n \n```\n\nYes, if (s)he is of the same or lower rank then you, then 申し伝えます is correct,\nif (s)he is of higher rank than you, than 申し上げる would be correct. However, as\nchocolate points out, if you talk to someone outside of our company (a\ncustomer, etc.), you use 申し伝えます because they are above everyone in your\ncompany.\n\nお伝えするについて\n\nお伝えする is showing respect towards the person you are _giving_ the message to.\nIn your example 田中さん is a coworker (自分の身内), hence using お伝えします here would be\nwrong.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-05T09:22:04.957", "id": "11390", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-06T05:13:17.813", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-06T05:13:17.813", "last_editor_user_id": "107", "owner_user_id": "1217", "parent_id": "11389", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "> As far as I can tell there is no \"たとう\" that would give rise to たとえば.\n\nActually, there is\n[たと・う](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&p=%E3%81%9F%E3%81%A8&dtype=0&dname=0na&stype=0&index=11556800&pagenum=1).\nたとえば used to be\n[たとへば](http://kobun.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%9F%E3%81%A8%E3%81%B8%E3%81%B0).\nIt's been around for a while as there are examples from 徒然草 and 平家物語, etc.\n\nIf you want to get into details, it has them\n[here](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E8%AD%AC%E3%81%B8%E3%81%B0):\n\n【文語】ハ行四段活用の動詞「譬ふ」の已然形である「譬へ」に、接続助詞「ば」が付いた形。\n\nAs you can see `ば` is a 接続助詞.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-06T09:31:13.157", "id": "11393", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-06T09:45:15.537", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-06T09:45:15.537", "last_editor_user_id": "1217", "owner_user_id": "1217", "parent_id": "11392", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "Trying to translate your initial phrase directly may be too burdensome, but\nbeginning a request with \"If I may...,\" has a direct translation suitable for\nyou:\n\n> よろしければ。。。\n\nHere is an example, though the whole sentence is probably a bit too stiff for\nyour purposes:\n\n> If I may, I'd like to ask you a few questions about something else.\n>\n> よろしければ別のことをいくつかお尋ねしたいのですが。\n\nSource: I searched \"If I may ask\" on <http://eow.alc.co.jp>\n\nPlease do the same if you would like to see other examples.\n\nIf you would like this response tailored to a specific quote, please provide\none.\n\nAmong friends, one could say,\n\n> ちょっと聞いてもいい？。。。", "comment_count": 9, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-06T23:06:17.560", "id": "11397", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-07T03:01:16.803", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "706", "parent_id": "11395", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "You've got 3 words here that _look_ similar but in meaning and use are really\npretty distinct.\n\nどうか is used to make very polite requests. It has kind of a strong meaning so I\ndon't think it's something that comes up too often in your day to day life. It\ncan have a kind of sense of desperation to it, like begging a doctor to save\nsomeone's life or begging someone not to take you to court or something like\nthat, or it can also just be affixed to polite requests. (どうか助けてください！） [(alc\nfor\nreference)](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E3%81%A9%E3%81%86%E3%81%8B&ref=sa)\n\nどうにか expresses the idea of \"somehow or other,\" like you're not really sure how\nor why it worked, or you didn't think it would. Basically things just weren't\nthat great but some way or another you managed to pull through.\n(難しかったが、どうにか成功しました) [(alc for\nreference)](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E3%81%A9%E3%81%86%E3%81%AB%E3%81%8B)\n\nどうかして kind of borrows from どうか but only insofar as it describes doing\n\"something.\" どうかして just means that you want to do something, somehow. In fact\nit doesn't really matter how, you just want to make it happen. It may be more\nuseful to think of it as a hypothetical sort of situation like in the example\nbelow, like \"if by chance _something_ were to happen.\" Examples on alc seem to\nshow this having a kind of poetic \"if only\" kind of feel to it, like this:\n\n> どうかして夢にみたことをのこらず、あくる日目がさめてもおぼえていられたらいいだろう。\n>\n> If only to-morrow on awaking, I could again call all to mind so vividly!\n\n[(alc for\nreference)](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E3%81%A9%E3%81%86%E3%81%8B%E3%81%97%E3%81%A6%20-%E3%81%A9%E3%81%86%E3%81%8B%E3%81%97%E3%81%A6%E3%82%8B%20-%E3%81%A9%E3%81%86%E3%81%8B%E3%81%97%E3%81%A6%E3%81%84%20-%E3%81%A9%E3%81%86%E3%81%8B%E3%81%97%E3%81%A6%E3%81%BE)\n\nThis is not to be confused with どうかしている, which is an expression that means\nyou've gone crazy or that there's something wrong with something/someone in\nthe not thinking straight sort of sense.", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-07T00:03:01.397", "id": "11398", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-11T11:55:26.923", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "11396", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "<http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1122105076>\n\n> mod は、modulo(モジュロ) の省略で、モッドと読みます。\n\nSomeone deleted his answer but he was also right in a way.\n\n`a % b` is also read `a を b で割った余り`.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-07T06:22:08.853", "id": "11402", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-07T06:22:08.853", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "11399", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "The word `modulo` is read `モジュロ`, while the abbreviation `mod` is read `モッド`.\nIn many programming languages, the modulo operator is written with a symbol\nsuch as `%`, but it still _represents_ either `modulo` or `mod`, so you could\nread the symbol either way.\n\n```\n\n Written form Reading\n ----------------- --------------------\n x modulo y x モジュロ y\n x mod y x モッド y\n x % y x モジュロ y OR x モッド y\n \n```", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-07T06:24:47.917", "id": "11404", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-07T06:24:47.917", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "11399", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "I think I learnt in elementary math that\n\n```\n\n 22 % 3 = 1\n \n```\n\nwould be read as\n\n```\n\n 22を3で割るところの余りは1\n \n```\n\nHence, I would read the example in the original question as\n\n```\n\n 4を2で割るところの余りは0\n \n```", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-07T06:39:55.847", "id": "11406", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-07T06:39:55.847", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3251", "parent_id": "11399", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Find here <http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/negation>\n\n> 4)〔数学〕否定, 相反《真偽を逆にした命題》.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-07T06:24:04.797", "id": "11403", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-07T06:24:04.797", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "11400", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I think it is two different things in your two sentences:\n\n 1. くる→くん (similar sound change to わからない→わかんない)\n\n 2. shortened form of 連れていく + んだ (のだ)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-07T15:31:31.287", "id": "11408", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-07T15:31:31.287", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "571", "parent_id": "11407", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "Yes, I believe it's a contraction of `くる`. Although the second example could\npossibly be a contraction of `連れていく` depending on the context.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-07T15:31:47.737", "id": "11409", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-07T15:31:47.737", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "11407", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "I think in regular Japanese it would be:\n\n「おめーはちょくちょくうちの晩飯 食いにくるなー」\n\n「というか、 なんで連れていくんだ？」\n\nI don't think in the second sentence its くる, since the る contracts to ん, if we\nwere to reformulate the sentence it would be\n\n「というか、なんで連れてくるだ？」\n\nWhich I think it's gramatically incorrect. Most probably this ん is the\nnominalizer の used in the pattern のだ and abbreviated to んだ. At least that's\nthe way I see it =)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-07T20:47:29.390", "id": "11411", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-07T20:47:29.390", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1392", "parent_id": "11407", "post_type": "answer", "score": -1 } ]

[ { "body": "The うち(に) means \"while/during/before\", similar to [間]{あいだ}に. (No. 2 [うち in\nweblio辞書](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%86%E3%81%A1) or No. 5 [うち in\ngoo辞書](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/je2/5466/m0u/%E3%81%86%E3%81%A1/).)\n\n> 明るいうちに帰ってきなさい。 \n> Come home before dark.\n>\n> 本を読んでるうちに寝てしまった。 \n> I fell asleep while reading.\n\nThe は is the binding particle([係助詞]{かかりじょし}). うちは is like \"as long as~\" and\nsimilar to [間]{あいだ}は. ([うちは in\nweblio辞書](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E7%9B%AE%E3%81%AE%E9%BB%92%E3%81%84%E3%81%86%E3%81%A1).)\n\n> おとなしくしているうちは、ここにいてもいい。 \n> You can stay here as long as you keep quiet.\n>\n> [双方]{そうほう}(が)[噛]{か}み合っているうちは、[極上]{ごくじょう}の[桃源郷]{とうげんきょう}に[身]{み}を[置]{お}ける。 \n> The two can stay in paradise (utopia?) as long as they are fighting.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-08T09:22:31.147", "id": "11412", "last_activity_date": "2014-07-26T19:19:15.330", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "11410", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

[ { "body": "I think that 部屋 usually refers to a room in a house/apartment, where someone\nresides. 室 is somewhat broader and often refers to a room with a particular\nfunction.\n\nThis seems to be reflected in the names of the rooms in a house/apartment:\n\n**Rooms with a particular function**\n\n * 寝室\n * 客室\n * 地下室\n\n**Rooms that are lived in**\n\n * 子供部屋\n * 仕事部屋\n * おもちゃ[部屋]{べや} _or_ 遊び部屋\n\nIn other buildings, too, special-purpose rooms usually end in [室]{しつ}, e.g.\n事務室, 図書室, 洗濯室, 音楽室. (Also cf. 和室 \"Japanese-style room\".) Maybe that is just\nbecause 室, which is 音読み, sounds more formal than 部屋, which is 訓読み. For\nexample, a public building won't have any 部屋, only rooms with a description\n(like 演奏室) or a number.\n\nIf your rooms are numbered, they are usually numbered as 132[号室]{ごうしつ}, but\nyou usually count rooms as [一]{ひと}[部屋]{へや}, etc.\n\nNote that 室 is a bit broader than the English \"room\". 132号室 could be a small\napartment, consisting of several rooms. I think of 室 as anything that has one\ndoor from a hallway.\n\nOne last remark would be that I talked about the difference between 部屋 and 室\n_as suffix_. But in conversational Japanese, I would say that 室 works almost\nexclusively as suffix (or prefix), whereas 部屋 is a word that can be used by\nitself to refer to a room. So if you want to say \"I entered the room\", or\nanything similar (i.e. without specifying which room), your choice will be\nlimited to 部屋 (unless you want to sound literary).", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-08T22:32:21.303", "id": "11414", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-11T02:07:55.687", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-11T02:07:55.687", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "11413", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 } ]

[ { "body": "I have _never_ heard 欲する spoken in Japan, while you can hear 〜がる every day on\nTV and in daily life. I would compare it to the currently-used form 感じる and\nthe now-rare 感ずる (cf. 弁ずる、講ずる) which I have again, never heard in speech but\nhave seen in the novels of Soseki and Dazai.\n\nI would be willing to go so far as to say that \"covet\" is a poor translation\nof 欲しがる, and should be placed under 欲する for the same reasons.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-05-30T12:01:09.890", "id": "12015", "last_activity_date": "2013-05-30T12:01:09.890", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3131", "parent_id": "11415", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Perhaps not an answer, but the question is based on a false presumption that\n\"even though both are 阝\". While the radicals may visibly look similar, the\nkanji that they represent are quite different. For \"big village\", the\ncharacter is 邑, while for \"small village\", the character is 阜.\n\nAs radicals, \"big village\" is properly written as ⾢ (U+2FA2) or ⻏ (U+2ECF).\nFor \"small village\", it is ⾩ (U+2FA9) or ⻖ (U+2ED6). Notice that ⻏ (U+2ECF)\nand ⻖ (U+2ED6) are two entirely different characters. In Unicode, the first is\ncalled city while the second is mound radicals.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-09T04:49:16.587", "id": "11417", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-09T05:05:30.643", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-09T05:05:30.643", "last_editor_user_id": "1141", "owner_user_id": "1141", "parent_id": "11416", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "They're both written as 阝, but they're simplified representations of two\ndifferent kanji:\n\n * 邑 (7 strokes) is the full form of おおざと (\"large village\" おお＋さと）\n * 阜 (8 strokes) is the full form of こざと (\"small village\" こ＋さと）\n\nAs you say, 邑 always appears on the right, while 阜 always appears on the left.\nOften, 阜 as 阝 is referred to as 阜偏（こざとへん)--the へん at the end tells you it's in\nthe left-side position. Likewise, 邑 as 阝 can be referred to as 邑旁（おおざとづくり),\nwhere つくり indicates the right-side position.\n\nThe customary names of 部首 are somewhat arbitrary, and they don't always\ncommunicate the meaning they lent to the kanji when they were formed, or if\nthey do, the connection to the meaning can be quite tenuous. Still, in the\ncase of 邑, it's called おおざと because it represents a (large) village. Let's\nlook at a couple examples of 邑 and see for ourselves:\n\n * 都 (\"capital, metropolis\") contains 邑 written as 阝, and in modern use it bears a clear semantic connection to the original meaning. 京都 is a large village indeed!\n * 郎, on the other hand, once was a place name meaning 良 good 阝(邑) village, but is now used as a simplification of 良 good 亻 person (man). Names like 太郎 certainly have no semantic connection to \"big village\"! \n\nSo 邑 appears to represent large village, at least historically. 阜 on the other\nhand has only a loose semantic connection to \"small village\". Etymologically\nand in most kanji, it instead represents a hill or mound. It's a little more\napparent in the older form, which you can see on\n[chineseetymology.org](http://www.chineseetymology.org/CharacterEtymology.aspx?submitButton1=Etymology&characterInput=%E9%98%9C).\nIt has three parts arranged vertically, representing a _terraced hill_. Why\nthen is it called こざと? By analogy to おおざと--the _opposite_ of an おおざと is a こざと,\nand from appearances it is a 阝 written on the _opposite_ side.\n\nLet's look at some examples for 阜:\n\n * The kanji pair 陰陽 (いんよう, often called yin and yang in English) contain 阜 as 阝 in its literal meaning of hill; the つくり of 陽 has a 日 sun with rays shining down onto a hill, creating a light side; 陰 is the other side of that hill, with the つくり representing its shadow. The semantic connection to \"hill\" is clear.\n * 陣 bears a relatively strong semantic connection to the 阜 it contains as 阝; it comes from 車 vehicles drawn up around a 阝 hill → army encampment → formation/position.\n\nSo we can see the \"large village\" and \"hill, mound\" meanings clearly, even if\nthey're sometimes obscured, and we've covered how \"hill, mound\" became \"small\nvillage\". I believe this answers your question!\n\nOne last note: in modern Japanese, you're unlikely to see the characters 邑 and\n阜 in their full forms unless you're using a 漢和辞典 or talking about kanji. I\ndeveloped a little mnemonic device to remember which one to turn to in my\ndictionary (which is 縦書き, so this won't make sense if yours is 横書き and printed\nleft-to-right):\n\n * If 阝 is on the right, then it's on the right side of the dictionary (7 strokes, 邑)\n * If 阝 is on the left, then it's on the left side of the dictionary (8 strokes, 阜)\n\nNote: in this entry I relied on Kenneth G. Henshall's _A Guide to Remembering\nJapanese Characters_ as a primary source for character etymology.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-09T05:10:32.043", "id": "11418", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-09T05:10:32.043", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "11416", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "I think the difference mainly lies in the following.\n\nThe ～がる forms make an assumption about the described person's internal state,\nwhereas the ～そう form is a statement about the person's external appearance.\n(Maybe a bit like the difference between sympathy and empathy.)\n\nFor example for 寒がる・寒そう, using 寒がる refers to your empathizing with the person\nwho is cold, whereas 寒そう describes the person who is cold as \"looking cold\".\n\nIn English the difference might be expressed as\n\n> He must feel very cold. \n> He looks (as though he is) very cold.\n\nThe ending ～たい gives the pair たがる・たそう. 食べたがる sounds more like someone is\ncraving something; 食べたそう sounds more like someone looks like s/he wants to eat\nsomething (but chooses not to for reasons of politeness, for example). The\nformer description is more emotional than the latter.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-09T21:36:09.910", "id": "11421", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-09T21:42:19.593", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-09T21:42:19.593", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "11420", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "_It's a question somehow unanswered for a fairly long time, while it doesn't\nseem to be too complicated to answer._\n\n> _If I am reading a Chinese text to a Japanese audience, how can I know which\n> reading to use for each character? Of the 音読み, there can be 呉音, 漢音, and 唐音\n> to choose from._\n\nThere are two major types of situation to read Classical Chinese text in\nJapanese you might encounter: **buddhist sutras** , and **all others**.\n\nIn the latter case, it's usually recited through\n[漢文訓読](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanbun#Example), where all untranslated\nwords (= remained as 音読み) are read prescriptively in **漢音** (though the rule\nwas established relatively recently that there's no assurance older documents\nbefore Meiji conform to it).\n\n> `兄弟` (brothers)\n>\n> * everyday: きょうだい (both in 呉音) 「うちは三人兄弟だ」 _My family has three brothers. (\n> \"I (who's male) have two brothers / I have three boys.\")_\n> * 漢文訓読: けいてい (both in 漢音) 「人は皆兄弟有り」 _[Other men all have their\n> brothers.](http://ctext.org/analects/yan-yuan#n1386)_\n>\n\nAnyway, in most cases you don't need to practice the method first-hand, unless\nyou are an enthusiastic Japanology researcher, because almost all of well-\nknown texts already have translations, and what you have to do is just follow\nthe textbook.\n\nThe buddhist sutras, on the other hand, are read _as is_ and the pronunciation\ndiffers roughly between sects and schools. The largest portion of them use\n**呉音** , but according to [here](http://tobifudo.jp/newmon/okyo/goon.html) and\n[here](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8D%97%E7%84%A1%E9%98%BF%E5%BC%A5%E9%99%80%E4%BB%8F),\n天台宗{てんだいしゅう} has some 漢音 sutras, and 黄檗宗{おうばくしゅう} (a Zen sect) uses 唐宋音 in\nevery piece.\n\n> `南無阿弥陀仏` (Namo Amitābhāya)\n>\n> * 呉音: なむあみだぶつ\n> * 漢音 (天台宗-style): なもあびたふ\n> * 唐宋音: なむおみとふ (Compare to Contemp. Mandarin _nāmó ēmítuófó_ )\n>\n\n>\n> `観自在菩薩行深般若波羅蜜多時照見五蘊皆空度一切苦厄`\n>\n> * 呉音: かんじざいぼさつぎょうじんはんにゃはらみたじしょうけんごうんかいくうどいっさいくやく\n> * 唐宋音: かんつざいぷさへんしんぽぜぽろみとすちゃうけんういんきゃいくんといちぇくえ \n> (Again, compare to Contemp. Mandarin _guānzìzài-púsa xíng shēn bōrě-\n> bōluómìduō shí zhàojiàn wǔyùn jiē kōng dù yīqiè kǔè_ )\n>\n\nNote that sutras contain many Sanscrit and Pali transcriptions that often\ndeviate from dictionary reading of kanjis.\n\n> _Also for pronunciation, would rhythm be modified to stress individual\n> characters in deference to their monosyllabic origin in Chinese speech?_\n\nYes, in buddhist tradition. In [this YouTube\nclip](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InkJE2PMX3Y) you'll notice that every\ncharacter (syllable) is pronounced in the same length.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2015-01-07T15:53:28.090", "id": "21197", "last_activity_date": "2019-11-27T14:32:52.833", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "7810", "parent_id": "11422", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "In a sense, yes, but に is the correct choice here. 受ける takes two objects, a\n\"direct\" and an \"indirect\" object.\n\n * を marks the direct object, i.e. _what_ is being received\n * に marks the indirect object, i.e. _from whom_ the direct object is being received\n\nを will not be translated at all, and に will be translated as \"from\". から, too,\noften means \"from\" but applies more generally to verbs, even if they don't\nwant to take an indirect object.\n\nFor 聞く, から and に have a different use:\n\n> お兄ちゃんから聞いた。 \n> I heard it from my brother.\n>\n> お兄ちゃんに聞いた。 \n> I asked my brother. / I heard it from by brother.\n\nIn your case に受けた and から受けた mean the same thing, but 受けた wants its indirect\nobject to be marked by に, so you should use に.\n\nEDIT: As per the exchange with Chocolate below, I am not 100% clear on the\ndifference between verb+から and verb+に any longer. It seems to be clear,\nthough, that in this case both versions mean the same thing and both versions\nare equally acceptable. I also think a verb cannot take both から _and_ に, so\nthe difference in usage is even harder to determine (if there is any\ndifference). I think that the example に聞く vs. から聞く suggests there is at least\na conceptual difference, though.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-10T17:07:34.813", "id": "11425", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-15T00:47:33.713", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "11424", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "How about んだけど\n\n> 彼が出て行けばいいんだけど。 \n> あの建物さえなければ、きれいな景色が見えるはずなんだけど。 \n> 欲しいといえば、買ってあげたんだけど。\n\nMaybe no real synonym, but it is also a conjunction with the rest of the\nsentence omitted. のに means \"although\" and けど means more \"but\", but I guess\nthat is close enough.\n\nIn your last example せっかく…のに is a set phrase and のに can't be removed so\neasily.\n\nI'm also wondering about your translation, which obviously has more detail\nthan the original sentence. Even taking this into account, the translation of\nなのに sounds strange. I imagine the sentence ending in something like\n\n> ああ、せっかく学校が休みなのに、剣道部でめちゃくちゃ忙しくなりそうだ。 \n> Just as there is no school, it looks like I'm going to be really busy with\n> Kendo.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-11T02:06:54.207", "id": "11433", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-11T02:06:54.207", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "11426", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes - it would seem mouths slip not tongues.\n\nThe book is testing your recognition of the expression 口が滑る, trying to throw\nyou off by inserting 舌. (Its probably a common technique for the other\nquestions you are looking at)\n\nThe best insight I can suggest for this expression is to look up 口 and 舌 in\nthe dictionary to see how they are used. 口 tends to be used more for\nwords/talking eg:\n\n性格はいいけど口が悪い。\n\nBut it is not hard and fast. There are also expressions about speaking that do\nuse tongue:\n\n舌がもつれて何も言えなかった｜I was tongue-tied\n\nよく舌が回るね｜〔批判的に〕You really do [go on / talk].\n\nBut the main point for this book is to remember uses of 滑る", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-12T14:11:59.783", "id": "11446", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-15T14:49:00.550", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-15T14:49:00.550", "last_editor_user_id": "1556", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "11434", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "Probably the reason the book highlighted this is that the set phrase in\nJapanese, 口がすべる, is easily confused with the literal translation of a very\nsimilar set phrase in English, 舌がすべる。\n\nI don't think this points to an overall difference in the metaphorical uses of\n口・舌 (see also the word 舌禍{ぜっか}), just one of many cases where caution is\nneeded. I don't know the book so I don't know if this is something they\nregularly do - it would have been better if they'd added something along the\nlines of \"this is not the collocation you are looking for, try 口がすべる instead\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-12T16:41:44.677", "id": "11447", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-12T16:41:44.677", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "571", "parent_id": "11434", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "話の種 does mean topic of conversation, but it's not referring to a conversation\nthat took place within the context of the sentence. Rather it's introducing\nthe idea of going to eat at the new restaurant as a topic of conversation.\nWithout context it might be a little hard to say _exactly_ what the speaker\nmeans, but it's something like this. There was a new restaurant, and maybe a\nlot of people around town are interested in it or something. So this person\nwent to eat, and is bringing it up in the conversation, like \"hey you might be\ninterested in knowing that I went to the new restaurant!\" The intent is that\nthey will then talk about it. As Flaw mentions 話の種に can have the meaning of\nsomething like \"while we're on the topic,\" so if they were already talking\nabout restaurants or something related, then yes, it would mean that.\nOtherwise the suggestion is just that it has been a topic of conversation\nlately (in general), and that this person went to the restaurant specifically\nso he could talk about it.\n\nSo the conversation is taking place now. The speaker went to the restaurant\nand wants to talk about it.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-11T12:13:14.250", "id": "11437", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-12T06:49:31.330", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-12T06:49:31.330", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "11435", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "The most natural reading of the sentence is something like this:\n\n> I went to the new restaurant because I thought it would be an interesting\n> experience to bring up in conversation.\n\nSo sure, as ssb says, the speaker could be about to bring it up in\nconversation now, or he could have brought it up in the past or could bring it\nup in the future. But the important thing is that at the time that he went the\nintention (or one of the intentions) was to be able to bring it up in\nconversation later.\n\nJust some cultural background: It's not uncommon for Japanese to talk about\nthe fact that even if an experience wasn't enjoyable or useful per se, it was\n(might be) useful because of its value in conversation.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-12T06:22:43.227", "id": "11444", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-12T06:22:43.227", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "11435", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "You're right that it follows the pattern from your previous question with the\nidiomatic use of バカを見る. The speaker desires a society in which honest people\nare not deceived or made to be fools.\n\nI don't think that it's accurate to say that _society_ fools people,\nnecessarily, but rather this person wants a society _in which_ honest people\naren't made fools of. The implication here is of course that honest people\nfollow the rules while others may break them for personal gain, thus putting\nthose that follow the rules at a disadvantage. In this way you can say that\nthey are made to be fools, but not necessarily that they are \"fooled\" in the\nsense of being tricked.\n\nGiven this, I think your second translation would be more accurate. However,\nan even more accurate translation might avoid the more proverbial notion of an\nhonest person becoming the fool and saying more directly that an honest person\nis at a disadvantage among liars and thieves, etc. (or find an equivalent\nEnglish expression)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-11T12:25:56.057", "id": "11438", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-15T23:41:38.860", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-15T23:41:38.860", "last_editor_user_id": "162", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "11436", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "I agree with ssb (who is welcome to add my input here to his answer). If you\nare looking for a more literal translation perhaps:\n\n> Society should be a place where honest people do not look stupid\n>\n> Society should not be a place where it is stupid to be honest.\n>\n> Society should be a place where it pays to be honest.\n\nNone of these are perfect but more helpful than \"Honesty is ill for thriving.\"\nper Chocolate's link which otherwise gives a good explanation and most\nimportantly informs us that this is a proverb/kotowaza, which are sometimes\nidiomatic.\n\nIt would be interesting to here about how others would translate this....but\nmeanwhile the following dictionary explanation of バカを見る might also help (the\nEnglish is mine):\n\n> つまらない目にあう。| have a worthless experience\n>\n> ばかばかしい思いをする。| have an absurd thought\n>\n> ばかな目にあう。| experience something silly\n>\n> eg「助けてやって文句を言われるなんて、—•見た」|I tried to help but [just] received complaints and\n> looked stupid [for it].", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-11T22:49:59.787", "id": "11441", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-13T12:13:46.790", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "11436", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "And I'll go ahead and give an answer to this as well:\n\n<http://kotowaza-allguide.com/i/issekinityou.html>\n\nAccording to this, it was translated directly from English into a 四字熟語. This\nis interesting to me considering that 一挙両得 already exists and means basically\nthe same thing.\n\n<http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1332146923>\n\nAccording to this site, it was introduced as a phrase in Meiji Japan and then\nlater made into 4 characters. I don't know the origin of the phrase in\nEnglish, but that's out of the purview of this site!\n\nJust makes me wonder what other proverbs were taken from English and made into\n四字熟語.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-12T05:02:11.890", "id": "11443", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-12T05:02:11.890", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "11442", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "Although 故事ことわざ辞典 says 一石二鳥 is a direct translation of ”kill two birds with\none stone” into the form of 四字熟語 (Chinese / Japanese idioms composed of four\ncharacters), I’m not sure of it, because the Chinese have exactly the same\nphrase\n\n> 一石二鳥 (yī shí èr niǎo).\n\nWe might have imported 一石二鳥 from Chinese, or the Chinese imported the proverb\nwe translated from English proverb, I don’t know.\n\nAs an antonym to 一石二鳥, we have\n\n> 二兎を追うものは一兎も得ず \n> He who chases two hares catches neither.\n\nAgain, I can’t tell whether this is the translation of the English proverb or\nnot.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2016-02-09T22:35:43.110", "id": "31045", "last_activity_date": "2016-02-10T08:40:04.513", "last_edit_date": "2016-02-10T08:40:04.513", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "12056", "parent_id": "11442", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "Looking at the kanji, one says \"all\" and the other \"all parts\". In that sense\none can distinguish them philosophically as 全て meaning \"everything\"\n(universally) and 全部 \"all\" (part by part).\n\nI think you can make out that difference when looking at examples (for example\non [Space ALC](http://www.alc.co.jp/):\n[全て](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E5%85%A8%E3%81%A6&ref=sa) and\n[全部](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E5%85%A8%E9%83%A8).)\n\nFor example,\n\n> 全部あなたのせいだからね。 \n> Everything is your fault.\n\nThe person is blamed for everything (every single thing) they did. Whereas,\n\n> 全てあなたのせいだからね。\n\nsounds like everything he did, is doing, and will do would be his fault, by\ndefault.\n\nUniversal statements, like\n\n> 全てについて債務者が悪い。 \n> He who owes, is in all the wrong.\n\nuse 全て.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-12T21:26:41.420", "id": "11449", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-12T21:26:41.420", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "11448", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "Since there is already a question for 出来る, I'll add my two cents for 出会う.\n\nI think 会う and 出会う have clear distinct uses. 会う means \"to meet\", as in\n\n> お母さんに会いに行った. \n> I went to see my mother.\n\nThis type of meeting someone is usually planned. (Of course あう can mean more\nthan meeting some _one_ , but these uses are not comparable to 出会う any\nlonger.)\n\n出会う means \"to come across, to meet by accident, to encounter\", e.g.\n\n> 出会ったときに楽しければ、別れるときは気が沈む。 \n> Sorrow is at parting if at meeting there be laughter.\n\nThe 出 just means what it always means and the structure of 出会う is just ます-stem\n+ verb, like in 見合わせる, 作り直す, etc. I don't think it's too far a stretch to\nimagine that \"to go out and meet\" came to mean \"to encounter\" or \"to meet by\naccident\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-13T11:39:24.010", "id": "11458", "last_activity_date": "2017-03-13T03:57:17.073", "last_edit_date": "2017-03-13T03:57:17.073", "last_editor_user_id": "7320", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "11450", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

[ { "body": "-ziru is from -zuru, which in turn is verb -suru voiced due to compounding. zuru becomes ziru during the push to normalize verbs to 一段 class.", "comment_count": 12, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-13T00:29:19.373", "id": "11452", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-13T00:29:19.373", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1141", "parent_id": "11451", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "### Japanese verbs as a class\n\nThe [**Word class system** section of the **Japanese grammar** Wikipedia\narticle](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_grammar#Word_class_system)\ndoes currently state that Japanese verbs and adjectives are [closed\nclasses](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_class). Strictly speaking, I\ndon't think this is quite correct -- closed classes don't have new members,\nand generally don't have many members. Japanese verbs are quite numerous\nindeed, and it's not uncommon for new ones to pop up -- witness recent\nneologisms like [ググる \"to\nGoogle\"](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%82%B0%E3%82%B0%E3%82%8B), or [スタバる\n\"to go to\nStarbucks\"](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E3%82%B9%E3%82%BF%E3%83%90%E3%82%8B).\nSure, these are slang, but they're also new verbs. It's also not unheard of\nfor folks to coin new verbs by just tacking a -る on the end, such as [クッキングる\n\"to cooking\"](http://twicsy.com/i/TFW4Yc) > humorous for \"to cook\", or\n[ドライビングる \"to\ndriving\"](https://www.google.com/search?q=%22%E3%83%89%E3%83%A9%E3%82%A4%E3%83%93%E3%83%B3%E3%82%B0%E3%82%8B%22)\n> humorous for \"to drive [a vehicle]\".\n\nThat said, I think it would be accurate to say that _-jiru_ verbs are a closed\nclass. These all seem to have arisen through regular sound changes from\n`[single kanji]` + transitive verb suffix す.\n\n### _Shinjiru_ and other _-jiru_ verbs\n\nAs an addendum to Dono's answer, Shogakukan's entries suggest that these\n`[single kanji]` + じる terms were originally used as verbs in Japanese by\nsimply appending す, the transitive auxiliary verb (superseded by modern する).\nThis す then became ず due to [rendaku](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rendaku)\ncaused by the final ん in 信{しん}, and then became ずる when the attributive and\nterminal forms for verbs fused, and finally became じる due to the shift to\n_ichidan_ verbs that Dono mentions.\n\nYou can track some of this back via online resources by starting at [the\nDaijirin entry for\n信じる](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E4%BF%A1%E3%81%98%E3%82%8B). Note how it\nsays:\n\n * 「 信ずる 」に同じ。 \nSame as _shinzuru_.\n\nClick on 信ずる and you'll jump straight to the 信ず entry. The second line here\nsays:\n\n * 「信ず」の口語形としては、サ行変格活用の動詞「信ずる」が対応する。 \nThe colloquial form of _shinzu_ is the _sa-hen_ conjugation verb _shinzuru_.\n\nSo we have a clear historical progression:\n\n * `[single kanji ending in ん]` + す → \n * `[single kanji]` + ず → \n * `[single kanji]` + ずる → \n * `[single kanji]` + じる\n\nOther examples include:\n\n案{あん}じる 演{えん}じる 応{おう}じる 禁{きん}じる 準{じゅん}じる\n\n生{しょう}じる 談{だん}じる 転{てん}じる 封{ふう}じる 論{ろん}じる\n\nOther terms borrowed from Chinese and used as verbs in Japanese historically\ntook the form `[kanji term]` + す, with す again changing to する when the\nterminal and attributive verb forms merged. Rendaku generally didn't happen\nfor multi-character words ending in ん, which is why you'll only see these -じる\nforms for single-character on'yomi terms, and mostly (but not always) where\nthe on'yomi ends in ん.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-16T16:48:25.083", "id": "17467", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-16T16:48:25.083", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "11451", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "The key to the first one is in the fact that it all comes down to\n～ほどじれったいものはない. It is a negative sentence, but it's not negating the meaning of\nthe sentence. If we put it into English it means \" _There's nothing as\nfrustrating_ as seeing people give up on things before they start.\" And that's\nif we use the book's translation for the rest of it. The point is that the\nspeaker is presenting this situation and trying to find something _worse_ than\nthat, and saying that such a thing doesn't exist. It's like saying \"Murder is\nbad\" vs. \"There's nothing as bad as murder.\" The latter isn't suggesting that\nmurder is good.\n\nAs for the second one I am curious to see how you would parse the meaning of\nthis since it _seems_ that you're missing the phrase ~てならない, which just that\nmeans something is unbearable, or at least felt very strongly. The fact that\nthe verb ends in ない doesn't mean we're inverting the meaning of the sentence.\nOn the contrary in this case it's making the meaning even stronger. So in this\ncase the speaker is not saying that it's _not_ disappointing but that it's\n_unbearably_ or _extremely_ disappointing. Compare this to the phrase ～てたまらない.\n\nSee\n[here](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E3%81%A7%E3%81%AA%E3%82%89%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84&ref=sa)\nfor examples.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-13T09:00:08.637", "id": "11456", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-14T01:38:55.140", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-14T01:38:55.140", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "11455", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

[ { "body": "杏 has as three 音読み, namely アン, キョウ, コウ, of which Kaempfer transcribed the\nfirst two (including ギンナン, as the picture shows). I don't consider too far a\nstretch of the imagination to think that Kaempfer simply asked for readings\n銀杏, and was told that you can read it as ギンキョウ, ギンナン, or イチョウ.\n\nThe [text accompanying the\npicture](http://kwanten.home.xs4all.nl/kaempfer.htm) says that the seed was\ncalled ギンナン (already in 1700). (He describes it resembling a \"Persian\npistachio\", just twice as big.) He also says that イチョウ was the common name for\nthe tree.\n\nIn current usage, too, 銀杏 is read ぎんなん and means the _seed_ of the Gingko\ntree. (In fact many supermarkets do sell Gingko seeds under the name 銀杏.) The\ntree itself is called イチョウ, which may also be written 銀杏, by 熟字訓, like you\nsaid.\n\nI think we can conclude that ギンナン did not replace ギンキョウ, but rather ギンキョウ has\nfallen out of use with the common name イチョウ surviving in its place.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-17T04:02:03.057", "id": "11478", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-17T04:02:03.057", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "11457", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I think of the difference between 聴く and 聞く as the difference between \"to\nlisten\" and \"to hear\". That is,\n\n> 彼の話を聴いてる. \n> I'm listening to his story.\n\nbut\n\n> 音が聞こえてる. \n> I can hear sounds.\n>\n> 大きい音を聞くと気持ち悪くなる。 \n> If I hear loud noise, I start feeling sick.\n\n(which are examples contrary to your animate/inanimate hypothesis).\n\nIntentional listening should be 聴く, the hearing of sounds should be 聞く.", "comment_count": 11, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-13T14:29:34.917", "id": "11460", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-17T12:05:45.133", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "11459", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "When I see 聴 my mind basically jumps first to 音楽を聴く. As mentioned this has the\nmeaning of _listening_ to something with some sort of interest in it. You\nmight want to connect it to the word 傾聴, which means \"to listen intently,\" or\nroughly that. Of course you can use 聞く in that sentence but that kanji has a\nbroader meaning of hearing in general. The difference is basically the same as\nthat between 見る and 観る, as in 犬を見た vs. 映画を観た.\n\nAsking questions has its own dedicated kanji as well: 訊く. You could probably\ntranslate this as \"inquire,\" as using that kanji gives it a slightly more\nrefined feel, and I think that this holds true for the others as well. The\nchoice to use these kanji is deliberate and creates extra nuance as to the\nnature of what you are hearing (vs. listening), seeing (vs. watching), asking\n(vs. inquiring), etc.\n\nJust a note from the\n[dictionary](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E8%81%B4%E3%81%8F) on the usage of\n聴く:\n\n> (2)心を落ち着け注意して耳に入れる。傾聴(けいちよう)する。《聴》 「音楽を―・く」\n\nAnd 訊く:\n\n> (4)（「訊く」とも書く）たずねて、答えを求める。問う。 「名前を―・く」「自分の胸に―・く」", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-13T15:14:52.207", "id": "11461", "last_activity_date": "2016-10-18T22:41:35.747", "last_edit_date": "2016-10-18T22:41:35.747", "last_editor_user_id": "11104", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "11459", "post_type": "answer", "score": 14 } ]

[ { "body": "Japanese people use the Arabic numerals \"10\" too. They would get the joke if\nyou just write \"10\".", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-13T16:44:44.470", "id": "11464", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-13T16:44:44.470", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "2960", "parent_id": "11463", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "Numbers written in kanji are analogous in English to numbers written out in\nfull. The joke would be just as ruined in English if it were written \"There\nare only **ten** types of people...\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-14T03:34:53.433", "id": "11467", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-14T03:34:53.433", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3265", "parent_id": "11463", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "A distinction is usually made between **positional numeral systems** and\n**non-positional**.\n\nLet's use Arabic numerals as an example of a positional numeral system. In\nthis kind of system, if we write **100** , each digit represents a coefficient\nin an exponential series. Let's use _b_ to represent the base:\n\n> **1** _b_ 2 \\+ **0** _b_ 1 \\+ **0** _b_ 0 = **100**\n\nOkay, so what about 漢数字? The numbers 一, 十, and 百 each consist of one numeral\nand each represent different powers of ten, but they do so _without respect to\nposition_. So in this use of 漢数字, we say they're _non-positional_. In this\nsystem, it makes the most sense to say 十 represents the _value_ ten. It\ndoesn't represent an exponential series like the one above because there's no\ncorrespondence between position and degree.\n\nNotice how in the example of Arabic numerals above, I didn't specify a base.\nIt might be decimal, or it might be binary. You can't say the same for 一, 十,\nand 百. With the numbers represented by these numerals, **there is no\nmeaningful definition of _b_ , so it doesn't make sense to talk about what\nbase the numbers are written in**.\n\nHowever, there is a positional use of 漢数字, as well. 漢数字 supplanted\n[算木](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%AE%97%E6%9C%A8) as a positional numeral\nsystem in Japan after the 16th Century, and in modern Japan both positional\nand non-positional uses exist. For example, [user1205935 wrote in a\ncomment](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/users/1628/user1205935) that a\nrestaurant price may be written `一三八〇円`. This number is clearly written using\npositional numerals:\n\n> **一** _b_ 3 \\+ **三** _b_ 2 \\+ **八** _b_ 1 \\+ **〇** _b_ 0 = **一三八〇**\n\nWe've demonstrated that a base exists! We haven't demonstrated _what_ base it\nis, and that's the crux of your question. In this case, it's obvious the base\nis 10. But is it always?\n\nI can't prove it, but I've searched and looked through history books, and I\ncan't find any evidence that it's ever _not_ 10\\. It seems like there's a very\nstrong preference for Arabic numerals when writing numbers in any base but\nten. In fact, I found people joking about what the numeral sequence would be\nif it _did_ continue, implying it doesn't. (Someone suggested 十土王圭, which I\ninclude here for humor value.) So, in the absence of evidence to the contrary,\nI conclude that the answer is:\n\n**No, kanji is not ever used to write values in bases other than decimal.**\n\nTwo historical notes:\n\n 1. The historical Chinese numeral 十 was once written as a vertical line, and this old form was combined with 一, 二, 三 and the old form of 四 to form single numerals representing the values 11-14. See [here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Shang_numerals.jpg) and [here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:%E8%A5%BF%E5%91%A8%E9%87%91%E6%96%87.jpg) on Wikipedia. However, I believe these forms had passed out of use before kanji was adopted in Japan.\n\n 2. According to [Wikipedia](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%BC%A2%E6%95%B0%E5%AD%97#.E4.BD.8D.E5.8F.96.E3.82.8A.E8.A8.98.E6.95.B0.E6.B3.95), in the old non-positional system, the juxtaposition 二八 represented the value 16 (二×八） rather than 28. I believe this sort of use is still around to some extent in, for example, [四六時中](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&p=%E5%9B%9B%E5%85%AD&dtype=0&dname=0ss&stype=0&pagenum=1&index=109881600000), which represents 四×六 through juxtaposition.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-14T06:43:54.067", "id": "11468", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-14T10:07:17.683", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:43.857", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "11463", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 } ]

[ { "body": "Let's look at each of these one-by-one:\n\n 1. **いらっしゃる** is a lexicalized contraction of 入{い}らせらる, which is described in 精選日国† as follows:\n\n> （動詞「いる(入)」の未然形に、尊敬の助動詞「す」の未然形、同じく「られる（らる）」の付いたもの）「入る」の尊敬語。おはいりになる。\n\nIn other words, it was a combination of 入る with the respect auxiliary す and\nthe passive auxiliary らる (in modern Japanese られる).\n\n 2. **くださる** is a lexicalized combination of 下す with る (modern Japanese れる) added, reanalyzed as a 四段動詞 → 五段動詞. From 精選日国:\n\n> くださ-・る【下】 \n> ①〔他ラ下二〕⇒くだされる（下―） \n> ②〔他ラ五(四)〕（近世以降、①が四段活用化したもの） [...]\n>\n> くださ-・れる【下―】 \n> 〔他ラ下一〕(文)くださ・る〔他ラ下二〕〔他ラ下二〕(動詞「くだす(下)」に、受身、尊敬の助動詞「る」のついてできたもの) [...]\n\n 3. **なさる** is likewise lexicalized from 為す with る added (modern Japanese れる), reanalyzed as a 四段動詞 → 五段動詞. From 精選日国:\n\n> なさ-る【為】 \n> ①〔他ラ下二〕⇒なされる（為） \n> ②〔他ラ五(四)〕①（が四段活用化したもの） [...]\n>\n> なさ-・れる \n> 〔他ラ下一〕(文)なさ・る〔他ラ下二〕(動詞「なす(為)」に尊敬の助動詞「れる(る)」の付いてできたもの) [...]\n\n 4. **おっしゃる** is given multiple theories in 精選日国:\n\n>\n> 室町時代に現れた「おしゃる」が江戸時代に「おっしゃる」となったとする説がある一方、二つとも同時的に例があるため共に「おおせある」または、「おおせらる」からの変化形と見る説もある。\n\nOther dictionaries such as 広辞苑 and\n[大辞林](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%8A%E3%81%A3%E3%81%97%E3%82%83%E3%82%8B)\nsay it's derived from おおせある without presenting any alternative theories.\nEither おおせある and おおせらる would then come from 仰す (おほす), which according to\n旺文社国語辞典 is derived from the causative form of 負ふ (おふ), used to mean 「言葉を負わせる」.\nAfter this, either らる or ある was added.\n\nSo of these four, three clearly have the passive/honorific auxiliary (ら)る,\nwhich is in modern Japanese (ら)れる. The fourth may have it, or it may have ある\ninstead; if we compare a fifth verb, ござる, we definitely have ある:\n\n 5. **ござる** is unusual in beginning with a voiced obstruent. In this case this is because the word is not entirely native, but a fusion of the Sino-Japanese 御座(ご-ざ) and ある. From 精選日国:\n\n> ござ・る(御座) \n> 〔自ラ四〕（「ござある」の変化した語）\n\nThis verb is often considered separately because only the lexicalized form\nwith ます remains in the modern language, outside of jocular or anachronistic\nuses. From a historical perspective, though, it makes sense to consider it as\npart of the same subclass of verbs.\n\nSo we find that all five verbs have either （ら)れる _-(r)are-_ or ある _ar-_.\nMartin notes that the passive doesn't attach to any of these verbs in _A\nReference Grammar of Japanese_ (1975), p.290:\n\n> We can find no causatives or passives for the subject-exalting verbs\n> kudasáru, nasáru, ossyáru, or even irassyáru… We might ascribe the absence\n> of such forms to the fact that it is usual to make the causative or passive\n> BEFORE putting the sentence into any other conversion (though there are\n> exceptions, as we will see below); but probably the real reason we lack the\n> forms is that **these verbs etymologically contain an occurrence of the\n> passive as reflected in the -ar- with which each base end.**\n\nSo Martin, at least, considers _-(r)are-_ to contain _ar-_ , though he doesn't\nexplain specifically how he derives one from the other. But they're similar in\nform and function, so it makes sense to try to _-(r)are-_ and _ar-_ somehow.\nHe notes a possible relationship on page 290 in a parenthetical:\n\n> (Chamberlain 199 derives -rare- from ár-i + é-ru.)\n\nIt's not clear to me which Chamberlain he's citing, but in any case it's very\nold, around a century ago. If we check a much newer reference, Frellesvig's _A\nHistory of the Japanese Language_ (2010), we find on p.238:\n\n> The [Early Middle Japanese] causatives and passives seem to reflect a\n> further morphologization of the derivational suffixes _-(a)s-_ 'transitive'\n> and _-(a)r-_ 'intransitive'.\n\nIn any case, it does seem plausible to say that all of them contain _ar-_\netymologically.\n\n* * *\n\n† 精選日国 is short for the full name of the dictionary, 「精選版 日本国語大辞典」.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-13T18:44:34.183", "id": "11466", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-11T09:14:30.323", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-11T09:14:30.323", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "11465", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "I would add a comment to the above answer, but it appears I need \"reputation\"\nto do so. Anyways, for the last two words, look here\n<http://archive.org/stream/historicalgramma00sansuoft#page/162/mode/2up>\n\n> [on the classical passive form] (3) to form honorific verbs An important\n> feature of the passive forms is their frequent use in an honorific sense.\n> [...] The usage is a well-established one, and is common in the modern\n> language, both written and colloquial. E.g. [...] The polite forms nasaru,\n> 'to do', kudasaru, 'to condescend', irassharu, 'to be present' (=irase-\n> raru), &c., also illustrate this honorific usage.\n\nNote that the above resource identifies いらっしゃる with 居らっしゃる instead of 入らっしゃる.\nThe historical spelling is ゐる for 居る, and いる for 入る, yet I find no mention of\n*ゐらっしゃる anywhere, so this lends credibility that it is not derived from\n居らっしゃる.\n\nAlso, る is the classical passive/potential suffix. If you're interested, I\nsuggest you start reading the above mentioned book from page 158 onwards:\n<http://archive.org/stream/historicalgramma00sansuoft#page/158/mode/2up>", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-15T21:42:43.253", "id": "11474", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-15T21:42:43.253", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3275", "parent_id": "11465", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "It's\n\n> [歩]{ある}かないで[渡]{わた}る \n> cross without walking\n>\n> 歩いて渡らない \n> not cross on foot\n\nIn this case you want the second option.\n\nFor \"not eating\" it is usually\n\n> 食べていない \n> I haven't eaten\n\nwhereas 食べないでいる is used to put emphasis on the duration of staying without\neating, but 食べていない also implies a continued state of being without food.\n\n(There is more on this in [this\nquestion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/3122/when-\nis-v%E3%81%A6%E3%81%84%E3%82%8B-the-continuation-of-action-and-when-is-it-the-\ncontinuation-of-state).)\n\nThe general rule seems to be to negate the auxiliary verb, unless you\nparticularly want the other meaning, e.g. compare\n\n> しないであげる \n> してあげない\n\nwhere the first phrase means \"doing something for someone by not doing\nsomething else\" and the second phrase means \"not doing something for someone\nby doing something else\".\n\n_Edit_. Since this answer has been downvoted and the OP still seems to be\nactive, let me just add what exactly I meant by \"食べないでいる is hardly used\" in a\nprevious revision of this answer.\n\nThe BCCWJ corpus yields the following results\n\n```\n\n 88 results 食べていない\n 133 results 食べてない\n 1 result 食べないでいる\n \n```\n\nso the form 食べないでいる needs the right context to be the natural choice. In case\nof the corpus the sentence is\n\n> 実際お菓子を **食べないでいる** ことは無理だと思います。 \n> I think that actually _staying without eating_ sweets is just not possible.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-15T11:04:23.190", "id": "11471", "last_activity_date": "2014-08-03T12:26:54.953", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "11470", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "In the Vて+V case, I think loosely translating て as \"by\" here helps give a\nlittle intuition:\n\n> 歩いて渡る \"cross by walking\" \n> 歩かないで渡る \"cross (not by walking)\" \n> 歩いて渡らない \"not (cross by walking)\"\n\nHowever, this intuition does not hold with auxiliary verbs (補助動詞{ほじょどうし}), and\ncertainly not with inflectable particles (助動詞{じょどうし}).\n\nWith auxiliary verbs, you sometimes can't negate the base verb. For example,\nthe auxiliary verb いる has nothing to do with the verb 居る, it is just an\naspectual marker indicating the progressive in the case of action verbs, and\nthe stative form in the case of state-change verbs. And because of this, you\ncan only negate the entire thing, not the \"inner verb\", because there is no\ninner and outer verb, there is only a single verb which is modified\ngrammatically.\n\nWith other auxiliary verbs, such as あげる, you can negate the inside because you\ncan \"(not V) for someone\" and also \"not (V for someone)\".\n\nEssentially, some auxiliary verbs simply perform a grammatical function, and\nwith those, it does not make sense to negate the base verb.\n\nWith inflectable particles (ます, たい, etc.), they all only perform grammatical\nfunctions, so it never makes sense to negate inside them and negation comes\nlast.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-15T15:18:00.967", "id": "11472", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-16T02:45:03.737", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-16T02:45:03.737", "last_editor_user_id": "3097", "owner_user_id": "3097", "parent_id": "11470", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I think there are a few possible origins:\n\n * 「ない」＋「だ」の連用形「で」＝「ないで」\n * 「ない」＋接続助詞「て」＝「ないで」 (voiced due to proxomity)\n * 「ない」＋格助詞「で」＝「ないで」\n * 「なき」＋格助詞「に」＋接続助詞「て」＝「なきにて」⇒「ないで」\n\nNone of them are completely satisfying.\n\n# 「ない」＋「だ」の連用形「で」＝「ないで」\n\n「で」 being the 連用形 of 「だ」 is a fairly recent reanalysis, but I can't find any\ntraces of 「ないで」 before the Meiji period, so in theory it's possible this is\nhow it was created.\n\nYou could also group 「なき」＋「なり」の連用形「に」＋接続助詞「て」 here.\n\nHowever, this theory really does not make much sense to me. Having the copula\nafter 助動詞 is not seen anywhere else.\n\n# 「ない」＋接続助詞「て」＝「ないで」\n\nI'm somewhat willing to buy this theory because 接続助詞 are usually pretty\nrelaxed about what they can come after. But in general, the 接続助詞「て」 comes\nafter a 連用形, so it's not exactly like this should be bought without some good\nevidence.\n\n# 「ない」＋格助詞「で」＝「ないで」\n\nIt's possible, but as far I know, 格助詞「で」 only connects to nominals. Seems\nweird for it to connect to a 助動詞. Maybe there is a dialect where this is\nallowed that 「ないで」 was borrowed from?\n\n# 「なき」＋格助詞「に」＋接続助詞「て」＝「なきにて」⇒「ないで」\n\nThis being essentially the same as the last one, but happening at an earlier\npoint in time.\n\nSyntactically it is slightly more believable because 「に」 connects to things\nother than nominals (e.g., 「ずに」), and the 連体形 is quasi-nominal anyways.\n\nThough, since 「ない」 as a 助動詞 is AFAIK fairly new, I'm not so sure of the\nprobability of this one.\n\nHowever, I was looking through older texts, and there are a number of\ninstances of 「なきにて」 in the 源氏物語. Here are a few:\n\n> 「数ならぬ身を、見ま憂く思し捨てむもことわりなれど、今はなほ、いふかひ **なきにて** も、御覧じ果てむや、浅からぬにはあらむ」 \n> ― 源氏物語葵\n>\n> 「限り **なきにて** も、世に亡くなりぬる人ぞ、言はむかたなく口惜しきわざなりける。」 \n> ― 源氏物語須磨\n>\n> 「なほ、この源氏の君、まことに犯し **なきにて** かく沈むならば、かならずこの報いありなむとなむおぼえはべる。」 \n> ― 源氏物語明石\n\nI am not entirely sure what these are, as 「なき」 seems to be connecting to the\n連用形 of the former verb instead of the 未然形 as we see in modern language, and I\nhave also never heard of 「ない」 being used with verbs so early on. Maybe one of\nour historical Japanese experts can help me out (@Dono?).\n\n# So is it a _te_ -form?\n\nWell, depends on what a _te_ -form is.\n\nIf you consider a _te_ -form to be something which people synchronically\nbelieve has a 接続助詞「て」 in it, then no, because I don't think that's how people\nthink of it morphemically (it is not even listed as a theory in any\ndictionaries!).\n\nIf you consider a _te_ -form to be something which diachronically includes\n接続助詞「て」, then almost certainly, because as you may have noticed, all 4\ntheories have 「て」 in them from the historical perspective.\n\nIf you consider a _te_ -form to be defined syntactically, then kind of. 「ないで」\nplays some of the syntactic roles that a positive _te_ -form would play\n(supports 補助動詞, stative adjuncts), while 「なくて」 plays others (conjunction). If\nyou consider 「なくて」 a _te_ -form given this definition, I would also consider\n「ないで」 one.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-16T02:33:38.550", "id": "11475", "last_activity_date": "2014-10-12T11:55:52.123", "last_edit_date": "2014-10-12T11:55:52.123", "last_editor_user_id": "3097", "owner_user_id": "3097", "parent_id": "11473", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes, a sarcastic use of this phrase is certainly possible (isn't it the case\nwith almost any phrases?), but it won't have the opposite effect.\n\nOne sarcastic use of this phrase that I can think of is:\n\n * someone makes a nasty remark about you\n * you say お礼を言わせてもらう because it reminds you why you hated him\n\nIn other words, when anger works as a motivation. It's probably more common in\ncomics and games than in the real life, but there you go.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-16T17:11:26.473", "id": "11477", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-16T17:11:26.473", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3059", "parent_id": "11476", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Stroke order is important for hand-written Japanese, which includes normal\nhandwriting and various styles of calligraphy.\n\nThe stroke order gives a flow to the character that can be recognized, even\nwhen the character looks very different to its [楷書]{かいしょ} incarnation.\n\nFor the non-expert, a character written in 楷書 (in the correct order) probably\ncannot be distinguished from the same character with a different stroke order.\nBut as soon as you get into cursive styles, the difference of the same\ncharacter with different stroke orders becomes very obvious.\n\n\n\nIf the author of the [玉泉帖]{ぎょくせんじょう} above had written like he did, but with a\nrandom stroke order, probably nobody would be able to actually read it.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-17T16:57:16.887", "id": "11480", "last_activity_date": "2015-04-17T15:55:25.890", "last_edit_date": "2015-04-17T15:55:25.890", "last_editor_user_id": "3275", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "11479", "post_type": "answer", "score": 15 }, { "body": "1. When you want to ask a Japanese person about a kanji/word... they may ask you to write it out. If you trace out the character with a finger on your palm IN THE CORRECT ORDER, they will probably be able to recognize the strokes and answer your question quickly. This shows up way more often than you'd expect.\n 2. Frankly, it's easier to remember complex kanji if you basically understand stroke orders. I'm not saying it's essential, but it does help your mind break them down a bit easier.\n 3. If you ever want to read highly-stylized characters (particularly sake brand names and store signs), or handwriting, you'll need to know stroke orders to help decode it. Kanji-shorthand is extremely difficult to parse if you're not sure what order it could possibly have been put together in.\n 4. If you ever have to write something (although this is probably going to be fairly rare), the stroke order is important to legibility in many cases... although this is probably the least important reason to learn them.\n\nWith that said... for alot of radicals it doesn't make that much difference.\n左右's first two strokes are in opposite orders, and I doubt many people would\nnotice. Stroke order is also generally not that hard to learn. Since after\nabout 100 or so basic radicals (most of the bushu radicals are made up of\nsimpler ones), you don't have that many exceptions left that will trip you up.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-17T22:07:02.313", "id": "11483", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-17T22:07:02.313", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "29", "parent_id": "11479", "post_type": "answer", "score": 13 } ]

[ { "body": "The former. と can be used to mark questions in\n[九州方言{きゅうしゅうほうげん}](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%B9%9D%E5%B7%9E%E6%96%B9%E8%A8%80)\n(in this case, she is speaking in\n[博多弁{はかたべん}](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8D%9A%E5%A4%9A%E5%BC%81), a\nsubdialect). (More technically, it is a 準体助詞{じゅんたいじょし} like の, and shares the\nnominalization property, which is probably why it can be used to mark\nquestions like that.)", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-17T21:02:17.277", "id": "11482", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-17T22:13:11.870", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-17T22:13:11.870", "last_editor_user_id": "3097", "owner_user_id": "3097", "parent_id": "11481", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "から means what it always means, in this case it marks a reason. It may be\neasier to read if you insert (mental) brackets for the quotation:\n\n> 本当のところを言うと、「この時間に悠馬さんがここを通るから」と、夏目さんに教えてもらったので、待っていたんです。 \n> Actually, I was waiting, because Natsume had told me that at this time Yũma\n> would come by here.\n\nMaybe 夏目 said\n\n> 4時に悠馬さんがここを通る **から** 、ここで待っていてください。 \n> Yũma comes by here at 4 o'clock, **so** please wait here.\n\nwhich got transformed and shortened to\n\n> この時間に悠馬さんがここを通るから\n\nin the quotation (marked by と) in the original sentence.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-18T11:48:58.253", "id": "11486", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-18T11:48:58.253", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "11485", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "About the question that isn't covered by the link Flaw provided:\n\n> However, and contradicting the explanation given, the second example\n> sentence does not take に.\n\nThis is because here it is not an adverb nor a pronoun. Here です is a copula\nlinking かいぎ to すいようび.\n\nに would be correct when you have a different verb, as in\n\n> かいぎはすいようびにあります。", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-18T15:35:33.170", "id": "11488", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-18T15:35:33.170", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "11487", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "The [Japanese Wikipedia page for\nエビ](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%B5%B7%E8%80%81) says the following:\n\n> 漢字表記の「海老」や「蛯」の字は曲がった腰を老人に見立てたものである。\n\nApparently the use of 老 comes from the way shrimp bend forward, like an old\nperson bending forward at the waist.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-18T22:07:58.637", "id": "11490", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-18T22:07:58.637", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "11489", "post_type": "answer", "score": 13 } ]

[ { "body": "He is hesitant because of the fear of being rejected.\n\n> 今日ほど断られることが怖いと思うことはない。 \n> _I did not care this much about the possibility of being rejected back in\n> the day_\n\nThe guy is talking to himself\n\n> と言い聞かせながら\n\nsaying he should just take it easy and just ask her out.\n\n> 電話番号を聞く勇気はあったじゃない、軽く映画にでも誘えばいいじゃないか\n\nAnd as always\n\n> 今日もまた\n\nhe was hesitating, lecturing himself and before he noticed, the day was over\nand he did not do shit\n\n> 時間が過ぎていった", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-19T06:41:03.530", "id": "11493", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-19T06:41:03.530", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "11492", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "A more colloquial translation.\n\n> 電話を前にして、彼女に僕の恋心を告げるべきがどうか非常に心が揺れていた。\n\nI know I should call her and let her know how I feel but I'm really nervous\nfor some reason.\n\n> 昔の僕だったら、ためらいもせず告白しただろうに。\n\nIn the past I would have just declared my love without hesitation.\n\n> 今日ほど断られることが怖いと思うことはない。\n\nI never used to be so scared of the thought of rejection.\n\n> 電話番号を聞く勇気はあったじゃないか、軽く映画にでも誘えばいいじゃないか、と言い聞かせながら、今日もまた時間が過ぎていった。\n\nI used to have the courage to ask for a phone number, to casually ask someone\nout for a movie, but I missed my chance again today.\n\n* * *\n\nReading between the lines, he really likes the girl and is more scared of her\nreaction so he can't muster the nerves to just ask her. As a result\n`今日もまた時間が過ぎていった`, he missed his chance to say anything again.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-22T04:00:07.530", "id": "11517", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-22T04:00:07.530", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3300", "parent_id": "11492", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "In typical everyday usage, the two words are fundamentally the same. However,\ndistinctions can be made between them.\n\n * zyougo: from 上戸 (a person who enjoys liquor), it expresses how liquids are sucked in without spilling like a funnel. The meaning is more abstract and includes funnel-like objects as well.\n\n * routo: (non-abstract) specifically a funnel; this is the preferred terminology in science experiments.\n\n> How about in compounds?\n\nI would expect it to be routo-. From the above explanation, zyougo is merely\natezi for 上戸, so this limits the likely hood of compounds with the same\nreading. Also, compounds typically narrow a meaning to something more\nspecific, while zyougo is already an abstract noun compared to the more\nspecific routo.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-20T10:45:19.250", "id": "11500", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-20T10:45:19.250", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1141", "parent_id": "11495", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "This seems to be a very uncommon word.\n\n日本国語大辞典 says...\n\n> 親しみ、むつみ合う感じ。身近で心がやわらぐ感じ。 \n> My translation: \"A calming feeling of familiarity and mutual intimacy.\"\n\nHow I'd actually translate 親和感 depends on the full sentence. I think\n\"familiarity\" would probably be the best choice without context.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-20T02:17:17.870", "id": "11497", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-20T02:17:17.870", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3097", "parent_id": "11496", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "Personally, I don't have a good enough intuitive sense of the meaning to\ndecide what the _best_ translation is, which is why I was reluctant to post an\nanswer.\n\nLuckily, I don't have to explain it myself. Let's take a look at an article\ntitled [Robotics' Uncanny Valley Gets New\nTranslation](http://www.livescience.com/20909-robotics-uncanny-valley-\ntranslation.html):\n\n> [T]he first English translation was done between the early morning hours of\n> 1 and 2 a.m. in a Japanese robotics lab in 2005 — a rush job that has\n> finally received a painstaking revision in 2012.\n\nSo you may be correct that **familiarity** isn't the best way to put it. The\narticle goes on to talk about the various translations of the term (\n_familiarity_ , _likableness_ , _comfort level_ , and _affinity_ ), and it\ngoes on to say:\n\n> Such English words fail to capture the full essence of Mori's original\n> Japanese, said Karl MacDorman, a robotics researcher at Indiana University\n> who served as one of the English translators for the uncanny valley essay.\n>\n> \"I think it is that feeling of being in the presence of another human being\n> — the moment when you feel in synchrony with someone other than yourself and\n> experience a 'meeting of minds,'\" MacDorman said. \"Negative 'shinwakan,' the\n> uncanny, is when that sense of synchrony falls apart, the moment you\n> discover that the one you thought was your soul mate was nothing more than\n> smoke and mirrors.\"\n\nIf the article is accurate, then Karl MacDorman doesn't believe any of these\nEnglish words accurately convey the meaning of _shinwakan_ by themselves. In\nfact, he's one of the two translators credited on the 2012 revision ([The\nUncanny Valley, IEEE\nSpectrum](http://spectrum.ieee.org/automaton/robotics/humanoids/the-uncanny-\nvalley)). This new translation has been authorized and reviewed by Masahiro\nMori himself, so that lends credence to his words.\n\nSo what _is_ the best translation, if not one of the above? Well, it appears\nthat they chose the word **affinity** , despite its presence in the list! But\nwhy, if it failed to capture the meaning of _shinwakan_?\n\nUltimately, words mean _what you explain them to mean_. In this context,\n**affinity** means what the translator explained above _because they've\nexplained what they meant_ , and although this may not be exactly what the\nword usually means, it is nonetheless close enough to be the term that was\nchosen by the new translators and approved by Masahiro Mori himself.\n\nAs a result, I think we can say that **affinity** is the best translation.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-20T14:32:19.320", "id": "11501", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-20T14:32:19.320", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "11496", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "As for why they use on-yomi, it's just because they were lifted right out of\nChinese by monks back in the Heian period. That's the easy part of this\nquestion, but interestingly it's really hard for me to find anything about\nwhat the days of the week were called _before_ the introduction of 七曜.\nApparently the naming of the days of the week based on the 7 visible planets\ncame through an old Buddhist text, quite a mouthful, called\n[文殊師利菩薩及諸仙所説吉凶時日善悪宿曜経{もんじゅしりぼさつきゅうしょせんしょせつきっきょうじじつぜんあくすくようきょう}](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%AE%BF%E6%9B%9C%E7%B5%8C)\n(or just 宿曜経 for short), with the 7 day system going as far back as ancient\nBabylonia.\n\nBefore this, however, I can't find anything too comprehensive. There is a\nsystem of days that also originated in China called the\n[六曜{ろくよう}](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%85%AD%E6%9B%9C), a system of a 6\nday week where each month is divided up roughly into 5 segments. These 6 days\nare 先勝, 友引, 先負, 仏滅, 大安, 赤口, and they represent certain astrology-tyle 'lucky'\nqualities. The first is \"lucky in the morning but not the afternoon.\" The next\nis good for lawsuits ad business. The third is unlucky in the morning. The\nfourth a very unlucky day (Buddha's death). The fifth is lucky, and the 6th is\nunlucky except at lunch time. According to wikipedia, though, this was\nactually introduced _after_ the current system. So I guess the search\ncontinues.\n\nThere is another very old system of measuring time known as the\n[旬{じゅん}](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%97%AC_%28%E5%8D%98%E4%BD%8D%29), but\nthis also unfortunately does not refer to specific days. Rather it refers to\ngroupings of 10 days, so in a month you have 上旬・中旬・下旬 to refer to the first,\nmiddle, and final 10 days of the month. This system of measuring time goes way\nback to the oldest writings in China, but you're not going to find your days\nof the week here.\n\nWith the above I guess it is possible that they used\n[十干{じっかん}](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8D%81%E5%B9%B2) to name days, but\nI'm not sure. The 10 are 甲・乙・丙・丁・戊・己・庚・辛・壬・癸, and they each apparently match\nup with one of the Chinese elements that were adopted into the names of days\n(look at the table on Wikipedia). Like I said, though, whether or not this\nnaming convention was used in Japan I am not sure.\n\nNone of these is a really satisfactory answer to the question, but in all the\nsearching I did I could not find any explicit information about the names of\nthe days of the week in Japanese before this. However I did learn a lot about\nit otherwise so I wanted to write it out here anyway.\n\nFor further reading check out these sites:\n\n<http://www.cjvlang.com/Dow/dowjpn.html> (English)\n<http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%BA%8C%E5%8D%81%E5%85%AB%E5%AE%BF> (another\nastrological grouping of 28 days from China)\n<http://koyomi.vis.ne.jp/doc/mlwa/200611070.htm>\n<http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%B8%83%E6%9B%9C>\n<http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%9B%9C%E6%97%A5>", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-20T05:12:52.350", "id": "11499", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-20T06:23:03.483", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-20T06:23:03.483", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "11498", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes, the meaning is pretty much as you explain, except I would add that it\nimplies doing something \"carelessly\" or \"thoughtlessly\". If you look up\n[ほいほい](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E3%81%BB%E3%81%84%E3%81%BB%E3%81%84) in the\ndictionary, you can find the relevant definition:\n\n> 軽々しく物事を引き受けたり行なったりするさま。 「 －（と）二つ返事で引き受ける」 「何でも－（と）買ってやる」", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-20T22:10:44.633", "id": "11504", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-20T23:02:08.143", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-20T23:02:08.143", "last_editor_user_id": "1217", "owner_user_id": "1217", "parent_id": "11503", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "I believe it's just a fancy reading for 世の面:\n\n1) よ is the usual reading for 世 (e.g. この世), and it's basically synonymous to\n世界 in this reading.\n\n2) な can be used instead of の: [Using な particle after common nouns (non na-\nadjectives)](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/1547/3295)\n\n3) も is a non-standard reading for 面 (e.g. 美面 or 水面 are read 「みなも」)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-21T02:53:47.357", "id": "11506", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-21T02:53:47.357", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.157", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "3295", "parent_id": "11505", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I believe よなも is 世な面, meaning roughly \"the surface of the world\". Here's how\nit breaks down:\n\n * よ is 世 (world)\n * な is the archaic case particle な, which is the same as the modern particle の\n * も is 面 (surface), a word derived from おも (the お is elided)\n\nThe case particle な is rare in modern Japanese. It's preserved in several\nwords:\n\n * 眼（まなこ＝[目]{ま}な[子]{こ}, meaning 目の子）\n * 港（みなと＝[水]{み}な[門]{と}, meaning 水の門）\n * 水面（みなも＝[水]{み}(な)[面]{も}, meaning 水の面, where な is unwritten）\n\nWhat all these words have in common is that they were formed back when な was\nin common use. I'm not sure whether よなも is a historically attested word or\nnot, but if it's not, it was probably formed on the pattern of these words--\nparticularly 水面 as pointed out by @Flaw's comment, fitting the imagery of\nウエーブ.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-21T03:28:08.760", "id": "11507", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-21T03:28:08.760", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "11505", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "Your translation was correct in meaning.\n\n> そんな嘘にオレがだまされっと思ってんのか！？\n\nI think the latter is the more colloquial version of the following:\n\n> そんな嘘にオレがだまされっと思ってんですか！？(or思ってるんですか)\n\nSo this:\n\n> そんな嘘にオレがだまされっと思ってんの！？\n\nhas the same meaning with perhaps less inquisitive emphasis, while this:\n\n> そんな嘘にオレがだまされっと思ってんか！？\n\nsounds less natural to me. I think one could say the sentence in the last way,\nbut it becomes very slangy, almost to a rarefied extent. (perhaps it would\nsound immature or \"country\" to a native listener, but I lack the expertise to\nsay)\n\nSo in conclusion, yes, you can make a sentence a question simply by altering\nthe tone of the words, but obviously adding か makes it a more \"complete\nexpression.\"\n\nex.:\n\n> これ食べる？ You eat this?\n>\n> これを食べますか？ Do you eat this?", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-21T21:52:03.807", "id": "11512", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-22T00:24:32.187", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "706", "parent_id": "11508", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "This usage of な simply emphasizes the sentence.\n\n> 何か来るんやろなとは思ったけどな \n> ＝［［何かが来る］のだろうな］と思ったけどな \n> = [[something-GA come-NONPAST]-NOMINALIZER right-NA]-QUOTE thought but-NA\n\nLiterally, \"I thought something must come, but...\"\n\nHowever, usage of けど at the end of the sentence like that generally means\nsomething inferable, and in this case it's something like \"but I wasn't\nexpecting this\". (Just guessing from the screenshot.)\n\nA more liberal translation is \"I knew something was going to show up, but not\nthis!\"\n\n(P.S., the nominalizer ん／の is there because だろう is a form of the copula だ,\nwhich takes a nominal (noun-like) object. There is another form of だろう which\nmodifies verbs, but this is not it, though they are tightly related\nsemantically.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-21T12:59:45.703", "id": "11510", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-21T14:17:07.337", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-21T14:17:07.337", "last_editor_user_id": "3097", "owner_user_id": "3097", "parent_id": "11509", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "> 古典文法は得意ではないですが、「なかりき」又は「なかりけり」だと思います。 \n> 自分が体験したことを話すときは「なかりき」、人に聞いたことを話すときは「なかりけり」だそうです。", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-22T01:28:02.120", "id": "11514", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-22T01:28:02.120", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "11511", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "The PDF at\n<http://repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/20017/1/jlc033002.pdf> says of\n山田敏弘（２００２）「格助詞および複合格助詞の連体用法について」『岐阜大学国語文学』２９、岐阜大学国語文学会 on page 25:\n\n> 「に対する」と「に対しての」のような「２つ以上の連体形を持つ場合、微細な違いを除き、ほぼ用法に差はない」（p.42）と結論している。\n\nAnd says that, while the differences between the two weren't examined in\ndetail in that report, it can be thought there are hardly any differences\nwhich stand out between the two in meaning.\n\n(It then goes on to compare the frequency of the two using Google counts and\nfrom that says that に対する is more frequent than に対しての, but [Google counts may\nnot be as reliable as you\nimagine](https://japanese.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/522/google-counts-\nmay-not-be-as-reliable-as-you-imagine) so I'd take that with a grain of salt).\n\nSo I'd say, for most practical purposes, the two are interchangeable.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-22T22:23:49.090", "id": "11521", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-22T22:40:00.217", "last_edit_date": "2017-03-16T15:48:25.793", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "11515", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "大奥婚 is made of two words:\n\n * 大奥 most likely refers to the movie [『大奥〜永遠〜［右衛門佐・綱吉篇］』](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%A4%A7%E5%A5%A5%E3%80%9C%E6%B0%B8%E9%81%A0%E3%80%9C%EF%BC%BB%E5%8F%B3%E8%A1%9B%E9%96%80%E4%BD%90%E3%83%BB%E7%B6%B1%E5%90%89%E7%AF%87%EF%BC%BD). As you can see from the Wikipedia link, both 堺雅人 and 菅野美穂 starred in this movie.\n * 婚 is short for 結婚 (\"wedding\").\n\nSo you could translate it as \"An Ōoku Wedding\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-25T10:20:09.310", "id": "11540", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-26T21:51:45.990", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-26T21:51:45.990", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "11518", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "Quote from [数え方の辞典](http://www.amazon.co.jp/dp/4095052015/) (which I have\nintroduced here\n[before](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/9714/why-are-movies-\nvideo-clips-counted-with-%E6%9C%AC/9718#9718)):\n\n> ラーメン（拉麺）\n>\n> 数え方：本、杯（はい）、丁（ちょう）、玉（たま）\n>\n>\n> スープ・具・麺（めん）を椀（わん）や丼に盛ると「杯」で数えます。飲食店で注文を受け、景気付けに店員が「ラーメン一丁」のように「丁」で注文を数えることがあります。ばらばらの麺は「本」、1食分の麺の分量は「玉」で表します。", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-22T14:51:23.150", "id": "11520", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-22T14:51:23.150", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1141", "parent_id": "11519", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "How significant is it when a Japanese learner says a word or phrase sounds\nweird? ひとつ、ふたつ、みっつ, etc. is by far the most often used way of ordering ramen\nin a restaurant.\n\n玉 is the counter for the noodle part of a ramen, not for the entire bowl of\nramen with noodles, soup, toppings, etc.\n\n杯 is the counter for the whole thing --- noodles, soup and toppings. Some\npeople use this counter for ordering ramen but it is much less common to do so\nthan to use ひとつ、ふたつ、みっつ.\n\n丁 is the counter almost exclusively used by the waiter/waitress to tell the\nkitchen how many ramen has just been ordered.\n\n本 is almost irrelevant to the original question because it is only used to\ncount the strands of noodle.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-18T03:08:54.777", "id": "13185", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-18T03:08:54.777", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "11519", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "FWIW, I would prefer the original translation. When you say \"I won't put up\",\nthere's a hint of your going to do something about it. When you say \"I can't\nstand\", there's no such intent of actions, and that is consistent with the\noriginal Japanese version.\n\n\"未知の人生\" is indeed ambigious as you say, even in Japanese. But in this case,\nthere's \"未知の世界\" that appears immediately before this, which means \"the world\nyou haven't seen\" in this context. So one would assume both \"未知の\" have the\nsame meaning.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-30T00:53:39.730", "id": "11588", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-30T00:53:39.730", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3059", "parent_id": "11522", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Ignore the meaning of the sentence; it is secondary to grammar. Firstly,\nevaluate which options can grammatically be inserted. Lets check each one.\n\n * -hazu can attach directly to an adjective or verb, to adjectival verb + na, and to noun + no. raku is either a noun or adjectival verb so needs to be raku na/no hazu, so you can eliminate this as an option.\n\n * -noni directly attaches to adjectives and verbs but requires na before nouns. Again, this cannot fit so you can eliminate it. \n\n * -tame requires no when attaching to nouns, na when attaching to adjectival verbs, and can attach directly to adjectives and verbs. This does not fit, so you can cross it off the list.\n\n * -tokoro requiers no when attaching to nouns and can attach direclty to verbs. This will not work, so eliminate it.\n\n * -beki requires dearu when attaching to nouns and adjectival verbs, -ku aru for adjectives, and directly to verbs. No luck here, so remove it.\n\n * -nanode: Rather, you should think of this as -node, which attached directly to adjectives and verbs, but requires na when attaching to nouns and adjectival nouns. This fits, which is good because we have already eliminated all of the other options.\n\nHere the meaning is not important. It is only a matter of grammar. When there\nare multiple valid choices, then the intended meaning becomes more important.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-23T11:27:36.003", "id": "11525", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-23T11:27:36.003", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1141", "parent_id": "11523", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I think the only _grammatical_ choice is なので, which has the copula な to be\nmodify ので.\n\n楽 by itself can't modify any of the other choices. If you go by meaning, then\n楽なため does make sense, but it's not an option. Similarly, 楽なはず or 楽なのに are not\neven an option.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-23T11:28:41.023", "id": "11526", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-23T11:28:41.023", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "11523", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "中心 means center and を中心に(して) means \"as center\". Like you suggested,\n\n> 東南アジアを中心に世界各地で活躍する \n> active all around the world, with South-East Asia as center of activity\n\nAlso, 多く should not refer to 華僑, 多く stands for many, in the sense of many\npeople.\n\nMy rough translation would be\n\n>\n> あるいはまた、東南アジアを中心に世界各地で活躍するいわゆる華僑勢力の多くが福建省出身者である事実を見ても、福建人たちの「海外雄飛」のパワーを知ることができる。 \n> Moreover, considering the fact that many of the so-called 華僑勢力 (Chinese\n> merchants overseas force) are active all around the world, South-East Asia\n> being the heart of their activity, one can understand the Fujian people's\n> power that comes from going overseas.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-23T11:50:31.093", "id": "11527", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-23T11:50:31.093", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "11524", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "If you're talking about yourself you can't really use it that way. Ending it\nwith に makes it sound like a kind of friendly request, like in お大事に. As such\nit sounds like you're telling someone \"楽しみにしてください\" because of the に ending.\nFor yourself you just say 楽しみ or 楽しみにしています. Generally do not leave a に\ndangling by itself at the end to refer to your own feelings.\n\nI'll piggyback off of Chocolate's beautiful comment for extra clarity:\n\n * 楽しみです and 楽しみにしています represent the speaker's feelings as the subject of the sentence. So \"I\" am looking forward to something. This is shortened to 楽しみ in casual speech.\n * お楽しみに, on the other hand, is a shortened way of saying 楽しみにしていてください, addressed _to_ someone, a way of telling someone to look forward to something. It has an imperative feel.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-23T12:45:18.713", "id": "11529", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-25T02:41:28.990", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-25T02:41:28.990", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "11528", "post_type": "answer", "score": 21 }, { "body": "I'm fairly certain 楽しみに is fine and they corrected it to that because it's\njust \"the proper way\" to say it. Japanese people do that a lot. If you say でしょ\nthey'll likely correct it with でしょう etc. even though Japanese people will use\nでしょ more often than not.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2016-11-25T02:22:14.527", "id": "41182", "last_activity_date": "2016-11-25T02:22:14.527", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "18809", "parent_id": "11528", "post_type": "answer", "score": -1 } ]

[ { "body": "誰の名前でもない means \"isn't anybody's name\", from the usual question word plus\nnegative construction (like 何でもない).\n\nIt would probably take a bit more context to find a good translation. Without\nfurther information it's not clear, whether the name that isn't anybody's name\nmodifies 輝き, or just stands by itself.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-23T14:58:05.917", "id": "11531", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-23T14:58:05.917", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "11530", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "The も is required by the 誰. 誰も means \"anybody\".\n\nBut things can come between the 誰 and the も. The case particles generally come\nbefore the も, e.g.\n\n> 誰とも行かない (I will) not go with anybody\n\nIn でもない, でない is a negative copula, but the で acts like a case particle and\ncomes before the も.\n\n> 誰でもない It isn't anybody\n\nIn this example even more stuff comes before the も:\n\n> 誰の名前でもない It isn't anybody's name", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-23T15:02:56.013", "id": "11532", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-24T02:02:51.517", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-24T02:02:51.517", "last_editor_user_id": "1073", "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "11530", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "I don't know if this answers your question but... there you go: \n\n> * 先生が新聞を _お読みになり_ ました。vs 先生が新聞を _読まれ_ ました。 \n>\n> * 先生、新聞を _お読みになり_ ましたか。vs 先生、新聞を _読まれ_ ましたか。 \n>\n>\n\n>\n> Dictionary form - れる/られる form - お/ご~~になる form \n> 読む - 読まれる - お読みになる \n> する - される - なさる (×おしになる) \n> なる - なられる - おなりになる \n> いる - おられる(×いられる)、いらっしゃる (×おいになる) \n> 見る - 見られる - ご覧になる (×お見になる) \n> 言う - 言われる、おっしゃる (×お言いになる) \n> 行く - 行かれる、いらっしゃる (△?お行きになる) \n> 来る - 来られる、いらっしゃる - おいでになる、お越しになる、お見えになる、見える (×お来になる) \n> 食べる - 食べられる - お食べになる、召し上がる、お召し上がりになる \n> 座る - 座られる - お座りになる \n> 掛ける - 掛けられる - お掛けになる \n> 知る - (×知られる) - ご存じ(だ/です) (×ご存じになる) \n> 買う - 買われる - お求めになる、お買い求めになる etc. depending on the situation (△?お買いになる)\n\nTo me, the お~~になる form sounds politer and more formal than the れる/られる form. I\nthink we use the れる/られる honorific form more often than the お~~になる form in\ndaily conversation. Examples: \n\n> * お嬢さん、もう高校生に _なられ_ たんですね。 Your daughter has become a high school student.\n> (-- おなりになった is possible but not so common) \n>\n> * あそこのおじいさん、去年 _亡くなられ_ たそうですよ。 I hear their grandfather passed away last\n> year. (-- more politely, お亡くなりになった) \n>\n> * きのうのニュース、 _見られ_ ました？ Did you see the news yesterday? (-- more politely,\n> ご[覧]{らん}になりました) \n>\n> * あそこの新しいパン屋さん、もう _行かれ_ ました？ Have you been to the new bakery? (-- お行きになった\n> sounds awkward to me...) \n>\n>\n\nI think students generally use the れる/られる form for their teachers/professors\n(I used ~~(し)はる because I was in Kyoto), but I don't think they use お~~になる\nform so often, at least when talking. I think we use both when we write,\nchoosing the お~~になる form when we want to sound politer. Examples: \n\n> * 先生、土曜日は学校に _来られ_ ますか？ Sensei, will you come to school on Saturday? (--\n> いらっしゃいますか would sound politer. おいでになりますか sounds even politer.) \n>\n> * 山田先生は[出張]{しゅっちょう}に _行かれ_ ているので、[授業]{じゅぎょう}は[休講]{きゅうこう}です。 Mr. Yamada is\n> away on business today so his class is cancelled. (-- 行っておられる is possible\n> too. 行っていらっしゃる is politer. お行きになっている sounds awkward to me.) \n>\n>\n\nYou might hear/read the お~~になる/ご~~になる form used quite often at shops or in\nbusiness situations when you're a customer/client. They might also use the\nれる/られる form though, especially when talking. Examples: \n\n> * お[客様]{きゃくさま}が _お掛けになっ_ た[電話番号]{でんわばんごう}は、[現在]{げんざい}使われておりません。 The number\n> you have dialed is not in service. (-- [掛]{か}けられた might not be polite enough\n> here) \n>\n> * こちらに _お掛けになっ_ て、お待ちください。 Please have a seat and wait here. (--\n> 掛けられて/座られて would also be okay but might not be polite enough depending on\n> the situation.) \n>\n>\n\nYou might also hear お/ご~~くださる (くださる is the honorific form of くれる), お/ご~~いただく\n(いただく is the humble form for もらう) and お/ご~~(だ/です). Examples: \n\n> * _ご来店いただき_ まして、ありがとうございます。Thank you for shopping. \n>\n> * このたびは[当社製品]{とうしゃせいひん}を _ご購入いただき_ / _お選びいただき_ / _お買い求めいただき_\n> 、[誠]{まこと}にありがとうございました。 Thank you for purchasing our product. \n>\n> * さきほど、一階、[催]{もよお}し[物]{もの}コーナーにて、[学習机]{がくしゅうづくえ}を _お求めの_ / _お求めいただきました_\n> [山田様]{やまださま}、お近くのレジまで _ご連絡ください_ / _お越しください_ ませ。Ms Yamada, who has purchased\n> a writing desk on the first floor, please contact us at the nearest counter. \n>\n> * 「京都、と、59-63」の黒色のプリウスで _お越しの_ お客様、・・・。 To the owner of the black Prius\n> with the license plate blah blah, ... \n>\n> * この[番組]{ばんぐみ}は、 _ご覧の_ スポンサーの[提供]{ていきょう}でお送りしました。 This program was\n> sponsored by ~~. \n>\n>", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-24T14:27:19.273", "id": "11539", "last_activity_date": "2016-12-11T13:51:05.083", "last_edit_date": "2016-12-11T13:51:05.083", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "11533", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "I've been thinking about various different sentences that include 思われる to see\nif any of them feel like a distinctive word of its own, and my feeling is that\nthe answer is no.\n\n思う does mean \"to think\", as in \"明日は雨だと思う / I think it'll rain tomorrow\", and\nthus its passive form 思われる means \"it is thought\". The passiveness would be\namplified when it is used without a specific subject, making it ambiguous as\nto who is thinking. Doing this creates a sense that the thought is shared by\nmany/all/everyone, as in \"情勢は不利だと思われる / the situation does not appear good.\"\nIt makes the sentence feel more objective, and I think this is the effect\nthat's making you feel that it has a separate meaning.\n\nIn contrast, when 思われる is used with a specific subject, it's easy to see that\nit's the passive form of 思う. This is true even when the subject is implied, as\nin \"バカだと思われるよ / [he will] think you are stupid.\"\n\nNote that 思われる is also a polite form (尊敬語) of 思う, as in \"どう思われますか？ / What do\nyou think?\". The example of \"意外に思われるかもしれません\" that you cited is also this\nusage.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-30T14:51:11.403", "id": "11591", "last_activity_date": "2018-12-28T15:25:08.163", "last_edit_date": "2018-12-28T15:25:08.163", "last_editor_user_id": "10045", "owner_user_id": "3059", "parent_id": "11534", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "ほど is usually used as particle, whereas 程度 is a noun, e.g.\n\n> B _ほど_ Aの **程度** は大きくない。 \n> A's **degree** is not _as_ high _as_ B's.\n\n[ほど](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch/0/0ss/118151200000/) can be used as noun,\nbut I would say\n[程度](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&stype=0&dtype=0&dname=0ss&p=%E7%A8%8B%E5%BA%A6)\nis more common. The dictionary definitions show that the meaning is not that\ndifferent (e.g. 大辞泉 has 許容される限度。 for 程度; 大辞林 has 許される程度。限度。 for ほど).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-23T20:36:51.700", "id": "11536", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-23T20:43:52.093", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-23T20:43:52.093", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "11535", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "> Did 母 undergo ハ行転呼 and then change (back) to /haha/?\n\nYes, it did become hawa (or rather ɸawa) before changing back. You may find\ncitations [here](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E6%AF%8D#Etymology_6).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-24T13:22:06.383", "id": "11538", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-24T13:29:32.123", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-24T13:29:32.123", "last_editor_user_id": "1141", "owner_user_id": "1141", "parent_id": "11537", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "All of these sentences on their own would permit either が or は. It is context\nthat could force one or the other. [This\nquestion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/22/whats-the-\ndifference-between-wa-%E3%81%AF-and-ga-%E3%81%8C) is worth reading if you're\ninterested how context comes into play.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-25T14:25:24.397", "id": "11545", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-25T14:25:24.397", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.740", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "3097", "parent_id": "11541", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "~たら conditional form of verbs is not always best translated as \"if\".\n\nFor example, it is sometimes used when the outcome is unexpected (often in\nthis case the following phrase would be in past tense).\n\n家に帰ったら猫がいた。 ← implies I wasn't expecting a cat on my doorstep.\n\nI think in this case your friends are just expressing mild surprise at the\ncontent of the link.\n\nClunky translation: \"Oh, it's ホルモン? I wondered what that (link) was.\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-25T14:02:19.900", "id": "11543", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-25T14:02:19.900", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "571", "parent_id": "11542", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "Wait, I'm a little confused on the question. The title says \"What's the\npurpose of なんて?\", but it really seems like you're asking \"Why is なんて the\ncorrect answer?\" Anyway, here's why I think it's the correct answer.\n\nAccording to [this answer on a similar\nquestion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/1823/78), `なんか` only goes\nbefore verbs, so that would be incorrect. `など` is a more formal/written(?)\nform of `なんて`, and this sentence is clearly be spoken in an informal (though\npolite) form. `なんと` would emphasize the `素晴らしいですねぇ`, so the preceding would\nhave to be something like `...できて` or `...できるのは`.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-25T14:47:02.143", "id": "11546", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-25T14:47:02.143", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.863", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "11544", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Just for the record before this gets closed, the US State Department\nclassifies (classified?) Japanese as an \"exceptionally difficult\" language for\nnative English speakers, and at least in their programs recommends 88 weeks of\nstudy at 2200 class hours, half of which are spent in Japan. Not sure how out\nof date this document is but it might be as close to an authoritative answer\non this as you'll get. \"Understanding video games\" can be extremely difficult\ndepending on the game, so we'll just say you need to be near fluent to get by\nwithout a dictionary.\n\n<http://web.archive.org/web/20071014005901/http://www.nvtc.gov/lotw/months/november/learningExpectations.html>\n\nI can say that if you're not working on learning Japanese as a full time job\n88 weeks seems extraordinarily unlikely for a high level of proficiency. Note\n2200 hours in 88 weeks works out to 25 hours of study per week.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-25T23:42:08.877", "id": "11548", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-25T23:42:08.877", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "11547", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "This question is generally not something we consider on-topic, but I'll give\nyou my honest advise anyway.\n\n**The Short Answer** :\n\nA long time. A really really long time. Your mileage may vary, but expect it\nto take several years.\n\n**The Long Answer** :\n\n**\"A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step\"**\n\nI would say in my own opinion that you're going to want near-fluent levels to\nunderstand games. If you memorize 100 words from one game, that's all well and\ngood but you may never see any of those 100 in any other given game. A hurdle\nin your way is that there isn't any program to learn slangy, video-game type\nlanguage to the point of fluency without also having to pick up standard\nJapanese (and I would not recommend trying to do so).\n\nAny program telling you you can \"Learn Japanese Fast!\" isn't telling you the\nwhole truth. Programs like Rosetta Stone will only help you _so far_. My\npersonal (limited) experience with Rosetta Stone are that you'll learn some\nvocabulary and be able to recognize words and sentences, but you won't be\nable, say, understand a TV show.\n\nThe good news is that you _want_ to learn Japanese. But! Video games are fun,\nand understanding video games will feel fantastic. Learning Japanese to\nfluency will take a lot of hard work and effort, and you're not going to be\nable to pop in a brand new Japanese video game and understand it perfectly for\nyears. It's really hard to stay dedicated to something without that instant\ngratification, and that's the same for everyone. You have to keep at it,\nbecause it takes time.\n\nIt's good that you're willing to spend money on materials. I'm a pretty frugal\nperson so I thought for the longest time I would not spend money to learn\nJapanese as there are plenty of free resources on-line. I ended up changing my\nmind on that point because when you buy materials you're paying money for\nsomething that someone was paid to make so that you can learn. You're paying\nfor their quality (and compensated) work. Free and open information that\npeople want to share with the world is absolutely amazing and there's no\nreason not to use it as a tool, but paying for textbooks/workbooks etc is a\ngood base for your studies. (As an added bonus, actually spending money on\nsomething makes me personally want to actually use it to get my money's\nworth.)\n\nA third group of learning materials is native sources (newspapers, TV\nshows/movies, video games, books/comics, etc). Get and use these sources as\nmuch as you can handle and more. For me, this is where what I was talking\nabout instant gratification comes in to play. When I do flashcards, that's all\nfind and dandy, and I \"sure, I learned that word enough to get the flashcard\nright\", but when I hear/see a word in a drama or book, I think \"Yes! I know\nthat word! I'm so smart!\" (or sometimes just seeing the word in context makes\nremembering it so much easier the next time it comes around on the flashcard\nprogram). There's also a bizarre phenomenon where you're likely to come across\nby happenstance a new word you just learned in a completely unrelated context\n_that day_ (I'm sure it has a name). Those words get jammed in your memory,\nbut if you don't have Japanese coming at you regularly, the chances that\nyou'll see those kinds of words diminishes.\n\nAll in all, it's going to take months and months and years and years to\nachieve near-native fluency. Maybe less if you live in Japan or don't have a\njob. The tricky part is learning a language isn't about just one aspect; you\ncan't just memorize a stack of kanji and be done. One day work on this aspect,\nthe next, that aspect. Look at your weaknesses and attack those points. Don't\nworry if it seems like you're at a brick wall, or worse, a plateau, because\nthis too shall pass as long as you keep at it.\n\nSome final points of advice:\n\nDo a little every day (within reason...sometime real life happens and that's\nokay).\n\nDon't judge your success or lack thereof based on what others have\naccomplished or failed to do.\n\nFocus on _why you want to learn Japanese_ , not how cool it would be to be\nable to speak it.\n\n**\"A year from now you may wish you had started today\"**", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-26T03:11:44.770", "id": "11549", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-26T03:11:44.770", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "921", "parent_id": "11547", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

[ { "body": "This isn't a 100% sure answer based on experience, but a little investigation\nleads me to believe that in the IT context these two words are synonymous.\n\n 1. [Here](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=User%20requirements) we see both ユーザー要件 and ユーザー要求\n 2. [Here](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=system%20requirements) we see both used for system requirements. It's also written here as 必要最小システム構成 for \"minimum system requirements.\"\n 3. [Here](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=requirement%20gathering) we see \"requirement gathering\" simply stated as \"要件の取りまとめ,\" although I'd be willing to bet that 要求 is ok here too.\n\nYou can gather the minute differences by looking at the kanji (or just a\ndictionary). Of course they both have 要, which is the kanji for the verb 要{い}る\n(to need) so we get the meaning of \"necessary\" from here. For 要件 the 件 adds a\nmeaning of conditions or provisions, like in 条件. It refers to the things that\nare necessary. 要求 uses the kanji from 求{もと}める, or something that you _seek_ or\n_desire_. The nuance here is that these things are demanded as necessary for\nthe task at hand, in a sense that they are \"sought.\" If you check the\ndictionary entries, the key part on 要求 is\n\"[強く求めること](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E8%A6%81%E6%B1%82)\" while in 要件 the\nimportant part is\n\"[欠くことのできない条件](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E8%A6%81%E4%BB%B6).\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-26T04:30:05.540", "id": "11551", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-26T04:30:05.540", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "11550", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "They both can mean the same thing but they are not the same. Probably a\n[similar problem to 目標 and 目的](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/9790/78). \nThe main difference to me is the point of view.\n\n * User's point of view => 要求\n * Dev's point of view => 要件\n\n要求 would be functionalities the user is looking for. While 要件 would be\nfunctionalities the system need to do to answer the 要求.\n\nIn my company, we first go through the 要求開発 process, which can include\ncustomer study, market survey etc to decide what functionality to add to our\nproduct. Then it is passed to a 要件定義 that clearly define the specifications of\nyour product. \n要求 is not supposed to be done in the 開発部 but by the 営業／マーケティング部.\n\nI don't fully get the other two meanings but\n\n * Minimum system requirements : 要求スペック", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-26T04:50:15.540", "id": "11552", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-26T14:34:22.293", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.207", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "11550", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "There's no adverbial trickery going on here. Indeed in a normal sentence it\nwould be something like 木の家で暮らそう, or \"let's live _in_ a wood house.\" Taken at\nface value it may seem like it's just saying that you should live with a tree\nor 'with' a wood house (like a tree as a roommate, as you say), but this is\nadvertisement speak. The effect of saying it this way is ultimately emphasis\non the woodiness of the house. It is telling us to live _with_ the wood house\nin a deeper sense of the word. My opinion would be that saying と evokes more\nof an image of living 'naturally' _with_ your house rather than living _in_\nit, that is, with natural materials rather than something synthetic. I don't\nknow how many would share that opinion, so take it for what it is! Chocolate's\ncomment above seems to corroborate this, too. It's a way of placing value on\nwood, on trees, and invoking a consciousness of that in your daily life.\n\nBut at any rate it's _not_ using 木の家 as an adverb. It just wouldn't really\nmake sense that way, or at least it makes less sense than the alternative\ninterpretation. If all else fails defer to Occam's Razor here.\n\nThe translation question is probably off topic considering there isn't going\nto be a right answer for it. The idiosyncratic nature of the phrase makes a\ntranslation that captures the nuances in the same way impossible and would\nprobably be left up to a marketing team rather than translators to choose an\nalternative (I guess, anyway!). Because there is no solid equivalent every\nsituation will require a different translation that captures that sentence's\nunique meaning.", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-26T14:40:02.710", "id": "11555", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-27T05:51:36.080", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-27T05:51:36.080", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "11554", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "Looks to me like he's suggesting that this character is holding his hands up\nin that half-shrugging \"I don't know nothin'!\" kind of way\n\nForgive the meme but this is the only picture that popped up in my 15 seconds\nof intense google imaging:\n\n\n\nWhether or not this is 外国人のくせ I don't know, but that's what came to mind for\nme. Reading over it again I don't think the emotional quality of it is the\nsame but I think the general gesture could be the same.\n\nEither that or the author has his own idea of how foreigners act.\n\nEdit: I'd like to comment that Chocolate's suggestion (from the position of a\nnative speaker) of a pure [shrug](http://www.cavstheblog.com/wp-\ncontent/uploads/2012/03/searching.jpeg) may be accurate here, although\napparently none of us as foreigners immediately associate shrugging with\nraising of the _hands_ as much as we do with shoulders. However Japanese does\nhave the word 肩をすくめる to refer to shrugging the shoulders. Seems to be a\ndistinction between which way the palms are facing!\n\nEither way the following image describes my feelings adequately.\n\n", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-26T23:39:49.893", "id": "11560", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-27T00:12:29.853", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-27T00:12:29.853", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "11558", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "You may wish to read [Japanese\nnumerals](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_numerals). So 1'0000 is called\n`万`, which is also used in Greek as\n[myriad](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myriad).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-27T01:58:44.017", "id": "11562", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-27T01:58:44.017", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3315", "parent_id": "11561", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "The 納める in どうか管理人さんにちゃんとお納めになられるようにと... means \"to receive, take, accept,\n[受領]{じゅりょう}する, [受]{う}け[取]{と}る, [受納]{じゅのう}する\" (No.2 in\n<http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/30841/m0u/> ). I think お納めになられる\n(お納めになる+れる) is what is called [二重敬語]{にじゅうけいご}(\"double honorific\"?), and\naccording to this page\n<http://wol.nikkeibp.co.jp/article/topics/20100507/106978/?P=2> お納めになる / 納められる\nseem to be more appropriate. I think お納めくださる or お納めいただく would sound a bit\npoliter.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-28T23:14:15.433", "id": "11578", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-29T01:02:15.173", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-29T01:02:15.173", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "11564", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "The nominalisation occurs with just の.\n\nを and が are case markers and the choice between them depends on the other part\nof the sentence; whether a verb that assigns a を argument is used, or a verbal\nnominal adjective (such as 好き that takes が for object marking1), or a stative\nclause.\n\nVerb: 宿題をするの **を** 忘れた \nVerbal Nominal Adjective: 水を飲むの **が** 好きです \nStative verb: 誰かが話すの **が** 聞こえる \n\n[1] _The Structure of the Japanese Language_ , p. 91, Susumu Kuno", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-27T16:12:34.340", "id": "11567", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-27T16:26:18.370", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-27T16:26:18.370", "last_editor_user_id": "542", "owner_user_id": "542", "parent_id": "11566", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "Flaw's answer is of course correct, but here's another way to look at it.\n\n* * *\n\nStart with a simple sentence like this:\n\n> **犬{いぬ}** が好{す}きだ。 \"I like dogs.\"\n\nSince the predicate is a na-adjective, 好きだ, the object (犬) needs to be marked\nby が. (Your second sentence is ungrammatical for this reason, btw.)\n\nThen, if you want to say something like \"I like running.\", you need to change\nthe verb 走{はし}る into something like a noun, so it fits in the same spot as 犬.\nYou do this with 〜の. This is essentially the same thing as \"run\" → \"running\"\nin English. So, we get:\n\n> **走るの** が好きだ。 \"I like running.\"\n\n* * *\n\nIf you instead have a predicate which requires an を-marked object, like やめる\n\"to quit\"/\"to stop\", it goes like this:\n\n> **会社{かいしゃ}** をやめた。\"I quit my job.\" \n> **走るの** をやめた。 \"I stopped running.\"\n\n* * *\n\nBasically, all the 〜の does is make a verb act like a noun, and then\nsyntactically-speaking, that noun-like thing can fit into any spot a noun\nwould normally go, and that spot will already be marked with が, の, or some\nother case particle.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-27T17:46:13.037", "id": "11568", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-27T17:46:13.037", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3097", "parent_id": "11566", "post_type": "answer", "score": 14 } ]

[ { "body": "Unless this is a set phrase, I think we need more context to go on--who said\nthe quote, what was the line before and after, etc.\n\nI don't see the provided translation matching up though.\n\nHere is my attempt:\n\n> その頑張りは、すべてむだというかそういう気持ちになる。\n>\n> All that hard work for nothing, you know...that's how I feel.\n\nHere is how I break it down:\n\n> その頑張りは、/ すべてむだ / というか / そういう気持ちになる。\n>\n> (as for) that hard work,/ all (for) naught / you know (or, how should I put\n> it,.) / this kind of feeling becomes.\n\nreferences:\n\n[http://tangorin.com/general/というか](http://tangorin.com/general/%E3%81%A8%E3%81%84%E3%81%86%E3%81%8B)\n\n[http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=というか&ref=sa](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E3%81%A8%E3%81%84%E3%81%86%E3%81%8B&ref=sa)\n\n[http://tangorin.com/general/そういう](http://tangorin.com/general/%E3%81%9D%E3%81%86%E3%81%84%E3%81%86)", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-28T01:28:03.260", "id": "11571", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-28T02:02:48.420", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "706", "parent_id": "11570", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "There was a news segment on public hospitals a few months ago focusing on a\ndoctor from [柏原]{かいばら} hospital in Hyogo prefecture (Western Japan). Here is\n[an article](http://www.jinken.ne.jp/medical/kaibara/) covering what happened\n(Japanese). The prefecture kept closing down the hospitals and consolidating\nthem due to a shortage of doctors, and he was the only pediatrician for\nseveral hospitals in the area. As a result, he was the only pediatrician for\n18,000 children. He handed in his resignation because the working conditions\nwere just too poor.\n\nThis is what he said:\n\n> 「すでに月に７日以上宿直や小児輪番を担当し、夜ごとひっきりなしに外来患者を診ていました。睡眠不足で疲れ切っていて、いつ事故を起こしてもおかしくな\n> い状況でしたから、もう限界。小児科が実質私１人となる体制で『勤務を続ける』と言うほうが無責任だと思ったんです」\n\nRough translation:\n\n> I was already working the night shift 7 days or more per month while working\n> on rotation as a pediatrician, and each night without fail I would have out\n> patients come in. I was sleep deprived, exhausted, but since a serious\n> accident could occur at any time I hit my limit. I was the only real\n> pediatrician in the area, and I thought that it would be irresponsible to\n> \"just keep on working\".\n\nMy guess is that the quote you give is from a doctor with a similar\nexperience. I think that the quote you gave would be translated more as, \"All\nof my hard work is for nothing, or at least that's how it makes me feel.\" Like\nDr. [和久]{わく?} he probably thinks that despite all his hard work, the situation\nisn't improving, and he's just burning himself out for no good reason (or at\nleast feels like that's the case).\n\nIn the case of Dr. [和久]{わく?}, the parents of children in the area started a\ngroup to lower his workload, not come in the middle of the night with trivial\nproblems (like slight fevers), bringing him food, and otherwise trying to make\nhim a bit less stressed.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-28T04:22:29.547", "id": "11572", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-28T04:22:29.547", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3300", "parent_id": "11570", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "I think 遅いランチ is quite common, and so is 遅め(の)ランチ. In either case 遅 is read\nおそ, so I would think 遅ランチ is just a shortening to be read as おそランチ.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-28T15:29:51.997", "id": "11575", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-28T15:29:51.997", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "11574", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "`文明` is \"civilization\". I would say the last part would be \"and reigns to\nbring peace to the world and to yet further civilization\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-28T19:33:10.383", "id": "11577", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-28T19:33:10.383", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "11576", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Like you say, かと言って is just か＋と＋言って.\n\n * か makes it into a question\n * と is the quoting particle\n * 言って is \"say/called\"\n\nIt can appear without any ambiguity in the middle of a sentence\n\n> 家まで送ろうかと言ってくれた。 \n> He offered to bring me home.\n\nWhen it is used as a conjunction at the beginning at a sentence it works like\nというか, なので, だから, etc., which apply to the whole preceding sentence (or\nargument).", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-29T01:38:33.407", "id": "11580", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-29T01:38:33.407", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "11579", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "[もはず](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%82%82%E3%81%AF%E3%81%9A) is a word by\nitself.\n\nThe sentence means \"I confessed without hesitation\".\n\nAs explained in the comments, there is big chances the sentence is miss-typed.\nI personally think the sentence would originally be `ためらいもせず告白した`.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-29T04:52:24.213", "id": "11582", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-29T05:34:12.627", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-29T05:34:12.627", "last_editor_user_id": "1065", "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "11581", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "I think you are thinking of some distinctive names used by nobles and bishops.\nSome (many?) of them have distinctive suffix like 〜[小路]{こうじ}, 〜[坊]{(の)ぼう},\n〜[寺]{じ}, and so on, and because of these suffixes, the names tend to get\nlonger for them.\n\nNote that there's a plenty of two-character surnames, such as [徳川]{とくがわ},\n[藤原]{ふじわら}, [近衛]{このえ}, etc. that are used by nobles, and peasants also\nsometimes use a prefix/suffix such as [大]{おお}/[小]{こ}〜 (such as [大曽根]{おおそね},\n[小日向]{こひゅうが/こひなだ}), so I don't think one could say the upper class had a\nlonger surname.\n\n**The following section added after a comment by jmac**\n\nAs I wrote, I just don't agree with your premise that the upper class had a\nlonger surname. After all, when we say everyone got their 名字 in 明治 era, it's\nnot like a whole bunch of new names were suddenly invented out of thin air.\nThe majority of the names were pre-existing names.\n\nTake a look at\n[this](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%B9%B3%E5%AE%89%E6%99%82%E4%BB%A3%E3%81%AE%E4%BA%BA%E7%89%A9%E4%B8%80%E8%A6%A7)\nfor example, and you see a long list of two character names that are nobles\nand samurais. Same for [war lords in the Edo\nperiod](http://ja.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category%3a%E6%B1%9F%E6%88%B8%E3%81%AE%E5%A4%A7%E5%90%8D).\nI think it'd be hard to claim that they have a higher average character count\nin their surnames than people today.\n\nBy the way, 長谷川 [goes back a long\ntime](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%95%B7%E8%B0%B7%E5%B7%9D%E6%B0%8F), and\nso does\n[佐々木](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%BD%90%E3%80%85%E6%9C%A8%E6%B0%8F). And\nyou might be also intereted in playing with <http://myoji-yurai.net/> or\n<http://home.r01.itscom.net/morioka/myoji/best200.html> that gives you some\ninformation about the origins of those names --- can't vouch for their\naccuracies, though.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-30T00:35:22.070", "id": "11586", "last_activity_date": "2013-04-02T07:13:47.103", "last_edit_date": "2013-04-02T07:13:47.103", "last_editor_user_id": "3059", "owner_user_id": "3059", "parent_id": "11583", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "As snailplane basically explained, 手に(by hand)成る(be shaped/completed)\nbasically means \"done by [someone]\". For example, if an artist made a\nsculpture, you'd say \"ミケランジェロの手になるピエタ (noun phrase) / Pieta by Michelangelo\".\nSimilarly, you can use this for a building made by an architect, or a play\nchoreographed by a director.\n\nWhile its literal meaning is to make something by hand, and that is the most\ncommon use, you can use it for things that are not literally made by hand\n(such as a building) --- in this case, the phrase emphasizes a personal\nattention to the object by the said person.\n\nI think I see 手による more often than 手になる, but they both mean the same thing.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-30T20:09:02.110", "id": "11594", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-30T20:43:19.227", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-30T20:43:19.227", "last_editor_user_id": "706", "owner_user_id": "3059", "parent_id": "11584", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "One of the meannings of 「〜に見える」 is \"looks like [something]\" (for example,\n彼は子供に見える / he looks like a child), and while I do not have the context, I\nsuspect that is the usage you are seeing.\n\nAnother possibility is that they are saying something is practically invisible\nbecause it's too fast.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-30T00:46:04.837", "id": "11587", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-30T00:46:04.837", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3059", "parent_id": "11585", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I think that the お and ご prefixes are included when the resulting word has\nbeen _lexicalized_ and is no longer simply a combination of the prefix and the\nbare word.\n\nFor example, I see entries for\n[おやすみ](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?p=%E3%81%8A%E3%82%84%E3%81%99%E3%81%BF&stype=0&dtype=0&dname=0ss),\n[おにぎり](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?p=%E3%81%8A%E3%81%AB%E3%81%8E%E3%82%8A&stype=0&dtype=0&dname=0ss)\nand\n[ごはん](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?p=%E3%81%94%E9%A3%AF&stype=0&dtype=0&dname=0ss)\nin 大辞林. I think these words were originally combinations of お and ご with 休み,\n握り, and 飯（はん）, but the combinations became words in their own right, so they\nhave their own entries.\n\nWords like お名前 don't have separate entries because there's no need. お名前 is\nsimply the combination of お and 名前.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-30T13:06:38.380", "id": "11590", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-30T13:15:36.773", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-30T13:15:36.773", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "11589", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 } ]

[ { "body": "This sentence ending with が is suspicious. I wonder if it ended in か.\n\nWith か, it's an informal form of \"僕が来る前からこうだったんですか？\", which means \"Has it been\nlike this before I came [here]?\"\n\nWith が, it'd have to be \"But it has been like this before I came here\", and\nfor this to make sense, the boy would first have to complain, his lazy aunt\nwould then need to respond back blaming him of making the mess, before this\nsentence makes sense.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-30T15:08:40.003", "id": "11593", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-31T14:32:01.093", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-31T14:32:01.093", "last_editor_user_id": "3059", "owner_user_id": "3059", "parent_id": "11592", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Loose translation.\n\nHe is has been working since the morning. She comes in and says\n\n> Hey, being exhausted from this little bit... Don't you think you're just a\n> bit out of shape?\n\nHe replies\n\n> That's not exactly something you'd tell someone, who has been working here\n> since the morning.\n\n働かせる is \"to make so. work\"; っぱなし means to do something and let it stay that\nway, although whatever was done should really have been undone. An alternative\ntranslation would be\n\n> それって、朝からずっと働かせっぱなしの人間に対して、掛ける言葉じゃ、ないと思うんだけど \n> That's not exactly something you'd tell someone, who has just been left\n> working here since the morning.\n\nThe reason why the passive can't be used here is that っぱなし means \"to do sth.\nand leave it that way\", whereas 働かせられる is passive (i.e. not active). 働かせられっぱなし\nsounds like he's left himself being put to work, when he should really have\nstopped. So in this case, 働かせっぱなし doesn't refer to an action by 人間, which\nwould be natural, but to someone else.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-30T21:37:52.377", "id": "11596", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-30T21:49:03.897", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-30T21:49:03.897", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "11595", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "The conclusion is that, user4092's comment on the question is correct. It\nmeans:\n\n> person who _you_ are forcing to work all the time\n\nAnd 働かせられっぱなしの人間 would be rather unnatural here, because, (1) in this\nsituation, he is blaming her for _her act_ , saying that it's _she_ that has\nworked him into the ground; (2) it must share the same subject with 掛ける言葉,\notherwise, it might well be taken that \"who says to him\" and \"who forces him\nto work\" isn't the same person.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2015-01-16T12:35:32.510", "id": "21322", "last_activity_date": "2015-01-16T12:35:32.510", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "7810", "parent_id": "11595", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "The extra あ only comes from lengthening the きゃ and could equally well have\nbeen written 行きゃ～. Just in the middle of the sentence it looks better as 行きゃあ.\n\nThe sound is lengthened, because there is a small break when saying the\nsentence. For example, in\n\n> 行きゃいいじゃねぇか \n> Why don't you go?\n\na lengthening wouldn't be natural.\n\nI presume if you really want, 行ければ can also be contracted to 行きゃ, but 行けりゃ\nprobably works better.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-03-31T03:48:23.017", "id": "11598", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-31T03:48:23.017", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "11597", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]