Datasets:

---

p1atdev

/

japanese-stackexchange

like 3

[ { "body": "[大辞泉](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/detail?p=%E5%AD%97%E5%BC%95&stype=0&dtype=0&dname=0na)\nsuggests that 字引 is a synonym for 字典, 辞典 or 辞書, all of which basically mean\n\"dictionary\". (大辞林 also lists it as an alternative of 字書...)\n\nI would say that 字引 is simply a rare alternative for 辞書, which usually is used\nin the set expressions 生き字引 \"walking dictionary\" and\n[字引と首っ引き](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E5%AD%97%E5%BC%95%E3%81%A8%E9%A6%96%E3%81%A3%E5%BC%95%E3%81%8D)\n\"looking up word by word\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-09-29T23:26:37.293", "id": "12975", "last_activity_date": "2013-09-29T23:26:37.293", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "12974", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "First, I want to give my personal impression. (Keep in mind that I'm just\nlearning Japanese, so I have less experiences to call on than some other\npeople! But I think perhaps I've seen enough Japanese to give an impression\nworth sharing, nonetheless.)\n\nMy _impression_ is that 字引 is just another word for dictionary, but that it's\nquite a lot less common. The words I see most often are 辞典 and 辞書. In\ncontrast, the only place I can really recall seeing 字引 used is on Wikipedia,\nin the \"[Wikipedia is not a\ndictionary](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia%3a%E3%82%A6%E3%82%A3%E3%82%AD%E3%83%9A%E3%83%87%E3%82%A3%E3%82%A2%E3%81%AF%E5%AD%97%E5%BC%95%E3%81%A7%E3%81%AF%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84)\"\ntemplate:\n\n> **ウィキペディアは字引ではない**\n>\n> ウィキペディアは字引（辞書）ではありません。俗語辞典や専門用語辞典、語法辞典でもありません。ウィキペディアは百科事典を作るプロジェクトです。\n\nAnd notice how it says 辞書 in parentheses after 字引, telling you what it means.\nI think in this context it pretty much just means _dictionary_ , and I haven't\ncome across it in any other contexts that I can recall.\n\nWell, there is one more place I've seen it, which is the word you mentioned:\n`生き字引` ( _[a person who is] a living dictionary_ ). But you knew that one\nalready.\n\n* * *\n\nWe can also check a dictionary. Kotobank has a single page with the\ndefinitions from both [大辞林 and\n大辞泉](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E5%AD%97%E5%BC%95), so I'll link to that. Notice\nthat both dictionaries basically just give a list of synonyms. Between the two\ndictionaries, they list 字典, 辞典, 辞書, and 字書.\n\nThe only thing I could guess is that because it has 字 in the name, it's more\nlikely to be used for dictionaries indexed by characters, such as 漢和辞典・漢字字典.\nAnd that's supported by the dictionary definitions which refer to 字典 and 字書.\nBut they also list 辞典 and 辞書 as synonyms, and I haven't actually observed that\nin practice, so I don't know how true it is.\n\n* * *\n\nIs it really that rare? I decided to check\n[少納言](http://www.kotonoha.gr.jp/shonagon/) to find out. Here are the terms I\nsearched for, from most results to fewest:\n\n```\n\n 辞書　　　　　　　　１０７８件\n 辞典　　　　　　　　９１９件\n 字書　　　　　　　　６５件\n 字引　　　　　　　　３７件\n 字典　　　　　　　　２６件\n -----------------------------\n total　　　　　　　２１２５件\n \n 生き字引　　　　　　１７件\n 字引 - 生き字引　　２０件\n total - 生き字引　２１０８件\n \n```\n\nI included 生き字引 so we could see that it accounts for almost half of the uses\nof 字引 (17 out of 37). So taking those 17 results out of the equation, it seems\nthat 字引 accounts for less than 1% of the total results (20 out of 2108).\n\nAnyway, this more-or-less fits my intuition that 辞書 and 辞典 are the commonest\nwords for _dictionary_. It seems that 字引 is a rare alternative which appears\nin the compound `生き字引`.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-09-29T23:40:04.757", "id": "12976", "last_activity_date": "2013-09-29T23:40:04.757", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "12974", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 }, { "body": "I asked a native speaker and she told me that 字引 and 辞書 have a different\nnuance to them. When you hear 字引 you think of a kanji dictionary, sorted by\nradicals and such. They are becoming rare, for various reasons, but mostly\nthanks to technology. The word 辞書 feels closer to what an English speaker\nunderstands as dictionary - there are words in it with definitions, synonyms\nand such.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-08-10T01:03:27.277", "id": "88844", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-10T17:49:44.563", "last_edit_date": "2021-08-10T17:49:44.563", "last_editor_user_id": "39347", "owner_user_id": "36332", "parent_id": "12974", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "I think the difference is similar to:\n\n * How will you respond? (corresponds to ですか)\n * How might you respond? (corresponds to でしょうか)\n\nUsing a hedge word like \"might\" or \"でしょう\" weakens the certainty of the\nstatement or the certainty demanded in the question.\n\nThe effect of using hedge words in an interrogation helps the interviewee\nbuild some distance between his actual personal thoughts and feelings, and the\nresponse that he gives. This eases up the interviewee. Knowing that he does\nnot have to commit entirely to his response, he is more likely to give a\nresponse.\n\nOn the hesitant and politeness issue, it is generally considered rude to\ndirectly ask about a person's personal opinions and thoughts when you are not\non familiar terms. Using でしょう allows you to ask without sounding too demanding\nof a answer with absolute certainty.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-09-30T11:42:52.397", "id": "12978", "last_activity_date": "2013-09-30T11:51:58.207", "last_edit_date": "2013-09-30T11:51:58.207", "last_editor_user_id": "542", "owner_user_id": "542", "parent_id": "12977", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "There's no real change in meaning - the choice of pattern depends on the\nsituation, who you're speaking to, etc. There's a lot of ~でしょうか used with\nkeigo (patterns like ~していただけないでしょうか).\n\nIf anything, it indicates uncertainty on the speakers side. Although in many\ncases this translation is clunky, you can think of it as similar to English\nphrases like: \"I was wondering...\" that get tagged onto the head of a\nsentence.\n\n\"I was wondering if you were available next week.\" has the same basic meaning\nas \"Are you available next week?\"; it just has a slightly softer feel to it.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-09-30T11:49:01.463", "id": "12979", "last_activity_date": "2013-09-30T11:49:01.463", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "571", "parent_id": "12977", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "でしょうか is **_not_** a polite version of ですか. If you want to see it as a politer\nform of some other phrase, it would be だろうか.\n\nThe three main usages of でしょうか are as follows:\n\n 1. The speaker is asking the listener about something they're not really sure about. Typically, it's something that makes the speaker worried or something they're wondering about. A good example is 時間までに間に合うでしょうか。(Do you think we can make it?). You're wondering if you can make it in time like 間に合うだろうか. But the でしょうか version is not talking to yourself, which would be a more likely interpretation if it were だろうか. You're asking someone. It sounds polite just like how a question of the form \"I am wondering if you could do it for me\" in English sounds politer than \"Can you do it for me?\"\n\n 2. It is a rhetorical question of some sort. Examples are 誰が僕を信じてくれるでしょうか (Who would believe me? = No one would believe me) and いつ私がそんなことを言いましたでしょうか (When did I say that? = I don't think I did). This is polite but has a negative connotation, such as the sense that the speaker disagrees with the listener. You could sound passive aggressive. In any case, you can see this as a politer version of だろうか as well. Note that as in the first usage, this is clearly directed to the listener, so it can be actually harsher than 〜だろうか as a rhetorical question even though it's technically a politer form; a rhetorical question with 〜だろうか can be said in a way you sound like you're talking to yourself (or wondering rhetorically, so to speak).\n\n 3. Following 〜ではない, it expresses the sense that the speaker is suggesting that something might be true (i.e., making a guess and telling it to the listener). The connotation is that the speaker isn't confident about their guess. And they're being polite. An example is このままでは間に合わないのではないでしょうか (I'm worried if we can make it in time. Do you think we can?). You can use 〜ではないでしょうか when you're sure you're right too if you want to be extra polite about it.\n\nSo, some more context is necessary to understand/translate your example\nsentence. If it's just the speaker is asking something, it's the first usage.\nThe speaker is kind of wondering, and being polite, too. But if the context is\nlike the speaker is arguing with the listener and implying something along the\nline of \"You would respond this way!\", it would be the second rhetorical usage\nwith a negative tone.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-09-30T14:38:55.653", "id": "12980", "last_activity_date": "2013-09-30T14:45:29.707", "last_edit_date": "2013-09-30T14:45:29.707", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "12977", "post_type": "answer", "score": 31 } ]

[ { "body": "Your example doesn't contain たらと思います in it. So, I don't address this phrase.\nIf the original passage doesn't have it, probably stachexchange wants you to\nstart another question thread because it's totally unrelated.\n\nAlso, I think \"集中できろよう\" should read \"集中できるよう.\"\n\nSo, ように here roughly means \"in a way that,\" \"such that,\" \"so that\" or the\nlike. It might help you put a comma between ように and そっとしてあげたら. For example,\n\n> Aをしなくてもいいように、そっとしてあげる\n\nroughly means \"to leave him alone so he doesn't have to do A.\" I think the\nrest of your interpretation is fine.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-09-30T21:25:17.713", "id": "12983", "last_activity_date": "2013-09-30T21:25:17.713", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "12982", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "I think it's the usual 終助詞「よ」 ( _sentence-final particle_ よ). What I've read\nis that it attaches directly to nouns in so-called 女性語 ( _feminine speech_ ).\nI think it's often used in stereotyped dialogue in fiction, so it's also an\nexample of 役割語 ( _role words_ )--though I don't mean to imply that it's only\nused in fiction, or only by women for that matter!\n\n[Wikipedia's article for\n女性語](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%A5%B3%E6%80%A7%E8%AA%9E) says:\n\n> よ 【終助詞】 「わ」と並んで多用される女性語。 **「ね」と同様、「そうよ」「きれいよ」など体言に直接続く形式は女性的とされる。**\n> ただし、「よ」を下降調で伸ばしながら発音すると、「あっしは神田の生まれよォ」のような男性的な表現になる。\n\nI've bolded the relevant part for emphasis, which I'll translate loosely here:\n\n> In the same way that ね attaches directly to uninflected words, so can よ, as\n> in the examples 「そうよ」 and 「きれいよ」. This use of よ is considered feminine.\n\nThe dictionary [大辞泉](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E3%82%88) also talks about this\nuse of よ:\n\n> 現代語では、終止形に付く場合、男性語としてはその終止形に直に下接するが、\n> **女性語では「のよ」「わよ」「ことよ」「てよ」などの形で、また、名詞、形容動詞の語幹に付いて、用いられることが多い。**\n\nAgain, I've bolded the relevant part for emphasis, and I'll do my best to\ntranslate it:\n\n> In women's language, it is often used in forms such as 「のよ」「わよ」「ことよ」「てよ」, as\n> well as attaching directly to nouns, including adjectival nouns.\n\nNote: I changed the translation slightly at the end to say \"adjectival noun\"\nin place of 形容動詞の語幹, because the root of a 形容動詞 is simply called a _na-\nadjective_ in the grammar that is usually taught to non-native speakers. The\ndictionary says it this way because, in traditional Japanese grammar, the\ncombination of a _na-adjective_ plus an inflectional ending such as だ or な is\nconsidered a single word.\n\n* * *\n\nAt the end of your question, you ask if です is omitted before よ. I think you\ncan analyze it that way, sure. Except I'd usually assume it's だ that's\nomitted, not です.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-01T03:24:20.663", "id": "12987", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-01T10:04:50.727", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-01T10:04:50.727", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "12986", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "Chocolate's link will teach you the usual usage of たり, but it might still not\nbe clear how it's used in this case. In this case, it's used basically to make\nan excuse or to beat around the bush or something like that. The literal\ntranslation might be something like\n\n> In fact, I can't speak [the language] among other things\n\nbut the real meaning is closer to\n\n> In fact, I kinda can't speak [the language]", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-01T08:43:10.543", "id": "12993", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-01T08:43:10.543", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "12988", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "It looks to me like two parallel phrases have been coordinated:\n\n> Relative clause A = `人と目が合うたびにやさしく笑いかけるような` \n> Relative clause B = `そんな、人を疑うということを知らないような`\n\nBoth relative clauses end with ようだ, conjugated to ような because they're\nattributive modifiers. (An attributive modifier is one that comes before the\nword it modifies.) In other words, they're being put together like a pair of\nadjectives. I think you can parse it like this:\n\n> その子は、（ Aな Bな ）子だったと言う。\n\nWhere both Aな and Bな modify 子.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-01T05:28:28.480", "id": "12991", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-03T09:26:04.807", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-03T09:26:04.807", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "12990", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "This is almost certainly meant to be a representation of spoken Japanese. The\nperson is speaking and describing this kind of person. First the speaker\noffers \"笑いかけるような,\" but deciding that isn't enough, simply interjects a そんな to\nbe kind of like, \"you know\", in English. So it's like, you know, that kind of\npattern where like.. you're describing something but, like, in the middle it's\npunctuated with these.. you know.. verbal cues that indicate thought about how\nto expound upon the subject.\n\n笑いかけるような is modifying 子. So is 人を疑うということを知らないような, obviously. The そんな I guess\nis technically also modifying 子; essentially the three are aiming to be the\nsame thing, both in meaning and therefore in grammatical role. What kind of 子?\nそんな子. そんな子ってどんな子？人を疑うということを知らないような子。笑いかけるような子。\n\nそうなんだ。", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-03T01:47:08.523", "id": "12996", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-03T01:47:08.523", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "12990", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Your question asks whether the addition of でしょう changes the assertion of a\nrhetorical sentence from positive to negative. In this case the simple answer\nis \"no\" but perhaps your real question (which you might want to revise) is:\n\n> \"I understand sentence endings that include 〜のではないか are positive but is this\n> always the case? eg if they include でしょう？\"\n\nIf I follow your application of logic then two \"+ve\" s => +ve result\n\nBut, you don't have to rely on this logic. A better approach is to ask\nyourself:\n\nHow can I be sure 〜のではないだろうか is positive? After a while this becomes intuitive\nbut two simple checks are:\n\n> 1. What is the context? (the most useful check but not always something we\n> can be confident of understanding when we are stil learning)\n>\n> 2. Are there any other useful words that confirm the meaning? (eg おそらく or\n> もしかえしたら）\n>\n>\n\nThe following examples/explanations from my notes might help:\n\n**1. Typical example**\n\n転んだ時に頭を撃たれたのではないかと心配しましたが、\n\nI was worried he might have banged his head when he fell over.\n\n**2. Conversational example**\n\n> んじゃないか＝のではないか＝＋ve\n\neg:\n\nA: これ以上のへんこうは好ましくないんじゃないかという気持ちがしまして\n\nB: ええ、できれば避けたいですね\n\n**3. おそらく**\n\n> = I think / probably. おそらく is often used with:\n\n〜だろう\n\n〜と思う\n\n〜のではないか\n\n〜のではないだろうか\n\n**4. もしかしたら / もしかすると**\n\n> = suggestion\n\nwhich often comes with:\n\n〜かもしれない\n\n〜のではないか\n\n〜のではないだろうか", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-01T16:19:09.553", "id": "12995", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-05T01:26:50.400", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "12994", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "If you think about it 大幅に一番～ doesn't really make sense since 大幅 refers to a\nlarge span and 一番速い refers to the singular fastest. As such we need an\nexpression that emphasizes the difference.\n\nLooking at alc for some similar phrases, I found some stuff that might work.\nChecking [\"by a long\nshot\"](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=by%20a%20long%20shot) gives us the\nfollowing:\n\n> 大きく差をつけて、断然 \n> ・This one is better by a long shot. : こちらの品の方がはるかに良いです。\n\nThis seems appropriate to me for your situation. 大きく差をつけて makes perfect sense\nsince we refer to an outstanding thing by saying 差がつく. 断然 also works with a\nmeaning like \"firmly\" in terms of an extent or certainty. The example sentence\nuses はるかに, which you can also translate as being something like \"a distant\nfirst.\"", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-03T08:10:22.160", "id": "12998", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-04T06:07:17.610", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-04T06:07:17.610", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "12997", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "I think a more colloquial way is: 「彼は他の人よりも、めちゃくちゃ速かった。」 \"He was absurdly\nfaster than anyone else.\" But, writing \"めちゃくちゃ\" might be unnatural because\nthere is so much kana. Spoken though, \"めちゃくちゃ\" sounds pleasant/natural in my\nopinion.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-03T15:09:26.080", "id": "12999", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-03T15:09:26.080", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3962", "parent_id": "12997", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "You can use ぶっちぎり, which kind of means \"overwhelming\" with a nuance of\ncompetition.\n\n * ぶっちぎりの速さでトップフィニッシュ\n * ぶっちぎりで優勝した\n\n\"Fastest by a large margin\" would be ぶっちぎりの速さ.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-03T15:35:13.887", "id": "13000", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-03T15:35:13.887", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3835", "parent_id": "12997", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "How about `大差で【たいさで】`? It looks like you could say:\n\n> * 大差で勝つ Win by a large margin\n> * （誰かを）大差で破る Beat (someone) by a large margin\n>\n\n(Examples adapted from\n[ALC](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E5%A4%A7%E5%B7%AE&ref=sa).)\n\nNeither of these examples directly expresses _fastest_ , though.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-03T16:40:18.517", "id": "13001", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-03T16:40:18.517", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "12997", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "How about \"ダントツの1位\"，or \"ダントツの速さ\"\n\nAさんはダントツの速さで勝ちました。\n\nダントツ＝断然＋トップ\n\nso\n\nダントツの1位 = by far + the top + number one, so it will be a good choice if\nrepetition is your style :-)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-13T01:45:24.997", "id": "13111", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-13T02:13:12.417", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-13T02:13:12.417", "last_editor_user_id": "1242", "owner_user_id": "1242", "parent_id": "12997", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "I've found several webpages online which talk about the sentence `黒い髪のきれいな女の子`\nas a famous example of an ambiguous sentence. (For example, [this blog\npost](http://blog.query1000.com/archives/17503948.html)).\n\nHere are a couple ways in which this sentence could be considered ambiguous:\n\n * 女の子 could mean _a female child_ or _a woman's child_.\n * 黒い could modifies 髪, meaning _black hair_ , or it could modify （髪のきれいな）女, meaning _black woman with beautiful hair_ , or it could modify （髪のきれいな女の）子, meaning _black child (of the woman with beautiful hair)_.\n\nSome of the ambiguities, I think, come from reading the sentence in unusual\nways.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-04T04:55:03.893", "id": "13004", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-04T04:55:03.893", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13002", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "_I'm looking to test some Morphological Analysis tools, which split sentences\ninto tokens and provide part of speech and **pronunciation information**._\n\nOne of the beauties of Japanese is that there is no need for \"pronunciation\ninformation\". No diphthongs, \"silent e\", etc. Knowing the 振り仮名 is enough.\n\nAnyway, not sure of your purpose, but how about this old classic: \n「貴社の記者が汽車で帰社した。」\n\n_another test_ \nThis will tokenize easily, but there is zero chance it will resolve 「触れない」 to\nthe correct kana. \n「君はチビだから、あそこに触れないでしょう。」\n\n「触れない」-->「さわれない」-->「さわる」-->「触る」 \n「触れない」-->「ふれない」」 -->「ふれる」 -->「触れる」", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-04T22:10:36.980", "id": "13013", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-05T00:06:39.727", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-05T00:06:39.727", "last_editor_user_id": "3962", "owner_user_id": "3962", "parent_id": "13002", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "1. ここではきものを脱いでください \na. ここで[履物]{はきもの}を脱いでください。(here, please put off your shoes) \nb. ここでは[着物]{きもの}を脱いでください。( put off your clothes here )\n\n2. このはしを渡ってはいけません \na. don't walk through this bridge. \nb. keep center when walking through this.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-14T18:47:34.940", "id": "13131", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-14T18:47:34.940", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "3849", "parent_id": "13002", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "I think that you are looking for written expressions in Japanese which are\nambiguous at some level.\n\nOf course, an easy way to get ambiguity in written text is by using\nhomographs, which is often resolved by considering the meanings:\n\n> 書の[大家]{たいか} authority of caligraphy \n> アパートの[大家]{おおや} the owner of apartment\n>\n> 彼女は京都に[行]{い}った。 She went to Kyoto. \n> 彼女は消防設備の点検作業を[行]{おこな}った。 She performed the inspection of fire protection\n> equipments.\n\n([行]{おこな}った is often written as 行なった exactly to avoid this ambiguity.)\n\nIn Japanese, the word boundaries and the parts of speech are often clear from\nthe form of the words when a sentence is written with kanji. Therefore it is\ndifficult to get ambiguity in word boundaries and parts of speech. Here is a\nsomewhat close example I managed to make up:\n\n> この件に関して彼は立場上手を出すことができない。\n\nIt is incorrect to parse 立場上手 as a compound word consisting of 立場 (たちば) and 上手\n(the common spelling of homographs うわて, かみて, and じょうず). The correct way to\nparse 立場上手 is an adverb 立場上 (which is made by adding suffix -上 to noun 立場)\nwhich modifies the rest of the sentence, and a noun 手:\n\n> この件に関して彼は[立場上]{たちばじょう}[手]{て}を出すことができない。 He is not in a position to do\n> anything about this matter.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-18T12:16:15.120", "id": "13188", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-18T12:16:15.120", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "13002", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "_Conjunctive form_ is just a label. It tells you about one of the most common\nuses of the _-te_ form, but it's not a complete definition. Let's take a look\nat the relevant sense in [大辞林](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%A6), a\nJapanese dictionary:\n\n> 命令・依頼を表す。「てよ」「てね」の形をとることもある。\n\nTranslated, this says that it **expresses a command or request** , and that it\ncan also take the forms てよ and てね. (In other words, this use of the _-te_ form\nsometimes has the particles よ or ね after it.)\n\nHow does this make sense? Well, I was taught that this comes from either 〜てくれ\nor more politely 〜てください, with the くれ or ください omitted. So in this case, I think\n助けて is a bit of a softer than the actual imperative form 助けろ.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-04T07:46:12.217", "id": "13008", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-04T15:14:43.560", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-04T15:14:43.560", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13003", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "Between voiceless consonants, u and i sounds often become silent. The most\nnotable example is the ending ました or ます in verbs. In the case of _kakikonde_\n書き込んで it would be _kak-konde_ , with very light _i_ sound, not _kakonde_ like\nyou said.\n\n氏名 _shimei_ refers to 氏 and 名, which combine to mean \"full name\". On the other\nhand 名前 is often use to indicate the \"given name\".\n\nMore about this on wikipedia: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voicelessness>\n\n> Sonorants are those sounds, such as vowels and nasals, which are voiced in\n> most of the world's languages. However, in some languages sonorants may be\n> voiceless, usually allophonically. For example, the Japanese word sukiyaki\n> is pronounced [su̥kijaki]. This may sound like [skijaki] to an English\n> speaker, but the lips can be seen compressing for the [u̥].", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-04T07:18:06.287", "id": "13006", "last_activity_date": "2018-03-30T18:25:41.480", "last_edit_date": "2018-03-30T18:25:41.480", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "3786", "parent_id": "13005", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "I think that the sequence beginning `一番・二番・三番` corresponds roughly to _number\none, number two, number three_. Each word in this sequence is formed from the\ncombination of a numeral (`一・二・三`) with a counter meaning _number_ (`番`).\n\nYou can take this list and add the ordinal suffix `目` to each word, producing\nthe list `一番目・二番目・三番目`, corresponding roughly to _first, second, third_.\n\nWhat may be confusing here is that an adverb has been derived from `一番`, but\nnot from the other words formed with `番`. As a result, `一番` can represent\neither _number one_ or _first/most_ , but `二番` and `三番` mean _number two_ and\n_number three_. You can see this if you compare dictionary entries; the\nentries for [一番](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E4%B8%80%E7%95%AA) in 大辞林 and 大辞泉\nlist it as both a noun and an adverb, while the corresponding entries for\n[二番](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E4%BA%8C%E7%95%AA) don't list a derived\nadverbial sense.\n\nSo, if you're talking about the tallest, second tallest, and third tallest\nbuildings, I think the list naturally looks like this:\n\n * 一番高い建物\n * 二番目に高い建物\n * 三番目に高い建物\n\nAnd your example `二番速い人` is, I think, ungrammatical.\n\nAs for whether `〜目` is a counter, I don't think so. It doesn't combine\ndirectly with numbers like counters do. Instead, it's a suffix that attaches\nto words that consist of a number and a counter. If we check\n[大辞林](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E7%9B%AE%E3%83%BB%E7%9C%BC), we find the\nfollowing:\n\n> 二 （ 接尾 ） \n> ① **数を表す語に付いて，順序を表す。** 「一つ目」 「三番目」\n\nYou'll notice that it says this is a 接尾語 ( _suffix_ ). I've bolded the actual\ndefinition, which I'll translate here as \"attaches to words that express\nnumber, and expresses ordinality.\"\n\nYou'll note the definition includes an example where `目` attaches to a word\nwith `つ`, as well as another example where it attaches to a word with `番`.\nWith `目` attached, both `一つ目・二つ目・三つ目` and `一番目・二番目・三番目` express _first,\nsecond, third_ , but of course the `つ` list can only count to nine, while the\n`番` list can be used to express arbitrary positions in a list.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-05T14:20:31.863", "id": "13027", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-05T14:27:33.637", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-05T14:27:33.637", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13009", "post_type": "answer", "score": 13 } ]

[ { "body": "`やすみ` means vacation or holiday. `おやすみ` is usually said to mean `おやすみなさい`,\nwhich means \"good night\". I don't know what the `ちゃー` part means. Can you\nprovide more context (or the whole tweet itself)?", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-04T15:38:00.290", "id": "13012", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-04T15:38:00.290", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "13011", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "could it also be a contraction of 休みちゃういますー or similar?\n\n行ってしまう ・ 行ってしまいます are the same after all & Japanese people love 略語.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2017-01-19T23:28:12.007", "id": "42694", "last_activity_date": "2017-01-19T23:28:12.007", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "19367", "parent_id": "13011", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "According to\n[Wikipedia](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%B0%B4%E7%B4%A0%E3%82%A4%E3%82%AA%E3%83%B3%E6%8C%87%E6%95%B0#cite_note-2),\nthere are three pronunciations of pH:\n\n 1. An older pronunciation from German, ペーハー.\n 2. A newer pronunciation from English, ピーエイチ.\n 3. A variant on the latter, ピーエッチ.\n\nIt seems like these are all still in use, but [the long-term trend is toward\nthe English-derived reading](http://www.horiba.com/jp/application/material-\nproperty-characterization/water-analysis/water-quality-electrochemistry-\ninstrumentation/the-story-of-ph-and-water-quality/qa-ph/measurement/1/).\nAccording to Wikipedia, ピーエイチ was decided upon as a standard reading by JIS in\n1957, and this was revised to ピーエッチ by JIS in 1984, so you may wish to follow\nthe standard and read it ピーエッチ.\n\nAs for the numbers, we have [a question about how to read a range of\nnumbers](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/8134/1478) already. In short, I\nthink you can read the numbers like you normally would, pronouncing the `〜`\nbetween them as から, or very formally as ないし. I don't think you need to add a\nsuffix.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-04T23:41:55.630", "id": "13015", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-04T23:41:55.630", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:48.447", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13014", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "First, I think it is supposed to be **出会った** 時, not 出会って.\n\nSecond, it will be easier to understand if you invert the sentence:\n\n> ユーマくんと初めて出会った時 **と** 似てるよ。\n>\n> It's similar **to** that time when I first met Yuuma.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-05T02:15:09.020", "id": "13017", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-05T02:15:09.020", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1392", "parent_id": "13016", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Try to translate meaning, not words. Towards doing this, think of 2 or 3\ndifferent ways express what you want to say in English. Match those against\nyour understanding of Japanese grammar. btw: Fight hard not to use second\nperson pronouns. Avoiding them sounds more natural, but also pushes one\nfurther away from direct word translations.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-05T13:01:59.243", "id": "13026", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-05T13:01:59.243", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3962", "parent_id": "13018", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "As a previous answer mentioned, never try to translate directly as far as word\nchoice goes. Always translate the intended meaning instead.\n\nThat being said, \"Which one of you?\" is a question in English that is asking\nbasically \"Who\" within a group of people. Consider the following phrase:\n\n> あなたたちの中の、(誰/どの人）ですか？ \n> Within (all of) you, who is it?\n\nThat being said, this is a phrase you'd be using to select one specific person\nout of a specific group of people.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2017-07-26T21:20:52.833", "id": "51786", "last_activity_date": "2017-07-27T02:10:48.700", "last_edit_date": "2017-07-27T02:10:48.700", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "21684", "parent_id": "13018", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "止まれ is the imperative form, so it's basically equivalent to \"Stop!\".\n\nI'm not sure where you get \"rough intransitive\" from. 止まる is intransitive\nalready and 止める transitive.\n\nAlthough the imperative is usually considered too blunt for _speech_ , the 止まれ\nroad sign is usually the best example for a standard use of the imperative.\n\nThe imperative for 五段 verbs (e.g. 行く, 待つ, etc.) is formed by sending the final\nkana to the え-row (e.g. 行け, 待て, etc.)\n\nThe imperative for 一段 verbs (e.g. 食べる, 見る, etc.) is formed by appending ろ to\nthe \"ます-stem\" (e.g. 食べろ, 見ろ, etc.).", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-05T11:19:15.737", "id": "13022", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-05T11:29:54.390", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-05T11:29:54.390", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "13019", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 }, { "body": "As Earthling says 止まれ is the imperative form, so it's basically equivalent to\n\"Stop!\" In this context the imperative is not \"rude\", it is quite simply an\norder.\n\nThis also explains why the て-form is not required.\n\n止める is transitive. You would use it to say stop the car, but as in English, it\nis normal to refer to the person, just as you might say to a taxi driver in\neither language, \"Turn left here and then stop on the right hand side\n\"/「ここで左へ曲がって右側に止まります」.\n\n(Note: To be precise, the English verb for stop can be either transitive or\nintransitive but it is important to grasp that, for whatever reason,\nintransitive is the norm in Japanese and even in English speaking countries\nwhen you see signs on the motorway such as \"Please drive on the left\" or\n\"Please drive slowly\" (etc), I take them to be intransitive because it more\npressing.)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-05T11:35:04.493", "id": "13023", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-07T12:02:23.463", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-07T12:02:23.463", "last_editor_user_id": "1556", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "13019", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "I recommend [www.alc.co.jp](http://www.alc.co.jp) as a starting point for\nthese kinds of questions. It contains a huge library of example sentences and\nyou can search multiple words simultaneously in both English and Japanese.\n\nThat said, here is my translation of the sentence you gave:\n\n> 当市は複数の文明ーノルマン文明やギリシャ文明やフランス文明などーが住み着いたことのある歴史を持っています。\n\nThe tone got a bit more formal than your original sentence, but you get the\nidea.\n\nThe key thing to point out is that when translating, you should try searching\nfor how ideas are expressed rather than word-equivalences. If you attempt the\nlatter, you usually end up with awkward formulations or just end up making\nthings more complicated than you need to.\n\n**Edit (2013/10/10)** : \nFollowing Earthling's suggestion, the original translation,\n\n> 当市は様々な国の人―ノルマン人やギリシャ人やフランス人など―を占めていた都市です。\n\nwas changed to better reflect the intent of the original sentence", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-09T09:30:06.870", "id": "13062", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-10T09:46:38.130", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-10T09:46:38.130", "last_editor_user_id": "1565", "owner_user_id": "1565", "parent_id": "13021", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "This can be checked in a monolingual dictionary. For example\n[大辞泉](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E6%A9%9F%E6%A2%B0-49964#E3.83.87.E3.82.B8.E3.82.BF.E3.83.AB.E5.A4.A7.E8.BE.9E.E6.B3.89)\nsays:\n\n> **き‐かい** 【機械／器械】\n>\n> 1. 動力を受けて、目的に応じた一定の運動・仕事をするもの。\n> 2. 実験・測定・運動競技などに使う装置・道具。\n> 3. 自分の意思を失ったように、指令どおりに動いたり、物事を繰り返したりすること。\n>\n>\n> 〔補説〕「工作機械」「包装機械」のように、動力を用いて操作する装置（マシン）を「機械」、「測定器械」「光学器械」のように、人間が直接動かし、比較的小型で小規模な装置や道具（インストルメント）を「器械」と使い分けることが多い。\n>\n>\n\nTo summarize the supplementary explanation (補説), 機械 is usually used for\n_machines_ which make use of some motive force (like an electrical motor), 器械\nis usually used for _devices_ which are operated by humans directly (via a\ncrank/handle, for example).\n\n## 機械\n\n\n\n## 器械\n\n\n\n* * *\n\nOn the other hand,\n[大辞林](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E6%A9%9F%E6%A2%B0%E3%83%BB%E5%99%A8%E6%A2%B0-239347#E5.A4.A7.E8.BE.9E.E6.9E.97.20.E7.AC.AC.E4.B8.89.E7.89.88)\nhas\n\n> **きかい** 【機械・器械】\n>\n> ① 動力源から動力を受けて一定の運動を繰り返し，一定の仕事をする装置。主に，きっかけを与えると人力を借りずに自動的に作動するものをいう。からくり。\n>\n> ② 精密な作動をする実験・測定用の装置。 「観測－」 〔規模の大きいものを「機械」，小さいものを「器械」と書いて区別することがある〕\n>\n> ③ （器械）うつわもの。器具。道具。\n>\n> ④ 書名（別項参照）。\n\nmentioning that 機械 and 器械 may be used for large and small machines,\nrespectively.\n\nThis loosely ties in with the explanation in 大辞泉, as very large machines are\noften too big to be used with a simple crank and make use of some motive\nforce, whereas small machines often don't need any motor.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-05T12:10:26.947", "id": "13025", "last_activity_date": "2016-08-17T04:13:53.490", "last_edit_date": "2016-08-17T04:13:53.490", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "13024", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

[ { "body": "気を使う is an idiom, so take the whole thing as a unit. It means something along\nthe lines of 'make accommodations for someone', i.e. to go out of your way to\navoid saying/doing things that might negatively affect someone (especially\nemotionally). Whether this is a good thing or a bad thing depends on your\nperspective - it can be a pain to have to accommodate other people all the\ntime, but that doesn't mean it's not a nice thing to do.\n\nAs a note, in most (if not all) cases in modern Japanese, 気 is used as part of\nidioms rather than as a word on its own. Don't think of 気 as a separate word\nmeaning 'energy', think instead of 気を使う as a single verbal unit (albeit one\nthat can't take an object, since it technically already has one). These days\n気を使う means as much 'use ki/energy' as 'shoot someone an email' means 'fire an\nemail out of a cannon at someone'.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-05T20:14:09.003", "id": "13029", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-05T20:14:09.003", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3639", "parent_id": "13028", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "I think the confusion arises because です can both replace だ as the copula\n(行きたかったんです), or simply mark politeness (行きたかったです).\n\nThe correction you received has little to do with a grammatical need for だ or\nです in a sentence, but rather the two improved versions sound more natural.\n\nGrammatically speaking,\n\n> ドイツはいちども行ったことがないから、ずっと行きたかった。\n\nis perfectly fine.\n\nYou need a copula when you have a noun predicate. 行きたかったんだ needs だ because ん\nnominalizes the preceding phrase. 行きたかった alone doesn't need a copula, but may\nbe marked with です for a more polite tone.\n\nYour original sentence could be amended to\n\n> ドイツはいちども行ったことがなかったから、ずっと行きたかった～ \n> I had never been to Germany and had been longing to go...\n\nin which case you don't need んだ or です.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-05T22:19:16.793", "id": "13031", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-05T22:19:16.793", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "13030", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "\"Fire\", \"folding chair\" and \"mouth\" is\n[「烙」](http://jisho.org/kanji/details/%E7%83%99).", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-05T22:44:36.060", "id": "13033", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-05T22:44:36.060", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "22", "parent_id": "13032", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "These are sometimes called **embedded questions** , but if you look them up\nyou'll find a variety of terminology in use, including \"embedded interrogative\ncontent clauses\" and \"indirect questions\".\n\n* * *\n\nI think the か in embedded questions is more or less the same か used to form\nregular questions. But there are a couple differences:\n\n * In an embedded question, it's okay to have だ before か:\n\n> _1._ [ 誰 **だか** ] 分からない ← _okay_\n\n * In an embedded question, か generally can't be omitted:\n\n> _2._ デパートは [ どこにある **か** ] 知っていますか？ ← **か** _can't be omitted_\n\nAnother difference is that embedded interrogatives can function like nouns\n(for examples, see Satoshi Tomioka's paper [_Japanese Embedded Questions are\nNominal_](http://udel.edu/~stomioka/papers/tomioka_QVE.pdf), especially pages\n8 and 9). In fact, we might want to say as a matter of theory that the\nか-phrase is the direct object of 知る:\n\n```\n\n 　 　 _3a._　[　どこにあるか　]- **を**　知らない \n 　 　 _3b._　[　どこにあるか　] ****　知らない\n```\n\nWe might choose to say that sentence 3b is derived from sentence 3a by\nomitting を. But in practice, it's usually omitted, particularly in\nconversation, and sometimes inserting を is strange, so I'm not sure if this is\nthe right approach. ([See our discussion in\nchat.](http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/18356802#18356802))\n\n* * *\n\nWe have embedded questions in English, too:\n\n> _4a._ **What** are you talking about? \n> _4b._ I don't know [ **what** you're talking about ].\n\nIn _4a_ we have a basic question, and in _4b_ we have the embedded question\ncorresponding to _4a_. Likewise, in Japanese, we can write:\n\n> _5a._ **何** を言っているのか？ \n> _5b._ [ **何** を言っているのか ] 分からない。\n\nAs you can see, embedded questions straightforwardly correspond to main clause\nquestions, although in each language there are small differences in syntax.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-06T05:56:14.613", "id": "13038", "last_activity_date": "2014-11-04T01:57:09.610", "last_edit_date": "2014-11-04T01:57:09.610", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13034", "post_type": "answer", "score": 26 }, { "body": "Think of this か as a **の** that is nominalizing a question.\n\nデパートはどこにあるか、知{し}っていますか？\n\nDo you know where is the department store?\n\nIn **spoken casual** conversation I've heard native speakers drop the か and\ncommunicate just as effectively, but I would recommend always using か.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-11-06T18:37:04.720", "id": "19399", "last_activity_date": "2014-11-08T14:01:35.863", "last_edit_date": "2014-11-08T14:01:35.863", "last_editor_user_id": "7671", "owner_user_id": "7671", "parent_id": "13034", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "There are several things here.\n\n * `もん` is colloquial for `もの`\n * `だ` is the usual copula\n * `な` here is the variation of `ね` usually used to imply wondering or wishfulness. Sometimes written as `なあ` or `なぁ`.\n * `って` can be thought of as contraction of `と言う`, though it can mean other things as well.\n\nSo, without knowing the context (`いける` may mean several things), the whole\nphrase could be translated as:\n\n\"Being a guy is not too bad either, you know. That's what I think, anyway.\"", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-06T02:29:00.810", "id": "13036", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-06T02:29:00.810", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3295", "parent_id": "13035", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "It's #1 or #2 of the explanation here:\n\n[http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E5%A3%B2%E3%82%8A&ref=sa](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E5%A3%B2%E3%82%8A&ref=sa),\n\ni.e. \"sales point\" or \"big appeal\".\n\nAs for why it's written in katakana, it's a stylistic choice, and I can only\nguess about the reason. One reason could be that this meaning of 売り is a bit\ncolloquial.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-06T07:53:38.940", "id": "13040", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-06T07:53:38.940", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "13039", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "コレ and アレ are, as you suspect, replacements for これ and あれ. The use of katakana\njust gives it kind of a rougher feel.\n\nチクる, as snailplane points out, is a slang word that means \"tattling\" or\n\"ratting someone out.\" [Etymologically it comes from ちくん, ちくちく, or\nちくり.](http://gogen-allguide.com/ti/chikuru.html) This is a 擬態語 (onomatopoeia)\nreferring to a kind of pricking pain (like from a needle). I cannot find a\nkanji for this, but many onomatopoeia words don't have kanji at all.\n\nThe link that snailplane provided also suggests that [it might come from an\ninversion of 口 (くち)](http://zokugo-dict.com/17ti/chikuru.htm). If that's the\ncase I don't think we can say it's replacing kanji either.\n\nUltimately it's just following the established pattern of slang words that\nthose darn kids use being a mix of katakana and hiragana, especially popular\nwith characterizations of foreign accents or yakuza and yankee type\ncharacters.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-07T03:44:35.570", "id": "13043", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-07T04:51:48.553", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-07T04:51:48.553", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "13042", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "This is my first time posting here. I hope it's helpful. Here's my\nunderstanding of the sentence. I think it's right. But I'm not a native\nspeaker or anything. Yes the katakana is just to emphasize, and チクる is\ntattle/rat on. Here's a breakdown:\n\n気にしないで don't worry about it\n\nコレ全然アレじゃねぇ (これは全然あれじゃない） 'this' is not 'that'(other thing) at all. So he's\nsaying 'this isn't what you think it is'\n\nから so\n\n間違っても in this case it kind of means 'no matter what', or 'you'd better (not).\nTechnically it's the same as どんなことがあっても or 絶対に. If you can stretch your\nimagination a bit, it's like 'don't do (whatever), not even by mistake'\n\nチクんじゃねーぞ I'd say in this case 'don't rat on me' or 'keep your mouth shut'\nwould be appropriate.\n\nOK. Let's put it together, and make it sound like somewhat natural English\n(haha).\n\n**\"Don't worry about it. This totally isn't what you think. So you better keep\nyour mouth shut about it!\"**\n\nHope that makes sense.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-19T15:03:12.833", "id": "13200", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-19T15:13:10.587", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-19T15:13:10.587", "last_editor_user_id": "4075", "owner_user_id": "4075", "parent_id": "13042", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "This means \"There isn't anything\" or \"Nothing is there\", where\n\"nothing/anything\" has to be an animal or something living due to the use of\n`います`. It's worth noting that it is **NOT** a \"who\", since both question and\nanswer use `なに` instead of `だれ`.\n\nYou are correct that `も` is used for \"also\". But it is used as a \"negation\"\nparticle in the pattern `〜も〜ません`. Here are some examples.\n\n> * なにもいません／ありません → There is nothing (living/non-living) (there).\n> * だれも来【き】ません → No one will come\n> * なにもしませんでした → I didn't do anything\n> * どこにもいきませんでした → He didn't go anywhere\n>", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-07T19:19:25.870", "id": "13045", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-07T19:24:40.213", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-07T19:24:40.213", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "13044", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "This use of the `も` expresses _completeness or totality_ , like the English\nword _all_. And in particular, when it's attached to an _indefinite\ndemonstrative_ (なに, どこ, どれ, だれ, どなた, and so on), it causes that word to refer\nto a **complete set** of the type denoted by the demonstrative:\n\n```\n\n 　　だれ　　　who\n 　　だれも　　everyone (with positive verb)\n 　　だれも　　no one (with negative verb)\n \n```\n\nThe same thing happens when you add も to other words like this:\n\n```\n\n 　　どこ　　　where\n 　　どこも　　everywhere (with positive verb)\n 　　どこも　　nowhere (with negative verb)\n```\n\n```\n\n 　　どれ　　　which\n 　　どれも　　all (with positive verb)\n 　　どれも　　none (with negative verb)\n \n```\n\nBut なに is an exception. It doesn't usually appear in positive sentences:\n\n```\n\n 　　なに　　　what\n 　　~~なにも　　everything (with positive verb)~~\n 　　なにも　　nothing (with negative verb)\n```\n\nSo let's make things easier to understand by starting with an example that's\n**not** an exception. We'll use だれ, which means _who_ , and we'll add も to\nthat to make _everyone_. Here it is with a positive verb:\n\n> [ **だれも** ] が 知っています【しっています】 \n> [ **everyone** ] knows\n\nAnd now, with a negative verb:\n\n> [ **だれも** ] いません。 \n> [ **no one** ] is here.\n\nWhy does the meaning change with a negative verb? Well, it doesn't really. The\nexample above literally means \" **Everyone** is not here\", but the usual way\nto say that in English is with the logically equivalent \" **No one** is here\".\n\nOkay, so now let's try a sentence with **なにも**. Like I said before, this is an\nexception, so we'll skip making a positive sentence and go straight to the\nnegative:\n\n> [ **なにも** ] ありません。 \n> [ **nothing** ] is there.\n\nThis literally means \" **Everything** is not there\". But again, that's not how\nwe usually say it in English, so we translate it instead to the logically\nequivalent \" **Nothing** is there\". And your sentence is the same, except that\nit uses います (animate existence) rather than あります (inanimate existence).", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-07T20:28:38.180", "id": "13046", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-07T22:44:11.480", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-07T22:44:11.480", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13044", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "It is referring to a technique for learning kanji in which the various\ncomponents of the kanji are given \"names\". In addition to breaking the kanji\ndown into an easily quantifiable number of components, it helps to create a\n**mnemonic sentence** for the kanji out of the **mnemonic words** of each\ncomponent. For example, \"烙\" means \"burn\", so a technique for memorizing this\nkanji would be to form a sentence related to \"burn\" out of the words \"fire\",\n\"folding chair\", and \"mouth\".\n\nNote that some of the mnemonics come from the actual meaning of the component\nwhen it appears as a standalone kanji (such as 火, which literally means fire),\nwhile others are simply named the way they are because of their appearance,\nsuch as 夂、 which resembles a folding chair, but the actual meaning of it is\n\"winter\". When forming a mnemonic sentence for the kanji, there is also the\noption of using \"winter\" as the mnemonic for the 夂 component.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-07T22:21:10.597", "id": "13048", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-07T22:26:51.957", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-07T22:26:51.957", "last_editor_user_id": "1575", "owner_user_id": "1575", "parent_id": "13047", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "To memorize something abstract like a kanji, you we must to connect it with\nsomething, like some nominal meaning (which doesn't have to be entirely\naccurate or complete).\n\n(If we do not connect the form with something else, then what does it mean to\nmemorize it and to recall it? If something has no association, yet we are able\nto recall it, all we can do is point at it and say \"I am sure I have seen that\nform before\": basically, the form is associated with a \"Yes\" or \"No\": yes, I\nhave seen it; no, I don't think I have. And it ends there.)\n\nA mnemonic device just serves to help retain and recall an association. The\ndetails of the mnemonic do not matter, as long as it makes sense to you and\nhelps you remember. You can (and should) make up your own mnemonics.\n\nMnemonic devices can build on your existing knowledge. For instance, in regard\nto this 烙, I already know 各 which means \"each\", \"every\". I do not need a\nmnemonic for that character any more. (I do not remember whether I ever had\none).\n\nSo I might build a mnemonic based on treating this with two parts, rather than\nthree: perhaps combining the concept of fire, with each and every: *if\n**each** and every part of something is subject to **fire** , then it is\ncompletely **burned**. Another possible association is with customer/guest\n(客). We are missing the \"roof\" part which distinguishes it from \"each\". Why is\nthat? _The store was **burned** by exhibiting bad **customer** service (mortal\nsin in Japan), and **lost the roof** over their heads._\n\nAnother mnemonic that could work, via another connection to \"each\": the word\n烙印 (rakuin) means \"brand\": a symbol that is burned on, like on cattle. Hence:\n_\"Each and every one of my cattle is branded\"_.\n\nYou don't have to associate 烙 with the nominal meaning of \"burn\" given in some\ndictionaries; you can use something else, like \"branding\". The accuracy isn't\ncritical, because this meaning-word is only an access key to the other\ninformation you will later hang onto the character, like the words that it is\ninvolved in.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-08T05:38:32.140", "id": "13051", "last_activity_date": "2014-11-25T20:03:19.613", "last_edit_date": "2014-11-25T20:03:19.613", "last_editor_user_id": "1266", "owner_user_id": "1266", "parent_id": "13047", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "There are several useful systems for learning Kanji by building a memorable\n\"story\" based on (sometimes random) radical names.\n\nMy favorite example of a useful story is remembering the kanji for \"tall\",\nwhich is 高. Breaking it apart from top down, we see a cowboy hat over a mouth,\nabove a space helmet with a mouth visible inside. Of course, this is **Woody\nand Buzz** from Toy Story, and you can see that Woody in his cowboy hat is\n**TALL** compared to Buzz in his space helmet! Bonus is that you know how to\nwrite and understand the meaning of this kanji.\n\nRinse and repeat for the remaining 2,799 Kanji you want to remember ;)\n\nHelpful sites:\n\n * \"Remembering the Kanji\" by James Heisig is a series of books which show the author's method for breaking down over 2,800 kanji into simple memorable pieces, that you can recombine mentally in a story so you are building up and (more importantly) distinguishing similar kanji through these stories. A website that helps immensely is <http://kanji.koohii.com/learnmore> ( _Reviewing the Kanji_ ) where you can put in your OWN stories for kanji you want to remember.\n\n * Another new system that has a built-in Spaced Repetition system is <http://www.WaniKani.com> which has a very nice interface and well-thought-out progression. It will also bug you to come back and keep progressing, which is a nice feature!\n\n * I have also heard and used KanjiDamage (.com) but it's a little too far out for me. YMMV. ;)\n\nThe official radical names are sometimes not meaningful for Westerners\nlearning Japanese, so don't be afraid to make up your own radical names that\nmean something to you. You only need them for a while until the intermediate\nstep of recalling the story isn't needed anymore, and you just recognize 高 as\n_[mentally insert your recollection here]_ whenever you see it.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-09T15:03:25.490", "id": "13064", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-09T15:03:25.490", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1736", "parent_id": "13047", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "There are actually three options.\n\n> 1. [タバコを吸いません]{LLLLLLLLL} \n> tobacco-OBJ smoke-NEG-POLITE \n> \"I don't smoke tobacco.\"\n>\n> 2. [タバコは吸いません]{LLLLLLLLL} \n> tobacco-TOP smoke-NEG-POLITE \n> \"I don't smoke tobacco.\"\n>\n> 3. [タバコは吸いません]{LLLHLLLLL} \n> tobacco-CON smoke-NEG-POLITE \n> \"I don't smoke _tobacco_ , (but I do smoke something else).\"\n>\n>\n\n1 and 2, (marking タバコ with the object marker and topic marker, respectively),\nare semantically the same.\n\nHowever, 3 (marking タバコ with the contrastive marker, which is also は but has a\nraised pitch) has the implication that you smoke something else.\n\nSo, to answer your question, for a transitive verb, marking the object with を\nor は both always work (assuming that you aren't constructing an embedded\nclause), but depending on how は is pronounced, it can potentially have the\ncontrastive meaning.", "comment_count": 9, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-08T04:19:57.180", "id": "13050", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-08T04:38:17.173", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-08T04:38:17.173", "last_editor_user_id": "3097", "owner_user_id": "3097", "parent_id": "13049", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "No, 彼【か】の **isn't** basically the same as 其【そ】の, but it **is** basically the\nsame as 彼【あ】の, except that it's older and no longer used as much. In short, か\nbecame あ.\n\nかの is preserved in some modern words and phrases:\n\n * かの女【おんな】 became かの女【じょ】 and stuck around (rather than becoming あの女【おんな】). Of course, you usually see this written 彼女, with the genitive の left unwritten.\n * かの有名な still comes up, I think as a set phrase (rather than あの有名な)\n\nBut mostly it's just an old form of あの. So `かの日` means `あの日`, but it sounds\nolder.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-08T06:05:59.740", "id": "13053", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-08T15:16:35.263", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-08T15:16:35.263", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13052", "post_type": "answer", "score": 17 } ]

[ { "body": "This one can be beautifully summarized by a simple quote from\n[wiktionary](http://ja.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E3%81%A9%E3%81%86%E3%81%84%E3%81%9F%E3%81%97%E3%81%BE%E3%81%97%E3%81%A6):\n\n> 語源[編集] \n> どう、いたし・まし・て＜「どう（どのように、何を）」+「いたす（「する」の謙譲語）」+「ます（丁寧語を造る助動詞）」+「て（反問的用法の終助詞）」）。 \n> 「何を、したというわけでもありませんよ（だから、気になさらないでください）」の意\n\nIt's fairly self explanatory, but to give a breakdown in english:\n\n * どう = どのように\n * いたす = する in humble language\n * ます is the polite verb ending, but in te form, where...\n * て is \"反問的用法の終助詞,\" the formal English name for which I don't know. It is basically a final particle used for a returning remark.\n\nThe final rough translation (of the example sentence from wiktionary) would\nthen be something like \"I didn't really do anything anyway so don't pay it any\nmind.\" However as blutorange points out, the negative notion of not having\ndone everything comes from it being a humble _polite_ form of どうして, so it's\nlike asking \"what did I do to be worthy of thanks?\" or \"Why thank me?\"", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-08T15:24:08.537", "id": "13055", "last_activity_date": "2020-05-05T18:24:38.560", "last_edit_date": "2020-05-05T18:24:38.560", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "13054", "post_type": "answer", "score": 22 } ]

[ { "body": "It seems there are really 2 questions here:\n\n> 私は妹に新しいおもちゃを買いました。\n\nis completely standard. に binds to a noun and marks is as indirect object,\ni.e. you bought the toy _to_ or _for_ the/your little sister.\n\nIn the other sentence, something else is going on:\n\n> よい子になるには早寝早起するコトです。 In order to become a good child, you have to get up\n> early and go to sleep early.\n\nThe easiest way is to read this as a fixed construction ~には~ used for\nexpressing \"In order to _something_ , you have to _something_ / _something_\nhas to happen\". Note that you can't use には to mean \"in order to\" generally,\nthe \"have to\" part needs to be there, e.g.\n\n> *よい子になるに(は)早寝早起した \n> He got up early and went to sleep early in order to become a good child\n\nis ungrammatical. It would have to be e.g. よい子になるために早寝早起した\n\nA bit of background is that Japanese used to have zero-nominalization, i.e.\nyou were able to attach case particles to verbs as is they were nouns. In\nmodern Japanese, this is not generally felicitous, but survives in many fixed\nconstructions.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-09T02:52:12.870", "id": "13058", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-09T02:52:12.870", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "13057", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Sequential voicing (called 連濁【れんだく】 in Japanese) isn't predictable, but there\nare rules that describe when it's \"blocked\"--in other words, when it's much\nless likely to occur. None of these rules are absolutes, though, and we can\nfind some exceptions.\n\nReduplication commonly results in sequential voicing:\n\n * 黒々 （くろ **ぐろ** ）\n * 人々 （ひと **びと** ）\n * 華々しい （はな **ばな** しい）\n * それぞれ （それ **ぞれ** ）\n * 口々 （くち **ぐち** ）\n\nThis process is blocked in reduplicated onomatopoeia, which has its own rules.\nBasically, both halves should sound the same, regardless of whether a sound is\nvoiced or not:\n\n * とんとん\n * どんどん\n * ぴくぴく\n * ひくひく\n * びくびく\n\nAnd it's blocked when the reduplicated portion already contains a voiced\nobstruent. (This is just a restatement of Lyman's Law as applied to\nreduplication.) So:\n\n * 度々 （たびたび）\n * 飛び飛び （とびとび）\n * 数々 （かずかず）\n * 繁々 （しげしげ）\n\nThis process is also usually blocked with Sino-Japanese compounds, which is to\nsay, those compounds that use _on_ readings:\n\n * 空々 （くうくう）\n * 個々 （ここ）\n * 半々 （はんはん）\n * 少々 （しょうしょう）\n * 戦々恐々 （せんせんきょうきょう）\n * 燦々 （さんさん）\n\nThere are exceptions, though, where reduplicated Sino-Japanese compounds are\nvoiced, so it's not an absolute rule. These are all the exceptions I'm aware\nof, although there are undoubtedly more:\n\n * 甲斐甲斐しい （かい **がい** しい） _[but this may not be S-J at all, see comments]_\n * 散々 （さん **ざん** ）\n * 種々 （しゅ **じゅ** ）\n * 精々 （せい **ぜい** ）\n * 騒々しい （そう **ぞう** しい）\n * 猩々 （しょう **じょう** ）\n\nIn certain cases this can be explained as a property of the word being\nreduplicated. For example, 甲斐【かい】 voices very readily in compounds:\n\n * 不甲斐ない （ふ **がい** ない）\n * 生き甲斐 （いき **がい** ）\n * 甲斐甲斐しい （かい **がい** しい）\n\nSo it's no surprise that it voices in our reduplicated example. Why does this\nword voice when others do not? It may be that this word is treated as a\n_nativized_ part of the Japanese vocabulary, rather than as a Sino-Japanese\ncompound, making it subject to the phonetic rules that normally apply to\nnative words. And the same explanation can be used for other Sino-Japanese\ncompounds that readily undergo voicing, such as 会社:\n\n * 株式会社 （かぶしき **がいしゃ** ）\n * 信販会社 （しんぱん **がいしゃ** ）\n * 親会社 （おや **がいしゃ** ）\n\nSo we can see that in some cases, our exceptions are because of a _lexical\nproperty_ of the word that undergoes voicing.\n\nIn other cases, though, I have no explanation. Why is 猩々 voiced while 少々 is\nnot? Why is 散々 voiced while 燦々 is not? It's possible that the same explanation\napplies, but I find it much harder to support. After all, 種 never voices to じゅ\nin compounds other than 種々.\n\nSo I think the best explanation is that the rules \"blocking\" sequential\nvoicing are merely _strong tendencies_ rather than actual rules. What's more,\nin cases where it's **not** blocked, whether or not it occurs isn't\npredictable. And as a result, we can make some generalizations about when\nsequential voicing occurs, but we can't predict it with certainty. I'm afraid\nyou'll just have to memorize cases like 燦々 and 散々.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-09T17:46:28.510", "id": "13065", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-09T22:03:40.890", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-09T22:03:40.890", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13059", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

[ { "body": "もの： physical thing/object, like a book. \nこと： non physical thing, like a fact or an idea. \nやつ：physical thing or person. (familiar)\n\n私のこと： me/things related to me. \n私のもの/私のやつ： my property.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-09T06:39:29.737", "id": "13061", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-10T02:56:01.563", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-10T02:56:01.563", "last_editor_user_id": "1065", "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "13060", "post_type": "answer", "score": -1 }, { "body": "Where did you see 「いいえ、私のやつではないです。」? Almost no one would say that in real life\nbecause 私のやつ is collocationally constrained. やつ sounds fairly slangy and\nmannish, so it does not sound natural to combine it with 私. One will, however,\noccasionally hear オレのやつ or even ボクのやつ, both meaning \"mine\" when both the\nspeaker and listener know exactly what item they are talking about.\n\nNative speakers will just use 私の without a noun following it since 私の, in this\nparticular context, already means \"mine\" instead of \"my\".\n\n「私のではありません。」 = \"It is not mine.\" More literally, \"It is not my belonging.\"\n\nIn the sentence above, the 私の part can be replaced with 私のもの but just using 私の\nwould be a more natural choice for us native speakers. もの may be added when\nwanting to emphasize that the item belongs to no one but to you yourself.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-21T01:15:59.827", "id": "13214", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-21T01:15:59.827", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13060", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Regarding why you find different lyrics in different places - this is pretty\nmuch true for most folk songs in most languages, either due to regional\nvariants or improvisation. For example, famous songs such as \"Drunken Sailor\"\noften have various additional/optional verses.\n\nIn this specific case, the Japanese wikipedia article on\n[鰊場作業唄](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%B0%8A%E5%A0%B4%E4%BD%9C%E6%A5%AD%E5%94%84)\ndescribes the format as 沖揚げ音頭 surrounded by 囃子詞｛はやしことば｝like ソーラン and ドッコイショ.\nThese would be working songs, so many of the words are simply there to keep a\nrhythm going when people are doing some joint work that requires them to keep\nin rhythm (hauling in nets, for example).\n\n```\n\n ヤーレンソーランソーラン ヤレン ソーランソーラン ハイハイ\n 鰊来たかと鴎に訊けば わたしゃ発つ鳥 波に聞け チョイ ← 沖揚げ音頭\n ヤサエンエンヤーーーァサーァノ ドッコイショ ハードッコイショドッコイショ \n \n```\n\nAnd, unsurprisingly, sometimes the 沖揚げ音頭 include deliberately rude/lewd verses\n(listed in the above linked wikipedia article under 卑猥な歌詞の一例)\n\nThe version you quote appears to have been popularised in the 1980s and is\noften performed by school groups, so not so surprising that it's popular on\nplaces like youtube. (description in English\n[here](http://www.enma.org/2013/pa/soranbushi.htm)).", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-10T21:31:12.713", "id": "13086", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-10T21:31:12.713", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "571", "parent_id": "13066", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "The verb 浴びる expresses something like _be showered with [DirectObject]_.\nCommon literal uses include liquids such as water (水を、シャワーを) and rays of light\n(光を、日光を、月光を、日差しを), although it can be used with anything you can be showered\nby. It doesn't need to be translated as _showered by_ , though; 月光を浴びた could\nbe _bathed in moonlight_ , _basked in the moonlight_ , etc.\n\nThis verb can also be used more figuratively. For example, the object can\nrepresent criticism (非難を、批判を), cheers or applause (称賛を、喝采を), or attention\n(注目を). Any of these could be translated with _shower_ figuratively in English:\n_she was showered with attention_ or _showered with praise_ , and so on.\n\nNote that this doesn't translate very well to _clean_. Although you're likely\nto get clean if you _take a shower_ , you're not so likely to be cleaned by\n_having praise rained upon you_ or by _basking in moonlight_.\n\nYou can, however, use an object to express what is being showered upon. To do\nso, you need to use the ditransitive causative verb corresponding to 浴びる,\nwhich is 浴びせる. This verb means something like _cause [IndirectObject] to be\nshowered by [DirectObject]_. And as you might expect, the indirect object of\n浴びせる is marked with に. Here are a few examples adapted from\n[ALC](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E6%B5%B4%E3%81%B3%E3%81%9B%E3%82%8B&ref=sa)\nputting it all together:\n\n> 〜にガラスの破片を浴びせる \n> _shower 〜 with shards of glass_\n>\n> 〜に称賛を浴びせる \n> _rain praise upon 〜_\n>\n> 〜に罵声を浴びせる \n> _shout abuse at 〜_\n>\n> 〜に唐辛子スプレーを浴びせる \n> _douse 〜 in pepper spray_", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-12T01:41:44.857", "id": "13100", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-12T01:41:44.857", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13067", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Song lyrics tend to take poetic license, but if not, this is a shortening of\n「浴びれば」. As far as I'm aware, it's not regional, since I hear it in common\nspeech in Tokyo and on television programs.\n\nFor more on 「りゃ」see:\n<http://maggiesensei.com/2011/10/14/%E3%81%98%E3%82%83%E3%81%82%EF%BC%89%EF%BC%86%E3%80%80%E3%82%8A%E3%82%83%E3%81%82%EF%BC%89-jaa-\nryaa-casual-contraction/>", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-12-28T16:13:17.323", "id": "13926", "last_activity_date": "2013-12-28T16:13:17.323", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4401", "parent_id": "13068", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Changing ない to ね is routine in several dialects. So you'll hear things like\n知らね instead of 知らない, or やらね instead of やらない.\n\nAdditionally, the character probably said わかんね, not わかね. ら and る will\nsometimes be rendered as ん when followed by な行 mora such as な, ね, or の. So\nyou'll hear things like つまんね (instead of つまらない - つまんない is, of course, also\nused), どうすんの (どうするの), or なにしてんの (なにしてるの).", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-10T01:15:33.463", "id": "13072", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-10T01:15:33.463", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4039", "parent_id": "13069", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "It's fairly common for both `ai` and `ae` to be slurred to `ee` in colloquial\nspeech.\n\nFor example:\n\n * じゃない → じゃねぇ `jan **ai** → jan **ee**`\n * のみたい → のみてぇ `nomit **ai** → nomit **ee** `\n * おまえ → おめぇ `om **ae** → om **ee**`\n * てまえ → てめぇ `tem **ae** → tem **ee**`\n\nYour example has an additional contraction. When a vowel is dropped between\n`r` and `n`, you end up with `rn`. This isn't pronounceable, so it assimilates\nto `nn`.\n\n * わからない → わかんない `waka **ran** ai → *waka **rn** ai → waka **Nn** ai`\n\nThen this undergoes the other contraction we already talked about:\n\n * わかんない → わかんねぇ `wakaNn **ai** → wakaNn **ee**`\n\nJapanese is somewhat sensitive to length, so that `ん` doesn't drop out very\neasily, and the vowel at the end tends to stay long. It's possible that they\n_were_ both shortened, but without hearing it, my guess is that it was `わかんねぇ`\nand not `わかね`.\n\nAs for _where_ this happens, I have to admit I'm no expert on dialects. But as\nI understand it, it's fairly widespread. I've read that it happens in and\naround Tōkyō, and I know it happens in other parts of the Kantō area as well.\nTo be honest, I wouldn't be surprised if it happened all over Japan. (But the\ncharts I found only mentioned the Kantō area.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-10T01:27:51.193", "id": "13073", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-10T01:27:51.193", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13069", "post_type": "answer", "score": 14 } ]

[ { "body": "When you try to walk on a muddy road, the mud makes it difficult to walk\nacross. In other words, the muddy road is bothering you. ぬかるむ is a word\nimplicitly meaning \"directly bothering\".\n\nBecause hills do not directly bother you (maybe the road is what it's directly\nbothering), 丘はぬかるむ is grammatically correct, but is a strange expression.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-10T05:30:23.280", "id": "13075", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-10T05:30:23.280", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4041", "parent_id": "13070", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I think the translation \"to be muddy\" is slightly inaccurate. First of all,\nぬかるむ is a dynamic verb. Probably, \"to become muddy\" would be better.\n\nA dynamic verb is a verb which describes a change. Japanese verbs tend to be\ndynamic comparing to English.\n\nFor example, \"have\" and \"know\" are stative verbs in English. They describe a\ncertain state. However, 持つ and 知る are dynamic. See: [How should I choose\nbetween [知]{し}る and\nわかる?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/1659/how-should-i-choose-\nbetween-%e7%9f%a5%e3%81%97%e3%82%8b-and-%e3%82%8f%e3%81%8b%e3%82%8b/21016#21016)\n\nJust like that, ぬかるむ means a change from ぬかるんでいない to ぬかるんでいる.\n\nSo, 「春来たりて、雪は融け、丘はぬかるむ」(Note: 春来たりて sounds old.) means \"The spring has come,\nthe snow melts, and the hill becomes muddy.\"\n\nIt is not \"The hill is muddy.\" If you want to say so, you have to say ぬかるんでいる\n\"to have become muddy (= to be muddy).\"\n\nBack to your question, the reason why ぬかるむ is often used before a noun is that\nit takes a long time to ぬかるむ. It is easier to make a sentence which uses ぬかるむ\nas a phenomenon that often happens. For example, \"ぬかるむ道\" means \"a road which\noften becomes muddy.\"", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2019-07-18T04:49:50.453", "id": "69553", "last_activity_date": "2019-07-18T04:49:50.453", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "8010", "parent_id": "13070", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "I would say, どこでも and どこにでも mean anywhere, and どこも means everywhere.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2016-04-18T04:20:30.783", "id": "33640", "last_activity_date": "2016-04-18T06:16:15.200", "last_edit_date": "2016-04-18T06:16:15.200", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "14204", "parent_id": "13074", "post_type": "answer", "score": -1 }, { "body": "I think it might help you if rather than analyzing どこも and the rest as\nindividual words, but as a instance of a general ‘interrogative + も’ pattern.\nThat is from どこ ‘where/which place’ and the particle も ‘also/even’ one get どこも\n(doko mo) meaning something along the lines of ‘all/any place(s)’ or ‘no\nplace’ given whether it is attached to an affirmative or negative predicate,\nrespectively.\n\nどこにも (doko ni mo) and どこでも (doko de mo) are just cases where you have other\nparticles attached similar to cases like 〜には (-ni wa) or 〜では (-de wa).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2016-04-18T21:24:55.140", "id": "33647", "last_activity_date": "2016-04-18T21:31:35.057", "last_edit_date": "2016-04-18T21:31:35.057", "last_editor_user_id": "1634", "owner_user_id": "1634", "parent_id": "13074", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "To clear up the situation:\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/H7nQo.png)\n\n 1. In the first place, **どこ** is grammatically a noun \"what place\" in Japanese, thus is always accompanied by particles when it appears in a sentence. This applies to all question words except どんな (adjective) and どう (adverb).\n\n 2. There are three series of 取り立て助詞 (\"focus particle\") that are involved in this question. 取り立て助詞 usually attach to another particle from behind, except when が or を comes before, then they'll eat it.\n\n * ～ **も (with negative verb)** \nIt works like English \"not ... any X\", \"no X\" if attaches to a question word.\nCombined with どこ, \"not [preposition] any place\" or \"[preposition] nowhere\".\nThe accent pattern of phrase always be **accentless** (no pitch downstep\nwithin the phrase).\n\n * ～ **も (without negative verb)** \nWorks like \"every X\" with a question word. Combined with どこ, \"[preposition]\nevery place\" or \"[preposition] everywhere\". The accent pattern is that of the\nbase noun (i.e. follows どこ{HL}).\n\n * ～ **でも** \nWorks like \"any X\" with a question word. Combined with どこ, \"[preposition] any\nplace\" or \"anywhere\". The accent pattern is usually accentless, but when you\nput emphasis on this phrase, the accent of the base noun is restored. Note\nthat since this particle is originated from だ + も, therefore you can't attach\nit after だ once again.\n\n * **～も vs ～でも** \nWe disproportionately prefer \"どこ + particle + でも\" to \"どこ + particle + も\"\n(positive). I've only heard this positive も series used in \"every X ... each\nY\" construction. The same seems to apply to all question words.\n\n> どこにも{HLLL}住んでみなければわからない苦労がある。 \n> _Every place has its own troubles of life you'll never know until you live\n> there._\n\n 3. As you can see, the form どこも appears in two slots, and どこでも confusingly enough takes up six slots(!). Let's summarize them.\n\n * **どこも**\n * _(not) any place_ (subject/object): どこが/を + も(neg.) [どこも{LHH}]\n * _every place_ (subject/object): どこが/を + も(pos.) [どこも{HLL}]\n * **どこでも**\n * _any place_ (subject/object): どこが/を + でも [どこでも{LHHH}, どこでも{HLLL}]\n * _(not) at/in any place_ : どこ + で + も(neg.) [どこでも{LHHH}]\n * _at/in every place_ : どこ + で + も(pos.) [どこでも{HLLL}] (infrequent)\n * _at/in any place_ : どこ + で + でも [どこでも{LHHH}, どこでも{HLLL}]\n * _be (not) any place_ , _be (not) anywhere_ : どこ + だ + も(neg.) [どこでも{LHHH}]\n * _be every/any place_ , _be every/any-where_ : どこ + だ + も(pos.) [どこでも{LHHH}, どこでも{HLLL}]\n * **どこにでも**\n * _to/at any place_ : どこ + に + でも [どこにでも{LHHHH}, どこにでも{HLLLL}]\n\n* * *\n\nFor the usage of に vs で, please refer to the following questions:\n\n * [Particles: に vs. で](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/60/7810)\n * [に and で revisited](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/2197/7810)\n * [In this location context how are に, で and にて different?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/1290/7810)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2016-08-17T10:03:09.907", "id": "38523", "last_activity_date": "2016-08-17T11:43:30.390", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.157", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "7810", "parent_id": "13074", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes - in the past it was quite usual to see labels written from right to left\n\neg （if remember correctly):\n\n> ルービ・ロポッサ", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-10T15:34:33.580", "id": "13084", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-10T15:34:33.580", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "13076", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "Your Wikipedia knowledge is correct - vertical Japanese is top-to-bottom,\nright-to-left; and historically (i.e. pre-WWII), horizontal text was treated\nas a single row of vertical text. This meant that since you start on the right\nwhen reading vertically, you started on the right here as well. Most of the\ntime this was restricted to places where text didn't really fit well\nvertically (e.g. over/under images). Since WWII this usage has been replaced\nwith writing horizontal text the same way Western languages write horizontal\ntext, i.e. left to right (because, unlike with scripts like Arabic, you don't\nhave to modify the actual letters in any way).\n\nAs a result, with extremely few examples, any example of right-to-left\nhorizontal text you'll see in modern Japan is either historical or\nhistorically-flavoured (or period-correct, if it appears within fiction).\nYou'll see it if you look at images from prewar Japan, though (a good example\nmight be propaganda posters).\n\nJapanese is not the only language that has done this, pretty much any writing\nsystem derived from Chinese did the same thing (for example, a good deal of\nChinese temples have signs across the entrance written right-to-left).", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-10T23:20:09.710", "id": "13088", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-10T23:20:09.710", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3639", "parent_id": "13076", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/AlhoZ.jpg)\n\n# ⇳\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Mhhte.jpg)\n\n(The upper image from: <http://p.twipple.jp/zAedi>; the lower from:\n<http://portal.nifty.com/cs/mitaiwa/detail/100607127809/1.htm>)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2016-01-29T10:25:18.510", "id": "30807", "last_activity_date": "2016-01-29T10:25:18.510", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "7810", "parent_id": "13076", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "You can replace '糖質源だ' with '糖質源になっている' without changing the meaning of the\noriginal sentence.\n\nAs Mobius Pizza is saying, sometimes '糖質源だ/糖質源である' are used instead of\n'になっている'. Meanwhile, '糖質源です' and '糖質源になっている' are also objective and assertive\nexpressions. Examples of subjective expressions are '糖質源だろう/糖質源でしょう'.\n\nThe 'has become...' sentence in Sjiveru's comment refers to the role of the\nrice in the past. But the original sentence only mentions the present state.\nThe sentence in Sjiveru's comment\n\n```\n\n Rice has become an important source of carbohydrates in many diets\n \n```\n\ntranslates to, say,\n\n```\n\n '米は、多くの食事で、重要な 糖質源となった/糖質源となってきた'\n \n```\n\nAs to PhoenixFox's comment, '糖質源になっている' and '糖質源だ' are both direct\nexpressions. While the original sentence means 'It is 'usually' the case\nthat...', the meaning 'usually' comes from '多くの食事で' (in many diets). If you\nsay, omitting 'in many diets',\n\n```\n\n 米は、重要な糖質源になっている。\n \n```\n\nthis is equal to saying\n\n```\n\n 米は、重要な糖質源だ。\n \n```\n\nTherefore, you can replace '糖質源になっている' with '糖質源だ'.\n\nHowever, as mentioned in the comments, 'になっている' seems to be more frequently\nused than 'だ'. The reason is unclear to me, but there is a similar, widely-\nused expression '...源になっている/...源になる'. Also, the author might prefer the rhythm\n(ending always with 'だ' makes sentences too short and monotonic).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-31T20:23:23.873", "id": "13295", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-31T20:23:23.873", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4098", "parent_id": "13077", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Xに生まれる is syntactically ambiguous between:\n\n 1. Born as a X\n\n * 女に生まれる (be born as a woman)\n 2. Born to a X\n\n * 裕福な家庭に生まれる (be born to a wealthy family) \n * 女に生まれる (be born to a woman)\n\nFor (1), think of adverb+verb. (E.g. Run quickly) ( ✕ Born woman-ly → ◯ born\nas a woman)\n\nAnd for (2) think of a intransitive verb acting with a indirect object (e.g.\nBob lied(verb) to Mary(indirect object))", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-10T12:45:46.903", "id": "13079", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-10T13:30:05.657", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-10T13:30:05.657", "last_editor_user_id": "542", "owner_user_id": "542", "parent_id": "13078", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "In language, a process is said to be _productive_ if it can produce new words\n(or phrases, etc.). For example, in English, you can add _un-_ to lots of\nwords, so we say that _un-_ affixation is a productive process. And in\nJapanese, affixing _go-_ and _o-_ to words is relatively productive.\n\nBut when a word can no longer be formed via a productive process in the modern\nlanguage **with a predictable meaning** , we say that it's become\n_lexicalized_. In other words, it's become a single word, and it needs its own\ndictionary entry. You need a dictionary entry for _disgruntled_ because you\ncan't figure it out from _dis-_ and _gruntled_ in the modern language.\nLikewise, you need a dictionary entry for おやすみ, ごはん, and おにぎり because they've\nbecome single lexical words.\n\nSo yes, _o-_ and _go-_ can become a necessary part of a word, and the name for\nthis process is _lexicalization_.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-10T13:50:06.863", "id": "13082", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-10T13:50:06.863", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13081", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

[ { "body": "I think you're asking this because in English, we distinguish _times_ from\n_by_ :\n\n * 3 **×** 3=9 three _times_ three is nine\n * a 3 **×** 3 block a three- _by_ -three block\n\nBut I think in Japanese, it's just かける in both cases:\n\n * ３ **×** ３＝９ さん **かける** さんはきゅう\n * ３ **×** ３のブロック さん **かける** さんのブロック\n\nYou can see that both uses are listed on [Wikipedia's article for\n`×`](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%97#.E7.A9.8D) in the same section\n(titled 積), and in that section it says that the symbol is usually pronounced\nかける.\n\nThis [ALC example](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=will+four+by+six) also uses\nかける to correspond to English _by_ , although this example has units:\n\n> Also about the photo size, would you like it **four by six inches** or\n> **three by five inches**?\n>\n> あと、写真の大きさですが、 **4インチかける6インチ** のと **3インチかける5インチ** がありますが、どちらにしますか？\n\nI also found some videos online where `×` was used to express dimensions, and\nthey pronounced it かける in each case. For example, [this\nvideo](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__pwVMiD6hA) and [this\nvideo](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSOLGqb81v4) say 2×2 and 3×3 as に\n**かける** に and さん **かける** さん. (They're both Minecraft videos.)\n\nSo I think you can just say \" _number_ かける _number_ \".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-10T21:58:03.153", "id": "13087", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-10T22:08:53.927", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13085", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "`言い出しっぺ` is a single word and if you check a dictionary you get: 'the one who\nbrought it up'. \nSince he is the one who originally proposed the idea of getting 10 people, it\nis his responsibility to carry out his proposal, is what he is saying.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-11T00:49:26.483", "id": "13091", "last_activity_date": "2015-06-21T14:43:31.923", "last_edit_date": "2015-06-21T14:43:31.923", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "13089", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "The meaning seems to be:\n\n> About this period's conversation, its meaning is that, \"I wonder whether\n> hearing the 'kin kin' (piercing, metallic sound) exactly in the right\n> moment, such that it cleared up my exam-studying gloom, was just\n> imagination.\"\n\nThe するように is a device for expressing that the sound's effect was _such as to_\nclear up the gloom.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-11T22:07:02.323", "id": "13096", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-11T22:07:02.323", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1266", "parent_id": "13095", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "I believe it is a split apart\n[～ように聞こえる](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E3%82%88%E3%81%86%E3%81%AB%E8%81%9E%E3%81%93%E3%81%88%E3%82%8B&ref=sa)\n(sounds like ~ / sounds as if ~).\n\n聞こえる is modified twice, once by the clause ending in ように, and once again by\n妙にキンキンと.\n\n> この時期の会話というのは、受験勉強の鬱屈をここぞとばかりに晴らそうとするように、妙にキンキンと聞こえるのは気のせいだろうか。 The(se things\n> called) conversations around this period, I wonder if it is my imagination\n> that they sound unnaturally shrill, and **like/as if** they are an attempt\n> to eagerly snatch at the opportunity to clear up the gloom of studying for\n> exams.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-12T00:28:26.250", "id": "13099", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-12T00:28:26.250", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "315", "parent_id": "13095", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "In more linguisticky terms, you might say that **velar stops before /æ/ are\nsometimes palatalized** in loans from English. Why?\n\nWe can find our answer in [_Adaptation and Transmission in Japanese Loanword\nPhonology_](http://ecommons.library.cornell.edu/bitstream/1813/13947/1/Crawford,%20Clifford.pdf),\nClifford James Crawford's doctoral dissertation, in section 2.3.3\n\"Palatalization of velars before /æ/\". Quoted below:\n\n> [T]here is an allophonic variation in English between velars with a\n> relatively front place of articulation, as in _key_ , that occur before\n> front vowels, and velars with a relatively back place of articulation, as in\n> _coo_ (Keating & Lahiri 1993). **Fronted velars are thus likely to be\n> perceived as palatalized by Japanese listeners, given their similarity in\n> articulation** (Akamatsu 1997).12 _(emphasis added)_\n\nSo when these words were borrowed, it's likely that native speakers of\nJapanese **did** perceive a resemblance to the original, even though you, as a\nnative speaker of English, do not.\n\nWhy does this occur only before /æ/? Crawford continues:\n\n> [O]nly velars before /æ/ actually can be palatalized; the other possible\n> source sequences here (/ki, kɪ, ke, kɛ/) are always adapted with a\n> (phonologically) plain velar instead. This is because Japanese phonology\n> does not make a palatalization contrast before front vowels (Ito & Mester\n> 1995).13\n\nCrawford also attempts to address the question of why palatalization occurs\nonly some of the time. He shows relationships between the date of borrowing\nand likelihood, and he also shows that words with \"similar enough\" cognates in\nother languages available for borrowing tend not to exhibit palatalization.\nThese two factors combined, he says, give us a relatively strong way to\npredict whether velar stops before /æ/ will end up palatalized in Japanese.\nFor details, please see his dissertation, linked above.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-11T23:48:50.990", "id": "13098", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-11T23:48:50.990", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13097", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

[ { "body": "The そう is 副詞/an adverb (meaning #1 in\n[そう【然う】](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/127918/m0u/%E3%81%9D%E3%81%86/))\nand the subject for the verb 思う can be 私, あなた etc. (can be omitted), depending\non the context. Like, わたしは*そう*(≒そのように/そんなふうに)思います。I think so / that way.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-12T06:38:24.410", "id": "13103", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-12T06:38:24.410", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13101", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "I think you are misunderstanding the grammatical use of そう as in そう思う、そう（だ）and\nother \"fundamentals\" such as the use of と（as in と思います, という etc)：\n\nそう＆こう are used to refer to the previous sentence and are used with a verb like\nan adverb.\n\neg\n\n> 困ったとき助けてくれる友達がいる。 **そう** 思うと安心する。\n>\n> I have a friends who help me when I am in trouble. When I remember **this**\n> , I relax.\n>\n> _(Reference: 新完全マスターN３文法 p１３４）_\n\nso\n\n> そう思う＝ I think [the previous sentence is true/correct]\n\nand\n\n> そうだ ＝ That statement (or sentence) is true/correct.\n>\n> そうですか= (literally in a grammatical sense) Is that statement so / true?\n\nby extension:\n\n> そうだと思う ＝ \"I think that statement (or sentence) is true/correct\"\n\nHere you are stating what you think is correct but you are not certain.\n\nそうと思う might be understood but I don't think it works for reasons explained in\nthe accepted answer to the following question:\n\n[When is 「だ／である」required between a noun and the quotation particle\nと?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/6950/1478)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-12T06:46:47.333", "id": "13104", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-14T14:23:22.303", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "13101", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I think your friend has picked up the use of 受ける which can be used to say\npopular or in the sense of \"the joke carried\". This is one the many uses of\n受ける. I took the following as set phrases to learn this use, from 総まとめN１語彙\n(p92)：\n\n> 若者に受ける映画｜movie that is very popular among young people\n>\n> ギャグがウケなかった｜the joke did not go down very well\n>\n> ウケがいい｜very popular\n\nThe following examples came from the dictionary on my Apple computer:\n\n> 1. 彼の推理小説は学生に大いに受けている｜His detective stories are extremely popular with\n> [among] students.\n>\n> 2. 彼のしゃれはインテリの間で受けた｜His witticisms gained [earned] him popularity among\n> the intelligentsia.\n>\n> 3. そのミュージカルは非常に受けた｜The musical was a great hit.\n>\n> 4. 彼女のパーティーはお客に受けた｜Her party [was a success / went over well] with the\n> guests.\n>\n> 5. 彼のだじゃれは一般大衆に大いに受けている｜His gags [have caught the public fancy / appeal to\n> the public].\n>\n> 6. その芝居は全く受けなかった｜That play was a complete flop [failure].\n>\n>", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-13T03:14:50.163", "id": "13112", "last_activity_date": "2019-06-24T00:33:55.693", "last_edit_date": "2019-06-24T00:33:55.693", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "13102", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "I have definitely heard/ seen \"ukeru\" used as slang for funny, but in those\ncases it is usually written as ウケる (manga, books, drama scripts). Often, I've\nobserved it proceeded by \"cho\" - 超ウケる. ( Though as virgil points out, this is\nnot a definitive - usage may vary by region, etc)\n\nI never thought of it before, but it makes sense that it originated from 受ける,\nand started as more of \"that joke really gets to me/ I receive that joke\" -\nhowever, as I've seen it used in natural language, especially in response to a\njoke or such, it does seem to simply mean \"that's funny/ that's really funny\"\n- that is certainly how I would translate it, at least. And a quick google of\nWeiblo's English/Japanese dictionary shows them translating it as simply\n\"funny\" when spelled in katakana, and linking it to 受ける.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2017-02-16T06:51:01.673", "id": "43583", "last_activity_date": "2017-02-20T05:18:50.863", "last_edit_date": "2017-02-20T05:18:50.863", "last_editor_user_id": "19853", "owner_user_id": "19853", "parent_id": "13102", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "You're thinking of\n\n> ウケる\n\nNote that for ウケる we don't use kanji.\n\n**Origin:** Because reception of something is 受ける. One party (the person\ntelling a joke, for example) is seeking reception (from the person receiving a\njoke, for example).\n\nIn this case, if _your personal_ reception of something is positive you could\nuse ウケる. The usage of this particular usage started around the ~1980s.\n\n(More: <http://zokugo-dict.com/03u/ukeru.htm> )", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2017-02-16T06:59:50.963", "id": "43584", "last_activity_date": "2017-02-16T07:14:33.567", "last_edit_date": "2017-02-16T07:14:33.567", "last_editor_user_id": "19790", "owner_user_id": "19790", "parent_id": "13102", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "I think one of your assumptions is wrong. A nominalized verb phrase doesn't\nnecessarily need a subject (omitted or otherwise). Take a look at the\nfollowing sentence:\n\n> [ **嘘をつくこと** ] は良くない。 \n> [ **Telling a lie** ] is not good.\n\nI don't think there's a recoverable subject in the verb phrase 嘘をつく. I think\nit's more like \"telling a lie\" or \"to tell a lie\" than \"[someone] tells a\nlie\". And I think the same thing is true about your example:\n\n> 私は [ **外に出ること** ] にした \n> _As-for me, [ **going outside** ] decided-to_ \n> = I decided [ **to go outside** ].\n\nThe nominalized verb phrase [ **外に出ること** ] talks about the idea of going\noutside, but it doesn't specify an actor via a subject or anything else.\nThere's no subject to recover here.\n\nThe topic 私 connects to the matrix verb した, not the embedded verb 出る. Usually\na topic splits things into two parts:\n\n> 私は ｜ 外に出ることにした \n> topicは ｜ _comment_\n\nThis is called a _topic-comment_ structure: the comment on the right tells us\nsomething about the topic on the left. Essentially, the topic connects with\nthe entire verb phrase on the right half, the head of which is した. And that's\nwhy it can't connect with 出る, which is stuck inside a relative clause.\n\nIf you'd like to say you decided to _make_ someone go outside, you can do so\nby getting rid of the intransitive 出る and putting the transitive (causative)\n出す in its place (as jovanni suggested in [this\ncomment](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/13106/can-one-say-a-\ndecides-that-b-will-do-x-\nwith-%E3%81%93%E3%81%A8%E3%81%AB%E3%81%99%E3%82%8B#comment28108_13106)). This\nmakes an を-role available inside the nominalized verb phrase:\n\n> 私は [ **snailboatを外に出すこと** ] にした \n> _As-for me, [ **making snailboat go outside** ] decided-to_ \n> = I decided [ **to make snailboat go outside** ].\n\nBut you can't directly say \"A decided that B will do X\", only \"A decided to\nmake B do X\". The ことにする idiom doesn't have a separate role for B to fill.\n\n* * *\n\n(Note: in the above, decided-to really corresponds in meaning to ことにした, not\njust にした. Even though ことにする isn't a single constituent, it _is_ a single\nidiom, so you can't really divide it up when talking about what it means.)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-15T04:59:50.640", "id": "13135", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-15T05:36:31.137", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.157", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13106", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "I would like to add some intricate points to snailboat’s answer.\n\nSnailboat is right in that in general, verbs in Japanese do not have to have a\nsubject, even an implied one. Also it is right is to say that we cannot use\n～ことにする to state someone decides that someone else will do something. ～ことにする is\nused when someone decides what _he/she_ will do.\n\nHowever, there are cases where BがXすることにする sounds fine to me.\n\nAs you might be aware, the sentence\n\n> (1) 私は私が外へ出ることにした。\n\nis unnatural. However, if there is some context where who goes outside is\nimportant, then it makes sense to say:\n\n> (2) 私は自分が外へ出ることにした。 I decided that _I_ would go outside.\n\nFor some reason, it is strange to repeat the topic and the subject as in (1)\neven when who goes outside is important.\n\nAs another example, suppose that a team of athletes discussed the running\norder in an upcoming relay race. Then it is fine to say:\n\n> (3) 話し合いの結果、康介がアンカーを務めることにした。 As a result of the discussion, they decided\n> that Kosuke would run as the anchor.\n\nThe subject of 務める is 康介 and it is explicitly stated. The semantic subject of\n務めることにする is the team, and it is not explicitly stated but implied by the\ncontext.\n\n(I think that there is another interpretation of (3) depending on the context.\nSee the remark after sentence (5) below.)\n\nIf we say\n\n> (4) 話し合いの結果、康介にアンカーを務めさせることにした。\n\nthen I think that it means that Kosuke was not one of those who decided it.\nProbably he was not at the discussion, or he participated in the discussion\nbut he did not agree to the decision.\n\nBy the way, if we change が to は in (3) and say\n\n> (5) 話し合いの結果、康介はアンカーを務めることにした。\n\nthen it is more likely to mean “As a result of the discussion, Kosuke decided\nto run as the anchor.” That is, 康介は specifies the topic of the whole sentence\nrather than just the subject of the アンカーを務める part.\n\nIt is also possible to interpret 康介が in (3) as the subject of the whole\nアンカーを務めることにした part. In this case, (3) means roughly the same thing as (5),\nwith an emphasis on the subject: “As a result of the discussion, it was Kosuke\nwho decided to run as the anchor.” Therefore sentence (3) may be ambiguous\ndepending on the context. But given that it was a result of the discussion, I\nthink that it is more natural to interpret that the team decided it unless the\ncontext implies otherwise.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-15T23:27:30.407", "id": "13148", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-15T23:51:54.347", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-15T23:51:54.347", "last_editor_user_id": "15", "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "13106", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "働く is more of the 'doing labour' side of things (putting in effort), while 勤める\nis more of the 'being an employee' side of things (working for someone). You\ncan 働く even if you're unemployed or self-employed, but not if you're not\ngetting anything done. You can 勤める even if you're not actually doing any real\nwork, but only if someone has hired you and is paying you.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-12T18:20:59.217", "id": "13109", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-12T18:20:59.217", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3639", "parent_id": "13107", "post_type": "answer", "score": 13 } ]

[ { "body": "Neither, really. Both the prefectures and the people are named after important\nlocations in the prefectures. A good deal of Japanese people have toponyms or\ntoponym-esque words for family names (though this is of course not unusual,\nconsider how many people of English descent are named 'Somethingfield'). Both\nthe creation of prefectures and the universality of family names were things\nthat came about in the last half of the 19th century, while many of the places\nreferenced in those names have had their names for centuries; so both\nprefectural and familial names come from preexisting toponyms.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-13T19:50:51.523", "id": "13122", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-13T19:50:51.523", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3639", "parent_id": "13110", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "This に means \"with\" or \"using\".\n\nAをBに = \"With A as B\" or \"using A as B\"\n\n口下手で料理好きの父親を主人公に modifies 描いた = \"drawn with a 口下手で料理好きの父親 as its hero\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-16T02:50:31.787", "id": "13150", "last_activity_date": "2020-10-29T03:36:47.490", "last_edit_date": "2020-10-29T03:36:47.490", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13113", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "You have actually picked two good examples to explain an odd corner of\nJapanese. 〜と思う and 〜ことにする both are \"state-change\" verbs regarding things that\nhappen in people's heads. These sorts of verbs have rules.\n\n## 〜と思う\n\n 1. **Plain: State-change**\n\n> （私は）ジョンが大丈夫だと思う。 \n> Lit. \"I just had the thought that Jon is okay.\" \n> \"I think that Jon is okay.\"\n\n 2. **〜ている: Stative**\n\n> （私は）ジョンが大丈夫だと思っている。 \n> \"I think that Jon is okay.\"\n\n 3. **〜た: Past state-change**\n\n> （私は）ジョンが大丈夫だと思った。 \n> Reading 1: \"I think that Jon is okay (but perhaps he's not?).\" \n> Reading 2: \"I thought that Jon was okay (and no longer do).\"\n\n(Reading 1 is more likely unless context suggests 2.)\n\n 4. **〜ていた: Past stative**\n\n> （私は）ジョンが大丈夫だと思っていた。 \n> \"I thought that Jon was okay (but no longer do).\"\n\nAll of the above sentences are just fine with the listed readings. However,\nnote the following:\n\n> ｘ **彼は** 、ジョンが大丈夫だと思う。 \n> Lit. \"He just had the thought that Jon is okay.\"\n\nYou cannot say this because it suggests that you can essentially see someone's\nmind change on the fly. You need to instead use one of the other forms, like\n思っている or 思った. (Or wrap it in say, でしょう.)\n\n* * *\n\n## 〜ことにする\n\nThis behaves essentially like 〜思う.\n\n 1. **Plain: State-change**\n\n> （私は）明日デパートに行くことにする。 \n> Reading: \"I (just) decided to go to the department store tomorrow.\"\n\n 2. **〜ている: Stative**\n\n> (私は）明日デパートに行くことにしている。 \n> Lit. \"? I am decided to go to the department store tomorrow.\" \n> Reading: \"I intend to go to the department store tomorrow.\"\n\n 3. **〜た: Past state-change**\n\n> (私は）明日デパートに行くことにした。 \n> Lit. \"I decided to go to the department store tomorrow.\" \n> Reading: \"(A little while ago), I decided to go to the department store\n> tomorrow.\"\n\n 4. **〜ていた: Past stative**\n\n> （私は）明日デパートに行くことにしていた。 \n> Lit. \"? I was decided on going to the department store tomorrow.\" \n> Reading: \"I was intending on going to the department store (but now I'm\n> not).\"\n\nThis form isn't really used. It would be much more common to use `〜予定だった` or\nsimilar.\n\nJust as with 〜と思う, you cannot use the plain 〜ことにする form with another person,\nbecause it suggests you can see inside their mind.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-12-05T22:54:15.503", "id": "13603", "last_activity_date": "2013-12-05T22:54:15.503", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3097", "parent_id": "13115", "post_type": "answer", "score": 14 } ]

[ { "body": "I don't quite understand the tone you are trying to affect. But, if you are\nthrowing cakes, calling them inedible, as well as cursing: \n「ケッコウです！！！！！」\n\nPut strong emphasis on the 「ケ」. Do a longer than normal pause between 「ケ」\nand「ッコウ」. Then hold the 「ス」 a little bit longer than normal.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-13T12:28:10.003", "id": "13119", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-13T12:28:10.003", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3962", "parent_id": "13117", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "How about something like this?\n\n`気持ちだけは受け取っておきます`\n\n(or more casually)\n\n`まぁ 気持ちだけは受け取っておく`\n\nLiterally, it's supposed to mean, \"Well, I appreciate the thought.\"\n\nPlease correct me if I have it wrong.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-15T09:03:32.730", "id": "13136", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-15T09:03:32.730", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3502", "parent_id": "13117", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "The Japanese equivalent is ありがとう【ございます】.\n\nThe \"anyway\" part is rude, and so it unverbalized.\n\nTo express gratitude for something that someone did (even if the effort wasn't\nsuccessful), we simply praise the effort, and omit any rude insinuations at\nthe incomplete or unsatisfactory result.\n\nFor instance if we asked some clerk to look something up or research something\nfor us, but the investigation was in vain, we might say:\n\n調べてくれてありがとうございます。 (Shirabete kurete arigatou gozaimasu). \"Thank you for\nlooking it up for me\".\n\nWhereas if the research was fruitful, we could just use ありがとうございます, which is\ngratitude for the effort and the result.\n\nOr in general, to thank someone for struggling hard in any manner:\n\nがんばってくれてありがとう (Gambatte kurete arigatou).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-18T18:28:39.837", "id": "13192", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-18T18:28:39.837", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1266", "parent_id": "13117", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "I'm not a native speaker or close to reaching that level but this is my\nguess...\n\nIt seems like when root word is like a verb, use 者, when it is like a noun,\nuse 人. For more business-related activities 家 might be appropriate.\n\nIn classical chinese, 者 was a 'subject nominalizer' which means it takes verbs\nand turns it into a subject. For example, 切玉=to cut jade, 切玉者=the one who cuts\njade.\n\nIt can be hard to tell what is a noun and a verb in Japanese but basically if\nit's a する verb then it is likely to use 者 instead of 人.\n\nI've never really thought about 家 but it seems like it usually appears when\ndescribing someone's occupation (as if you were supporting your family with\nit?). Note that 投資者 is also listed in the dictionary.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-13T18:12:24.687", "id": "13120", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-13T18:12:24.687", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3221", "parent_id": "13118", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "In informal situations (っ)て can be substituted for と when it's being used as a\nquoting particle. As such, [何]{なん}という can become [何]{なん}ていう (or more\nfrequently [何]{なん}てゆう in speech).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-03-17T18:06:14.593", "id": "14912", "last_activity_date": "2014-03-17T18:42:21.027", "last_edit_date": "2014-03-17T18:42:21.027", "last_editor_user_id": "4914", "owner_user_id": "4914", "parent_id": "13121", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "なんて is a colloquial variant of など. なんか is another one.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-16T20:36:53.483", "id": "15448", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-16T20:36:53.483", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3776", "parent_id": "13121", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "# The difference between 通す and 通じる:\n\n```\n\n \n 通す -> transitive\n (私が)[心臓に]電気を通す\n (I will) pass electricity [through the heart].\n \n```\n\nTransitive means that \"X does verb to Y\"; が and を are permitted, and に marks\nany extra participants. in the case of 通す, it means 'X (が) pushes something\n(を) through Y (に)'. The something (を) may include things like heat,\nelectricity, or even needles.\n\n```\n\n 通じる -> intransitive\n (精髄が)[脳に]通じる\n (The spinal cord) leads to [the brain]\n \n```\n\nIntransitive means that \"Y does verb\"; が and に are permitted. In the case of\n通じる, it means 'Y (が) leads to something (に)', or 'Y (が) conveys some meaning\n(に)'.\n\nEssentially, you are asking what the difference between transitive and\nintransitive verbs is. Transitivity creates the difference between \"I dropped\nthe ball\", and \"The ball dropped\". In both cases, the ball is falling,\nhowever, in the first one (transitive), **I** caused the ball to fall. In the\nsecond one (intransitive), the ball just fell... no fanfair, nobody forcing it\nto fall. Maybe it rolled off a table. Who knows?\n\n# The difference between を通して and を通じて\n\nBoth the verbs you provided are conjugated into -te form, so in English, they\nwould be used in cases such as the partial sentence \"Being a part of the\nfamily...\" (家族の一員として...). According to [this\nlink](http://www.tjf.or.jp/hidamari/4_mondou/mondou05_02.html), they have a\nsimilar meaning in that context. The link goes on to say that they are\ninterchangeable. The difference in nuance is likely because を通じて is more\nformal (a side effect of how indirect intransitive verbs are). According to\nthe link, を通して is naturally used by people, while を通じて is mostly for news and\nbusiness speech.\n\nFurthermore, the difference between the phrases you gave is very miniscule:\n\n```\n\n 受付を通して、三階に案内された。 \n \"Going through the reception desk, I was directed to the third floor.\"\n 現地の大使館を通じて、外務省に事件の第一報が入った。\n \"The Ministry of Foreign Affairs received the incident's first report via the local embassy\"\n \n```\n\nNote that the first example may use either. In the second example, however,\nyou would probably sway towards を通じて because it is more formal and indirect\n(the report passed through the embassy and had to deal with their policies).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-15T20:01:17.033", "id": "13146", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-15T22:31:30.233", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-15T22:31:30.233", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13123", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "[My grammar book](http://shop.alc.co.jp/spg/v/-/-/-/7010021) (albeit an older\nversion) says that while many times they can be used interchangeably, `を通じて`\nis used when describing the means that brings about some **conclusion**. Here\nis the full description from the book:\n\n>\n> 「～を通じて」「～を通して」は同じように使える場合が多いが、「～を通じて」は「～」を何かが成立するとこの媒介、手段としてとらえ、「～を通して」は「～」を間に立てて何かをする、という積極的な意味で使われることが多い。\n\nHere are some of the example sentences showing that something is **concluded**\nby `～を通じて`.\n\n> * わたしはそのことをテレビのニュース **を通じて** 知りました。\n> * 彼とは共通の友人 **を通じて** 知り合った。\n> * 「このような民間レベルの国際交流 **を通じて** 、両国の相互理解が少しずつでも進んでいくことを願っています。」\n>\n\nAnd although it does not explicitly say it, I agree that `～を通じて` sounds more\nformal for the interchangeable situations.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-16T04:27:54.457", "id": "13151", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-16T04:27:54.457", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "13123", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "I would probably say one of\n\n```\n\n 話者数上位１０言語\n 話者数による世界トップ１０言語\n 世界で最も話されている言語の上位１０言語\n \n```", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-13T23:31:27.930", "id": "13125", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-14T01:26:15.653", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-14T01:26:15.653", "last_editor_user_id": "119", "owner_user_id": "2964", "parent_id": "13124", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "Let's start with 話されている \"are spoken\".\n\nWe'll use that as a relative clause to modify 言語 \"language\":\n\n> 話されている言語 \n> _languages that are spoken_\n\nAnd we'll add 最も \"most\":\n\n> 最も話されている言語 \n> _languages that are spoken the most_ \n> = the _[most spoken] languages_\n\nAnd 世界で to make the scope \"in the world\":\n\n> 世界で最も話されている言語 \n> _the most spoken languages in the world_\n\nLast, we insert １０の to say _how many_ of the most spoken languages:\n\n> 世界で最も話されている１０の言語 \n> _the ten most spoken languages in the world_", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-14T03:15:13.223", "id": "13126", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-14T03:32:38.860", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-14T03:32:38.860", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13124", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "I think 好き was originally a noun derived from 好く, but then it came to be used\nas a _na_ -adjective as well. In fact, most _na_ -adjectives derive from nouns\n(and some people consider them to _still_ be nouns).\n\nThe following quote is from [_Origins of the Verbalizer Affixes in the Japonic\nLanguages_](http://ling.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/alumni%20senior%20essays/TylerLAuSeniorEssay.pdf)\nby Tyler Lau:\n\n> Uehara (2003) provides a compelling argument for the development of the non-\n> inflecting adjective class in Japanese. He claims that this class developed\n> from a metaphorical interpretation of container-based locational\n> expressions, accompanied by a shift in the semantics of \"things\" to\n> \"properties.\" Uehara observes that **the majority of non-­inflecting\n> adjectives can be traced back to regular nouns** and that only a few are of\n> unknown origin. _(emphasis added)_\n\nThe Uehara paper cited is _A Diachronic Perspective on Prototypicality: The\nCase of Nominal Adjectives in Japanese_ (Satoshi Uehara, 2003).\n\nSo it's not surprising that 好き looks like a (deverbal) noun. But if you check\n[a dictionary](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E5%A5%BD%E3%81%8D), you'll see that\nit's marked not only 名 (short for 名詞 \"noun\"), but also 形動 (short for 形容動詞,\nwhich is the part of speech that corresponds to _na_ -adjective).\n\nSo from the perspective of the modern language, it uses な (or だ, etc.) because\nit's a _na_ -adjective.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-14T06:02:57.707", "id": "13128", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-14T06:22:40.047", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-14T06:22:40.047", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13127", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "The な suffix is reserved entirely for nouns. な adjectives behave exactly like\n名詞 in my experience, aside from using な when modifying another noun. 好き in\nEnglish is approximately equal to the noun 'desirability'. This, however, is\nan inconvenient explanation to young learners, so it is common to see the 形動\nexplained as 'な adjectives'. The problem is, 形動 do not interact with other\nJapanese words the way that Japanese adjectives (い adjectives) do.\n\nFundamentally speaking, there are three main classes by which words in\nJapanese interact. The first, 'nouns', broadly includes 名詞 and 形容動詞 (な\nadjectives). The second, 'verbs' includes 動詞 and 形容詞 (い adjectives). The\nthird, 'adverbs' roughly includes any adjectives, particles, postpositions,\n形容動詞 with the と suffix, etc.\n\nNouns:\n\n```\n\n 好きです '(it) is likeable'\n 猫です '(it) is cat'\n 海の魚です '(it) is the sea's fish'\n 好きな魚です '(it) is a fish that is likeable'\n \n```\n\nThe only apparent difference between both of the two (aside from English\nequivalent) is that so called な adjectives use な in place of the possessive の.\n\nVerbs:\n\n```\n\n 私が魚を食べる 'I will eat fish'\n その人が優しい 'That person is kind'\n 水を飲みますか？ 'Will you drink water?'\n 美味しいですか？ 'Is (it) delicious?'\n 優しい人です '(He) is a person that is kind'\n 食べた魚です '(it) is the fish that (I) ate'\n \n```\n\nWith verbs, the differences are much more apparent. い adjectives cannot use\nthe を particle, but may take the suffix です for politeness. Besides that, they\nmay both be conjugated, and may serve as subordinate clauses to other nouns.\nYou may also end sentences with any verb.\n\nI won't get into 'adverbs' here as the class is very general and honestly,\nquite irrelevant to your question. Suffice to say, there is a humongous\nvariety of 'adverbs' as I have basically used this class as a catch all for\nsemantic modifiers of every description.\n\nな adjectives are Japanese nouns which take な when modifying another noun. い\nadjective are Japanese verbs with unique conjugation rules. I'm sorry to say,\nbut because these words translate into English adjectives, numerous beginner's\nmaterials make the mistake of naming them both adjectives. The honest truth is\nthat 形容動詞 are a special subclass of nouns. Contrarily 形容詞, the い adjectives,\nare actually a lot more similar to verbs.\n\nAccording to lesson 40 in \"Making Sense of Japanese Grammar: A Clear Guide\nThrough Common Problems\" by Zeljko Cipris and Shoko Hamano, the な suffix\nbelongs to a small set of nouns that due to their abstract nature, are given a\nspecial suffix. For example, you can't deny that a student belongs to a\nuniversity (大学の学生), but you can argue about what 'healthy' is (元気な人). General\nspeaking, only the most subjective of nouns use な. (sickness is easier to\nidentify than health, explaining the contrast between 元気な～ and 病気の～.\n\nThis link may be of interest: <http://www.yano.bc.ca/vansin/vansinpo072.htm>", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-15T18:18:07.020", "id": "13145", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-15T18:18:07.020", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13127", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "A native speaker here. Between the two ways you parsed the line, the second\none is much better though still not perfect. The first period placed after the\nにじむ in your second attempt is unnecessary.\n\nNearly all native speaers would consider 色あせる or 色あせた as one word, therefore;\nwe would not even think that a が or の is being omitted. All of 色あせた、青ににじむ and\n白い modify the 雲.\n\nWhat is 遠い is the 日, not the 雲, which makes your first parsing attempt\nincorrect. 「遠い日」 is a very common collocation. The あの serves to emphasize and\nspecify the 遠い日.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-15T02:32:03.337", "id": "13133", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-15T02:32:03.337", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13132", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "I had to consult with one of my friends regarding this (specifically regarding\npoint 2), as it felt a little ambiguous to me, but now I've come to understand\nthat it's not ambiguous.\n\n> ［［［色あせた］青］ににじむ］［白い雲］。［［遠い［あの日］］の］いろ。 \n> [[[faded] blue]-DAT blur] [white clouds]. [[distant [that day]]-GEN] color. \n> Literal: 'The white clouds which blur into the faded blue. The colors of\n> that distant day.'\n\n 1. 色あせる is one word.\n\n 2. にじむ semantically fits much better as a relative clause of 白い雲 because it would be rather weird for にじむ to not have a subject, since that verb describes the fading from the perspective of its subject into its indirect object, and there is such a nice subject (the white clouds) right next to it.\n\n 3. As Tokyo Nagoya mentioned, 遠い日 is common.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-15T03:15:18.447", "id": "13134", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-15T03:15:18.447", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3097", "parent_id": "13132", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "\"Not everything is X\" is the same logically as \"Some things (exist which) are\nnot X\", so in the general case you can do something like\n\n> 青くないものもある \n> there also exist things that are not blue \n> = some of them aren't blue \n> = not every one of them is blue\n\nUnfortunately, for the \"is here\" case, where our verb is いる, that would give\nus something like いない人もいる, which is at best confusing, so we might want to\nlook for a rephrase.\n\n> 来ていない人もいる there are people who haven't come / not everyone is here \n> 全員そろっていない the group of everyone is not fully gathered\n\nDepending on how you want the emphasis you can also negate the clause\n\"everything is X\" directly by inserting a noun like わけ:\n\n> 誰もがいる **(という)わけ** ではない \n> **it is** not **that** everyone is here", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-15T12:21:00.400", "id": "13139", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-18T00:02:48.767", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-18T00:02:48.767", "last_editor_user_id": "315", "owner_user_id": "315", "parent_id": "13137", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "`Not everyone is here.' is translated into \nすべての人がここにいるのではない。\n\nHere 「すべて～ではない」is a partial negation.\n\n`Everyne is not here' is translated into \nすべての人がここにいない。(i.e. 誰もいない)\n\nHere「すべて～ない」is a total negation.\n\n> If you are familiar with formal language representations :-), \n> We can interpret the above situation as below: \n>\n>\n> When P(x)≡[x is here], \n> Not everyone is here. \n> ⇔ ￢(∀xP(x)) \n> ⇔ すべての人がここにいるのではない。\n>\n> 誰もいない。 \n> ⇔ No one is here. \n> ⇔ ￢(∃xP(x)) \n> ⇔ ∀x(￢P(x)) \n> ⇔ Everyone is not here. \n> ⇔ すべての人がここにいない。\n\nIn contract to the expresson 「すべての人がここにいない」(total negation), \nthe expression 「すべての人はここにいない」is somewhat ambiguous. \nthis can be interpreted as both partial negation and total negation.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-15T12:37:38.793", "id": "13140", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-15T12:37:38.793", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3849", "parent_id": "13137", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "The verbal morpheme\n[化【か】](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&p=%E5%8C%96&dtype=0&dname=0na&stype=0&pagenum=1&index=02707000)\nin Japanese acts as a derivational suffix. Since it's a verbal morpheme (as in\nChinese), it forms verbal nouns from regular nouns. These verbal nouns can be\nused in periphrastic constructions with する (see [Japanese \"Verbal Noun and\n_suru_ \" Constructions](http://www.billposer.org/Papers/japper.pdf) by Bill\nPoser).\n\nIt corresponds fairly closely to _-ization_ or _-ification_. It adds the\nmeaning _-ize, -(i)fy_ (intransitively: \"to become\", transitively: \"to cause\nto become\"), but the resulting compound is still a syntactically a noun.\nPlacing it in a periphrastic construction with する allows it to be used as a\nverb:\n\n```\n\n 武器　　　　　　　　weapon\n 武器化　　　　　　　weaponization\n 武器化する　　　　　weaponize\n \n```\n\nIn particular, this suffix can be attached to _adjectival nouns_ (called\n形容動詞の語幹 in traditional grammar):\n\n```\n\n グローバル　　　　　global\n グローバル化　　　　globalization\n グローバル化する　　globalize\n \n```\n\nBut as [jovanni points\nout](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/13138/13147?noredirect=1#comment28163_13147),\nthe resulting words don't work quite the same way; the result of グローバル化する is\nnot a グローバル, but a thing which is global.\n\nMuch like English _-ize_ and _-(i)fy_ affixation, Japanese 化 affixation is a\nproductive process, so you can add it to nouns whenever you feel it makes\nsense to do so:\n\n```\n\n 階層　　　　　　　　stratum\n 階層化　　　　　　　stratification\n 階層化する　　　　　stratify\n アイコン　　　　　　icon\n アイコン化　　　　　iconization\n アイコン化する　　　iconize\n \n```\n\nOf course, the stranger it is semantically, [the sillier the result\nis](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1285146442):\n\n```\n\n ハンバーガー　　　　hamburger\n ハンバーガー化　　　hamburgerization\n ハンバーガー化する　hamburgerize\n \n```\n\nBut I think that as long as a noun can be interpreted as something other than\na verbal noun, 化 can attach to it. It seems to be very productive!", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-15T22:34:00.557", "id": "13147", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-16T03:07:36.790", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.740", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13138", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "It appears to be: 金品ト交換出来マセン\n\nIt says \"Cannot be exchanged with money or goods\":\n\n```\n\n 金品と: with commodities (money/goods)\n 交換出来ません: Not exchangeable\n \n```\n\nI don't have a clue why they decided to use katakana (instead of hiragana, as\nis generally used in Japanese).", "comment_count": 11, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-15T16:27:53.397", "id": "13142", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-20T08:40:25.893", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-20T08:40:25.893", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13141", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "With all due respect, I must state that thinking that a sentence automatically\nbecomes a question if it has a question mark at its end is a very Japanese-as-\na-foreign-language-esque way of thinking. The question mark itself is a\nrelatively new phenomenon in the history of the Japanese language; therefore,\nwe tend to use it more freely than the speakers of other languages that have\nbeen using the question mark longer.\n\nNot sure if the members like this analogy but to me it is like sushi. Where\nsushi is relatively new, such as in North America, people make sushi more\nfreely than the Japanese do --- like by using cream cheese and avocado or\ndeep-frying sushi as with the volcano rolls.\n\nThe sentence 「マスコミにバラしてもいいんですよ？」 is 100% natural-sounding and \"correct\" by\nnative speakers' standards, period. Grammatically, it is a statement but is\nread with a rising intonation at its end, which is the purpose of the use of\nthe question mark by the author. In informal writing, this (the combo of\nstatement and question mark) is often used to let the reader know that the\nspeaker expects the other person's opinion or reaction to the statement. You\nmay think of this as an unstated \"Is that OK?\" or \"What do ya think?\"\n\nWe do exactly the same thing in oral conversations when we say a statement\nwith a rising intonation. Naturally, this is without using a question mark.\n\nFinally, a couple of \"real-life\" examples:\n\n 1. A group of 4 dudes are in a house and it is about noon. Taro volunteers to cook ramen for the entire group but one of the other three says he is not hungry. Taro might say as he starts toward the kitchen:\n\n「マジで？マサちゃんお腹空いてないんだぁ。じゃあ3人分しか作んないよ？」 For those unfamiliar with Tokyo dialect,\n作んない means 作らない.\n\n 2. You and your friend are walking towards school when your friend says 「ヤベっ！数学の教科書家に置いてきちゃった！ごめん、取ってくる。」 Because your first class starts soon, you could not wait for him to come back. You might say:\n\n「そうなんだ、しかたないねぇ。んじゃ悪いけどオレ先に行っちゃうよ？」", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-17T01:50:46.957", "id": "13158", "last_activity_date": "2019-02-11T15:31:28.390", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13152", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "Just to make sure you don't miss this point:\n\nThe lady is trying to blackmail the principal into firing the teacher by\nthreatening to spill the beans to the media, thereby damaging the reputation\nof the school.\n\n> マスコミにバラしてもいいんですよ\n\n\"I'll go to the media if I have to\" or something like that. As others have\nexplained, the question mark doesn't really turn this into a question, it just\nindicates that the speaker is looking for a response, i.e. a hidden \"Does this\nchange your mind?\" or something like that.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-17T03:02:06.863", "id": "13159", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-17T03:02:06.863", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "13152", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "In computer encodings, a kanji or kana usually takes 16 bits, not 8 bits, and\neven as much as 24 bits for really obscure kanji. In Weibo (the Chinese clone\nof Twitter, i.e. Evil Censorship Profiteer), Chinese chars count as two ASCII\nchars. Chinese (especially literary Chinese) is even more dense than Japanese\nthough.\n\nFrom a linguistic perspective (not a computer storage perspective), Japanese\nis very much the _opposite_ of dense. This is mostly due to Japanese words\nbeing long:\n\n> 緑 vs. green: 3 vs. 1 moras (グリーン is four...)\n>\n> 日本 vs Japan: 3-4 vs 2 moras\n\nThis is even more apparent when you factor in the agglutinative grammar of\nJapanese:\n\n> さゆりちゃんが来たので、とてもうしくなりましたね。 (22 syllables)\n>\n> I'm so happy that Mary came. (8 syllables)\n\nThis is part of the reason why Japanese is spoken so quickly, and why it likes\ndropping pronouns so much. Nobody wants to say `私達は、あなた達と私達の昼ごはんをゆっくり食べました`\n(36 syllables) for `We ate our lunch with you slowly` (8 syllables).\n\n(Side note: earlier forms of Japanese were thought to have been spoken\n**much** more slowly, due to the fact that the phonology was complex, and\nthings took less cruft to say.)", "comment_count": 10, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-16T21:23:06.653", "id": "13156", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-16T21:23:06.653", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "2960", "parent_id": "13155", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "An alpabet has roughly log(60)～6bits informations and a Kanji has roughly\nlog(3000)～12bits informations.\n\n> Here we assumed that every character has equal frequency. \n> More acculate estimates would be \n> -Σ((probability of a character X)×log(probabily of a character X) \n> (sum over every character X). \n> If all the character have equal frequency, this sum becomes to log(total\n> number of characters). \n> If we include the space character into the sum above, the sum becomes\n> smaller because the frequency of the space chacter in alphabetical texts is\n> very high.\n\nSo a kanji character has as twice informations as that of an alphabet. \nSince each kanji character has twice width as that of an alphabet, and English\ntexts have many spaces, I estimate the total length of japanese texts would be\n0.7～0.8 of English texts.\n\n> We assumed the very important fact that \n> 'texts written in English and corresponding texts written in japanese have\n> equal informations' \n>", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-17T00:31:11.287", "id": "13157", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-17T00:50:26.517", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-17T00:50:26.517", "last_editor_user_id": "3849", "owner_user_id": "3849", "parent_id": "13155", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "This is not an answer, but I will post it in the hope that it may resolve part\nof your confusion. I am afraid that you seem to be mixing “shorter” in the\nsense that it uses less _characters_ and “shorter” in the sense that it uses\nless _area_ in typical typesetting (hence less pages in typical books,\nassuming that the size of a page is similar in books in English and books in\nJapanese).\n\nI think that it is fair to say that text in Japanese tends to use less\ncharacters than the corresponding text in English, because the writing system\nof Japanese has more characters to choose from. However, for the same reason,\ncharacters in Japanese tend to be more complicated than those in English, and\ntherefore characters in Japanese take more area when printed than those in\nEnglish. Therefore, it would not be surprising if books in Japanese sometimes\nhave more pages than the corresponding books in English.\n\nYour comparison of the number of pages of novels in English and Japanese is\ninteresting (from your comment):\n\n> I already did something on my own, comparing Anna Karenina, Crime and\n> Punishment and Catcher in the Rye in Japanese and English (using Amazon book\n> data). Interesting enough, the Japanese version of The Catcher in the Rye\n> had more pages than the English one.\n\nAlthough comparing three pairs of books is clearly not enough to draw any\nconclusion, what you observed may have something to do with the fact that\n_Catcher in the Rye_ is originally written in English and translated into\nJapanese, whereas _Anna Karenina_ and _Crime and Punishment_ are originally in\nRussian and translated into both English and Japanese. I would try to see if\nthe comparison gives the opposite results in case of novels originally written\nin Japanese and their translations into English.\n\nI have been always thinking that there may be a tendency that text translated\ninto some language is longer than text originally written in the same\nlanguage. I do not have any evidence for this hypothesis, but if this tendency\nreally exists, a hypothetical reason is as follows: A text (especially text in\nnovels) in some language is often written in such a way that it is natural in\nthat language, and probably natural text can often be concise. Translation\ntries to reproduce the content and/or the atmosphere of the original text in\nanother language, which forces less natural way of using the language.\nTherefore I think that it is a plausible possibility that translation often\nsacrifices conciseness. Of course, this is just a hypothesis yet to be tested,\nunless someone has already thought the same thing and tested it. [Edit:\nPhoenixFox has already mentioned a similar point in a comment on user54609’s\nanswer, so it is at least not just me.]", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-17T23:07:32.987", "id": "13183", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-18T11:04:19.833", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-18T11:04:19.833", "last_editor_user_id": "15", "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "13155", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "\"Instead of 「か」, real questions in casual speech are usually asked with the\nexplanatory の particle or nothing at all except for a rise in intonation\"\n\n<http://www.guidetojapanese.org/learn/grammar/question>", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-17T05:25:51.440", "id": "13163", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-17T05:25:51.440", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3221", "parent_id": "13161", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "To add to what 無色受想行識 said, の is regularly used in conjunction with\ninterrogative words, such as in どこに行くの？or 何を食べるの？ Often when no interrogative\nword is used, rising intonation will mark that the sentence is a question,\nsuch as in 明日、パーティに行く？\n\nAdditionally, の can be used to indicate surprise or disbelief. For example,\n\n```\n\n A: 明日、パーティに行くよ。\n B: 行くの？ \n \n```\n\nIn this instance, B probably thought A wasn't going to the party, and is\nsurprised to learn that he is.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-17T06:26:57.950", "id": "13164", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-17T06:26:57.950", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4039", "parent_id": "13161", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "To put it as directly as possible, based on my experiences and learning, the\nbest way to describe the article の appearing at the end of questions, after\nverbs, is to convey a stronger sense of curiosity than simply asking the\nquestion without it. If you're familiar with the んですか？[noun]なんですか？\nconstruction, it plays a similar role.\n\nYou might think of it as:\n\n> お手洗いはどこありますか？ ＝ Where's the bathroom? \n> お手洗いはどこあるの？あるんですか？= Where's the bathroom?(I really need to go!) \n> \n> 何をしている？= What are you doing? \n> 何をしているの？= What in the world are you doing?/What are you doing?(Tell me! I\n> wanna know!)\n\n(Disclaimer: This isn't a super natural phrasing for this question. It was\nbent to fit my example. お手洗いはどこですか？ is much more common.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2015-08-18T18:26:18.100", "id": "27470", "last_activity_date": "2015-08-18T18:26:18.100", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "10907", "parent_id": "13161", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "It is not strange at all. It appears to me that many Japanese-learners let the\ntranslated English words bother them too much. Then again, the same happens\nwhen we Japanese learn foreign languages as well.\n\n許せ is very often used in informal speech among close friends as a sort of\n\"tough-guy speech\". It is heard most often from young male speakers. Using the\npoliter forms can only sound out of place in certain situations, and I really\ndo not think it is a Japan-only phenomenon.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-18T03:24:59.497", "id": "13186", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-18T03:40:05.767", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-18T03:40:05.767", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13162", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "If I had to try to generalize, I'd say:\n\n * 下りる is used for _moving downward_ , including a number of metaphorical or idiomatic uses\n * 降りる is used mainly for _falling back_ or _getting out of a vehicle_\n\nBut I think it helps to be more specific, so I've put together a little\noutline with some examples:\n\n* * *\n\n# 下りる\n\n * **Move downward** [descend, climb down, fall, fly down, land] \n * 山を下りる\n * はしごを下りる\n * 階段を下りる\n * 幕が下りる\n * 飛行機が下りる\n * 宇宙船が下りる\n * **Grant or issue** [permission, a license, payment, pension] \n * 許可が下りる\n * ビザが下りる\n * 金が下りる\n * **Feel relieved** [like a weight has been lifted off your shoulders] \n * 肩の荷が下りる\n * **Lock**\n * 錠が下りる\n * **Discharge from the body**\n * 血が下りる\n\n* * *\n\n# 降りる\n\n * **Getting off/out of things** , particularly modes of transportation [train, boat, bus, car, taxi, plane, horse, elevator] \n * タクシーから降りる\n * 電車から降りる\n * 馬から降りる\n * 飛行機から降りる \n * 屋根から降りる\n * 椅子から降りる (these examples work with を as well)\n * **Quitting, withdrawing, pulling back** [from a job, a game, a position] \n * 仕事を降りる\n * 役職を降りる\n * 勝負を降りる\n * マウンドを降りる\n * **When something descends upon the landscape** [shadow falls, dew or frost form] \n * 霜が降りる\n * 露が降りる\n * 闇が降りる", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-17T13:27:20.650", "id": "13167", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-17T13:53:55.360", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-17T13:53:55.360", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13166", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 } ]

[ { "body": "The linguist Kunio Nishiyama analyzes the 連用形 of a verb as its stem, plus an\nepenthetic vowel `-i` in the case of consonant-stem verbs. This makes sense\nbecause:\n\n 1. It appears with consonant-stem verbs, e.g. between the root `hur-` and the suffix `-sou` (振りそう).\n 2. It does not appear with vowel-stem verbs, e.g. between the root `mi-` and the suffix `-sou` (見そう).\n 3. It does not appear with -i adjectives, e.g. between the root `taka-` and the suffix `-sou` (高そう).\n\nIn other words, all three of these cases can be described as the suffix\nattaching to the root. The epenthetic `-i` is inserted in cases where Japanese\nrequires that a consonant be followed by a vowel.\n\nI'm not sure where Nishiyama presents this idea formally. I read about it in a\nfootnote in his workshop paper [_Japanese Verbal Morphology in\nCoordination_](http://conf.ling.cornell.edu/WOSA/Nishiyama_handout.pdf) (2012)\nwhile I was trying to research a different topic. If you read through that\nhandout, you can see some of the consequences of this analysis.", "comment_count": 13, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-18T02:17:07.410", "id": "13184", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-18T10:01:35.447", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-18T10:01:35.447", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13182", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I will hazard a guess here. If va was written ヷ then the entire v- line would\nprobably have to be written with the w- line for consistency. I think the\nproblem is that except for wa, the members of the w- line are strange. There\nis no wu. wo is only used for one word and we, wi are not used, meaning people\nare not as familiar with them.\n\nPeople may have gotten annoyed by these factors and decided to use ヴ_ because\nit is more convenient for representing all of the v- sounds.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-19T05:20:48.640", "id": "13199", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-19T05:20:48.640", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3221", "parent_id": "13187", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "A possible (but not really equivalent) translation of this might be \"good time\nof day\".\n\nSuch words (including `こんばんちは`、`おはこんにばんは` and other variations on the theme)\nare very informal and are somewhat humorous. They might be used when the\nspeaker does not know the time of the day, or pretends to. For example, it's\nsomewhat common on various personal blogs, since the author can't know at what\ntime of the day the post will be read.\n\nYou definitely shouldn't say this to a person you meet for the first time. In\nthis situation simple `こんにちは` works regardless of time of the day.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-18T18:21:40.653", "id": "13191", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-18T18:21:40.653", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3295", "parent_id": "13189", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "There are quite a few problems with the lyrics on the site you linked. The\nrelevant portion of the lyrics shown on Uta-Net's lyrics page for [Together by\nMONKEY MAJIK](http://www.uta-net.com/song/64937/) read as follows:\n\n> もしこの背中に翼があったら \n> いますぐキミに届けたい \n> あふれだす幸せを\n>\n> そよぐ風に乗り \n> ひかり輝く未来を \n> Together いつまでも\n\nThe phrases 「あふれだす幸せ」 and 「そよぐ風に乗りひかり輝く未来」 are both intended to be the objects\nof the verb 届ける. If we were to rearrange the lyrics into a complete sentence,\nit would probably look something like the following:\n\n> もしこの背中に翼があったら、いますぐキミにあふれだす幸せとそよぐ風に乗ってひかり輝く未来を届けたい。\n\nThe translation is just a bad one. That's all there is to it.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-11-03T19:48:13.073", "id": "13329", "last_activity_date": "2015-06-13T21:02:17.550", "last_edit_date": "2015-06-13T21:02:17.550", "last_editor_user_id": "3506", "owner_user_id": "384", "parent_id": "13193", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Here's two that have just horizontal symmetry, at least in some fonts: 旧 咺", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-19T01:58:25.070", "id": "13196", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-19T01:58:25.070", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3295", "parent_id": "13195", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "巨 臣 排 区 州 唱, etc. but this is for fun only. Some are not as symetrical as\nothers.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-19T02:26:32.310", "id": "13197", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-19T02:26:32.310", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13195", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "まで means \"until, up to\":\n\n> You can get away with being a virgin until elementary school. _or_ \n> Virginity is allowed up to elementary school.\n\nWhen まで is translated \"even\" it is used in the same sense as \"until/up to and\nincluding, e.g.\n\n> 老人まで踊っている \n> People up to and including the elderly are dancing. = Even the elderly are\n> dancing.", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-20T00:26:57.830", "id": "13203", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-20T01:37:25.440", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-20T01:37:25.440", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "13201", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "I think I can help you with this. I'm going to borrow from cypher with a tip\nof my hat. Really great lines. Skip to the end for the short answer. I would\ntranslate it as:\n\nえーマジ童貞！？ **Huh, for real? He's a virgin!?**\n\nキモーイ **Gross**!\n\n童貞が許されるのは小学生までだよねー **Virgin is so, like, elementary school...**\n\n## Here's my explanation:\n\n * 童貞 **virgin**\n * が許されるのは\n\nThis is close to ' **is acceptable** '. ' **OK** ' works to. I think using the\nword \"allowed\" is trying to hard too make the dictionary word fit in the\nsentence. Like, here's a common topic on the internet:\n**アニメ見たりゲームするのって何歳まで許されるの？** They're saying **how old is acceptable to watch\nanime and play video games?** You know, you're 'allowed' to play them until\nany age you want. But what's OK? what's _socially_ acceptable?\n\n * 小学生までだよねー\n\nUP TO elementary school students. What they don't say, but you have to imply,\nis the FROM half. Namely, '...but not FROM Junior High (age)... tee hee hee.'\n\n## The Short version\n\nI made a long response but to answer your question much shorter, まで is like\n'up to and including'. You are an elementary student up to and including the\ntime period until you're not. Then you're something else... like a junior high\nstudent. In this, apparently it's acceptable to be a virgin _up to_ this time,\nbut after that you are 'gross'.\n\nI hope that makes sense.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-20T16:26:14.140", "id": "13209", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-20T16:26:14.140", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4075", "parent_id": "13201", "post_type": "answer", "score": -2 } ]

[ { "body": "It should be the auxiliary verb けり that you are discussing, not ける. Or is it\nthe origin of けり that you are trying to find out? If so, I do not think anyone\ncould answer.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-20T01:47:41.627", "id": "13204", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-20T01:47:41.627", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13202", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "They are conjugational endings from (sh)i-Adjectives:\n\nWe can derive verbs from adjectives by adding あり:\n\n> 赤し -> 赤く＋あり -> 赤かり\n\nAnd conjugate them further:\n\n * 赤かれ＋ば\n * 赤けれ＋ど(も)\n * 赤からず (negation)\n * ...\n\nThis conjugational suffix got reanalyzed as a word on its own, yielding けれども,\nwhich was shortened to けれど, けども, and けど.\n\nEven けれ by itself was used in the meaning of けれども by the same process.\n\n日本国語大辞典\n\n> けれ：この助詞が現れたのは、文語の形容詞の「数こそ多けれ、すぐれたるは少し」の_\n> _「多けれ」のような用法から、「けれ」そのものに「が」「けれども」の意がある_ _と考えたためであろうといわれる。〔徳川時代言語の研究=湯沢幸吉郎〕", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-20T20:35:55.167", "id": "13211", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-20T20:35:55.167", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3275", "parent_id": "13202", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "I think ね is sort of rhetorical, and I'd only answer it if I was talking to\nsomeone in person. Even then, the answer would probably be something\nperfunctory like そうだ, just to feign attentiveness ;)\n\nI could be wrong; I learned this from [Tae\nKim](http://www.guidetojapanese.org/learn/grammar/adverbs), so you can check\nout that reference and see if it helps. Also, the example sentences at\n[Tangorin](http://tangorin.com/examples/%E3%81%AD) and Jim Breen's WWWJDIC\ncome off as making it sound rhetorical/for flavor, in the same category as よ\nand ざ.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-20T19:55:54.353", "id": "13210", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-20T19:55:54.353", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4068", "parent_id": "13207", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "You're right about the expected \"yes\" answer. 「～だね。」 is a rhetorical question,\nand a full answer is not expected. ね is a sentence ending particle that\nchanges a statement into a rhetorical question. だ is the casual copula used\nwith nouns or な-adjectives.\n\nThe asker is usually mentioning something they think (subjectively) and they\nexpect you to agree with their thoughts. Answering with「うん、そう」 or even simply\n「そう」 would work as a general answer.\n\n*As mentioned in the comments below, 「そう」is unnatural as a response to a compliment. In that case you can use 「そうだね」（そうですね）to agree without sounding too arrogant.\n\nIt is also common to respond by repeating the statement asked. For example:\n\nＡさん：今日は寒いね。 (Today is cold, isn't it?)\n\nＢさん：うん、寒い。(Yes, it is cold.)\n\nUnfortunately I don't have enough rep to comment, so I attempted a full\nanswer. This answer comes from my limited experience, so please correct me if\nI am wrong.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-03-16T05:58:35.650", "id": "14886", "last_activity_date": "2016-06-20T05:23:12.890", "last_edit_date": "2016-06-20T05:23:12.890", "last_editor_user_id": "4892", "owner_user_id": "4892", "parent_id": "13207", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I think it would depend on the context. For example, if someone commented to\nmy photo:\n\n> これ、プードルだね。It's a poodle, right? \n> インドカレーだね。It's Indian curry, isn't it? \n> あ、ディズニーランド(に行ったん)だね！Ah you've been to Disneyland? \n>\n\nthen I would respond:\n\n> うん！/はい！/ そうよ。/ そうだよ。Yes. \n> そうよ、かわいいでしょ。Yes, isn't it cute? \n> はい、おいしかったです！Yes, it was yummy! \n> うん。楽しかったよ。Yes, I had so much fun. etc...\n\nIf someone commented:\n\n> オシャレ/ステキだね。It's so fashionable/cool. \n> ハンサム/イケメン/美人だね。You look so handsome/pretty. \n> かわいいプードルだね。Your poodle is so cute! \n> かっこいい車だね。What a nice car! \n> (to the food I prepared) おいしそうなカレーだね。Your curry looks yummy. \n> etc... \n>\n\nthen I would respond like:\n\n> そう？ありがとう！/ ほんと？ありがとう！^^ Really? Thank you! \n>\n\nIf someone said:\n\n> そっくりだね。You two look so alike. \n> 珍しい花だね。It's an exotic flower, isn't it. \n> 変な動物だね。It's a strange animal, isn't it. \n>\n\nthen I would say \n\n> そうでしょ。/ そうね。(feminine) / そうだね。(masculine) Yes, I know. \n> そう？Oh really? \n>\n\netc etc...", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-03-16T08:43:23.040", "id": "14887", "last_activity_date": "2014-03-16T12:00:43.230", "last_edit_date": "2014-03-16T12:00:43.230", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13207", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "For a male speaker, if you're in a casual setting and just want to agree and\nkeep the conversation going: だよなぁ〜。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-03-17T20:55:51.343", "id": "14914", "last_activity_date": "2014-03-17T20:55:51.343", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4914", "parent_id": "13207", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "`息{いき}が合{あ}う` is an idiom that means \"work together smoothly\". In this case,\nit's the negative form of that idiom, so it means the dog and the person\nraising it aren't working together well.\n\nAlso, in this context, `街{まち}に出{で}かけても` isn't so much \" _despite_ going to the\ncity\", it's maybe more like \"out in the city _as well_ \". There is no\nexpectation that the city should be a place where they would work together any\nbetter than anywhere else, just that it's _also_ a place where things went\nwrong.\n\nFrom there I think you can work out the full sentence.\n\nHope that helps.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-21T01:36:03.647", "id": "13215", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-21T01:56:51.080", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-21T01:56:51.080", "last_editor_user_id": "119", "owner_user_id": "119", "parent_id": "13213", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "I won't go through a long dissection. I think Dave M G gave great clues. To\nanswer, 'what does it mean?' I'll give my interpretation and you can try to\nwork backwards from there. If you're still stuck let me know.\n\n盲導犬を飼いはじめて最初は、二人の息が合わず街に出かけても失敗ばかりでした。 **When I first got a seeing-eye dog we\ndidn't work well together at first, so when we went out together in the city\nit was one blunder after another.**\n\nTake care.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-21T06:26:10.720", "id": "13216", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-21T06:26:10.720", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4075", "parent_id": "13213", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "In this particular instance it can be read as either し or よん. Basically you're\nfine to call it either way as long as it's 単体, or rather a single number not\nbeing used as a counter (四枚{よんまい}) or in other set compound ([４月]{しがつ}) where\nthe context makes it clear which one should be used.\n\nIn your example, I don't think it's counting. It's enumerating a list of\npossible answers. You could replace it with A B C D, アイウエ, or whatever.\nDespite the fact that it's sequential, I think it's still distinct from just\n'counting,' and that's why it would be OK to use either in this situation. I\ndiscussed this with a native who said that both are definitely fine in this\ncontext.\n\nI think the insistence on \"ichi ni san shi\" as a set kind of phrase comes from\nthe kind of group call and response style of counting that they use for\nexercise or other things, where a leader will call out \"いち に さん し！\" and the\nresponse will be \"ご ろく しち はち！\" Even in this situation technically it could be\nboth (as with 7), but that's just The Way It's Done.\n\nSo yeah, it can be both. As far as I know there's no rule that dictates which\none it should be in these situations, and I have heard both used in this kind\nof test instruction setting.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-21T10:22:42.193", "id": "13218", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-22T07:49:03.940", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-22T07:49:03.940", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "13217", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "As the characters clearly suggest, 大西洋 simply refers to the big Western ocean.\nNot much confusion there.\n\n太平洋, however, is an adaptation of the English \"Pacific\" Ocean. 太平 is a word in\nits own right that means roughly this: \"peaceful\" or \"tranquil,\" or \"pacific,\"\nif you will. According to the page linked at the bottom it had previously been\nknown as 大東海.\n\nIt seems like 太 may be a simplified form of 泰, although apparently this isn't\nlisted in all character dictionaries (note that\n[here](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1316862793) a\nperson claims to have found it). The word 泰平 exists and is the same word as\n太平, and based purely on shape it makes sense that one would be a 略字. So if\nthis theory is to be believed then the 太 in 太平洋 does _not_ mean thick/fat, but\nrather peace as in 泰平, because 泰 simplifies to 太, and is not to be confused\nwith Thailand.\n\nLengthy discussion about it can be found here!\n<http://homepage2.nifty.com/osiete/s539.htm>", "comment_count": 10, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-21T15:13:40.427", "id": "13220", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-22T01:37:40.143", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-22T01:37:40.143", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "13219", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 } ]

[ { "body": "Syntactically こと is a\n[nominalizer](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominalization) in all these\nsentences, i.e. it turns a verb into a noun by simple concatenation (e.g.\n行くこと, 行く modifies こと).\n\nSemantically,\n\n * [verb]+ことにする is a set phrase and means \"to decide to [verb]\"\n * [verb]+ことになる is also a set phrase and means \"to turn out that [verb]\".\n\n[verb]ことは難しいです just means \"[verb]ing is difficult\" or \"it is difficult to\n[verb]\".\n\n* * *\n\nAnother nominalizer in Japanese is の. For a difference in usage see [this\nquestion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/1395/what-is-the-\ndifference-between-the-nominalizers-%E3%81%93%E3%81%A8-and-%E3%81%AE).", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-21T19:18:07.527", "id": "13222", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-21T22:25:11.470", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:48.447", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "13221", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "「この町に住ませて頂きたいんです。」 is a fairly unusual way of saying that one wants to live in\na certain town because people just do not have to beg to live in a certain\ntown in real life --- at least not in Japan anyway. Who said it to whom in the\nfilm? And in what kind of situation?\n\nFor the same reason, 「３年ぐらい、広島に住ませて頂きました。」 sounds strange. (That comma is\nunnecessary BTW.) It sounds as if you begged someone for some kind of rent-\nfree arrangement or you had to receive permission from the police or court to\nlive there because you were on probation or something. Or are you just\nincredibly super-humble to begin with?\n\n「3年ぐらい、広島に住ませてくれました。」 means a different thing than the sentence immediately\nabove in that with 住ませて頂きました, the unmentioned subject of the sentence is the\nspeaker, but with 住ませてくれました, the subject is another person who let you live\nthere (probably for a very low or free rent and even with board). So, if it is\nthat kind of person that you wanted to talk about, 「3年ぐらい、広島に住ませてくれました。」 is a\nvery natural-sounding sentence.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-22T02:53:35.157", "id": "13225", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-22T02:53:35.157", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13223", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "This decorative frame can be called\n[飾り罫](https://www.google.com/search?q=%E9%A3%BE%E3%82%8A%E7%BD%AB&hl=en&tbm=isch)\n(かざりけい).\n\n飾り罫 can be text-based or not, it means any kind of\n[dingbat](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dingbat)-style framing in general.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-30T06:08:17.130", "id": "13281", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-30T06:08:17.130", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "107", "parent_id": "13226", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "I think that it comes from the grammar form [～もの +\nだ](http://maggiesensei.com/2010/04/08/requested-\nlesson-%E3%80%8C%E3%82%82%E3%82%93%E3%81%8B%E3%80%8D%E3%80%8C%E3%82%82%E3%82%93%E3%81%A0%E3%80%8D%E3%80%8C%E3%81%A0%E3%81%AA%E3%82%93%E3%81%A6%E3%80%8Dmonkamondadanante/).\nWhich when changed to casual becomes もんだ which then you could add a な to.\n\nものです-> もんだ->もんだな->もんな\n\nI think this may be a usage of 'reason/explanation' version of ～もの, perhaps in\na sentence before or after the character is talking about why he had often\nalmost killed her?", "comment_count": 9, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-23T06:07:23.573", "id": "13228", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-23T09:53:31.557", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-23T09:53:31.557", "last_editor_user_id": "3916", "owner_user_id": "3916", "parent_id": "13227", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "It's a variation of entry 2イ here:\n\n<http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/219750/m0u/>\n\nAs Goo says, it's basically an exclamatory way to state a reason for\nsomething, 「詠嘆の意をこめて理由を表す」. I don't have the context in this case, but I would\nsay that in most cases the meaning is approximately the same as\n\n> 俺、何度も彼女を殺しそうになったからな\n\nand I would give the English translation as roughly\n\n> I did almost kill her several times, didn't I...", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-23T09:40:08.513", "id": "13229", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-23T09:40:08.513", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "13227", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "More than anything, it is a colloquial way of adding the nuance of\n\"retrospective confession or boasting\" in my own words.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-03-20T09:37:12.380", "id": "14958", "last_activity_date": "2014-03-20T09:37:12.380", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13227", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "It is similar to \"right ?\" Used by men The equivalent used by women would be\nもんね\n\n相手に自分の言ったことへの同意や、肯定を求める言い方です。 男性の言い方です。 女性であれば「〜もんね 」です。\n\nExemples\n\n> 今日って寒いもんな。 It's cold today, right ?\n\nSource: <https://hinative.com/ja/questions/1911840>", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2020-12-29T15:54:07.563", "id": "83337", "last_activity_date": "2020-12-29T16:23:32.257", "last_edit_date": "2020-12-29T16:23:32.257", "last_editor_user_id": "37097", "owner_user_id": "37097", "parent_id": "13227", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "It's like\n\n> 咲も必要が無い上に興味が向かない **と言って** 料理はしなかった。 \n> 咲も必要が無い上に興味が向かないと **いう理由で** 料理はしなかった。\n\nThe と is the case particle as a quotative marker. The reasons 咲 didn't cook\nare 必要が無い and 興味が向かない.\n\n* * *\n\nBy the way, the ここ in ここ２年 means \"these (two years)\", not \"here (location)\",\nand you're missing 一人 (alone) in 一人暮らしをしていたけど・・・.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-23T15:07:33.537", "id": "13232", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-23T15:07:33.537", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13231", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "I would say this と is a condensed form of **と思っているで** but this is to quibble\nabout specifics in terms of what the quotatitive implies rather to disagree\nwith ちょこれーと. I would probably translate the whole as follows:\n\n\"Even though I have been living alone for two years, my cooking has not gotten\nany better. Saki hasn't cooked either, but more than it not being necessary,\nit's because she hasn't been interested [in cooking].\"", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-24T04:44:02.747", "id": "13236", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-24T04:44:02.747", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4091", "parent_id": "13231", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "\"君に会うと、会いたくなくなる。\" means \"If I meet you, I will start wishing not to meet you.\"\n\nIn parts 君に会うと. The と is one of your four many options for if type\nexpressions. But this particular one has a 前後 (before/after) connection some\nof the others lack. This means the event following in this case happens\ntemporally after. So it could also be translated \"After I meet with you, I\nstart to wish I didn't meet you\" or something roughly like that (the tense in\nthe ～と clause is immaterial in Japanese).\n\nThe second half involves the following sequence:\n\n> 会う to meet\n>\n> 会いたい to want to meet\n>\n> あいたくない to not want to meet\n>\n> あいたくなく adverbialization of the constructon\n\nなる in this case to become\n\nergo, I begin to not want to meet you.\n\nThus, together, whenever I meet with you, I start wishing I didn't meet you.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-24T04:51:17.040", "id": "13237", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-24T04:51:17.040", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "4091", "parent_id": "13234", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I would say it like this:\n\n```\n\n 君に会えたら、 If I were to meet you\n 必ず、 for sure\n 同時に、　in that same moment\n この「君に会いたい」気持ちが消えちゃう。　this I-miss-you feeling would disappear.\n \n```", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-31T15:49:17.787", "id": "13289", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-31T15:49:17.787", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1266", "parent_id": "13234", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "In English, the auxiliary verb _do_ is a meaningless verb that is inserted for\nvarious reasons. For example, direct questions require an auxiliary verb in\nmodern English:\n\n> 1a. *Like you the movie? \n> 1b. Do you like the movie?\n\nWhen you form an English question like this, the subject and auxiliary swap\nplaces. But the lexical verb _like_ isn't an auxiliary, so example 1a is\nungrammatical. You insert _do_ so that you have an auxiliary to switch with\nthe subject.\n\nAnd in modern English, you need an auxiliary to add the negative _not_ or\nnegative affix _-n't_ :\n\n> 2a. *She takes not the money. / *She takesn't the money. \n> 2b. She does not take the money. / She doesn't take the money.\n\nThe examples in 2a don't work because _take_ is a lexical verb. In this kind\nof English sentence, you can only negate an auxiliary verb, so you insert the\nmeaningless verb _do_.\n\n* * *\n\nJapanese is completely different. It has a negator `-(a)nai` which attaches\ndirectly to verb stems. There's no need to insert anything like _do_ , so\nwhether or not you translate it with _do_ depends on what's required in\nEnglish. It has nothing to do with Japanese.\n\nTo form the negative in Japanese, attach `-(a)nai` to the stem of a verb:\n\n```\n\n 　食べる　　tabe-ru　　　　　\n 　食べない　tabe-nai\n \n```\n\nThe stem `tabe-` ends in a vowel, so you add `-nai` without the `(a)`.\n\n```\n\n 　話す　　　hanas-u\n 　話さない　hanas-anai\n \n```\n\nThe stem `hanas-` ends in a consonant, so you add `-anai` **with** the `(a)`.\nAdding this extra vowel prevents you from saying the consonants /s/ and /n/\nwith nothing in-between, which Japanese doesn't allow.\n\nYour example 買う is a consonant stem verb, too, even though it doesn't look\nlike one. The stem is `kaw-`, so you insert the `(a)`:\n\n```\n\n 　買う　　　kaw-u\n 　買わない　kaw-anai\n \n```\n\nThe reason this seems weird is that /w/ disappears before every vowel except\n/a/. So the /w/ disappears from `kaw-u`, and you're left with `kau` (買う).\n\nThe main exception to this pattern is ある, which becomes ない instead of *あらない.\nAnd there are other negators (such as ん in ません, used to form a polite\nnegative). But I'm limiting this discussion to ない, since that's the negator\nyou asked about.\n\nAs you can see, there's nothing corresponding to _do_ in these Japanese\nexamples. Whether you translate these with _do_ or not depends entirely on the\nrequirements of English, and has nothing to do with the Japanese.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-25T12:31:41.977", "id": "13242", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-25T12:46:25.137", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-25T12:46:25.137", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13241", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "Tae Kim sometimes uses over-literal translations. I'm guessing the one that\nconfused you was \"[As for me, not\nbuy](http://www.guidetojapanese.org/negverb.html)\" (私は買わない).\n\nWithout context, this could mean:\n\n1) A specific statement about the future: I'm not going to buy/I won't buy\n(thing we were talking about)\n\n2) A more general statement about your habits: I don't buy (thing we were\ntalking about)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-25T14:33:33.340", "id": "13243", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-25T14:33:33.340", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "571", "parent_id": "13241", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "事 means \"(a) certain thing(s)\" while 物事 means \"everything\" or \"all kinds of\nthings\" instead of just one or two things. That is at least how we native\nspeakers perceive these words to mean, and accordingly, that is what you will\nfind in a monolingual dictionary.\n\nばかな事 is a perfectly normal collocation, but ばかな物事 is collocationally highly\nconstrained even though it might be labeled as \"grammatical\" in the sense that\nit is in a \"normal\" adjective + noun structure. Whether one calls it correct\nor incorrect, ばかな物事 just sounds very weird to the native ear.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-26T04:57:27.197", "id": "13248", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-26T04:57:27.197", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13245", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "If this is wrong, someone please point it out. I'm sure there's a better way\nto explain. But here's my 2 cents.\n\nThe hint is in ある・あります.\n\n**somewhereにsomethingがあります。** You could say: 'one of the questions is 'why do\nyou want to go'. That would be は right. Or you could say: 'one of the\nquestions in the University application is 'why do you want to go'. That would\nbe more in line with the bolded part above.\n\nTaking one step further. You could even pop の一つ right off the sentence. It\ncould still be に。And if it said の一つには that would also be OK, and probably a\nlittle easier to parse. I think someone else could expand further on this.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-26T08:38:34.830", "id": "13250", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-26T08:38:34.830", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4075", "parent_id": "13249", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "In Samuel Martin's 1975 _A Reference Grammar of Japanese_ , he calls this use\nof `に` the \"copula infinitive\" (p.396). But more importantly, he glosses it in\nEnglish with the word \"as\":\n\n> うちは **お客様に** 外人の方が多いんで、アスパラガス、ブロッコリーなどの西洋野菜がよくでます。 \n> \" **As customers** we have mostly foreigners, so lots of foreign vegetables\n> like asparagus and broccoli are out for sale.\"\n\nHe also gives an example that closely parallels yours, using `〜の一つ **に**` (\"\n**as** one of 〜\"):\n\n> **ハワイ群島の一つに** マウイ島がある。 \n> \" **As one of the Hawaiian Islands** there is the island of Maui.\" \n> = \" **Among the Hawaiian Islands** is the island of Maui.\"\n\nIn this example, \"among\" is a more natural expression in English, but \"as one\nof\" is a little closer to the literal meaning of the Japanese.\n\nAs you can see from these examples, `に` isn't really marking a location; it's\nfunctioning adverbially.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-26T16:02:58.880", "id": "13251", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-26T16:02:58.880", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13249", "post_type": "answer", "score": 13 }, { "body": "First, OP needs to get rid of this common misconception among J-learners that\nに functions only as location marker. It has so many usages; Look the word up\nin a larger monolingual dictionary.\n\nThe に in question is synonymous with ～～として. It expresses the set of\nqualifications or characteristics that something fulfills to be regarded as an\nexample of that group of things being decribed.\n\nWith sentence #1: Group: Questions Americans ask Japanese that Japanese have a\nhard time answering. Example: How to say \"How are you?\" in Japanese.\n\nSentence #2: Group: Procedures for applying for admission to U.S. colleges.\nExample: Writing an essay on why you wish to study at XYZ College.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-27T03:48:28.447", "id": "13252", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-27T03:48:28.447", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13249", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "I don't know of any analysis which compares the frequency of しょ and しょう\nsounds. You mention that しょ might be more likely at the start of a word and\nしょう more likely at the end of a word. I don't think that's necessarily true.\nFor example, the suffixes 書 and 所 (and 署) are quite frequent and are at the\nend of the word. Also, most kanji with reading しょう can also come at the\nbeginning of a word (e.g. [証書]{しょうしょ}).\n\nThe WWWJDIC kanji dictionary file contains\n\n * 52 kanji with reading しょ and \n * 238 kanji with reading しょう\n\nso one might guess that しょう is more frequent than しょ, both at the beginning\nand at the end. (But of course the above-mentioned suffixes might tip the\nbalance for しょ being more likely at the end, but for this one would have to\nlook at the actual numbers, for example in a corpus.)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-28T08:06:10.310", "id": "13261", "last_activity_date": "2020-05-14T10:17:59.843", "last_edit_date": "2020-05-14T10:17:59.843", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "13253", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "Simply from etymology I would expect `しょう` to be **far** more frequent than\n`しょ`. This is because `しょ` was always `しょ` historically, while a ridiculously\nlarge amount of sounds _merged_ to `しょう`:\n\n> せう せふ しゃう しゃふ しよ etc", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-28T12:35:35.527", "id": "13263", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-28T12:35:35.527", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "2960", "parent_id": "13253", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

[ { "body": "The best translation of this usage of する would depend on the preceding adverb\nand the context.\n\nWith はっきり, it would be either \"become\" or \"turn\". The same goes for other\nadverbs such as しっとり、くっきり, etc. that, as はっきり, describe a state of a non-\nanimate thing.\n\nWith adverbs like すっきり、どきどき、すかっと that describe a human sensation, \"feel\" would\nbe the verb choice for translation.\n\nBTW, you probably have a good book and/or teacher because you are using the\nword \"adverb\" correctly in discussing Japanese grammar. I say this because I\nhave met so many Japanese learners who call words like はやく and たかく \"adverbs\"\nwhen those are merely conjugated adjectives.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-27T11:32:05.073", "id": "13255", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-27T11:32:05.073", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13254", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "Such words are not really adverbs, but mimetic words (`擬態語` / gitaigo) or\nonomatopoeia (`擬音語` / giongo, for those that correspond to actual sounds).\nThey may be used as adjectives, adverbs, or even verbs. For example:\n\n * `はっきりと話す` (speak plainly) - adverb\n * `はっきりとした赤と青` (clear red and blue) - adjective\n * `記憶をはっきりさせる` (refresh one's memory) - verb\n\nSome gitaigo may be used like nouns:\n\n * `びしょびしょになる` (become wet)\n\n* * *\n\nThe topic of gitaigo words is generally kind of glanced over in many books but\nit is very important and can improve your understanding of the language quite\na lot. There is a very nice post [over at Nihon\nShock](http://nihonshock.com/2013/04/japanese-onomatopoeia/) describing it in\nmore detail but I'll just mention that gitaigo words can take one of three\nforms:\n\n1) doubling: `いらいら`, `くすくす`, `どきどき`, `にこにこ` etc. \n2) と ending: `にこっと`, `そっと`, `ちゃんと`, `ちょっと`, `ぼーっと` etc. \n3) り ending: `がっかり`, `しっかり`, `ゆっくり`, `はっきり`.\n\nThey may be often written in katakana, especially for actual onomatopoeia\n(representing sound).\n\nThere's a nice gitaigo dictionary [at\nNihongoResources](http://www.nihongoresources.com/dictionaries/onomatopoeia.html).", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-27T15:57:55.860", "id": "13257", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-27T15:57:55.860", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3295", "parent_id": "13254", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "First, it is なきよう, not なきょう.\n\nなき is a literary form of ない, and よう is the same as ように, which is often used at\nthe end of a polite request.\n\nお忘れなきよう ＝ お忘れのないようになさってください\n\nIn case you are not familiar with なさってください, it is a politer form of してください.\n\nTherefore, the phrase means \"Please do not forget.\"", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-28T23:56:55.530", "id": "13266", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-28T23:56:55.530", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13265", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "It is \"correct\" because 忘れたい人 can mean _**two**_ different things in Japanese\neven though Google Translate gave you only one. Which one it actually means in\na given situation solely depends on the context.\n\nThere are phrases that we can use if we absolutely must avoid any ambiguity\neven WITHOUT any context, but those can sound kind of wordy to our own native-\nspeaking ears so we often use the shorter forms just as your examples. **In\nreal life, after all, there is always context**.\n\nThe non-ambiguous forms are:\n\n私 **が** 忘れたい人 = the person(s) that I want to forget\n\n私 **を** （or 私のこと **を** ）忘れたい人 = the person(s) that want(s) to forget me\n\nAs always, it is the particle that matters.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-29T05:05:59.500", "id": "13268", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-07T01:18:48.143", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-07T01:18:48.143", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13267", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "I do know that (my friend' wife is a Japanese teacher in training) compounding\npoliteness is incorrect. Adding extra politeness honorifics does not increase\nthe politeness level, its just wrong. Don't follow everyday Japanese speakers\nthey are not well versed in this area.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-29T13:41:31.900", "id": "13274", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-29T13:41:31.900", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4045", "parent_id": "13269", "post_type": "answer", "score": -2 }, { "body": "As you probably have already guessed, there is no hard rule about how many\ntimes you can use お and ご prefixes in a sentence. We often avoid using too\nmany honorifics, and it is true that there is a general tendency to use\nhonorifics in the final verbs. However, we sometimes use honorifics also in\nother places.\n\nThis is different from 二重敬語. For example, consider お読みになられる. Because お読みになる is\na respectful form of 読む, and なられる is a respectful form of なる, お読みになられる is\nsomething like the respectful form of the respectful form of 読む. Expressions\nlike this are called 二重敬語, and they are usually discouraged in the modern\nJapanese except for certain common phrases. See pp. 30–31 of\n[敬語の指針](http://www.bunka.go.jp/bunkashingikai/soukai/pdf/keigo_tousin.pdf) by\nthe Agency for Cultural Affairs (文化庁) for more about 二重敬語 and what may look\nlike 二重敬語 but actually are not.", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-30T01:50:40.373", "id": "13277", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-30T01:50:40.373", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "13269", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "> And how do people actually decide how many times to use 「お」「ご」 in a\n> sentence?\n\nWhen talking, people think and talk simultaneously. So there are no strict\nrules to suppress the number of times 'お/ご' are used.\n\nWhen writing, personally I make it a rule not to overuse 'お/ご'.\n\nBut in both cases (talking/writing), prefixing 'お/ご' to every word possible\n(ie overusing it) causes few trouble, I think.\n\nThere is a widely-known trivia that there are some Japanese words that are\nalmost entirely composed of prefixes. \n<http://gogen-allguide.com/o/omiotsuke.html>", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-30T20:27:11.370", "id": "13287", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-30T20:27:11.370", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4098", "parent_id": "13269", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Just [ask the\ndictionary](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%8B%E3%82%8F%E3%81%84%E3%81%84):\n\n> (1)深{ふか}い愛情{あいじょう}をもって大切{たいせつ}に扱{あつか}ってやりたい気持{きも}ちである。 \n> 「わたしの―・い息子{むすこ}へ」「馬鹿{ばか}な子{こ}ほど―・い」\n\nJapanese to English dictionaries often tend to gloss over a lot of nuances, so\nit's good whenever possible to use a J-J dictionary. In English, this would\nread as \"something for which you hold deep affection and treat as important.\"\nThe examples refer to \"my 'dear' son,\" for example, which matches the usage of\nyour sentence. The example sentence in question would be \"わたしのかわいい息子へ\".\n\nSo as for whether it's a 'true' translation, which I assume you mean not to be\nin error, or else a literal translation, the answer is of course yes. Because\nthe speaker cares deeply for this child he/she scolds him/her. Technically it\nCOULD be that the speaker is just weird and especially enjoys scolding cute\nkids, but we have no context to suggest that the definition above is not the\nmost likely one.\n\nDefinition 2 in that dictionary entry is the one that has the typical \"cute\"\nmeaning that we tend to associate with the word", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-29T09:04:28.750", "id": "13272", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-29T12:50:45.520", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-29T12:50:45.520", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "13271", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "Kawaii, which can be written 可愛い has the same etymology as the verb 可愛がる\n(kawaigaru) which has a number of meanings. From what I've seen, in today's\ncommon usage it most often used to refer to petting or playing with a pet.\n\nHowever, it comes from a verb meaning, essentially \"taking care of something\nbecause its kawaii\" which is originally \"cute in pathetic/helpless way\".\n\nI don't know if it helps, but it may be useful to know that the ji in kawaii\nliterally mean \"lovable\".", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-30T03:37:31.560", "id": "13280", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-30T03:37:31.560", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3800", "parent_id": "13271", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "My take. 授業 is simply **class** (or its synonyms 'course','lesson', etc.) I\ndon't think it has any inherent time aspect. At least, not anymore than\n'class' has in English. I'm not sure what the translation is in your book, but\nto me 出席してこそ、授業の意味があるのです means 'class is given meaning by attending it' (very\nloosely). If you take a first-person stance the sentence would change. Depends\non context.\n\n授業時間 could mean either 'time in class', or 'class hours'. Again, context.\nExamples:\n\n授業時間を減らす cut back on classroom time\n\n通常の授業時間は9時から5時までです。 Course hours are usually from 9am to 5pm.\n\nI believe if you want to be specific about 'actual' class time/'scheduled'\nclass time. You need to add more descriptors (just like in English, actually).\nLike, 予定 for 'scheduled'. For 'actual', probably 実際の. I'm not sure if you can\nsay 実時間 here, a native speaker could probably confirm that.\n\nSorry I couldn't be more help.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-29T16:50:26.743", "id": "13276", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-29T16:50:26.743", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4075", "parent_id": "13273", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "授業 is defined in 大辞林 as 「学校などで，学問などを教えること。」\n\nA translation of this would be \"teaching a discipline/science at a school or\nthe like.\" So perhaps it would be best defined as \"instruction\", \"teaching\".\nAn instance of teaching/instruction would be a \"lecture\", \"class\", or\n\"lesson\".\n\nIts uses:\n\n * As a verb: 授業する to give a lecture, to instruct\n * As a noun: 授業 teaching (at a school), a lecture, a lesson\n\nCommon phrases:\n\n * (...の)授業を受ける receive a lesson (in ...), attend a lecture (on ...)\n * 授業を取る take a class (i.e. choosing it for the semester)\n * 授業に参加する attend a class, participate in a class\n * 授業が終わったら once class ends, after class is over, after classes", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2018-05-07T22:16:45.773", "id": "58442", "last_activity_date": "2018-05-07T22:16:45.773", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "11498", "parent_id": "13273", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "I would suggest that you think of する and なる as a pair.\n\nする expresses an active human effort in performing an action. It focuses on the\nprocess of the action.\n\nなる focuses on the result. Unilke する, a human effort may or may not be an\nessential element in the process leading to that result.\n\nTo take the phrases you listed ( 気にする or ようにする or 下にする or 深くする) for example,\nall of them still make sense if the する part is replaced with なる even though\nthe meanings will change.\n\nAs others mentioned above, you should not include a set phrase like 口にする in\nthe list. 口 _で_ する, by the way, means something I am not allowed to explain in\npublic. You decipher that one using what I said about \"human effort\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-11-12T23:50:09.710", "id": "13403", "last_activity_date": "2013-11-13T09:36:54.170", "last_edit_date": "2013-11-13T09:36:54.170", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "13275", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "As native English speakers I think we tend to relate pretty easily with the\nexpression 時間が空{あ}いている or 時間を空ける, meaning to have free time or to make/spare\ntime. The meaning in question is similar but not exactly the same. The も and\nthe lack of the direct object kind of obfuscates the real meaning. Indeed, it\ncould be read as ３週間を空けた, but that would mean he essentially cleared up 3\nweeks to be less busy. Instead it's referring to the website/place where he\nusually is: ３週間（ここを）空けていた. This usage refers to being away from somewhere.\nLiterally it means that he \"emptied\" the site, referring to his not being\nthere figuratively.\n\nOn alc we see [some examples of\nthis](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E3%82%92%E7%A9%BA%E3%81%91):\n\n> ＿日間家を空ける \n> be away from home __ days\n>\n> 何も聞かれずに一晩中家を空ける \n> stay out all night with no questions asked\n>\n> 10分間部屋を空ける \n> leave a room for __ minutes\n\nHopefully this is clear! It's just a literal idea of leaving a place vacant.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-30T03:24:20.493", "id": "13279", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-30T03:36:05.633", "last_edit_date": "2013-10-30T03:36:05.633", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "13278", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "It's just a coincidence and an example of a [false\ncognate](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_cognate).\n\nThe etymology is covered [here](http://gogen-allguide.com/na/namae.html) in\nJapanese.\n\nBasically, the term \"名\" has been around for a pretty long time with the same\nmeaning as 名前. It's thought that the 前 part is an honorific that was added\nsome time later. Early uses of the full word 名前 can be seen in use in\nrelatively modern times. The English term for it seems to be \"modern\" in the\nhistorical sense, but in Japanese 近世 seems to refer roughly to the Azuchi-\nmomoyama period through Edo, roughly 1500s to mid 1800s. Not quite sure\nexactly when the first recorded use was. It was widely used from the Meiji\nperiod onward.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-30T08:15:52.743", "id": "13283", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-30T08:15:52.743", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "13282", "post_type": "answer", "score": 17 }, { "body": "It might be a true cognate.\n\nI see responses above that say they aren't close in pronunciation, but the\nroots are close. In Old English name was \"nama\" and linked with similar\nsounding words in other languages. 「なまえ」is a similar pronunciation.\n<https://www.etymonline.com/word/name>\n\nI've definitely seen other similar cognates while learning Japanese that\nappear coincidental and potentially connect to ancient roots, even though the\netymologies tend to document the Chinese character development, rather than\nlinking to other potential influences.\n\nConsider 青空. 青空 or あおぞら or aozora appears linked through ancient roots to the\nEnglish word azureus.\n[https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/青空](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E9%9D%92%E7%A9%BA)\n<https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/azureus>", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2018-01-19T00:13:22.260", "id": "56040", "last_activity_date": "2018-01-19T00:13:22.260", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "27364", "parent_id": "13282", "post_type": "answer", "score": -7 }, { "body": "I'd like to add onto ssb's answer, further exploring the etymologies for these\nterms.\n\n# 名前【なまえ】\n\nI use Shogakukan's 国語大辞典【こくごだいじてん】 (KDJ) as one of my main sources. This\ndictionary includes more etymology (word-origin) information than most\nJapanese dictionaries that I've seen.\n\n[Here's the KDJ entry for\n名前](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E5%90%8D%E5%89%8D-22836#E7.B2.BE.E9.81.B8.E7.89.88.20.E6.97.A5.E6.9C.AC.E5.9B.BD.E8.AA.9E.E5.A4.A7.E8.BE.9E.E5.85.B8).\nAs we can see, the earliest citation is from 1720, with a sense closer to\n_\"appellation, what something is called, the label put ʻin front of’\nsomething\"_. This is slightly different from _\"name\"_ per se. The actual\n_\"name\"_ sense, in terms of _\"a person's or thing's proper name\"_ , appears\nfrom 1731.\n\nBoth of these citations are early enough that influence from English is\nexceedingly unlikely -- the English language had little relevance for Japanese\nuntil [the Perry Expedition of\n1853](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perry_Expedition).\n\nThat said, Dutch did have some influence on Japanese much earlier, [from\naround 1600](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanban_trade#Dutch_trade), and the\nSpanish and Portuguese even earlier, [from\n1542](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanban_trade#First_contacts). So it still\nbears asking if a European language may underlie the Japanese term 名前【なまえ】.\n\n## Derivation of 名前【なまえ】\n\nThis is clearly a compound, of 名【な】 _\"name\"_ + 前【まえ】 _\"front\"_. The _\"name\nfront\"_ translation sounds super weird in English, but we must remember that\nword order is different in Japanese. It's worth noticing too that there are\nother Japanese compounds that end in 前【まえ】 in reference to something ʻput in\nfront’, such as 建前【たてまえ】, or 一人前【いちにんまえ】, etc.\n\nThe straightforward compound nature, plus the late appearance of this term in\nthe historical record, presents a strong case against this being at all\nrelated directly to any European word.\n\nBut what about 名【な】? Might that be at all related?\n\n# 名【な】\n\n[Here's the KDJ entry for\n名](https://kotobank.jp/word/%E5%90%8D-586865#E7.B2.BE.E9.81.B8.E7.89.88.20.E6.97.A5.E6.9C.AC.E5.9B.BD.E8.AA.9E.E5.A4.A7.E8.BE.9E.E5.85.B8).\nWe see that the first citation is in the\n[_Man'yōshū_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man%27y%C5%8Dsh%C5%AB), a large\npoetry collection finalized around 759 CE, and the first large corpus\n(collection of texts) with Japanese written phonetically and grammatically as\nJapanese. Other ancient texts like the\n[_Kojiki_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kojiki) of 712 or the [_Nihon\nShoki_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihon_Shoki) of 720 are mostly written\nin a kind of Classical Chinese, and thus don't provide us with much\ninformation about the ancient Japanese language.\n\nSo we know that the word 名【な】 with a sense of _\"name for a person or thing\"_\nhas been around unchanged for a _very_ long time.\n\n## Derivation of 名【な】\n\nThis same sense of _\"name\"_ , and mostly the same pronunciation -- albeit with\na longer vowel value, as //naː// -- is reflected as well in the various\nRyūkyūan languages, strongly suggesting that this is a cognate term inherited\nfrom the Proto-Japonic stage of the language family. See also [the Wiktionary\nentry for 名](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E5%90%8D), which includes a few\nof the Ryūkyūan terms.\n\n# _\"name\"_\n\nThe English term clearly has a final consonant, and nothing to do with\n_\"front\"_. Where did this come from?\n\n## Derivation of _\"name\"_\n\nAs visible in various dictionaries, the English term traces back to Old\nEnglish, back to Proto-Germanic, ultimately back to the reconstructed Proto-\nIndo-European (PIE) term _h₁nómn̥_. See, for instance, [the Merriam Webster\nentry](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/name#etymology-anchor), or\n[the Wiktionary entry](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/name#Etymology_1).\n\nSo while English is an unlikely source for Japanese _namae_ , or Japanese _na_\n, what about PIE?\n\n# Likelihood of relatedness to English _\"name\"_?\n\nThe Japonic term is consistently realized as _na_ , a single syllable with no\nfinal consonant.\n\nThe PIE reconstruction, and pretty much [all the cognates in descendant\nlanguages](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-\nEuropean/h%E2%82%81n%C3%B3mn%CC%A5#Descendants), include a closing nasal\nconsonant //m// as either the final sound in the word, or the close on the\nfirst syllable.\n\nGiven the known and reconstructed phonetic rules for Japonic languages, I'm\nnot aware of any means by which a (mostly polysyllabic) word with a core\nsyllable ending in //m// would shift to a monosyllable with an open vowel and\nno final consonant.\n\n## Conclusion: Highly likely to be wholly unrelated.\n\nIt's actually surprisingly easy to find words in any two languages that kinda\nsorta sound similar and kinda sorta have similar meanings. If you're\ninterested in word origins and comparative linguistics, I highly recommend you\nread [\"How likely are chance resemblances between\nlanguages?\"](https://www.zompist.com/chance.htm) The author even lays out a\nwell-backed-up mathematical model for determining the likelihood of such non-\ncognate similarities.\n\n### Addendum\n\nA different poster brought up the possibility that Japanese 青空【あおぞら】 is\nsomehow related to English _azureus_.\n\n青空【あおぞら】 is clearly a compound, consisting of 青【あお】 _\"blue\"_ + 空【そら】 _\"sky\"_.\n\nMeanwhile, _azureus_ is Latin, not English, and traces in turn to Arabic, and\nthen to Persian. See [the Wiktionary entry for\n_azureus_](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/azureus).\n\nThe Persian term لاجورد‎ ( _lâjvard_ , “lapis lazuli”) is itself [probably\nalso a\ncompound](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%AC%D9%88%D8%B1%D8%AF#Persian),\nconsisting of _lâj_ \"blue\" + _vard_ \"stone\".\n\n * Japanese _ao_ and Persian _lâj_ both mean \"blue\", but the phonetics certainly don't match up very well.\n * Japanese _sora_ means \"sky\", while Persian _vard_ means \"stone\" -- these don't match in either meaning or sound.\n\nIf you think you've found a cognate, **dig**. Chances are quite high that the\nancestor terms of the modern \"matches\" you've found are not actually matches\nat all. \"What if\" can be a fun game, but it won't get you very far.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2019-12-13T09:07:02.347", "id": "73488", "last_activity_date": "2019-12-13T09:07:02.347", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "13282", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 }, { "body": "Since 名 alone means name, there is no need 前 to be added to form a word to\nmean \"name\". This is true to other countries such as Korea which also uses\nChinese characters.\n\nAnd 前 means front(or first in certain context),\n\nso 名前 together could literally interpreted as \"first name\".\n\nthis makes me doubt/wonder if the usage of 名前 instead of 名 as a Japanese term\nfor \"name\" indeed has something to do with Japanese people's first encounter\nwith English speaking foreigners hundreds of years ago.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-12-02T11:32:36.617", "id": "91423", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-02T11:32:36.617", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "48870", "parent_id": "13282", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]