Datasets:

---

p1atdev

/

japanese-stackexchange

like 3

[ { "body": "育児休業 is the right word.\n\nIf you are the woman giving birth, you could also use 産休.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-01T19:39:14.317", "id": "14373", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-01T19:39:14.317", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "14372", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "I think you can say\n\n> 今、[育児休業中]{いくじきゅうぎょうちゅう} / [育児休暇中]{いくじきゅうかちゅう}です。 \n> 今、[育休]{いくきゅう}で休んでます。 \n>\n\nfor \"I'm on paternal leave\" (In Japan, normally starting 8 weeks after the\nbirth of the child and ending by the time when the child turns one year old...\nI think), and\n\n> 今、[産休中]{さんきゅうちゅう}です。 \n> 今、産休で休んでます。 \n>\n\nfor \"I'm on maternity leave\" (In Japan, normally for 6 weeks before and 8\nweeks after the birth of the child... I think).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-02T04:58:31.773", "id": "14376", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-02T08:08:06.683", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-02T08:08:06.683", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14372", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "It is from なる, in a way; but it may not be the one you're thinking of. The なる\nhere is the 連体形 of the former copula なり, which itself derives from に+あり\n(modern ある). This seems to have been the copula as far back as we have records\nof. Indeed, this kind of adjective is younger than the copula it uses - these\nkinds of adjectives do not occur before the Heian-jidai.\n\nA couple of forms do appear that have since become them (e.g. adjectives\nending in -らか), but I don't know how these were used - my source (Bentley's\nDescriptive Grammar of Old Japanese Prose) mentions their existence, but only\nsays that these なり-based adjectives are new as of the Heian-jidai; it says\nnothing at all about how they were used in Old Japanese. I would speculate\nthat they're used in the very old adjective patterns that require no\nmorphology at all: so just like you can get /awo sora/ (/səra/?) where you\nwould expect /awo-ki sora/, I bet you could get /tapiraka umi/ when later you\nwould expect /taɸiraka=naru umi/ (for 平らかな海).\n\nAs for きれい, it's a Chinese loanword, and was loaned after the creation of\nthese kinds of adjectives. So there was never a point in time before きれいなる女 -\nyou would have used a native Japanese word like 美しい, and so you would have\neither /utukusi-ki womina/ or the older /utukusi womina/.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-03T20:23:29.983", "id": "14393", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-03T20:29:38.863", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-03T20:29:38.863", "last_editor_user_id": "3639", "owner_user_id": "3639", "parent_id": "14374", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "As others have noted, the modern な particle used with _-na_ adjectives evolved\nfrom なる, itself _not_ the verb なる \"to become\", but instead a contraction of\nにある \"to be in a state\". So from newest form to oldest, using your example of\nきれい, we would have:\n\n * 綺麗な女\n * 綺麗なる女\n * 綺麗にある女\n\nThe _-naru_ form is still used in modern poetry and other contexts to give\nthings a somewhat archaic and formal sense, such as in 静{しず}かなる田舎{いなか}, _the\nquiet contryside_.\n\nAlthough the classical _-naru_ adjectives did indeed seem to develop mostly in\nthe [Heian period](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heian_period) (794-1185), the\nconstruction of [noun phrase] + にある + [noun] can already be found in the\n_Man'yōshū_ , dating to some time between the mid-300s and the mid-700s.\nExample:\n\n * [Poem 165](http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/japanese/manyoshu/Man2Yos.html#165): \n宇都曽見乃 人尓有吾哉 従 \nうつそみの人{ひと}にある我{わ}れや \nHere, _utsusomi no hito_ is a noun phrase (\"person in the real world\", i.e.\n\"someone who is still alive\") used to modify _ware_ (\"I, me\").\n\nThere is also at least one example I found of what may be an early _-ni aru_\nadjective in the _Man'yōshū_ , 寛{ゆた}, classed in Shogakukan's _Kokugo Dai\nJiten_ as a 形容動詞{けいようどうし} ( _-na_ adjective):\n\n * [Poem 2367](http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/japanese/manyoshu/Man11Yo.html#2367): \n大舟之 由多尓将有 人兒由恵尓 \n大船{おほぶね}のゆたにあるらむ人{ひと}の子{こ}ゆゑに \n_...because [you're] the child of a person who is steadfast like a big ship_ \nHere, the phrase _ohobune no yuta_ (\"big ship's easygoing-ness / steadfastness\n/ steadiness\") is used to modify _hito_.\n\nIf you're interested in the history of _-na_ adjectives, the [概要 section of\nthe JA Wikipedia article on\n形容動詞](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%BD%A2%E5%AE%B9%E5%8B%95%E8%A9%9E#.E6.A6.82.E8.A6.81)\ndescribes how Heian-period writers suffixed -にあり (becoming -なり) and -とあり\n(becoming -たり) to nouns to create new classes of adjectives.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-17T01:01:09.677", "id": "15991", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-17T06:53:25.923", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-17T06:53:25.923", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "14374", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I think you could say:\n\n> [大晦日]{おおみそか}を[楽]{たの}しく[過]{す}ごすのは(or 大晦日に[盛]{も}り[上]{あ}がるのは) いいですが(or\n> [結構]{けっこう}ですが*)、([少]{すこ}しは)[他人]{たにん}(or [人]{ひと} or [他]{ほか}の[人]{ひと})\n> のことも[考]{かんが}えてください。or (少しは)[人]{ひと}の[迷惑]{めいわく}も考えてください。\n\nif you want it in the polite form. *結構ですが would sound a bit sarcastic.\n\n(I might say 少しは人の迷惑も考えろ！if I was very angry.)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-02T15:54:54.277", "id": "14379", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-02T15:54:54.277", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14377", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "It's 歩, as in 歩{ある}く, and the radical is 止. It has **8 strokes** , and is\nformed by combining 止 and 少.\n\nStroke order and other miscellaneous information can be found\n[here](http://jisho.org/kanji/details/%E6%AD%A9).\n\n", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-03T04:41:25.193", "id": "14384", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-04T10:25:59.013", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-04T10:25:59.013", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "14383", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

[ { "body": "I'm going to translate this [best answer on\ngoo](http://oshiete.goo.ne.jp/qa/2283678.html)\n\nFirst, a bit on the origins: あすdescribes the \"next day\", ie the day after\ntoday. On the other handあしたdescribed the \"morning\" in contrast to nightfall.\nSince the sun setting or nightfall signified the end of the day, あした was used\nto refer to the morning after. Now-a-days, we use the word 翌朝（よくあさ）to describe\nthe next morning. Eventually, instead of referring to just \"morning\", あした\nbecame to describe tomorrow (AM) and finally became to mean tomorrow. Today,\nあした is used casually and in the order of あした→あす→みょうにちfor formality.\n\nIn answering your question: Although they mean the same thing, in terms of\nusage, あした is most often used colloquially while あす is commonly used in\nwriting. The kanji 明日 is read as あす in most dictionaries and is said to be\nread that way to emphasize how it is written.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-04T02:52:55.280", "id": "14397", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-04T02:52:55.280", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4628", "parent_id": "14385", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 }, { "body": "\"Tomorrow\" is said in three different ways in Standard Japanese. In the order\nof formality, those are:\n\nみょうにち、あす and あした. (In kanji, all three are written as 「明日」.)\n\nWhat that inevitably means is that the native speakers learn the three \"words\"\nin the **reverse order**. 「あした」 is definitely the most intuitive for us.\n\nあした is by far the most common pronunciation for everyday speech among friends,\nfamily, neighbors, etc.\n\nあす is a little more formal than あした. It is used in more official communication\nthan daily conversations. Its use in weather forecast on TV and radio, as OP\nmentioned, is a good example. When adults phone each other to announce an\nunexpected community or school event for the next day, it is likely that they\nwill use あす over あした. When kids do the same among themselves, however, they\nwill still use あした.\n\nみょうにち is almost reserved for the business world and the most formal occasions.\nUsing あした in business will NOT make you sound like a good businessman. あす\nwould be OK once in a while, but not always in business.\n\nAs for the meaning, all three can mean \"tomorrow\", but only あした and あす can be\nused to figuratively mean \" **the future** \".", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-04T03:19:38.837", "id": "14399", "last_activity_date": "2019-07-06T14:56:48.707", "last_edit_date": "2019-07-06T14:56:48.707", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14385", "post_type": "answer", "score": 35 } ]

[ { "body": "「出かけるためにでんわしました」 or 「出かけるのによびました」 ought to both be valid translations of that.\nIt depends a little on the kind of _going out_ that you're doing, but you can\ngenerally say \"I did X in order to Y\" with ために and のに.\n\n<http://okwave.jp/qa/q4740693.html> has these descriptions (English\ntranslations mine):\n\n「ために」は目的の理由？ - ために states the reason why, or the goal, directly.\n\n「のに」は説明？ - のに explains the reason for the call.\n\nI would interpret this as shifting the emphasis, with ために being weighted\ntowards the goal and のに being heavier on the action that was actually taken\nrather than the reason it was taken.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-03T17:50:37.533", "id": "14390", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-03T17:50:37.533", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4179", "parent_id": "14386", "post_type": "answer", "score": -1 } ]

[ { "body": "I think that 兜唐草 is the name of a particular arabesque pattern by 源右衛門, a\nwell-known pottery store. In particular, this pattern:\n\n\n\nThe imagery of 兜 is being strong or forceful. In that sense, 兜唐草 seems to be\nwell-suited as a name for fancy accessories like a pen or a wallet. (The name\nfor pattern for a plate or a piece of cloth might be more something like 雅唐草.)\n\nI don't think that the choice of 兜 is related to トリカブト, the aconite plant, as\nthere is no particular resemblance of the pattern with the aconite plant.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-03T19:14:03.867", "id": "14391", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-03T19:14:03.867", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "14387", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "To us native speakers, 「好奇心」 is a fairly big Sino-loanword and we do not use\nit as often as English-speakers might use \"curiosity\" in informal situations\n(or out on the street with a stranger, so to speak).\n\nNatural ways to say \"I'm just curious but ~~\" or \"Just out of curiosity, ~~\"\nwould be:\n\n**Informal** :\n\n * 「ちょっと[聞]{き}きたいんだけど～～」\n\n * 「[参考]{さんこう}までに～～」\n\n * 「参考までに聞くけど～～」, etc.\n\n**More formal** :\n\n * 「[少々]{しょうしょう}お[聞]{き}きしますが～～」\n\n * 「[参考]{さんこう}までに[伺]{うかが}いたいのですが～～」\n\nIn formal situations, you could use 「好奇心」 if you wanted to and say something\nlike 「ほんの好奇心から伺いますが～～」. 「ほんの」 means \"just\". \"mere(ly)\", etc.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-03T23:56:19.830", "id": "14396", "last_activity_date": "2019-10-03T12:32:07.777", "last_edit_date": "2019-10-03T12:32:07.777", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14388", "post_type": "answer", "score": 18 }, { "body": "There is also\n\n「[後学]{こうがく}のために〜」\n\nwhich would mean asking so that it could be used for future reference.\n\nBut in plain use is pretty much used as \"out of curiosity\", it can be used in\ninformal and formal situations since it implies that what your asking has some\nvalue above mere curiosity, which is kind of more polite, just a bit.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-03-26T01:52:03.550", "id": "15045", "last_activity_date": "2014-03-26T10:56:23.100", "last_edit_date": "2014-03-26T10:56:23.100", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4991", "parent_id": "14388", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "「あと」 is a common modern colloquial word meaning \"in addition\", \"and also\",\netc.\n\nAnd yes, レア means \"rare\".\n\nYou did not ask but I will say for others that 「つーか」 is the slangy (and very\ncommon as well) way of saying 「って言うか」 or 「と言うか」. It roughly means \"I mean\",\n\"or more precisely\", \"or rather\", etc.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-03T23:26:28.780", "id": "14395", "last_activity_date": "2020-01-05T14:16:24.097", "last_edit_date": "2020-01-05T14:16:24.097", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14394", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "The way I learned it is that ～かい actually consists of two particles. The\nquestion particle ～か and the final interjection particle ～い. See\n[here](http://www.akenotsuki.com/kyookotoba/bumpoo/zhoshi.html#i) for a very\nbrief description. In contemporary Japanese, this particle appears in contexts\nof familiarity, where speaker and hearer are well acquainted. The particle can\nalso follow ～ぞ, making it ～ぞい. Here's the first example from a search for ぞい\non Yahoo Japan.\n\n```\n\n 今日も一日がんばるぞい\n \n```\n\nAnd the expression ～だい as in 何だい？ also contains the particle ～い. If you want\nto use these expressions, carefully select the context. Asking your Japanese\nboss\n\n```\n\n どうだい？\n \n```\n\nwill not make you last long in the company.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-19T15:39:42.853", "id": "16042", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-19T15:39:42.853", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5362", "parent_id": "14398", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "We spent a while talking about this on chat tonight, and I think I understand\na little better now thanks to Chocolate and Yang Muye. So I'm going to try to\nwrite up the conclusions I came to in an answer.\n\n* * *\n\n## Rules for だい and かい\n\nI think the description given in the grammar dictionaries is fairly accurate\nfor today's Japanese, but it may be a bit of a simplification, and is perhaps\nnot 100% descriptively accurate. After all, we know from 非回答者's comment and\nfrom the fact that 夏目漱石 wrote it that かい must be possible! The only question\nis how we should make sense of it.\n\nTo get started, [I read the rules on the page 非回答者 linked to and went through\nthe quiz at the bottom](http://www014.upp.so-net.ne.jp/nbunka/0610ga.html),\nand I discovered something very interesting:\n\nI can get 100% of the answers right with two simple rules!\n\n## Rule 1. If you can't use だ, you can't use だい.\n\n## Rule 2. If you can't use か, you can't use かい.\n\nThat is, I ignored the presence of い entirely and focused on whether だ, か, or\nの was grammatically possible. In all cases I ended up with the right answers.\nYou'll note that the quiz never makes you decide between だい and かい when _both_\nだ and か are possible.\n\nAnd although these rules aren't _quite_ adequate on their own, they seem\nnatural enough if you think of い as a separate particle. In fact,\n[dictionaries list い as a sentence-final\nparticle](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/9100/m0u/%E3%81%84/). That\nleads us to rule #3:\n\n## Rule 3. The particle い is unambiguously clause-final.\n\nWhat does this mean? Compare the following examples:\n\n> A. 会議はいつ **か** \n> B. 会議はいつ **かい**\n\nThe first example sounds incomplete—you could complete it by adding something\nto the end, like `会議はいつか、 **知ってますか？**`. But because the second example ends\nwith い, a sentence-final particle, it seems like a complete sentence. So this\nis one place that かい is possible that か would seem strange.\n\nSo this is a slight revision to our rules #1 and #2, which otherwise serve us\nquite well. Now, let's move on to the last two rules:\n\n## Rule 4. When there's no question word, you can't use だい.\n\n## Rule 5. When there _is_ a question word, you _usually_ use だい.\n\nThat is to say, だい is more common in today's Japanese than かい with a question\nword. And while かい is still possible today, I think it's a less common than だい\nwhen both are possible, and in some cases it might seem a little bit old-\nfashioned sounding. [Chocolate reported in chat that it was the sort of thing\nyou might find in a 夏目漱石\nnovel](http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/15702580#15702580),\nand of course that's exactly what your question is about.\n\nSo I think that Makino et al. probably simplified things slightly in their\ngrammar dictionaries. Because it's more common to use だい than かい today, their\nrules work fairly well most of the time, but they might not have 100%\ndescriptive adequacy.\n\n* * *\n\n## An explanation?\n\nI've come up with an explanation for why this the case. It's a bit of a just-\nso story, so I wouldn't put too much stock in it, but helps everything make\nsense in my head, so I thought I'd include it here:\n\n 1. I think 誰だい is possible for the same reason you can say 誰だ—the presence of the question word 誰 makes it obvious that you're asking a question, even with だ and without an overt marker like か or rising intonation. That doesn't _force_ you to use だい, but it makes it possible, and practically speaking it's more common to use だい than かい when both are possible syntactically.\n\n 2. On the other hand, a sentence like おいしいのだい fails as a question for the same reason おいしいのだ does. Without a question word, you need another way to signal to the listener that you're asking a question, and that most likely means using rising intonation or an overt question particle. This rules out だ and therefore だい as well, as they would be taken as signals that you're _not_ asking a question.\n\nOf course, I never use だい or かい in my own speech so these rules are somewhat\nacademic for me :-) But I hope either the rules or the reasoning help you\nunderstand why it was okay that he used かい in his writing.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-24T08:56:02.660", "id": "16116", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-24T09:17:00.470", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14398", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "I think it's\n[高度成長](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E9%AB%98%E5%BA%A6%E6%88%90%E9%95%B7)\n(こうどせいちょう) or more fully\n[高度経済成長](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E9%AB%98%E5%BA%A6%E7%B5%8C%E6%B8%88%E6%88%90%E9%95%B7)\n(こうどけいざいせいちょう).\n\nThere's also an article for\n[高度経済成長](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%AB%98%E5%BA%A6%E7%B5%8C%E6%B8%88%E6%88%90%E9%95%B7)\non Wikipedia.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-04T16:08:37.637", "id": "14403", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-04T16:08:37.637", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14402", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "It comes from Classical Japanese but it is used in Modern Japanese much more\noften than you appear to think.\n\n「ど」 is a contrastive, conjunctive particle. 「[歩]{ある}けど」 means the same thing\nas 「歩くけれども」 and 「歩くが、しかし」.\n\nYou speak of the conjugation but the ど is not part of the conjugation. 歩け is\nthe [已然形]{いぜんけい} of the verb 歩く.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-04T22:18:14.397", "id": "14405", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-04T22:18:14.397", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14404", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "The conjunctive particles [**ど**](http://kobun.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%A9)\nand [**ども**](http://kobun.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%A9%E3%82%82) are Classical\nJapanese contradictory conjunctions, like the English _but_ and _although_.\nAlthough they aren't used as much anymore, you surely know them from the\nmodern **けれど(も)** , and you probably know them from **いえども** and **されど** as\nwell.\n\nThey attached to the 已然形 (realis stem), which in modern Japanese has been\nreanalyzed as the 仮定形 (hypothetical stem). In this case, that stem is **歩け** ,\nso you get **歩けど**.\n\nHere, the **〜ど〜ど** pattern has the verb redoubled for emphasis:\n\n> 歩け **ど** 歩け **ど**\n\nSince it's literary, we could try to give it a literary sounding translation:\n\n> **歩けど歩けど** 、岩しか見えなかった。 \n> **Walk and walk as I might** , I could see only rocks.\n\nHopefully you can see the meaning from this simplified example.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-04T22:30:07.730", "id": "14406", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-04T22:30:07.730", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14404", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

[ { "body": "1. The drought in Arizona has been going on for about fifteen years. So it's \"this year too\". \n\n 2. The 連用形{れんようけい} (\"continuative form\") of a verb or adjective can be used like a conjunction without adding て. For an adjective, that is the 〜く form, and for a verb, it's the stem you add 〜ます to. \n\nHere you have the 連用形 of an adjective, not an adverb. It acts like a\nconjunction, joining two predicates together. You can think of it like 少ない,\nexcept that the sentence continues with something like an \"and\".\n\nWe have some questions already where people talk about this usage:\n\n * [いAdjective. difference between くて and く](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/3439/%E3%81%84adjective-difference-between-%E3%81%8F%E3%81%A6-and-%E3%81%8F)\n * [Use of く-form over くて in an い-adjective](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/12642/use-of-%E3%81%8F-form-over-%E3%81%8F%E3%81%A6-in-an-%E3%81%84-adjective)\n * [Is there a term for using conjugating verbs such that the sentence continues with another clause?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/9771/1478)\n * [なく vs. なくて and stem form vs. てform as conjunctions](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/2934/1478)\n\nBut if you wait, perhaps someone will write another answer talking about it.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-05T02:25:45.640", "id": "14409", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-05T02:25:45.640", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:48.447", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14408", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "「Verb + てやる」 has two (very) different meanings/usages.\n\n 1. To offer to do something in a patronizing or condescending tone as to demand gratitude.\n\n 2. To (proactively) perform an action so as to prove one's ability to others.\n\nOP seems to be talking about #2 above.\n\nMy own example sentences:\n\n> 1. 「[心配]{しんぱい}するな。１[年]{ねん}くらいオレが[食]{た}べさせ **てやる** 。」 = \"Don't worry. I'll\n> feed (or 'take care of') you for a year or so.\"\n> 2. 「[見]{み}てろ！２[年以内]{ねんいない}に[大]{だい}リーガーになっ **てやる** ！」 = \"Be watching. I\n> will be a major leaguer within two years!\"\n>", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-05T13:55:41.960", "id": "14416", "last_activity_date": "2022-08-25T08:39:20.030", "last_edit_date": "2022-08-25T08:39:20.030", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14413", "post_type": "answer", "score": 18 } ]

[ { "body": "守らむ(守らん) consists of the imperfective form (未然形) of 守る + the auxiliary verb\nむ(ん); meaning #2 in [助動詞\nむ](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/214421/m0u/%E3%82%80/). I think it's\nthe archaic form of 守ろう.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-05T12:54:01.583", "id": "14415", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-05T12:54:01.583", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14414", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 } ]

[ { "body": "I have done some research both online and in real life (all in Japanese) but\nfailed to find any reliable information as to exactly when or how it added the\nnew usage. So, this will mostly be a non-answer.\n\nAdoration and contempt are both sides of the same coin and the line between\nthe two sides is fragile. It would not be unusual using an honorific to show\nrespect to someone in public and simultaneously using the same \"honorific\" in\na derogatory way in one's privacy to express one's true feelings toward the\nsame person. After all, the walls have ears.\n\nRegarding the suffix 「[公]{こう}」, its derogatory usage is limited to highly\ncolloquial conversations, and believe it or not, it is not at all in wide use.\nThe only words containing 「公」 that I have actively used or heard others use\nhave been 「[先公]{せんこう}」 and 「ポリ[公]{こう}」 (meaning \"teacher\" and \"cop\",\nrespectively) , and it was only during junior high school. It just was not\ncool to continue using those words in high school. It should be noted that\neven in junior high, kids used those words mainly because it was the fad to do\nso at that time, not because we were delinquents who had grudges against our\nteachers and the police.\n\nThe only reason that I feel that Japanese-learners might be mislead to\nthinking that 「公」 is in wider use is that it is used much more often in\nfiction. In real life, we do not speak like the characters one sees in manga,\nanime, films, etc.\n\nIf OP's dictionary actually said that 「[熊公]{くまこう}」 was derogatory, it is NOT.\nIt only means \"little beary boy\". It is totally different from 「熊め」, which\nmeans \"that f***ing bear\".", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-09T23:15:53.177", "id": "14448", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-10T00:04:40.927", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-10T00:04:40.927", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14417", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Each family would use its own method and all I know for certain is how mine\nhandled the matter.\n\nWe used on-reading words, meaning kanji compounds, which small kids generally\nare not familiar with. We also \"created\" our own on-reading words in cases\nwhere the generic words were already on-reading ones. Our final weapon was to\nsay the words in English (we both knew English) as if they were loanwords when\nit was difficult to create a word.\n\nFor アイスクリーム, we used [冷菓]{れいか}, which is an existing word but small kids would\nalmost never know.\n\nFor お[菓子]{かし} (snacks), we used [軽食]{けいしょく} or [間食]{かんしょく}, both of which are\nexisting words.\n\nFor コーラ, I remember using my own creation [黒色炭酸飲料]{こくしょくたんさんいんりょう}, literally\nmeaning \"dark-colored carbonated drink\". Both 黒色 and 炭酸飲料 are existing words\nbut little kids would have no clue what they meant, either separately or\ncombined.\n\nFor ポテトチップス, I proudly coined a ディープフライド[馬鈴薯]{ばれいしょ} but it was hard to say.\n馬鈴薯 is a big word for じゃがいも (= \"potato\"), but a kid would usually need to be\naround 10-12 to know it.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-05T22:48:59.553", "id": "14421", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-05T23:07:01.877", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-05T23:07:01.877", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14418", "post_type": "answer", "score": 38 } ]

[ { "body": "The term 画期的 in its definition refers to an event so momentous that it heralds\nthe start of a new age (時代). The term epoch making, from what I can tell,\nappears to exist in Japanese as エポックメイキング, which might be why that English\ndefinition is attached to it. Indeed, in English such an event could be\ndescribed as 'epoch making.'\n\nBut it's metaphorical in Japanese. We reserve the term epoch making for events\nlike those listed in the question. But what about trivial things that can\n_usher in a new era_? It's the same sort of concept, I think. Epoch making\ncould be a literal translation, but it doesn't have the same nuance.\n\nPerhaps in Japanese the term epoch making has been taken and modified to fit\nthat level. Googling \"epoch making\" in English will give you pages of results\nfor the meaning of the expression, but very few examples of it actually being\nused, yet [大辞泉 has エポックメイキング in its definition for\n画期的](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E7%94%BB%E6%9C%9F%E7%9A%84?dic=daijisen&oid=03385200).\n\nA more appropriate term would be _revolutionary_ , or _groundbreaking_ , or\nmaybe even _game changing_. These don't carry nearly the sense of scale and\ngravity that the term \"epoch making\" inspires in English. 画期的 obviously, as\nused in the BOJ example, is _not_ conveying something on the level of the fall\nof Rome. That's why the translation provided uses \"groundbreaking\" instead.\n\nThis is why I think that revolutionary is a good choice. We call a lot of\nthings revolutionary even though the actual concept of a revolution is pretty\ngrandiose.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-06T04:56:00.957", "id": "14423", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-06T04:56:00.957", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "14422", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "maybe its a \"loooooong\" penis?", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-06T18:18:41.267", "id": "14425", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-06T18:18:41.267", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4648", "parent_id": "14424", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "It is an onomatopoeia, not the name for an object unless the author/speaker\nuses it as such for his own aesthetic purposes but this would be fairly rare.\n\nIt describes the way a long object dangles, stretches, lies down, etc. in a\nlazy manner. The long object coud actually be anything from linguini to a cat\nstretching its body, from hair to stretching cheese, etc.\n\nIf OP saw/heard the word in adult content, it would probably be about a male\norgan.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-06T21:25:50.687", "id": "14429", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-06T21:25:50.687", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14424", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "ぴろーん is an onomatopoeia to describe a long thin rolled object extends and runs\nlike a tonge of a chameleon. It's nothing to do with adult slang terms.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-15T16:04:47.033", "id": "14496", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-15T16:04:47.033", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4092", "parent_id": "14424", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "After a few minutes of murmuring to myself, I am going to say that basically,\nthe 「～～がり[屋]{や}」 form will stand if the 「～～がり」form stands with an adjective.\nThe naturalness and frequency of use of the 「～～がり屋」 form as an independent\nword look to be in direct proportion to those of its 「～～がり」form.\n\nAmong the ones that might not make their way into the dictionary but are\nactually quite often used would be 「[悲]{かな}しがり屋」、「[嬉]{うれ}しがり屋」, etc. I myself\nwas often called 「[痛]{いた}がり屋」 as a kid because I was susceptible to pain.\n\nThe ones that sound less natural to me include 「[楽]{たの}しがり屋」、「[難]{むずか}しがり屋」,\netc. but those are still heard occasionally if not frequently.\n\nI would need to conclude that with adjectives, one does not have a wide\nvariety of common 「～～がり屋」 forms because it works only with simple adjectives\ndescribing rather simple human emotions and sensations.\n\nWith verbs, however, one can and does use the 「～～たがり屋」 form much more freely\neven though only a few could be found in the dictionary. Anything goes in this\ncategory because all you need is the name of an action you want to peform ---\n見たがり屋、行きたがり屋、食べたがり屋、飲みたがり屋、知りたがり屋、読みたがり屋 --- anything!", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-07T11:30:42.880", "id": "14431", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-07T11:30:42.880", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14430", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "I believe ultimately it comes down to \"say\" or \"call\" itself. これという問題はない can\nbe interpreted as there is no question \"said like this\" or \"called such\" =\nThere is no question. Similarly, ということだ is the thing \"said\" or \"called\". I\nhave heard どういうことだ which they translate it to \"What do you mean?\" Taking it\nvery literally, \"What is the thing you are 'saying'?\" = \"What do you mean to\nsay?\" Hope someone can make it more clear.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-07T15:46:04.777", "id": "14434", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-07T15:46:04.777", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4507", "parent_id": "14432", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "という actually has multiple meanings. This part of Tae Kim's Guide should be a\ngood read for you: <http://www.guidetojapanese.org/learn/grammar/define>", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-03-10T04:31:04.867", "id": "14821", "last_activity_date": "2014-03-10T04:31:04.867", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4862", "parent_id": "14432", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "I think that the second example, \"これという問題はない\", means: the \"so-called\" problem\ndoesn´t exist. I would appreciate if you could give us the context.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-12-14T16:45:21.807", "id": "20886", "last_activity_date": "2014-12-14T16:45:21.807", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "7948", "parent_id": "14432", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "If you look up this word, 言う, in a dictionary of old Japanese, the first two\nmeanings are:\n\n> 1) 言葉で表現する。話す。\n>\n> 2) 名付ける。呼ぶ。\n>\n> (全訳古語辞典第三版／旺文社)\n\nOne point I think that is worth pointing out here is that Japanese does not\nuse explicit passive constructions as you do in English. Consider this\nillustrative sentence.\n\n> この家は父が立てました。\n>\n> This house was built by my father.\n\nThe use of active and passive construction are different between Japanese and\nEnglish, and there are some cases of Japanese favouring an active\nconstruction, while English uses a passive one. Passive constructions are used\nin English for various reasons including (1) avoiding mentioning the agent,\n(2) shifting focus (by moving `house` to the front and making it the subject).\n\nNote that Japanese does not require a subject for a complete sentence, thus\neliminating reason (1) for using a passive construction.\n\nWith that in mind, we can understand why a phrase such as `Ｘという問題` can be\ninterpreted as `a question/problem that is called X`, even though there is no\nexplicit passive construction in the original phrase.\n\nThis is described [in this\nbook](https://archive.org/details/historicalgramma00sansuoft) as well:\n\n> The function of the predicative form [終止形, =連体形 in mod. Japanese] is to\n> predicate, without reference to time. It is true that, being neutral as to\n> time, it can usually be translated by a present tense in English; but\n> context may demand other tenses. [...] In common with other forms of the\n> verb, the Predicative is neutral as to person. [...] This characteristic is\n> exhibited in a most interesting way in such common constructions as\n>\n> _kono mura wa Kose to iū_ this village is called Kose\n>\n> The idea of person or agent is neither expressed nor implicit in the verb\n> _iū_. In English, the corresponding locution requires the passive voice,\n> which is a grammatical device used when we wish to describe an act without\n> reference to the agent. In Japanese, an active verb is used, because the use\n> of an active verb does not involve mention of the subject.\n\n(An historical grammar of Japanese, George Sansom, Oxford at the Clarendon\nPress, 4th ed. 1968, page 131-132)", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-12-14T19:16:53.573", "id": "20888", "last_activity_date": "2014-12-15T20:59:52.030", "last_edit_date": "2014-12-15T20:59:52.030", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3275", "parent_id": "14432", "post_type": "answer", "score": -1 } ]

[ { "body": "Might be worthwhile rendering it into partial English:\n\n```\n\n So, with that as the 元, ...\n \n```\n\nAnd 元 can mean foundation, start, beginning, entranceway, original,... it\ncould be rendered many ways.\n\nEssentially, this construction requires that there be a preceding\nsentence/clause/word to point to. (それが)\n\nYou could also see it as\n\n```\n\n それが元となって, or それを元として, ...\n \n```\n\nSo you're wondering if it's related to それで or というわけで\n\nKind-of. というわけで is literally \"by way of the [mentioned] reason\" or \"for that\nreason\" in more natural English. The で in the phrase you posted can also be\ninterpreted as \"by way of [this] 元... (something occurred) \"\n\nWell you asked this over a month ago, but I wrote out this response so, I'll\npost it in case it's useful to someone down the line.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2015-03-18T20:16:22.980", "id": "23339", "last_activity_date": "2015-10-15T15:34:04.547", "last_edit_date": "2015-10-15T15:34:04.547", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "9542", "parent_id": "14433", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "I am going to post a rather simplistic answer just covering the basics.\n\nThere are cases (1) where adding a 「と」 is **appropriate** , (2) where adding a\n「と」 is **inappropriate** , and (3) where only adding a 「 **に** 」, not a 「と」,\nis appropriate.\n\n1) When an onomatopoeia functions adverbially to modify a verb, a 「と」 is often\nadded. In very informal speech, on the contrary, it is often omitted.\n\n> 「ワンワン **と** [犬]{いぬ}が[鳴]{な}いている。」 = \"A dog is barking 'bowwow'.\"\n>\n> 「[女]{おんな}はトウキョウナゴヤをゴツン **と** [殴]{なぐ}り、[部屋]{へや}を[出]{で}ていった。」= \"The woman\n> clonked TokyoNagoya in the head and ran out of the room.\"\n\n2) When an onomatopoeia is used with the verb 「する」, it is **inappropriate** to\nadd a 「と」.\n\n> 「 **ニコニコするなっ** ！ここは[陸軍]{りくぐん}だ！マクドナルドじゃねえぞっ！」 = \"Don't be smiling! This is\n> the Army, not McDonald's!\"\n>\n> 「トウキョウナゴヤは[仕事]{しごと}もしないで **ブラブラして** いる。」 = \"TokyoNagoya is bumming around\n> all day.\"\n\n3) When describing a change of state using an onomatopoeia, one would\ngenerally need to add a 「に」 instead of a 「と」.\n\n> 「くたくた **に** なるまで[歩]{ある}いた。」 = \"I walked until I was pooped.\"\n>\n> 「きんきん **に** [冷]{ひ}やしたビールはうまい。」 = \"Ice-cold beer tastes good.\"", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-08T10:53:04.820", "id": "14439", "last_activity_date": "2017-11-25T16:30:10.537", "last_edit_date": "2017-11-25T16:30:10.537", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14435", "post_type": "answer", "score": 14 }, { "body": "Chapter 8 of [A Dictionary of Basic Japanese\nGrammar](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/367611.A_Dictionary_of_Basic_Japanese_Grammar_)\nexplains the と that follows an onomatopoeia.\n\n> \"Each sound symbolism is an adverb associated with a specific verb. The\n> adverb is normally followed by the quote marker _to_ , because the sound\n> symbolism is perceived as a quotation.\"\n\nWhat I am about to write below is purely an inference. I do not have the\nintuition of a native/fluent speaker, so please take it with a grain of salt.\nTo attempt to answer the question as to what difference the inclusion of と\nmakes, I infer the following from the explanation cited above.\n\n 1. Without と, the onomatopoeia is simply an adverb: きらきら光る = to shine sparkingly.\n 2. The addition of と makes the description more vivid: きらきらと光る = to shine in a \"kirakira\" way. Somehow the sound symbolism plus the quotation particle と give a more immersive experience as if the reader/hearer imagines seeing the \"kirakira\" sparkle.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-11-01T19:52:50.020", "id": "91019", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-01T19:52:50.020", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "38770", "parent_id": "14435", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "One thing that struck me quite vividly when I first started to listen to\nJapanese lyrics is the near-ubiquity of mora-rhythm correspondence. You have\nprobably already noticed, but compared to English, syllables and\nvowel/consonant combinations are broken or skipped much less often. I won't\nsay you can't (especially in hip-hop), but it seems to be avoided.\n\nMost unintuitive (for English native speakers, probably) is the case of ん.\n\"なんだ\" takes up three syllables' worth in the majority of songs I have heard\nover the years). Similarly for っ: typically the previous mora is lengthened\n(it's not really possible to _sing_ a stop) to preserve intelligibility.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-15T23:47:02.243", "id": "14504", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-16T05:16:06.157", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-16T05:16:06.157", "last_editor_user_id": "3131", "owner_user_id": "3131", "parent_id": "14436", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "From the Japanese songs I've listened to, I belive that you do not need to be\nthat careful about the number of kanas in a line. You can always do two\nthings:\n\n 1. Sing the lyrics kana-by-kana or \"the ordinary way\". For example, 階段｛かいだん｝ could be sung as either just _kai-dan_ or _ka-i-da-n_. The former would be 2 syllables and the latter would be 4 syllables.\n 2. Give \"unorthodox\" _furigana_ to words. I'll illustrate this by an example, which is from Morning Musume's 「時空｛とき｝を超え 宇宙｛そら｝を超え」:\n\n> 時空｛とき｝を超え 宇宙｛そら｝を超え 結ばれる頃には\n>\n> この地球｛ほし｝は きれいになるかな\n\nNote that 時空, 宇宙 and 地球 are usually pronounced じくう, うちゅう and ちきゅう,\nrespectively, while とき, そら and ほし are respectively 時, 空 and 星. However, the\nsongwriter may assign to words whatever reading they desire, even if it is not\na valid reading of the word.\n\nSometimes this is used for special effect, but sometimes it's probably just to\nfit the number of syllables, such as this line in AKB48's 「桜の花びらたち」:\n\n> その背中に 夢の翼｛はね｝が 生えてる\n\nI don't really see a reason why 翼 is not pronounced つばさ as it usually is,\nbesides that the syllables would not fit...\n\nOf course, if you are writing _enka_ , you might need to be more careful about\nthe number of syllables. But I suppose you are not into that, so you don't\nhave to get mathematical about the number of syllables.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2017-02-06T21:14:29.143", "id": "43251", "last_activity_date": "2017-02-06T21:14:29.143", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "19346", "parent_id": "14436", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "「おやすも」 is used only by some residents of the region named インターネット. It is not\nused in Tokyo or Nagoya, I promise.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-10T00:14:50.863", "id": "14449", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-10T00:14:50.863", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14438", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "It needs to be ハンジは and not ハンジの because it is the subject that performed the\ntwo actions described --- 「[仲間]{なかま}を[喰]{く}った」 and\n「その[巨人]{きょじん}の[腹]{はら}をかっさいた」.\n\n「その巨人」 refers to the 「仲間」.\n\n「かっさいた」 ＝ 「かっ裂いた」 = \"ripped open\" said in the animated tough guy language\nusing 「かっ」, a verb prefix for that purpose.\n\n\"Haiji ate his friend. He ripped open the giant's abdomen.\"\n\nFor your reference, other emphatic verb prefixes include\n「おっ」、「つっ」、「とっ」、「ひっ」、「ぶっ」、「ぶん」, etc. Unfortunately, these are rarely\ninterchangeable. I will not get into that here, though.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-09T00:10:23.600", "id": "14441", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-09T00:35:42.490", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-09T00:35:42.490", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14440", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "It looks to me like 「彼」. A smart thing to do would be to show us the\nsurrounding characters --- in other words, context.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-09T06:03:23.170", "id": "14443", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-09T06:03:23.170", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14442", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "I'm a native speaker of Japanese and the sentence you mentioned sounds like\nthis:\n\n_How can I do something nice with a girl._\n\nYour sentence also has an atmosphere that you are talking about a kind of\nsexual things implicitly because of very abstract words like 物事 and なせる,\notherwise you can choose more specific words since it is not embarrassing at\nall.\n\nThe sentence you mentioned make sense except for \"物事に\", you should say \"物事を\"\nin this case. Since this sentence involve a sexual thing, it is considered be\nused in casual scene. And \"良い物事をなせるのですか\" is too formal in the casual scene,\nyou can say \"良い事ができますか\" instead. And you can omit 私は because it is clear this\nsentence is talking about yourself. So this can be a better sentence:\n\n_どうやって女の子と良い事ができますか？_", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-09T11:39:57.583", "id": "14445", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-09T11:39:57.583", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4658", "parent_id": "14444", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "TBH, I am a little perplexed by what appears to be the sudden popularity of\nthe question-ending 「の」 among Japanese-learners in the last several years. I\nam perplexed because it is used incorrectly or in an unnatural way at least\n60-70% of the time by them.\n\nWhile one could claim that 「神を信じるの？」 and 「神を信じますか？」 have the same surface\nmeaning, the intended nuances would be quite different if said by native\nspeakers. Those two sentences would not be interchangeable in real life by our\nstandards.\n\n「神を信じますか？」 is plain and simple. It means \"Do you believe in God?\" with no\nnuance intended. The speaker does not expect a particular answer.\n\n「神を信じるの？」 is not plain in that the speaker already sort of expects a nagative\nanswer. Someone who strongly believes in God himself would NOT say this.\n\nOP is correct regarding the informality of the 「の」.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-10T00:55:48.620", "id": "14450", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-10T00:55:48.620", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14447", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "If I had to make タメ語-丁寧語 correspondences, I would say that roughly\n\n> 神を信じる？ corresponds to 神を信じますか？\n\nand\n\n> 神を信じるの？ corresponds to 神を信じるんですか？\n\nThe versions without の are plain yes/no questions, something you ask when\nthere is nothing in the discourse/environment hinting either way.\n\nThe versions without の are used when something in the discourse/environment\nhas provided a hint to the speaker that the addressee believes in God\n(possibly contrary to previous expectation).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-10T01:53:39.983", "id": "14451", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-10T01:53:39.983", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "14447", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "A natural way of asking that would be:\n\n「ファイルのサイズを[教]{おし}えてください。」\n\nIf it is for business, one could say:\n\n「ファイルのサイズをお教えいただけますか。」\n\nThe problem with 「サイズは[何]{なん}ですか？」 is that while it is a perfectly grammatical\nsentence, it sounds like it was \"translated\" from anothet language, which it\nwas. When I read that part, it reminded me of the sentence 「[名前]{なまえ}は何ですか。」\nwhich is also often said by Japanese-learners.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-10T08:46:27.297", "id": "14453", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-10T08:46:27.297", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14452", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "To take the \"casually\" part literally, you could say:\n\n「（お）[名前]{なまえ}は？」\n\n「（お）名前、[聞]{き}いてもいい（かな）？」 or 「（お）名前聞いてもいいっすか？」\n\n「なにさんって[呼]{よ}んだらいいのかな？」 or 「なにさんって呼んだらいいっすか？」\n\n「（お）名前[教]{おし}えてもらえる（かな）？」\n\n, etc.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-10T10:35:28.640", "id": "14455", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-10T10:35:28.640", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14454", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "Just to add to Tokyo Nagoya's answer, I thought it'd be useful to mention that\n\"名前は何ですか\" is perfectly grammatical, and the reason that it can sound non-\nnative is cultural.\n\nJapanese tend to avoid questions that are too direct. Especially, the 何 can\nsound a bit direct or crude.\n\nOne way to get around this is to ask in a different way, as Tokyo Nagoya\nsuggests. Note that all his suggestions avoid using 何.\n\nAlso note that Japanese people will (in general, not all situations) feel less\nof a need to know your name than would be the case in many western cultures.\nYou could be called 先生、お兄さん、おじちゃん、彼、旦那さん (if you're a guy) depending on your\nage, your status and the situation.\n\nIt's also not uncommon that someone will ask your friend or partner for your\nname in front of you (to avoid asking you directly). This might seem\nborderline rude in some western cultures, where people might prefer to be\nasked directly.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-12T00:57:43.170", "id": "14464", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-12T00:57:43.170", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "14454", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "[平和]{へいわ} = peace\n\n平和な = peaceful\n\n平和に = peacefully\n\nThe に makes the word function adverbially to modify a verb (in this case,\n[暮]{く}らしている).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-10T23:02:23.403", "id": "14458", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-10T23:02:23.403", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14457", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "Almost! ←「[惜]{お}しい！」 in Japanese.\n\nThe passive voice past is [支配]{しはい}された --- \"was controlled\".\n\n支配されていた is passive voice past progressive --- \"was being controlled\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-11T22:37:49.340", "id": "14462", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-12T06:03:02.560", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-12T06:03:02.560", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14461", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "This question based on a video game called\n[アイドルマスターシンデレラガールズ](http://www.bandainamcogames.co.jp/cs/list/idolmaster/social_m/).\nIn that game, there are 3 types(\"タイプ\") of\n[idols](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_idol), which are cute, cool, and\npassion(\"パッション\"). As dainichi mentioned above, 分ける in this sentence means\n分類する. So, it translates as \"If you categorize her into 'type', is she passion?\n(Do you categorize her as a passion-type-idol?)\" or something along the line.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-13T06:40:05.090", "id": "14473", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-13T06:53:57.223", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-13T06:53:57.223", "last_editor_user_id": "3506", "owner_user_id": "3506", "parent_id": "14463", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "It depends on who issued his/her title and how widely recognized its title.\n\nThere is difference XX公認YY and 公認YY. Later one has no limitation. So who\nissued and how widely recognized are serious question.\n\nFor example,\n\nThis game is WBA title match. このゲームは、WBA公認タイトルマッチです。\n\nRegarding GARP, you can say ファイナンシャル・リスク・マネージャー USファイナンシャル・リスク・マネージャー\n米国ファイナンシャル・リスク・マネージャー USファイナンシャル・リスク・マネージャー(If US Gov. or equiv high authority\nissued the title and widely recognized in the US) 米国公認ファイナンシャル・リスク・マネージャー(same\nas above)\n\nBut you can not say 公認ファイナンシャル・リスク・マネージャー\n\nBecause ファイナンシャル・リスク・マネージャー is not widely recognized in Japan and Japanese gov\nor equiv authority does not recognise GARP.\n\nIf US and Japan agree on TPP, each financial risk manager title is compatible\nbetween US and Japan then you can say this in Japan.\n\nThe most easy way is, to use サーティファイド instead of 公認。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2015-03-08T11:03:22.123", "id": "23128", "last_activity_date": "2015-03-08T11:03:22.123", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4162", "parent_id": "14469", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "Depending on the situation, you can use 認定資格. Perhaps for a private\ncertification, this is more appropriate.\n\n(A related term to keep in mind is 認証. But it has a different nuance so does\nnot apply in this situation, necessarily.)\n\nE.g.\n\n「AdWords 認定資格」 is a Google-certified accreditation ([Google Partners\npage](https://support.google.com/partners/answer/3154326?hl=ja))\n\n「オートデスク認定資格」 is a Autodesk-certified accreditation ([Autodesk\npage](http://www.myautodesk.jp/certification/AutoCADuser/index.html))", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2015-03-09T17:15:43.430", "id": "23147", "last_activity_date": "2015-03-09T17:15:43.430", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "6823", "parent_id": "14469", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "It is usually called 「おまけカット」.\n\nWhen it consists of bloopers, it is called 「[NG集]{エヌジーしゅう}」.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-27T12:07:53.857", "id": "14645", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-27T12:27:33.083", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-27T12:27:33.083", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14471", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "My answer would be No. **「始めまして」** is literally only used the first time that\nyou encounter a person and introductions are in order. If you plan to meet in\nperson after already introducing yourselves online, you only need to greet\nwith **「こんにちは」** or whatever's appropriate for the time of the day. However,\nif after your 「こにちは」 you wish to re-state your name, feel free to!\n\nI learned this when meeting my Japanese tutor online first, then in person.\n\nIn addition, after meeting in person this way with a colleague, saying\n**「よろしくお願いします」** (yoroshiku onegai shimasu, \"Please be kind to me\") is also\nappropriate.\n\nHope this helps!", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-14T16:46:24.873", "id": "14487", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-14T16:46:24.873", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4654", "parent_id": "14474", "post_type": "answer", "score": -1 }, { "body": "I would typically say はじめまして again when meeting for the first time and I get\ngreeted in a similar way.\n\nInstead of よろしくお願いします, I would say 改めて{あらためて}よろしくお願{ねが}いします which acknowledges\nthat I have said it before.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-26T01:36:48.567", "id": "14624", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-27T05:04:52.977", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-27T05:04:52.977", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1805", "parent_id": "14474", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "It doesn't matter. Feel it out based on your relationship with that person and\nwhatever feels right. I have to imagine that if you had contact with someone\nbefore and you said 初めまして upon meeting them in person it would be accompanied\nby that kind of weak laugh of shared awkwardness like \"what do I say in this\nsituation?\" In other words, meeting people from the internet is still a\nrelatively new phenomenon, and while I'm sure there must have been people who\nhad met by correspondence in the past, there is not some universally accepted\ncultural norm for what to do in this situation. I think you can compare it\npretty directly to how the situation would play out in English.\n\nSo basically, I don't think there's a specifically Japanese way to do it. The\nmeeting will probably be awkward and fumbling for the first few moments\nanyway. Personally I'd make a comment along the lines of \"nice to finally meet\nyou in person,\" as I would in English, but that's just me. Just go for what\nfeels right.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-27T01:29:58.757", "id": "14639", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-27T01:29:58.757", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "14474", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "I am not a native speaker but based on my experience supported by the comments\nabove from native speakers, I would say it again, just as I might say \"pleased\nto meet you\" in English.\n\nIt might partly depend on the context and the nature of your previous contact:\nWhen you meet finally F2F, there may be a \"first time feel\" to the occasion\nand it comes very naturally. You might even say it after swapping e-mails for\nlong period and then seeing the person for the first time on AV.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-27T03:29:58.400", "id": "14643", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-27T03:29:58.400", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "14474", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "It's the quotative particle と, i.e.\n\n> 「初撃の後の陽動のために」と用意した慧による「姫」の誘拐作戦。\n\nThe actual meaning isn't much different, but gives a slight nuance that\n「初撃の後の陽動のために」 are somebody else's words (e.g. 慧's), not the\nspeaker/narrator's. I would need more context to see if this is done for a\nspecific reason.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-14T00:57:51.203", "id": "14481", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-14T00:57:51.203", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "14475", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "The difference between 「～～ために」 and 「～～ためにと」 can be very subtle at times;\nnevertheless a difference does exist.\n\nTo use 「～～ために」, the speaker needs to be 100% certain of what the reason for an\naction is. The action-taker may be either the speaker himself or another\nperson. If the latter is the case, the speaker already possesses enough\ninformation to determine what the reason is.\n\nTo use 「～～ためにと」, the speaker may or may not be 100% certain of what the reason\nfor an action is. The action-taker would generally not be the speaker himself.\nThe use of 「と」, though it is called the quotative paricle, does not\nnecessarily require an actual quote of a statement. From my experience with\nJapanese-learners, this is what seems to confuse them. It is perfectly natural\nand correct to use the quotative 「と」 and 「って」 to express what the speaker\nmerely thinks or believes would be the opinion of either the general public or\na specific individual. In other words, you do not have to have heard it said\nby someone.\n\nIn the phrase (it is not a sentence)\n「[初撃]{しょげき}の[後]{あと}の[陽動]{ようどう}のためにと[用意]{ようい}した[慧]{けい}による「[姫]{ひめ}」の[誘拐作戦]{ゆうかいさくせん}。」\n, the speaker, who is clearly [雪隆]{ゆきたか}, may or may not have actually heard 慧\nsay that 慧 prepared his strategy for the reason of 初撃の後の陽動のため. The reason may\nwell be 雪隆's conjecture.\n\nIf I were asked to rephrase 「～～のためにと用意した」 for a better understanding, I would\nsuggest inserting immediately after the 「と」, words like 「[思]{おも}い/思って」 or\n「[考]{かんが}え/考えて」. The important thing is that in this case, the person who 思う\nor 考える is 慧, not the narrator.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-22T00:31:56.780", "id": "14568", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-22T00:31:56.780", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14475", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "The sense of うるおい (which is a noun) that 沢 (or 澤) has is that of abundance, as\nin 沢山【たくさん】, 潤沢【じゅんたく】, or 贅沢【ぜいたく】; and the sense of うるおす that it has is that\nof favouring or blessing, as in 恩沢【おんたく】or 恵沢【けいたく】.\n\nThe sense of つや that 沢 has is that of glossiness, as in 光沢【こうたく】 or 色沢【しきたく】.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-13T20:30:01.357", "id": "14479", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-13T20:30:01.357", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "578", "parent_id": "14476", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Neither, really. Merging し and ひ happens in certain dialects, and your teacher\nprobably studied somewhere where that merger is common. You can choose to do\nit this way, or you can choose to not.\n\n(It has nothing to do with the individual word ひと, though. Some people might\nmerge し and ひ in some places and not others, and before a /t/ might be one of\nthose places, but it's not a single-word phenomenon.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-13T19:49:49.847", "id": "14478", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-13T19:49:49.847", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3639", "parent_id": "14477", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "The **「ひ」** in 「ひと」 is usually pronounced as kind of a silent huff of air.\n\nSimilar to how **「し」** is pronounced as a silent sound in 「している」 (like saying\n\"sh-teiru).\n\nOr how **「つ」** is a silent sound in a word like 「みつけた」. (like saying the 'ts'\nsound without sounding out the 'u' in 'tsu').\n\nBut pronouncing these as 'silent sounds' is only for certain words. There are\ndefinitely plenty of other vocabulary where these are fully sounded out.\n\nI hope that helps somewhat! ***^_^***", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-14T14:55:02.813", "id": "14485", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-14T14:55:02.813", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4654", "parent_id": "14477", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes, you are right on all counts. 心身を病む means, as you understood, to be ill in\nmind and body. The suggestion here is that the person is under considerable\nduress that is taking a toll both mentally and physically, and we can intuit\nthat this is a result of being in the military.\n\n立ち退く is to \"leave\" in the sense of packing up and getting out of there.\nRemoving yourself from that location. Moving from one place to another, in its\nsimplest terms. In this situation it's just \"leaving the military.\"\n\nHowever I think it might be more accurate to say \"I cannot leave\" rather than\n\"it's impossible.\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-14T01:10:39.457", "id": "14482", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-14T01:36:29.837", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-14T01:36:29.837", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "14480", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "そんなの and あんなの are demonstrative phrases that are often used when talking about\nsomething with less interest. however, these are not alwas used since japanese\npeople care about how the others look at you.\n\nfor example, if you have no interest in something, you may say そんなのどうでもいいよ。\nthis can be used in a conversation when you have no interest in what the other\nsay. however, this may be disrespectful if you are talking to someone you are\nnot so close with.\n\nin these cases, japanese people use something called as 相槌を打つ(aizuchi wo\nutsu). this is, making yourself as if you have interest in the conversation.\nthe useful phrases in this相槌を打つ are\n\nそうだね なるほど うん すごいね\n\nand more. Japanese people use these phrases in a combination to make\nthemselves look like as if they are interested.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-16T06:27:41.093", "id": "14508", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-16T06:27:41.093", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4696", "parent_id": "14483", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "「そんなの」etc. is used in the way that you described. It is not very respectful\ntowards whatever you are referring to or the audience. Usually you will be\nconsiderate of who the audience is. For example, I would only use this when\ntalking to my close 'buddies' or family but would never use this in a work\nsetting or speaking to someone I am not close to.\n\nI do want to note that そんなのcan be broken down into そんな の.\n\nそんな, still informal but not necessarily used in situations where you are\nspeaking of an undesirable thing or talking down. E.g. そんな訳で... So in this\nsituation you probably won't use this type of speech in a formal setting or to\npeople that are 目上.\n\n↓\n\nそのような, more formal and used in any situation.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-07-18T00:11:25.330", "id": "17860", "last_activity_date": "2014-07-18T00:11:25.330", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "6823", "parent_id": "14483", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "user224579 already gave great answer but I will just add some notes on using\nthese phrases.\n\nそんなの etc. are not particularly disrespectful, these words can be used very\nnicely to add some emotional colouring to the phrase. After all one should not\nbe afraid to speak about something with less respect as Japanese language\nprovides large amount of tools to add \"opinion\" to a phrase, just be aware\nabout consequences.\n\nFor example:\n\n 1. Showing lack of respect:\n\n * マックを食べる？ - will you eat mcdonalds?\n * そんなの食べない。 - I don't eat stuff like that. (looking down at this type of food)\n 2. Being playful:\n\n * //何とか//知ってる？ - Do you know about //something// ... ?\n * そんなのしらない。 - I have no idea ;) (quite playful, especially if used by girls)\n\nAlso, very similar construct is そんな ... の where you put a word instead of ...\nwhich you want to emphasise.\n\nFor example:\n\nExpressing amazement: - あんな大きいの今まで見た事ない！ - I've never seen such large\n(something) before!", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-07-22T17:10:05.873", "id": "17904", "last_activity_date": "2014-07-22T17:10:05.873", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "6748", "parent_id": "14483", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "I think those two sentences are equally acceptable. As for the other way,\n彼が来るはずはない. In 彼は来るはずがない, \"he\" is the point of attention, and this expression\nimplies other persons except him will come, like 彼女は来るはず. In 彼は来ないはずだ, \"won't\ncome\" is the point of attention, and this implies he will do other actions,\nlike 彼は他の場所へ行くだろう. In 彼が来るはずはない, \"彼がくるはず\" is a noun clause.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-14T15:28:38.590", "id": "14486", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-14T15:28:38.590", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14484", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "Both are acceptable.\n\nBut note that each of them has a different meaning. And these meanings are\nsubtly different.\n\n> 彼は来ないはずです。\n\n= We have the expectation that he won't come.\n\n> 彼は来るはずがない。\n\n= We do not have an expectation that he is coming.\n\nThe difference here is that we are stating our expectation in the first case.\nIn the second, we are negating an expectation. In the first the expectation is\nnegative. In the second, the expectation is positive. Turned into a chart:\n\n```\n\n ～ないはず ～はずがない ～ないはずではない\n \n Expectation - + -\n Statement + - -\n Net Statement - - +\n \n```\n\n来るはずがない is understood to be stronger than 来ないはずです in terms of the strength of\nour belief he wont' come by native speakers.\n\n* * *\n\n> 彼は来るわけがない。\n\n= We have no reason to expect he will come.\n\nBut\n\n> どうりで彼は来ないわけです\n\n= It's no wonder he doesn't come", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-15T04:07:30.263", "id": "14490", "last_activity_date": "2020-12-06T04:58:58.660", "last_edit_date": "2020-12-06T04:58:58.660", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "4091", "parent_id": "14484", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 }, { "body": "I am going to offer a simpler explanation making reference to the previous\nanswers and comments (avoiding any consideration of changing は or が ) :\n\nBoth are acceptable, both indicate the actor is not expected to visit but\nthere is a difference which can be shown by the following which are quite\nclose to the normal translation of はず into standard English:\n\n> 彼は来ないはずです。| I expect he won't come.\n>\n> 彼は来るはずがない。| I have no expectation of him coming [at all].\n\nAs explained by 明鏡国語辞典 (in Snailplane's comment), the second case is much\nstronger because the speaker is excluding any possiblity of the actor coming.\n(皆無＝＞\"There is no chance he is coming.\")\n\n**わけ＜＝＞はず**\n\nThis was not part of the question but it is a worthwhile comparison:\n\nはずがない and わけがない are taught as interchangeable. I rationalise this on the basis\nthat わけ is used to convey circumstances or a reason, as follows:\n\n彼は来るわけがない。\n\nHe has no reason to come.\n\nor\n\nHe is not coming under any circumstances.\n\n(~There are no circumstances under which he will come.)\n\n=> I have no expectation of him coming [at all].\n\nThe expression 「彼は来ないわけです。」, on the other hand, might be used to explain:\n\"That is because he is not coming.\", or depending on the situation: \"Yes but\nhe is not coming.\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-15T17:26:50.160", "id": "14499", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-15T18:25:29.083", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "14484", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "Are you talking about a website like\n[Wiktionary](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E6%8C%81%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6%E8%A1%8C%E3%81%8F)?\n\nIt appears that some sites which automatically generate conjugation charts\ntreat \"もっていく\" as though it's a regular godan verb, but you're correct that\nit's もって + いく, and that いく conjugates as it normally does.\n\nIt should be [もっていって](http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jwb/cgi-\nbin/wwwjdic.cgi?1W%BB%FD%A4%C3%A4%C6%A4%A4%A4%AF_v5k-s), not *もっていいて.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-15T01:54:31.837", "id": "14489", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-15T01:54:31.837", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14488", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I am not a native speaker of Japanese but I know 年寄り as a neutral word, which\ngets used not just in conversation but in notices. I took the following from\nSpaceALC:\n\n> ここはお年寄りや体の不自由な人のための優先席です。\n>\n> PRIORITY SEATING FOR SENIOR CITIZENS AND DISABLED PERSONS\n\nI think you just need to be sensitive when referring to people's age, as you\nwould in English eg use お年寄り if you feel awkward and want to express some\nreserve.\n\nFWIW, I don't really see a difference between aged-person and elderly but\nthese things vary from place to place and change with time. (My aged mother\nwould not thank you to refer to her using either word though neither word's\nroots have a -ve connotation.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-15T11:10:30.403", "id": "14492", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-15T19:20:24.740", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "14491", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "年寄り is pretty neutral, I think. 年配 is respectful and 老人 is a little more slang\n(from what I can remember).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-15T14:05:45.120", "id": "14494", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-15T14:05:45.120", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4689", "parent_id": "14491", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "there are also 老害 which means trouble causing elderly\n\na contempt way to call お年寄り", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-16T06:13:20.677", "id": "14507", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-16T06:13:20.677", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4696", "parent_id": "14491", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "For example, 暖かくなってきています is \"it's getting warm\" while 暖かくなっています is \"it has\nbecome warm\" = \"it is warm\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-15T16:28:26.393", "id": "14497", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-15T16:28:26.393", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4092", "parent_id": "14495", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "It would be helpful if gave specific examples because what seems like a simple\nquestion touches some quite complicated grammar, which I will try to cover\nbriefly:\n\nFirst you need to understand the nature of ~ている. There are several questions\ncovering this quite well so I won't repeat them but will try to summarise:\n\nなる is a \"punctual verb\", that is to say that when using the ~ている form, the\nresultative state precludes the continuative state. In other words if we say:\n\n> この地方は交通が便利になっています。\n\nThis usually means:\n\n> In this region the public transport has become convenient. (i.e. \"is\n> convenient\")\n\nIt can also mean \"is becoming convenient\" but to convey that sense (ie it is\nin a transition state) additional words, typically adverbs are often used to\ncreate the context. eg:\n\n> この地方は交通がだんだん便利になっています。\n>\n> In this region the public transport is gradually becoming [more and\n> more]convenient.\n\nSecond: 〜てくる／〜ていくis used to convey change in position or time. Often these\ncommunicate the movement/action of the speaker (「いってきます！」）or movement of\nsomething/action with respect to the speaker (「電話がかかってきた」）but they can also be\nused to convey continuation of a state or \"process of change\". eg:\n\n> この地方が交通がだんだん便利になってきた。これからは観光客が多くなっていくと思う\n>\n> In this region public transport gradually became convenient. Going forwards,\n> I think the number of tourists will be very large.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-15T23:12:02.667", "id": "14501", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-15T23:12:02.667", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "14495", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "It is from 'classical' grammar, or rather Early Middle Japanese. -し is the 連体形\n(the 'attributive' form, used to modify nouns) of the past tense marker -き. It\nis used to describe events the speaker knows have happened; in contrast to\n-けり, which is used for events the speaker has only heard about but not\nexperienced himself. (There are a few other past tense or perfect aspect\nmarkers - -ぬ, -り, etc - that are older and in varying stages of loss by Middle\nJapanese.)\n\n選ばれし者 then means 'the chosen one(s), the one(s) who has/have been chosen'.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-16T00:44:30.913", "id": "14505", "last_activity_date": "2018-01-22T00:54:33.440", "last_edit_date": "2018-01-22T00:54:33.440", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "3639", "parent_id": "14498", "post_type": "answer", "score": 14 } ]

[ { "body": "I have always heard this as `katayoku`. \n(e.g. _Umineko no Naku Koro ni_ makes plenty of references to a\n[片翼]{katayoku}[の]{no}[鷲]{washi}.)\n\nFor what it's worth (maybe very little), Google IME also suggests this song\ntitle as the first entry upon entering `katayoku` and does not recognize\n`katatsubasa` as a 2-kanji compound.\n\nThere is some discussion\n[here](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1136501161)\nabout this same song, where the answerers have the same opinion. The first\nanswer by ffbiyoriさん says that the word was coined fairly recently, and so the\nreading varies, with `hen'yoku` and `katatsubasa` also being seen sometimes,\nbut less commonly than `katayoku`.\n\n(Also note that if you search EDICT for [words ending in\n翼](http://tangorin.com/general/%2a%E7%BF%BC), they all use the `yoku`\nreading.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-15T23:14:53.087", "id": "14502", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-15T23:14:53.087", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "315", "parent_id": "14500", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "I believe it is katayoku.\n\nnormally, there are two ways to read kanji. kun-yomi and on-yomi. on-yomi is\npronunciation derived from chinese reading, and kun-yomi is the traditional\njapanese reading. usually in a single vocabulary, these two types of readings\ndo not mix. however, there are few special cases where these two types of\nreading do mix. these are called yuto-yumi(in order of kun-yomi, on-yomi) and\njyuubako-yomi(vise versa). in most of the time, the words that are read in\nthese types have been used for a long time and known as the \"special cases.\"\n\nhowever, in the case of 片翼, this is something taht came up recently. it was\nprobably first used by Taro Koizumi in his novel \"Katayoku dakeno tenshi\" and\nsince then, 片翼 has been read katayoku. it's like a coined word, so maybe if he\nhad titled his novel \"katatsubasa dakeno tenshi,\" we would have been reading\n片翼 as katasubasa.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-16T06:05:48.260", "id": "14506", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-16T06:05:48.260", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4696", "parent_id": "14500", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "Is it an excerpt from a novel?\n\nIt does seem weird both in Japanese and English. One possibility is that the\n黒いおり at the end of the sentence is attached to 肌の色:\n\n> あれほどなめらかだった肌の色も、揉み皮のように張りを失い、唇のあいだには、桑の実を食べた後のような、黒いおりがにじみ出る。\n>\n> The color of her skin that had been so smooth, has lost its tension like\n> chamois leather, and between her lips there were black stains, as if she had\n> just ate some mulberries.\n\nso that everything between 肌の色 and 黒いおり describes how her skin, which was once\nsmooth, has changed.\n\nAnyway, it is a weird sentence.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-16T06:42:28.603", "id": "14509", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-17T09:20:57.780", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "4696", "parent_id": "14503", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "To answer the title question, yes, it is. The particle 「も」 cannot mark a word\nanywhere else but right in front of it.\n\nThe main thing that is preventing both OP and the first \"answerer\" from\nunderstanding and appreciating this sentence seems to be their belief that 「色」\nalways means \"color\". Look it up in a good dictionary -- a monolingual one, of\ncourse. It will give you a dozen meanings and one of them will be 色つや =\n\"luster\".\n\n\"Luster\" can surely 揉み皮のように張りを失う, can it not?", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-07-17T02:21:20.723", "id": "17844", "last_activity_date": "2014-07-17T09:38:12.507", "last_edit_date": "2014-07-17T09:38:12.507", "last_editor_user_id": "29", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14503", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "It makes sense if the つや in 色つや is\n\n２ なめらかで張りがあり美しいこと。「若々しい―のある声」「肌に―がある」\n\nand not\n\n１ 物の表面から出るしっとりとした光。光沢。「宝石を磨いて―を出す」\n\nfrom <http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/148376/m0u/%E3%81%A4%E3%82%84/>", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-07-17T18:21:53.553", "id": "17855", "last_activity_date": "2014-07-17T18:21:53.553", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "6797", "parent_id": "14503", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "I do not know the formal name for it; but, I would call it 略称{りゃくしょう} (\"name\nabbreviation\") or 略語{りゃくご} (\"abbreviation\"). There is [an article on Wikipedia\nabout 略語](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%95%A5%E8%AA%9E) (Japanese).\n\nAnother example that comes to mind is country/region names. Some often seen in\nthe news are:\n\n * Germany: 独{どく} (from 独逸{ドイツ})\n * France: 仏{ふつ} (from 仏蘭西{フランス})\n * UK: 英{えい} or 英国{えいこく} (from 英吉利{イギリス})\n * USA: 米{べい} or 米国{べいこく} (from 亜米利加{アメリカ})\n * Australia: 豪{ごう} or 豪州{ごうしゅう} (from 濠太剌利亜{オーストラリア})\n * South Africa: 南ア{なんあ} (from 南{みなみ}アフリカ共和国{きょうわこく})\n * Europe: 欧{おう} or 欧州{おうしゅう} (from 欧羅巴{ヨーロッパ})\n * Northern Europe: 北欧{ほくおう}\n * South America: 南米{なんべい}\n * North America: 北米{ほくべい}\n * East Asia: 東亜{とうあ} (from 東{ひがし} and 亜細亜{アジア})\n\nFor a more exhaustive list, you might also check out the [list of 漢字{かんじ} for\ncountry\nnames](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%9B%BD%E5%90%8D%E3%81%AE%E6%BC%A2%E5%AD%97%E8%A1%A8%E8%A8%98%E4%B8%80%E8%A6%A7)\non Wikipedia.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-21T03:36:18.757", "id": "14558", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-21T03:36:18.757", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3835", "parent_id": "14512", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "As I stated in the comment, the set of \"rules\" that are used to save space in\nnewspapers and magazines (nowadays, websites as well) is commonly called\n「[見出]{みだ}し[文法]{ぶんぽう}」, literally meaning \" ** _headline grammar_** \".\n\nSome of the characteristics of 見出し文法 are:\n\n1) Use of [省略語]{しょうりゃくご} (abbreviated words).\n\n2) Omission of all forms of 「する」,「なる」,「いる」 and 「ある」. Instead of\n「オバマ[大統領]{だいとうりょう}が[来日]{らいにち}する（or した）= \"President Obama visits/visited\nJapan.\"」, you will see a 「オバマ大統領来日」 as the headline.\n\n3) Omission of particles -- most importantly, that of 「 **が** 」 and 「 **を** 」.\nI say \"most importantly\" because, as many of you would know, particles in\ngeneral often get omitted in informal conversations, but が and を are the ones\nthat are least often omitted. For this reason, the omission of those two in\n見出し文法 is of significance.\n\nYou will see a 「俳優田中明警官刺し逃走」with just a single kana instead of a\n「[俳優]{はいゆう}田中明{たなかあきら}が[警官]{けいかん}を[刺]{さ}して[逃走]{とうそう}している」= \"Actor Akira Tanaka\nstabs policeman and runs away.\"\n\n4) Omission of the predictable verb following the object of the phrase. For\ninstance, if a native speaker saw the short phrase 羽生「金」, he will be able to\ntell that it is the 見出し form of the sentence\n「[羽生]{はにゅう}が[金]{きん}メダルを[獲得]{かくとく}した」 = \"Hanyuu won the gold medal.\"\n\n***Please note that only #1 above is used in BOTH headlines and articles. The\nother techniques are used only in headlines.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-21T13:38:01.123", "id": "14559", "last_activity_date": "2018-05-21T23:52:30.007", "last_edit_date": "2018-05-21T23:52:30.007", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14512", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 } ]

[ { "body": "> Each kanji is assigned a key word that represents its basic meaning, or\n> **one of its basic meanings**. The key words have been selected on the basis\n> of **how a given kanji is used in compounds** and on the meaning it has on\n> its own. [...] To be sure, many of the characters carry a side range of\n> connotations not present in their English equivalents, and vice versa; many\n> even carry several ideas not able to be captured in a single English word.\n> _By simplifying the meanings through the use of key words, however, one\n> becomes familiar with a kanji and at least one of its principal meanings.\n> The others can be added later with relative ease, in much the same way as\n> one enriches one’s understanding of one’s native tongue by learning the full\n> range of feelings and meanings embraced by words already known._ (RTK1, p9)\n\nHeisig's keywords are just that: keywords. They don't represent the full range\nof meaning of the kanji and certainly are not \"translations\". I suspect Heisig\nchose \"employee\" for 員 for its use in common words such as 社員 and 従業員 etc.\nWhile in this case I agree that \"member\" would have been a better keyword, I\nthink the real problem here is that you haven't properly read the introduction\nto RTK.\n\nAs a small aside: while there's a fair amount of controversy (opinions both\nways) regarding Heisig's method in the Japanese learning community, I will\njust add that I found the method helpful and found the italic'd part of the\nquote to be true.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-17T12:01:09.610", "id": "14515", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-17T23:29:05.397", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-17T23:29:05.397", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3010", "parent_id": "14513", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "Heisig's keywords aren't translations. Remember that you aren't actually\nlearning any Japanese when you do RTK--you're learning mnemonic devices which\nhelp you to remember how to write all of the kanji in his list. This skill is\nsupposed to help you when do you start learning Japanese.\n\nThe book does purport to teach you the meanings of characters, too, but the\nsingle keywords are **not** reliable translations of anything. If it were\notherwise, we could say that a 弁護士 is a **Valve Safeguard Gentleman** , but a\n弁護士 is in fact a **lawyer**.\n\nIn this case, he probably chose the term \"employee\" for 員 based on certain\ncompounds it appears in, including the one you mentioned as well as (for\nexample) 社員 and 店員. If we play the game of putting keywords together, we get\n\"company member\" and \"store member\" for these. Are these really that much\nbetter than \"company employee\" and \"store employee\"? (Note that your word 従業員\nis gibberish either way--neither \"accompany business member\" nor \"accompany\nbusiness employee\" makes any sense.)\n\nThe truth is, you can't learn the meanings of all the words and morphemes\nwritten with a given kanji by memorizing a single keyword. It'll work okay in\nsome cases, but in a lot of others it won't. Instead, you need to learn what\nwords (like べんごし) and morphemes (like いん) mean, and you can't assume that\ntheir meanings will resemble Heisig's keywords for the kanji they're written\nwith.\n\nSo when you encounter a keyword that doesn't seem to match up with the meaning\nof a word or morpheme, just shrug and move on. There'll be plenty more where\nthat came from.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-18T00:04:53.530", "id": "14525", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-18T00:04:53.530", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14513", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "The left image should be turned over. It reads 細香寫. 細 means slender, fine,\nthin. 香 means fragrance, perfume. 寫 or 写 means copy, write, photo. In all, I\ncan't decipher its meaning. The right image is not turned over. Its upper\ncharacter reads 耕 cultivate. Its lower character I can't read.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-17T12:59:57.020", "id": "14516", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-17T12:59:57.020", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14514", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "I view ざる as old Japanese(from before the Yedo era) but ぬ can be used in\ntoday's Japanese as well as in the old. In old Japanese, ざる is interchangeable\nwith ぬ, both have the same level of colloquiality. In today's Japanese, I feel\nない more common than ぬ.\n\nはなれざる故か/はなれぬ故か oldest - はなれぬためか a little old - はなれないためだろうか nowadays\n\nFor き and かる, き indicates past tense in old Japanese( today's counterpart is た\nor した). かる has many means with different Kanji characters - 離る go far apart,\n狩る hunt, 借る borrow, 駆る make something (e.g. a horse or a dog) run.\n\n * thanks virmaior", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-03-02T11:54:36.023", "id": "14691", "last_activity_date": "2014-03-02T12:55:43.313", "last_edit_date": "2014-03-02T12:55:43.313", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14518", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "(I'm not a native speaker, nor am I a linguist.)\n\nIt seems to me that, both ぬ and ざる are used, but there is a difference. They\nare used for different writing styles. ぬ is used in 和文 while ざる is used in 漢文,\nas well as constructions borrowed from 漢文. I think that's why ざる appears much\nmore frequently in that passage.\n\nAnd also, ざる is used to conjugate ず because ず is uninflectable. The same goes\nfor かり adjective. かり and かる are only reserved for conjugation use. You don't\nuse かり to end a sentence or connect two, nor do you use かる to modify a noun.\n\n多かり seems to be an exception, used to avoid the ambiguity of おほし. Similarly,\n大きなり is used for the same purpose.\n\n* * *\n\nIn fact, I wonder if ざる was really used in spoken language when Chinese canons\nwere introduced in Japanese. In fact, it seems to me that the Japanese\nancients tended to choose or create expressions that are _archaic and stilted\neven then_ to render the ancient Chinese counterparts.\n\n* * *\n\nAs I don't have enough reputation to add a comment, I just write them here.\n\n@snailplane: They will not be confused. They should be はなれ **ぬ** 故 and はなれ\n**ぬる** 故 respectively.\n\n～ぬなり is indeed ambiguous though, but the ambiguity mainly comes from なり. It\nmay either means ～したという or ～ないのだ. So is ～ざるなり, which can mean ～しないのだ or\n～しないという.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-03-05T15:35:09.173", "id": "14750", "last_activity_date": "2014-03-05T17:23:52.753", "last_edit_date": "2014-03-05T17:23:52.753", "last_editor_user_id": "4833", "owner_user_id": "4833", "parent_id": "14518", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "バードキス is a _type of kiss_. The idea is that the shape of your lips resemble a\nbird's beak. This could be called \"the usual kiss\".\n\n小鳥のキス (小鳥 = small bird), presumably references バードキス and means a\nsmall/light/innocent/no-funny-business type of kiss.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-17T19:42:55.050", "id": "14520", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-17T19:42:55.050", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "14519", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "知らない方がいいって事もあるんです\n\nって is a casual quoting particle that can replace various combinations such as\nという\n\nwith that in mind the sentence becomes\n\n「知らない方がいい」 という事 も あるんです\n\nWhich literally means :\n\nThings (called / you say / said) \"better off left unknown\" (also) exist.\n\nUsing も instead of が emphasizes the (also/even) part.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-18T01:38:29.900", "id": "14526", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-18T01:38:29.900", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4704", "parent_id": "14521", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "This 「～～って」 is a quotative particle and it is the colloquial form of 「～～という」\nin the sentence in question. You will keep encountering those as long as you\nstudy Japanese and this is an understatement. In reality, you simply could not\nspeak natural Japanese without using the quotative particle even for a minute,\nperiod.\n\nSo, who are we quoting? In this case, no one ---- or at least. no one in\nparticular. In my own words, the speaker is merely representing the \"general\npublic\" by implying \"Here is how (most) people, myself included, would think\nor say.\" or \"Here is what they would say if you asked their opinion.\"\n\n[知]{し}らない[方]{ほう}がいいって[事]{こと} = things that (people would think/say) are better\noff if you/they did not know about\n\n～～事もあるんです = there are (also) things that ~~\n\nThis ことがある has nothing to do with \"to have the experience of ~~\". For it to\nmean that, it needs to be preceded by a verb in the past tense --- as in\n行ったことがある, 食べたことがある, etc.\n\nFinally, the difference between 「知らない方がいいって事もあるんです」 and 「知らない方がいい事もあるんです」 is\nthat the former sounds indirect and less assertive, which is exactly what many\nJapanese people like. The latter sounds more confident by not \"quoting the\nimaginary general public\" to back up the speaker's opinion.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-25T02:19:40.570", "id": "14600", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-25T02:19:40.570", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14521", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "* 知らない (しらない) - Not knowing, unknown \n * 方がいい (ほうがいい) - It is better \n * って -Indicating something was said or indicated\n * 事もある (こともある) - There are/is also (literally 'there also exists this thing') \n * んです - Sentence ending phrase like \"so it is\"\n\nSo if you put it all together you can say \"Said things also exist which are\nbetter not known\" or in more natural English \"Some things are better left\nunknown\".\n\nHope that helps break it down clearly.\n\nA better example of って would be:\n\n * すし **って** どういうものですか？ - What kind of thing is called 'sushi' (or more naturally - what is this thing called sushi?)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-25T22:54:54.713", "id": "14621", "last_activity_date": "2015-01-12T06:02:49.383", "last_edit_date": "2015-01-12T06:02:49.383", "last_editor_user_id": "3437", "owner_user_id": "4764", "parent_id": "14521", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "It sounds like you already have the correct understanding, and you're just\nlooking for confirmation/better motivation to believe what you suspect to be\ntrue.\n\nFor attributive verbs, the present progressive (～している) is considered informal,\nand is therefore forced to be recast as the plain form (～する). So you're\nessentially correct -- in a colloquial/informal setting, your example\nsentences would likely be phrased as 掴んでいる手、差し込んでいる日差し、構えている兵士、and\n泣きじゃくっている少女。\n\nIf you're looking for a theory-intense approach, you can view it as a context-\ndriven merger of attributive verb forms, where both underlying ～する and ～している\nsurface as ～する in formal contexts. Accordingly, the habitual interpretation is\nonly attainable when the underlying form is also plain, and the instantiating\ninterpretation when the underlying form is progressive.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-20T12:34:53.813", "id": "14553", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-20T12:34:53.813", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4229", "parent_id": "14523", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "The term 体言止め refers to ending a sentence with a 体言. So, what's a 体言?\n\nIn Japanese school grammar, a 体言{たいげん} is a type of word which has the\nfollowing traits:\n\n 1. It is an independent word. (It does not depend on another word, like 助詞 or 助動詞 do.)\n 2. It does not inflect. (In other words, it has only one form.)\n 3. It can be the subject of a sentence.\n\nAt a minimum, this includes at least 名詞{めいし} (nouns) and 代名詞{だいめいし}\n(pronouns), though some definitions include other word classes as well. For\nexample, 明鏡 says that some theories include 形容動詞の語幹 (what many learners call\nな-adjectives, but without the な), apparently ignoring the third requirement.\nMost commonly people use 体言 to refer to nouns, though.\n\nIn any case, 体言止め is a fairly simple concept--ending a sentence with a 体言.\nThat means:\n\n * Your example of omitting をする is 体言止め because the word before をする is a 体言.\n * Omitting だ or である (etc.) at the end of a sentence can be 体言止め for the same reason. \n * You can also form 体言止め by inverting the normal word order: 「星が輝く」 → 「輝く星」\n\nAnd so on. Dictionaries say that it was originally mainly a stylistic poetic\ndevice, appearing in 和歌 and 俳句 and so forth, but it's certainly not limited to\npoetry. You'll also see it in advertisements, in magazine articles, in the\nnews, in documentaries, and all over, really. It can be used for effect, or it\ncan simply be used to make your writing more compact.\n\nIf you do end a sentence with a 体言, make sure that whatever words you're\nomitting can be inferred from context.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-18T11:35:36.903", "id": "14529", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-18T23:28:02.527", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-18T23:28:02.527", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14524", "post_type": "answer", "score": 23 } ]

[ { "body": "I have always got by taking 方法 as method or \"way of doing\" and 手段 as \"a\nmeans\": As Tokyo Nagoya says, there is some overlap but if you know when to\nuse method and means in English then try to do the same in Japanese.\n\n(Hint: I think 方法 is the easiest to adopt. You could leave 手段 until after you\nhave heard it used more.)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-18T08:59:39.213", "id": "14528", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-18T14:51:57.160", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-18T14:51:57.160", "last_editor_user_id": "1556", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "14527", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "It's not a wholly Japanese word. It's a shortening of [空]{から} ('empty') and\nオーケストラ. So, since at least part of it needs to be written with katakana, the\nwhole word is written with katakana. (Switching between the two within one\nword typically only happens in slang verbs like サボる.)", "comment_count": 9, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-19T03:05:54.640", "id": "14534", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-19T03:05:54.640", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3639", "parent_id": "14531", "post_type": "answer", "score": 29 } ]

[ { "body": "1. I believe there's nothing wrong with your translation for the first sentence.\n\n 2. Yes.\n\n 3. As for the test (I'm having) in/after four days, I **don't** know whether or not it will be difficult, so I **don't** have confidence (I am not confident/ I have no confidence), and I **am** worried.\n\n 4. よっかご\n\nThe translations for both sentences could of-course be better phrased to sound\nmore natural in English but may be you were asked to do a more literal\ntranslation?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-19T03:48:30.220", "id": "14536", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-19T04:21:35.017", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-19T04:21:35.017", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "4704", "parent_id": "14532", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "苦しい has more of a connotation of suffering, or going through hardship.\n\nBecause the speaker is suffering from hurting in all these places, 気持ちが悪くなった。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-19T09:01:01.983", "id": "14540", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-19T09:01:01.983", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "271", "parent_id": "14533", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "持ってくる means to bring something with you (hold/carry than come) so the 3rd line\nis something like \"...and had them bring it back (to class)\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-19T04:08:42.070", "id": "14537", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-19T04:08:42.070", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4704", "parent_id": "14535", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Certainly b) is ambiguous. 私が書いたペン may mean \"my illustration of a pen; I draw\nthe figure of a pen on a paper\". If I want to be precise, I will be more\nverbose as 私が、それを使って文章を書いたところの、ペン.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-19T13:20:56.300", "id": "14543", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-19T13:20:56.300", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14541", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "# Relative clauses in English\n\nIn English, relative clauses are formed by removing something, leaving behind\na **gap**.\n\n> 1a) I kicked **the ball** \n> 1b) I wrote with **the pen** \n> 1c) I entered **the building** \n> 1d) I played in **the garden**\n\nIn each example, we'll pull out the bolded noun phrase, leaving behind a\n**gap** :\n\n> 2a) **the ball** [ _which/that/∅_ I kicked ____ ] \n> 2b) **the pen** [ _which/that/∅_ I wrote with ____ ] \n> 2c) **the building** [ _which/that/∅_ I entered ____ ] \n> 2d) **the garden** [ _which/that/∅_ I played in ____ ]\n>\n> Note: the ∅ symbol indicates the possibility of using neither _which_ nor\n> _that_\n\nIn examples **a** and **c** , the gaps are the objects of the verbs _kicked_\nand _entered_. In examples **b** and **d** , the gaps are the objects of the\nprepositions _with_ and _in_.\n\nThe gap in each case is indicated by a **relative pronoun** ( _who, what,\nwhich, how, where, when_ , etc.), which is inserted at the beginning of the\nrelative clause. In some situations, this pronoun can be replaced with the\nless specific _that_ , and in some situations _that_ can be deleted entirely.\n\nAs it happens, in all four of your examples the appropriate relative pronoun\nwas _which_ ; in all four it can be replaced with _that_ ; and in all four\n_that_ can be deleted entirely.\n\nIn two examples ( **b** and **d** ) the preposition before the gap can be\noptionally **pied piped** --moved before the relative pronoun _which_ --but if\nyou do this, you can't replace it with _that_ :\n\n> 3b) **the pen** [ with _which_ I wrote ~~with~~ ____ ] \n> 3d) **the garden** [ in _which_ I played ~~in~~ ____ ]\n\nBecause in many cases _that_ can be deleted, you can construct examples in\nEnglish without any overt indicator of where the gap is:\n\n> 4a) **the ball** [ ∅ I kicked ____ ] \n> 4b) **the pen** [ ∅ I wrote with ___ ] \n> 4c) **the building** [ ∅ I entered ____ ] \n> 4d) **the garden** [ ∅ I played in ____ ]\n\nAlthough there are no words \"to link the clause to the main sentence\" in\nexamples **4a** through **4d** , I'm sure you have no problem understanding\nthese examples. You immediately understand where the gap is, even if you don't\nconsciously think about something called a \"gap\"--or indeed about grammar at\nall!\n\n* * *\n\n# Relative clauses in Japanese\n\nIn Japanese, not every relative clause has a gap, but most do.\n\nHowever, there are no relative pronouns like _who, what, where_ , etc.; there\nare no words like _that_ ; and there is no **pied piping**. This makes gapped\nrelative clauses in Japanese fairly simple. They're very similar to the\nEnglish examples **4a** through **4d** above. Since you can understand those,\nI'm sure you can understand relative clauses in Japanese, too!\n\nLet's take a look at your examples. But before we can relativize them, let's\nreplace the topic particle は with the case particle が. Why? Because **relative\nclauses in Japanese don't contain topics** , so you need to use the version\nwith が to turn them into relative clauses.\n\nOkay, here are your non-relative examples with は replaced:\n\n> 5ａ) 私 **が** ボール **を** 蹴った \n> 5ｂ) 私 **が** ペン **で** 書いた \n> 5ｃ) 私 **が** ビル **に** 入った \n> 5ｄ) 私 **が** 庭 **で** 遊んだ\n\nIn each example, we have two case-marked nouns. (That means they're marked\nwith case particles like が, を, で, に, and so on.) Just like in English, we can\npick one of these to remove, leaving behind a **gap** :\n\n> 6ａ) [ ＿＿ ボール **を** 蹴った ] **私** \n> 6ｂ) [ ＿＿ ペン **で** 書いた ] **私** \n> 6ｃ) [ ＿＿ ビル **に** 入った ] **私** \n> 6ｄ) [ ＿＿ 庭 **で** 遊んだ ] **私**\n\nNow we have a relative clause! The head noun in each example is 私, which has\nbeen pulled out of the relativized clause. Because in each example the case\nparticle が has gone missing, nothing tells us what role is played by the head\nnoun 私--we need to figure it out from context.\n\nWe can tell, for example, that in **6a** the relative clause already has an\nを-marked noun, so the role played by 私 cannot be an を role. We must guess what\nthe role is from the set of possible roles the relative clause does **not**\ncontain, and then use our common sense to decide.\n\nOf course, we could relativize the other element, as in your examples:\n\n> 7ａ) [ 私 **が** ＿＿＿＿ 蹴った ] **ボール** \n> 7ｂ) [ 私 **が** ＿＿＿ 書いた ] **ペン** \n> 7ｃ) [ 私 **が** ＿＿＿ 入った ] **ビル** \n> 7ｄ) [ 私 **が** ＿＿ 遊んだ ] **庭**\n\nTake a look back at sentences **4a** through **4d** again. You can understand\nthose, right? They're just like **7a** through **7d** --there aren't any words\nspecifying the role the head noun plays in the relative clause! And if you can\nunderstand those sentences in English, I'm sure you can understand their\nequivalents in Japanese. In each case, you can figure out which case role\nmakes sense: を, で, に, and で.\n\n* * *\n\nThere's another process we need to talk about to describe relative clauses in\nJapanese, by the way. It's called **が／の conversion**! When you have a noun\nphrase marked with が in a relative clause, you can optionally mark it with の\ninstead. Let's rewrite the examples from **7a** through **7d** using の:\n\n> 8ａ) [ 私 **の** ＿＿＿＿ 蹴った ] **ボール** \n> 8ｂ) [ 私 **の** ＿＿＿ 書いた ] **ペン** \n> 8ｃ) [ 私 **の** ＿＿＿ 入った ] **ビル** \n> 8ｄ) [ 私 **の** ＿＿ 遊んだ ] **庭**\n\nBut if the relative clause contains an を-marked noun phrase, you can't replace\nが with の. Example **9a** is fine, but example **9b** is ungrammatical with the\nintended meaning:\n\n> 9ａ) [ ＿＿ ジョンが 本を 買った ] **店** \n> 9ｂ) [ ＿＿ *ジョンの 本を 買った ] **店**\n\nOverall, forming these case-gapped relative clauses in Japanese is relatively\nsimple. Although their interpretation is sometimes ambiguous, you can usually\nfigure it out from context. In particular, looking at the set of case roles\nalready present in the relative clause can help you narrow down where the gap\nis.\n\n## Gapless relative clauses\n\nHowever, Japanese also contains relative clauses **without** a gap. In these\ngapless relatives, the head noun is in some way semantically restricted by the\ncontent of the relative clause. You'll commonly see these with formal nouns\nlike こと:\n\n> 10ａ) [ 東京に行った ] **こと** がない\n\nIn this example, the relative clause 東京に行った gives the formal noun こと a\nspecific meaning. But obviously, there's nowhere in the relative clause to\ninsert こと; it has no gap!\n\nYou'll also see this type of relative clause with lexical nouns. I'll borrow a\nfew examples from [Timothy Baldwin's\nthesis](http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~tim/pubs/mthesis.pdf), along with his English\ntranslations:\n\n> 11ａ) [ 勝つ ] **意志** _the will to win_ \n> 11ｂ) [ 魚を焼く ] **煙** _smoke from grilling fish_ \n> 11ｃ) [ 学校に行った ] **帰り** _on the way back from school_\n\nIn each example, the precise semantic relationship between the relative clause\nand the head noun is slightly different, but it can be inferred from context.\nBut in each example, there's no gap to be filled!\n\nSo to understand a relative clause in Japanese, ask yourself these four\nquestions:\n\n 1. **Is there a gap?** Most of the time there is, but there isn't always!\n 2. If so, **which case roles make sense with the verb?** (It can't be を with 寝る, for example.)\n 3. Of those, **which roles are already filled?** (Where can the gap **not** be?)\n 4. Of the remaining possibilities, **which role makes the most sense in context?**\n\nRelative clauses are very common in Japanese, and the more you read, the more\nyou'll probably do all four steps automatically. Sure, sometimes things will\nbe ambiguous and you'll have to think about it, but most of the time you'll\nprobably be able to figure it out from context.\n\nMy advice? Just get used to spotting the possible relationships, and you'll be\nwell on your way to understanding relative clauses in Japanese!", "comment_count": 10, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-20T02:53:14.477", "id": "14550", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-21T02:27:08.943", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-21T02:27:08.943", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14541", "post_type": "answer", "score": 46 } ]

[ { "body": "郵便はがき postcard. 大日本 Dai Nippon \"big Japan\" or \"Japanese empire\". 樺太 Kara Futo,\nSakhalin. 大泊町 Oh Tomari Cho, literally means \"big harbor town\". 東 east. 三条 3rd\nstreet. 南 south. 一ノ十一 one hyphen eleven.\n\n髙橋 Taka Hashi, family name. 久男 Hisa O, a male name. 様 polite addressing like\n\"Sir\".\n\n北満 Hoku Man, northern Manchuria. 龍江省 a Chinese geometric name, literally means\n\"dragon river state\". 狐池(fox pond) or 狐地(fox land). ニテ means \"at\", he wrote\nthis letter at the 狐池 in 龍江省 of 北満. 久友 Hisa Tomo, a male name, the writer of\nthis letter. 満巽 Man Tatsumi, I don't know what Man Tatsumi means.\n\n謹賀新年 A Happy New Year. 皆 everyone. すこやかに healthy. 元気 vigorous. です is\n(indicates present tense).\n\n手紙 a letter. 一通 one, 通 tsu is a numerical unit (nominal measure word) for\nletters. を indicates object of a verb. 出しません don't write.\n\nでした was (indicates past tense, I didn't drop a line). が but/although. 然して\n(shikou si te) although. 悪い bad. 心 heart.\n\nから from. でわありません is not.\n\n此の this. 写眞 or 写真 photo. は is/equals. 北満 northern Manchuria. - The following\ntwo characters I can't read; it is の町 \"town of\" - thanks Earthliŋ :-)\n\nの of. 夕 evening. X(寒 cold) -> O(暮 sunset) - thanks Tokyo Nagoya :-)\n\n支 China. 満 Manchuria. の of. 雪 snow.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-19T14:48:31.680", "id": "14547", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-19T17:34:41.263", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-19T17:34:41.263", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14544", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 }, { "body": "Front upper:\n\n> 郵便はがき _Post Card_ (right-to-left)\n>\n> 大日本樺太大泊町 \n> 東三条南一ノ十一 \n> _1-11 Higashisanjō-Minami_ (South of East 3rd St.) _, Ōdomari-chō_ (town,\n> now Korsakov) _, Karafuto_ (Sakhalin) _, (EMPIRE OF) JAPAN_ (recipient's\n> address)\n>\n> 髙久男様 _Mr. Hisao Takahashi_ (recipient) \n> (Not sure if 髙 is the legal name or merely handwriting variant of standard\n> 高橋)\n>\n> 北満龍江省ノ孤地ニテ \n> _At (=from) a remotest place in Ryūkō_ (Longjiang) _Province, Northern\n> Manchuria_\n>\n> 久友 _Hisatomo(?)_ \n> 巽 _Tatsumi_ \n> 満 _Mitsuru(?)_ (senders) \n> (lack of family names suggests they are of the same family with the\n> recipient)\n\nFront lower:\n\n> 謹賀新年 _Happy New Year_\n>\n> ~~□す~~ (□ seems to be an erroneously written 比 instead of 皆)\n>\n> 皆すこやかに元気です \n> 手紙一通を出しません (を may be an error of も) \n> でしたが然して悪い心 \n> からでわありません (わ should be は in correct spelling) \n> _Everybody is fine and healthy._ \n> _We did not send a single letter_ (or _one of letters_ ) _, but that was\n> not out of ill will._\n>\n> 此の寫眞は北満の町 \n> の夕暮 \n> _The photograph is dusk of a town in northern Manchuria._\n>\n> (The text contains an apparent error and sounds somewhat stiff.)\n\nBack:\n\n> 雪の滿支 _Chinese continent in snow_ (right-to-left) \n> (This is the name of a picture postcard series)\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/WqFm2.jpg)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2016-02-15T14:15:46.080", "id": "32176", "last_activity_date": "2016-02-15T15:58:19.207", "last_edit_date": "2016-02-15T15:58:19.207", "last_editor_user_id": "7810", "owner_user_id": "7810", "parent_id": "14544", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "As written on [gogen allguide](http://gogen-allguide.com/hi/hinokuruma.html):\n\nApparently it's from the Buddhist 火車{かしゃ} piece of mythology. The story goes\nthat those who were rotten in their lifetimes would be carried into the flames\nof hell on a cart driven by a petty demon. This suffering was then later\nmetaphorically applied to financial difficulties.\n\nA possible alternate explanation is that it's connected to another Buddhist\nidea, 火宅{かたく}, which compares the pains of the world with a house on fire.\nSupposedly this may have been applied to 車 to represent financial difficulties\nspecifically.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-19T14:55:21.190", "id": "14548", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-20T00:49:13.613", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-20T00:49:13.613", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "14546", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "I think your question may be answered with this post:\n\n[Does -ou / -you / -mashou conjugation have a negative\nform?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/487/does-ou-you-mashou-\nconjugation-have-a-negative-form)\n\nProbably the closest would be to:\n\n * add まい to the dictionary form of the verb\n * say stem-ないように", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-20T10:34:47.273", "id": "14552", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-20T10:34:47.273", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.863", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "4378", "parent_id": "14551", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "You could also say it in the sense of \"let's give up on going out\".\n\n> * 天気が悪いので、出かけるのを ** _やめよう_** （かな）。\n>", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-20T16:13:49.670", "id": "14554", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-20T16:13:49.670", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "14551", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "I think you could say something like this:\n\n> 出かけ **ないでおこう** (plain) \n> 出かけ **ないでおきましょう** (polite)\n\nSince your example includes 出かけません, I assume you want the polite version.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-20T16:59:39.380", "id": "14555", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-20T16:59:39.380", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14551", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "This `〜め` is the one meaning \"slightly\" or \"somewhat\", and the `方` is\n\"people\". So the sentence translates as \"Foods that people with high(er than\nnormal) cholesterol (eat)\". It would probably sound more serious if it were\njust `高い`, but using `〜め` it sounds more of just a neutral magazine (pamphlet,\netc.) headline.\n\nAs for the `の`, that's needed to modify `方`. With, `高い`, it would just be\n`高い方`, but `高め` is not an イ-adjective, so it requires the `の`: `高めの方`.\n\nSee also this post: [“slightly/somewhat” の 「～目」: Usage and\nlimitations](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/2037/78).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-21T16:52:41.047", "id": "14563", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-21T16:52:41.047", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.260", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "14560", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Depending on the severity of what you are trying to convey, there are\ndifferent options.\n\nIf it's very objective matter -- possibly a strong or stern tone like in a\nnews report or something -- I think `事実` is probably best. This would best\nsuit a scenario like:\n\n> 10 facts about Japan\n>\n> 1. The capital is Tokyo\n> 2. The literacy rate is over 95%\n> 3. ...\n>\n\nHowever, if it's something more casual -- for example, personal observations\nthat you're writing in a blog -- you might want to use `[豆知識]{まめ・ち・しき}`. This\ntranslates more along the lines of \"trivia\", \"fun facts\", or \"tidbits\".", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-21T17:09:49.913", "id": "14564", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-22T00:09:38.163", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-22T00:09:38.163", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "14561", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "There is なのです (often contracted to なんです), which fits the bill. Just like you\nsuspect, it is declarative/emphatic.\n\nThis なんです is unrelated to 何{なん}です, but rather a combination of な (the\ninflection of the copula だ, if you like), the nominalizer の plus the\n\"politifier\" です.\n\nIt also exists in non-polite form: なのだ・なんだ.\n\nIt really appears everywhere, e.g. as a conjunction なので or question marker\n～なんですか. (Again, unrelated to 何.)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-21T21:25:39.493", "id": "14566", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-21T21:25:39.493", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "14565", "post_type": "answer", "score": 17 } ]

[ { "body": "I would say:\n\n彼女が夜中にどこかへの電車に乗ってしまった。\n\nBy \"midnight train\" do you mean an overnight train? Or just a 終電 last train?", "comment_count": 9, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-23T08:52:22.363", "id": "14574", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-24T08:21:22.637", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-24T08:21:22.637", "last_editor_user_id": "107", "owner_user_id": "107", "parent_id": "14573", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "I would say\n\n\"彼女は、どこへでも行ける夜行列車に乗った。\"", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-23T11:52:17.607", "id": "14577", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-23T11:52:17.607", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4563", "parent_id": "14573", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "I'd go for\n\n> 彼女はゆくあてもなく真夜中の列車に乗った。\n\nWhat gets lost is that the English can be interpreted two ways: (1) she gets\non some train and goes anywhere and (2) she gets on a train, which goes\nanywhere.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-23T12:40:28.667", "id": "14578", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-24T00:26:42.737", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-24T00:26:42.737", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "14573", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "The usage of [次第]{しだい}です/であります at the end of a sentence is indeed reserved for\npolite and formal language --- in particular, it is most often used in\nbusiness letters.\n\nThe phrase means that one is taking an action either right now or in the near\nfuture that has been necessitated by another event in the past. 次第 here has\nthe nuance of a \"natural next step\" in the flow of events.\n\nIn your sentence,\n「[日時]{にちじ}の[変更]{へんこう}について、[改]{あらた}めてお[知]{し}らせする[次第]{しだい}です。」, 日時の変更 has not\nbeen finalized as the author writes this. he is saying that he will inform you\nof the 変更 when it is finalized.\n\nFinally, 「知らせるわけです」 is not even close in meaning to 「お知らせする次第です」. I, a native\nJapanese speaker, actually do not even know what 「知らせるわけです」 could mean without\ncontext. Something like \"This is the reason I am informing you.\", maybe?", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-23T10:41:02.487", "id": "14576", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-23T10:41:02.487", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14575", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "> 「ねえ、この[記事見]{きじみ}て。[昨日]{きのう}のスケート[大会]{たいかい}、[青木選手]{あおきせんしゅ}が＿＿＿。」\n>\n> a）[優勝]{ゆうしょう}したとか b）優勝したんだって c）優勝したという\n\nOnly (b) can be the correct answer because you have the newspaper right in\nfront of you and therefore, you know exactly who won. You are NOT relying on\nhearsay or rumors, which is the source of information when you use 「とか」 or\n「という」.\n\n「～～したんだって」 can actually be used both ways --- quoting a hearsay or rumor AND\nquoting a direct source, but 「とか」 and 「という」 can only be used when quoting an\nindirect source. Tricky, I know but only (b) is correct.\n\n>\n> 「[今]{いま}、テレビの[天気予報]{てんきよほう}で[見]{み}たんだけど、[明日]{あした}は[全国的]{ぜんこくてき}に[雨]{あめ}だ＿＿＿よ。」\n>\n> a）と[聞]{き}いている b）と[言]{い}われている c）そうだ\n\nOnly (c) is correct and this question is more complicated than the first, I\nhave to admit. It is more complicated because it is about the next day's\nweather, which is something no one can be 100% sure about. The first question\nwas about a fact --- who won the race the previous day.\n\n「と聞いている」 does not fit because it suggests that there has been some time\nbetween the present and the time you heard what you heard. The sentence\nclearly says 「今見た」. You saw the forecast a moment ago.\n\n「と言われている」 does not fit, either, because it means \"Many people say ~~.\" You\njust saw the forecast now. You did not have the time to hear what many people\nsay about tomorrow's weather.\n\n「そうだ」 might look like the wrong answer to some because it sounds like you are\nquoting a rumor, but it is correct because even though you have just seen the\nforecast on TV, there is a possibility that it might not actually rain\ntomorrow. That it might rain tomorow is not a fact at this point.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-23T15:01:44.093", "id": "14580", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-23T15:26:59.683", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14579", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "This is Japanese. We can't be confident in a translation without knowledge\nlike who you're talking to, your relative status, written or spoken, what\nsetting, etc. etc.\n\n退屈で死ぬ would mean \"to die from boredom\". で is often used to mark the means or\ncause of something (cf. 病気で死ぬ=die from an illness, 水不足で死ぬ=die from\ndehydration, etc). Note that the particle marks what is before it. So you\ncould say like 退屈で死ぬかもしれない for 'I would die from boredom'. To a friend in\neveryday conversation though, I would probably say something more like\n退屈すぎて死ぬわ.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-23T15:52:16.973", "id": "14582", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-23T15:59:33.717", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-23T15:59:33.717", "last_editor_user_id": "3010", "owner_user_id": "3010", "parent_id": "14581", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "I'm no expert in the history of the Japanese writing system so I'm going to be\nputting a lot of faith [this\nchart](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%89%87%E4%BB%AE%E5%90%8D#.E5.AD.97.E4.BD.93.E3.81.AE.E7.94.B1.E6.9D.A5)\nand the idea in general that katakana are derived from small parts of larger\nkanji. This appears to be generally accepted though Japanese wikipedia notes\nopposition by one scholar.\n\nIf we go by this chart, it's no coincidence that katakana ニ looks like the\nkanji 二, since it was taken from the kanji 仁 which itself is made up of 人 and\n二. Similarly, カ is taken from the 力 in 加, エ is taken from the 工 in 江, ロ is\nfrom the 口 in 呂 and チ is directly from 千. I think that covers all ones which\nare very similar visually.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-23T16:23:51.070", "id": "14584", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-23T16:29:11.403", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-23T16:29:11.403", "last_editor_user_id": "3010", "owner_user_id": "3010", "parent_id": "14583", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "Here you have the ordinal ２, plus the counter 両{りょう}, which is used to count\nthe cars on a train. The combination ２両 would mean \"two [train] cars\".\n\nWhen you add the ordinal suffix 目{め} to ２両, it changes from \"two cars\" to \"the\nsecond car\". So, the whole phrase 前から２両目 really means the second car from the\nfront (of the train).\n\nYour sentence does _not_ contain the word 両目{りょうめ} meaning \"both eyes\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-23T17:07:45.977", "id": "14586", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-23T17:19:20.667", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-23T17:19:20.667", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14585", "post_type": "answer", "score": 14 } ]

[ { "body": "世界に友達を作りたい sounds to me like \"I want friends in the world\" (so the friends are\nin the world and you could make these friends through the Internet; the result\nof the action would be \"I have friends in the world\"). \n世界で友達を作りたい sounds to me like you'd go to the world and make friends there.\n(The 世界で modifies the action 友達を作る, so you'd do this action in the 世界, not\nonline.) \n(I would say 世界 **中** に友達を作りたい/世界 **中** で友達を作りたい to mean \"all over the world\")\n\nMaaybe this is because... ~~に is used with the verbs like いる、ある、存在する、住む (to\nbe, to exist, to live), while ~~で is used with action verbs? So I think the\n世界に indicates where these 友達 will be, and the 世界で indicates where the action\n作る will take place.\n\n世界に料理を食べたい sounds incorrect. 世界(中)で料理を食べたい (I want to eat dishes in the world\n/ all over the world) is grammatically okay and would mean you'd go to the\nworld and eat the dishes there. (And 世界(中) **の** 料理を食べたい would mean you want\nto try dishes from around the world, not necessarily by going there so you\ncould do this in foreign food restaurants in your country).\n\nI think 大学に友達を作りたい is grammatically alright and would mean like you want\nfriends who are in college.\n\n世界で友達を作りたい sounds perfectly alright to me.\n\n* * *\n\n\"a few more examples\" >>> How about...\n\n> [財界]{ざいかい} / [政界]{せいかい} / [業界]{ぎょうかい} **に** (notで)コネを作る -- to have\n> connections in the financial / political / business world \n> 自分の部屋 **に** (notで)テレビが欲しい。-- I want a TV in my room. \n> Compare: 秋葉原 **で** (notに)テレビを買いたい。-- I want to buy a TV in Akihabara. \n>", "comment_count": 9, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-24T07:32:44.367", "id": "14594", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-24T15:28:27.053", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-24T15:28:27.053", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14589", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "I agree with Chocolate's answer: で shows where you are when you perform the\naction of making the friend, に shows where the result of the action ends up.\n\nI believe this is described in Roy Miller's \"Reference Grammar of Japanese\",\nbut I have misplaced my copy. If you can find a copy of this I recommend it.\n\nOther examples of に although not quite the same:\n\n> フランスに留学していた。 I was an exchange student in France. \n> 野菜を水に[浸]{つ}(漬)けた。 I put the vegetables in water. \n> あの人の家にお邪魔した。 I visited his house. \n> 街に噂を広めた。 I spread the gossip in town. \n>\n\nNote that Roy Miller predates Martin. Martin mentions Miller in his\nintroduction.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-25T09:57:17.823", "id": "14611", "last_activity_date": "2015-01-06T07:00:52.717", "last_edit_date": "2015-01-06T07:00:52.717", "last_editor_user_id": "4754", "owner_user_id": "4754", "parent_id": "14589", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "This is a supplementary answer to compliment Chocolate's answer, written to\nmeet the OP's request for technical reference.\n\nに vs で is covered in \"A Students' Guide to Japanese Grammar\" by Naomi McGloin\non p62.\n\nAs Chocolate indicates and this book explains: で marks the location of action,\nに marks the location of existence.\n\n1) Some verbs characteristically take に, eg 住む、立つ、かける、座る：\n\n> 椅子 **に** かけてください・座ってください。 \n> Please sit on the chair.\n\n2) Some verbs take either に or で but the meaning changes:\n\n> 家 **に** あります。 \n> It is in my house.\n>\n> 家 **で** あります。 \n> It will be held at my house. [ie an event, perhaps a party]\n\nOr\n\n> 田中さんのうち **で** 赤ちゃんが生まれた。 \n> The baby was born at the Tanaka's house.\n>\n> 田中さんのうち **に** 赤ちゃんが生まれた。 \n> A baby was born to the Tanaka family.\n\nIn this example, if we use で then the baby was not necessarily the Tanakas',\nif we use に then the baby was not necessarily born at the Tanaka's house.\n\nAnother example, somewhat similar to yours is:\n\n> 部屋 **で** 棚を作った。 \n> I made the shelves in the room.\n>\n> 部屋 **に** 棚を作った。 \n> I made shelves for the room.\n\n(BTW, it is worth noting that some textbooks give different explanations which\nwork quite well for their target students at the time but can over simplify. に\nhas far more uses than just a \"standard usage\" exemplified by いる／ある and a role\nas a \"target particle\". Based on your final comment you seem to understand\nthis but for reference, The Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar by Makino\ngives seven uses and still does not answer all my questions on the particle.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-27T02:32:50.677", "id": "14642", "last_activity_date": "2017-12-22T15:38:29.847", "last_edit_date": "2017-12-22T15:38:29.847", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "14589", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "To choose between the two sentences, the first one is much better by the\nnative standards. However, 「何ヶ日」 sounds very awkward. 「[何日]{なんにち}」 is the\ncorrect word. You can also say 「[何ヶ月]{なんかげつ}」 if you guys are talking long-\nterm, but not 「何ヶ日」, which is probably why I, a native speaker, do not know\nhow to read it.\n\nYour second sentence is incorrect because of the use of 「[程]{ほど}」. Replace it\nwith 「だけ」 and you will have a correct sentence.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-24T03:07:24.240", "id": "14591", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-24T03:07:24.240", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14590", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "Both of those work with a little fixing.\n\n何日でも泊まってもいい\n\n泊まりたいだけ泊まってもいい\n\nor\n\n好きなだけ泊まってもいい\n\nHell, throw it all together and you can sound like a super welcoming friend\nlol.\n\n> 何日でも好きなだけ泊まってくれ！", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-24T03:09:04.710", "id": "14592", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-24T03:09:04.710", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3010", "parent_id": "14590", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "〒 is the symbol for Postal Code. In japan it has 7 digits (the number you see\nafter it).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-24T20:05:57.330", "id": "14597", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-24T20:05:57.330", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4604", "parent_id": "14596", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "飛行場 refers to a small local airport with a short runway, often with no regular\ncommercial airline service. It is mostly for private use of small-size\naircrafts.\n\n空港 refers to a larger airport with longer runways that serves the general\npublic.\n\nSome (but not many) native speakers use the two words interchangeably in\ninformal conversations.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-25T01:26:57.230", "id": "14599", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-25T01:26:57.230", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14598", "post_type": "answer", "score": 13 } ]

[ { "body": "People have been voting to close this as a \"translation request\". I vote we\nreword it into a question basically asking: \"how are the clicks in 'click'\nlanguages represented in katakana?\" because this actually got me super\ninterested and I've been doing a little research...\n\nI first checked the Japanese wikipedia pages for these languages hoping they\nwould have katakana representations of words but unfortunately no such luck,\nthey all use romaji. I did however find the names of lots of languages which\nstart with a click though:\n\nThe !Kung language is seems to be クン語 on wikipedia. Xhosa is\nコサ語（コーサ語、ホサ語とも表記する）, !Xoon is コオ語 and ǁXegwi is ケグウィ語.\n\nIt would appear that a click, at least at the start of words, is normally\nrepresented using **カ行 katakana**.\n\nTherefore, assuming the name in the video is pronounced correctly by the guy\nand that I'm hearing him right (I'm sure it's not, and it's super difficult to\nhear him, but...), I propose that something like クイレイ would be a good katakana\nrepresentation. Anyway, the point is it would start with a カ行 letter.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-25T08:25:36.477", "id": "14607", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-25T08:25:36.477", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3010", "parent_id": "14601", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

[ { "body": "Most of this answer is basically subjective, but there's a lot going on in\nthis question that I think should be addressed.\n\nThe tldr version: Yes, を is frequently used in \"real\" Japanese.\n\nBut if I may offer my 2 cents..\n\nBe careful not to get ahead of yourself in your assumptions about what is and\nisn't \"real\" Japanese. Sure, 私は is _often_ dropped, but only where it's\nappropriate to do so. It's not some unwritten rule that _real_ Japanese\nspeakers never use pronouns. Likewise with particles. Often they are dropped,\nusually in informal situations where the context is well understood. I know it\ncan be kind of a revelation when learners get out of the textbook and start\nrealizing that there's a whole other world of Japanese language, but the\ntextbooks start where they do for a reason.\n\nThat said, particles are used. Frequently. Very frequently, in fact. That\nincludes を and に, and while へ is in general a less common particle compared to\nothers, even that you will hear in regular, everyday use.\n\nI think we can probably get a rough guess at where your Japanese level is\nbased on the way you're asking this question, and the only thing I can really\nadvise you to do is _listen_ until you really get a feel for what's going on,\nand _don't break linguistic rules_ unless it's a choice that you are aware of,\nthe consequences of which you understand well. I would advise that you avoid\nimitating other people even until you've developed a bit more and stick with\nwhat is comfortable for you. The question includes some really off-base\nassumptions, but I'm sure they will be remedied by more exposure to the\nlanguage.\n\nUnderstand the particles and their roles. Part of the problem might just be\nthat you think one should come and you see another. Also continue to work on\nbeing able to hear and understand what's going on around you so you can get a\nkeener ear for what's being said. It's probably that particles are buzzing\naround you in people's words all the time, but they're just swallowed up by\nfast or unclear speech.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-25T03:29:13.340", "id": "14604", "last_activity_date": "2014-03-24T06:58:43.930", "last_edit_date": "2014-03-24T06:58:43.930", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "14602", "post_type": "answer", "score": 15 }, { "body": "Leaving を out when it is called for is possible in very informal\nconversations, but I would say you are better off leaving it in. Nobody will\nthink you are speaking too formally for using it, and developing the habit of\nusing it correctly will pay off when you are in more formal situations. For\nexample, when writing an e-mail to a friend I would not leave it out. For a\nquick text message, I could go either way, but would likely put it in:\nうどんを買っておいて！\n\nAlso, を can be hard to hear it even when it is spoken. For example, with 本を\nyou can't hear an \"n\" or a \"w\". The pronunciation of this combination is hard\nto describe, but the consonants are extremely soft.\n\nThere are cases like 私は which need to be dropped in many cases to avoid\nsounding stilted, but particles are your friends. Master them, and aim to be\nable to write a literate-sounding essay after you have progressed a bit more.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-25T08:51:31.533", "id": "14608", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-25T08:51:31.533", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4754", "parent_id": "14602", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I have lived in Japan for 5 years and speak Japanese quite fluently.\n\nYes, を is very frequently used in Japanese. It's not only used for cake\neating. ;)\n\nWhile a native probably wouldn't say \"私はケーキを食べます。\", I wouldn't call it \"not\ngood form.\" In everyday speech, a lot of particles are dropped. I don't think\nを is an underused particle, especially in written Japanese. It is very often\nskipped when speaking casual, everyday Japanese.\n\nI think you're just not seeing them used as they are in the textbooks. It is\nnot like they aren't used, textbook Japanese is just not that close to how\nmost people speak everyday (like most languages). That said, you should\nunderstand textbook Japanese before you start simplifying and breaking\nlinguistic rules. You might end up in a situation where you don't know\ncorrect, formal Japanese when that is required.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-25T09:19:39.820", "id": "14609", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-25T09:19:39.820", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4755", "parent_id": "14602", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "に in this case goes with ある. 話し = \"something to tell you, conversaton\" is just\na noun.\n\nAnother example is 君にプレゼントがある = I have a present for you.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-25T09:33:45.663", "id": "14610", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-25T09:33:45.663", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4754", "parent_id": "14603", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "In this case, 「に」 is not a location marker. It indicates the receiving end of\nan action, offer, request, order, etc. So, 「[君]{きみ} = \"you\"」 is on the\nreceiving end here.\n\n「[話]{はな}し」 does not mean \"a story\" here. Rather, it means \"a word\" as in \"to\nhave a word with someone\".\n\n「～～に話しがある」 should be remembered as a set phrase meaning \"would like a word\nwith ~~\".\n\nThus, 「ちょっと君に話しがある。」 means \"I'd like a word with you.\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-26T00:08:20.797", "id": "14622", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-26T00:08:20.797", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14603", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "You cannot break it up as\n\n> *[君に話]がある\n\nsince Japanese does not allow postpositional phrases to modify nouns without a\nの. So the phrase should be parsed\n\n> [君に][話が]ある\n\nYou might find it strange that the 君に modifies ある, not 話, since in English the\nmost natural parse would be \"I have a [present for you]\". However, English\nactually also allows the above parse, e.g. \"[For you], I have [a present]\".\nThis might help you to understand the Japanese parse intuitively.\n\nWhat if you wanted 君に to modify 話 instead? **Syntactically** you could,\nturning it into\n\n> *[君への話]がある\n\n(にの is not allowed, and becomes への), but this is not very natural. The reason\nis that these postpositional phrases with の mostly modify **definite** nouns,\nand do not work well with 話, which is indefinite (a story, a talk).\n\nHowever, changing the noun a bit, you could construct a meaningful pair\nhighlighting the difference:\n\n> 君にプレゼントがある I have a present (indefinite) for you \n> 君へのプレゼントはあそこにある My present for you (definite) is over there", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-27T00:37:03.487", "id": "14638", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-27T01:06:04.477", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-27T01:06:04.477", "last_editor_user_id": "1073", "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "14603", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "These are iteration marks. Used to repeat the same kanji / kana in writing.\n\n々 is used in kanji\n\n```\n\n 人々 - ひとびと - people\n 時々 - ときどき - sometimes\n \n```\n\nゝ is used for repeating hiragana characters and ヽ is used for katakana", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-25T16:35:40.790", "id": "14615", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-25T16:35:40.790", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4759", "parent_id": "14606", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Usually you can say this (for food if offered) for refusing politely:\n\nIie, kekkou desu. いいえ、結構です (けっこうです)\n\nUsing the japanese for 'I dont need, I don't want' (verb iru) might be a\nlittle rude. Use it only if you have to refuse it strongly:\n\n\"Irimasen desu\" Polite (somewhat rude) [いりませんです]\n\n\"Iranai\" (rude/familiar) [いらない]", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-25T16:00:44.650", "id": "14614", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-25T16:00:44.650", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4758", "parent_id": "14613", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "I'm familiar with the following options.\n\n> いらない \n> いらないです \n> いりません\n>\n> 結構です\n>\n> いい \n> いいです\n\nTheir usage overlaps (after all, they all mean \"no, thank you\" in some sense).\n結構です is quite formal and いいです probably the most common option, closely\nfollowed by いらないです. (The forms based on いらない are more direct.) If you want to\nbe informal, use いい or いらない.\n\nThe first reaction \"No\" is usually voiced as いや and can be used with all the\noptions above, e.g. いや、いいです. いいえ can be used in いいえ、結構です.\n\n_Caveat._ Although いいです is understood to mean \"No, thank you\", いいですね would\nusually be interpreted to mean \"Yes, please\".", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-25T16:38:16.650", "id": "14616", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-25T16:38:16.650", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "14613", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "Just to add to other answers. For \"no thanks\", from young people you'll often\nhear\n\n> 大丈夫{だいじょうぶ}です\n\nwhich originally means \"I'm fine (safe, alright)\".\n\nSome might even find いいです or 結構です a bit cold or rude.\n\nSome links: \n<http://questionbox.jp.msn.com/qa8287306.html> \n<http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1323030728>", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-26T00:59:33.333", "id": "14623", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-26T02:26:31.790", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-26T02:26:31.790", "last_editor_user_id": "1073", "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "14613", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "またまた is a word, but as far as I know never used in the sense of \"see you\nlater\", which, as you know, would be (じゃあ)またね.\n\n(またまた means something like \"yet again\", e.g. またまた驚かされた \"you surprised me yet\nagain\".)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-25T18:52:52.750", "id": "14619", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-25T18:52:52.750", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "14617", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "The way I've heard it used can be for either the store itself, or the store's\nowner/manager/etc.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-25T19:06:20.723", "id": "14620", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-25T19:06:20.723", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "14618", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "The さん doesn't really change the meaning, it can usually mean both the shop or\nthe person with or without the さん.\n\nThe difference is really at the level of connotations. A 本屋さん _could_ be a\nmore local, smaller shop than the big 本屋, or it could also be that the speaker\nlikes to add さん to make words sound a bit softer or cuter.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-26T04:45:14.487", "id": "14625", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-26T04:45:14.487", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "14618", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "Try going to <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harriet_(name)> and hitting the\nJapanese pages to see how other people named Harriet have their names written.\nIt's usually ハリエット (english names are usually written in katakana) or はりえっと in\nhiragana.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-26T07:49:08.323", "id": "14627", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-26T07:49:08.323", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3221", "parent_id": "14626", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "By any modern conventions ハリエット would be the proper way to write it. Something\nlike ハリエタ would be wrong because, first, words ending with consonants like t\nin this case frequently have a っ (small tsu) to give it that kind of hardness,\nand second, because words that end in t generally use ト rather than タ at the\nend. Using タ makes it sound more like it's from a Romance language or\nsomething (like how in Japanese it's サラダ and not サラド). ハリエト fails also on the\nfirst point. ハリート (if we make it katakana) doesn't really match at all. If we\nmatch the pronunciation it would be something like \"Hareet.\"\n\nWriting it in hiragana would never be done unless for some intended effect.\n\nSeveral examples are also present here:\n[http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=harriet&ref=sa](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=harriet&ref=sa)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-26T07:56:15.947", "id": "14628", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-27T01:07:07.347", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-27T01:07:07.347", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "14626", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "My name is also Harriet! :) I've been learning Japanese and travelling to\nJapan for about 10 years now - I've always used/been told that it's written\nハリエット.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-27T20:40:01.960", "id": "14659", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-27T20:40:01.960", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3487", "parent_id": "14626", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "I think it says\n\n> 悟空のじいちゃん \n> Goku's grandfather\n>\n> (そのラウンドのみ相手の必殺技を \n> 封じる) \n> (Blocks the opponent's special move in that round only)\n>\n> 占いババ \n> Fortuneteller Baba\n>\n> (必殺技をつかっても一定時間BPがへらない \n> (BP don't decrease for some fixed time, even if you use the special move", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-26T21:48:44.317", "id": "14633", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-27T11:19:45.710", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "14632", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "I got the answer from this link:\n<http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1359689833>\n\nLooks like サラバイ=さらば＋バイバイ, both for \"bye\".\n\nI don't think this is a proper word in a formal business context, but still\npossible in a business chat that is not so formal.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-27T05:42:41.157", "id": "14644", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-27T05:51:08.970", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-27T05:51:08.970", "last_editor_user_id": "4775", "owner_user_id": "4775", "parent_id": "14641", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "大辞泉 has\n\n> **ピーナツ** \n> (「ピーナッツ」とも) ラッカセイの実。南京(ナンキン)豆。\n>\n> **ピーナッツ** \n> => ピーナツ.\n\nbut I think that ピーナッツ is a more modern spelling, respecting that ピーナッツ is\nrelated to ナッツ (ナツ is not a valid transcription of \"nut(s)\"). I checked with\nmy trusted Japanese cuisine expert, and her verdict is that nobody really\nwrites ピーナツ anymore. (Her recipe( book)s all contain ピーナッツ.)\n\n落花生 has a much longer entry and is about the whole plant. In my experience,\n落花生 (when it means the \"nut\") is often used for 国産 peanuts (or the same\nvariety of peanuts, but produced in China). All foreign _products_ , whether\nmade from Japanese or foreign peanuts, usually have ピーナッツ (or ピーナツ) in their\nname, e.g. ピーナツバター, ピーナツ・オイル, etc.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-27T13:35:16.817", "id": "14649", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-27T16:56:34.393", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "14646", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "Searching the [_Balanced Corpus of Contemporary Written Japanese\n(BCCWJ)_](http://www.kotonoha.gr.jp/shonagon/) gives the following results:\n\n```\n\n ピーナツ　　　１１６件\n ピーナッツ　　１８８件\n \n```\n\nSo it seems like the latter is somewhat more common. All of these results are\ndrawn from contemporary sources, and although ピーナッツ is more common, ピーナツ is\ncommon enough that I think, descriptively speaking, both spellings should be\nconsidered correct.\n\nLooking through the corpus results, I don't see any obvious patterns in usage.\nBoth spellings seem to be used interchangeably. I don't see any reason to\nconsider them separate words.\n\nOut of curiosity, I decided to search for ドーナ(ッ)ツ:\n\n```\n\n ドーナツ　　　２３２件\n ドーナッツ　　９３件\n \n```\n\nIt's interesting that here, the trend is toward the shorter spelling. But\nagain, I don't see any obvious patterns in usage to suggest that they should\nbe considered separate words.\n\nSo in short, the most common spellings for the two words appear to be ピーナッツ\nand ドーナツ, but the other spellings seem to be common enough that I'd say\nthey're variants rather than misspellings.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-28T01:00:37.617", "id": "14662", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-28T01:00:37.617", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14646", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "Hm that's quite hard.. If you say パンが一本 it definitely does not mean bread that\nis round or cubicle (it has to be long in some sense), whereas パンが一個 could\nboth refer to round/cubicle one or a longer one.\n\nI'd say \"two (unspecified) eggplants\" would be more correct. You definitely\ncan't convey without ambiguity that it's not long by referring to it as 個", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-27T17:59:49.707", "id": "14654", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-27T17:59:49.707", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "14648", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "The interchangeability between [舟]{ふね} and [船]{ふね} , in theory, is close to\nnon-existent. In real life, however, it is left to the judgement of each\nindividual. Generally speaking, the more educated or well-read you are, the\nless interchangeable the two will become.\n\nIn school, we are taught to use 舟 to refer to a small boat, usually (but not\nnecessarily) hand-rowed. 船 refers to a larger boat than a 舟. For this, 船 can\nbe used for a much wider variety of boat sizes. It is all about the physical\nsize, not the purpose of the boat (passengers. cargo, etc.).\n\nMetaphorically, both 舟 and 船 are used as well.\n\n舟：[助け舟]{たすけぶね} = \"timely help or support\", [舟]{ふね} = \"a small boat-shaped dish\non which foods (like takoyaki and sashimi) are served\", etc.\n\n船：[飛行船]{ひこうせん} = \"blimp\", [宇宙船]{うちゅうせん} = \"spaceship\", etc.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-28T01:06:16.430", "id": "14663", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-28T01:06:16.430", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14650", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 } ]

[ { "body": "This webpage has a comprehensive explanation: [http://www.kyoiku-\nshuppan.co.jp/view.rbz?nd=1644&ik=1&pnp=100&pnp=106&pnp=134&pnp=1644&cd=89](http://www.kyoiku-\nshuppan.co.jp/view.rbz?nd=1644&ik=1&pnp=100&pnp=106&pnp=134&pnp=1644&cd=89)\n\n>\n> 「うお」は記紀万葉の時代から魚類の総称として使われているが，「さかな」が同様の意味で使われ始めたのは比較的新しく，近世になってからのようである。もともとは「さか（酒）＋な（副食物の総称）」で酒を飲むときに添えて食べる物，いわゆる「酒のさかな（肴）」を意味した。（「な」は「魚」のことで，「酒魚」の意，あるいは，「なぐさむ（慰）」の「な」である，などの語源説もある。）それが転じて，魚類の総称の意に使われ，近世になると，例えば「魚市」の場合，「うおいち」「さかないち」の両様の言い方が行われるようになった。\n>\n>\n> では，現代ではどうなっているかだが，まず，「魚河岸・魚市場・魚心・白魚・魚屋・小魚・魚売り」などの「魚」については，問題ないだろう。また，魚屋に並んでいる「魚」，副食物としての「魚」の類を，「さかな」と言うのも異論がないと思われる。問題なのは，水中にある「魚」であり，その周辺の「魚釣り・川魚」などである。大ざっぱにいって，古語が比較的多く残っている西日本では，「うお」（ないしは「いお」）が使われ，関東では，「さかな」が用いられているようである。\n> したがって，「魚」に「うお」と「さかな」の二つの訓が認められている現在，水中にある「魚」をどちらかに限定することは不可能で，むしろ地域地域の実態にまかせるしかないと思われる。\n> しかし，教育現場において，どちらかに限定する必要にせまられ，それを判断する根拠が見いだせない場合は，現在では「さかな」と読んでよいだろう。国立国語研究所がまとめた『日本言語地図』によれば，全国的には，「さかな」を魚類の総称とする人が，数のうえでは圧倒的に多いとのことである。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-27T17:49:32.500", "id": "14653", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-27T17:49:32.500", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "14651", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "I have never seen dots been used during my entire life; dashes are used.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-27T21:28:50.537", "id": "14660", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-27T21:28:50.537", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "14655", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "I'd say that phone numbers, like addresses, should be written in the format of\nthe country where they reside.\n\nPeriods (not middle dots) are used by a few countries, e.g. Belgium:\n`012/34.56.78`.\n\nIf it's a UK phone number, `(0123) 456-7890` seems to be the common format.\n\nIf it's a Japanese number, then `(012) 3456-7890` works (except for the \"free\ndial\" numbers, which use format of `0120-345-678` or `(0120)-345678`).\n\nIf you're putting the number down on a business card which you may give out in\ndifferent countries, then the most appropriate is probably the international\nformat: `+81 12 3456 7890` or `+44 123 456 7890`.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-27T22:12:16.793", "id": "14661", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-27T22:12:16.793", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3295", "parent_id": "14655", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "On my (and others') Japanese business cards, we use spaces or dashes, never\ndots. International formatting is appropriate, even if you don't expect to\ngive your card outside of Japan. So these are all appropriate:\n\n * 03 XXXX YYYY\n * 08-XXXX-YYYY\n * 080 XXXX YYYY\n * 080-XXXX-YYYY\n * +81 3 XXXX YYYY\n * +81 90 XXXX YYYY\n\nOut of my many business cards, I have none that use parentheses for the area\ncode. A couple of times I've seen parentheses used for a small edge case of\ninternational dialing, like so:\n\n * +81 (0)80 XXXX YYYY", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-28T02:47:40.370", "id": "14665", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-28T02:47:40.370", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "271", "parent_id": "14655", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "くださる is used when the -doer- is the one who needs honorifics, so that sentence\nmakes it sound like you're exalting yourself above the listener. (It can be\nappropriate if you're talking about someone else having seen your email.) もらう\nhas similar problems - -てもらう is used when someone else is doing the thing, so\nメールを見てもらった sounds like '[I] had [my] email read'. You don't typically talk\nabout doing favours for other people, generally you talk about other people\ndoing favours for you - the connotations of the relevant grammar honour the\nperson who goes out of his way to do something nice, rather than humbling the\nperson that receives the nice thing.\n\nTypically in situations like this you don't need any particular honorifics\nbeyond -ます, but if the superior is high enough up in the company's hierarchy,\nyou might feel drawn to a humble sentence like メールをお読みしました. メールを見ました or\nメールを読みました is almost always going to be enough.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-27T18:45:19.570", "id": "14657", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-28T17:11:25.173", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-28T17:11:25.173", "last_editor_user_id": "3639", "owner_user_id": "3639", "parent_id": "14656", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "In addition to what @Sjiveru said, it's probably also OK to use\n\n> ○ 読ませていただきました ; ? お読みしました \n> ○ 目を通しました (this might require some discretion, as it may make the email\n> sound unimportant) \n> ○ メール、確認させていただきました ； △ メールが届きました \n> ○ 拝見しました (again, depending on how high up this superiour is)", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-27T18:58:55.950", "id": "14658", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-28T15:30:21.567", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-28T15:30:21.567", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "14656", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "This kind of question is very good because it puts us on the spot in exactly\nthe same way we often find ourselves in real life. Unfortunately, just like\nmany questions on this site, we need to know a bit more about the context:\n\nIs it someone you deal with on a daily basis? If so then you will use the\n\"politeness level\" you use with them all the time - probably neutral Japanese.\n\nIf they are asking you if you saw their mail then your response will follow\nthe level and words they used in the question, so the conversation will be\nsomething like:\n\n田中課長：「...のメールを見ましたか」\n\nYou:「はい、見ました。」\n\nAnd you will wait for the next question, ready to give your view or explain\nthe action taken.\n\nIf you are broaching the subject then:\n\n1)You will ask them if they are busy.\n\n2) If you have a view or a response that might take time then you introduce\nthe subject first, giving them the opportunity to postpone the conversation.\n\n3) At all times you have to be clear what you are talking about so as not to\nwaste their time.\n\n(This might all sound obvious but _you have not described the scenario_ and\nalthough we are often concerned not to offend by using the wrong level of\npoliteness, getting these things right may be more important to the superior)\n\nSo, having got their attention you will probably say something like:\n\n「今朝、田中さん／課長からのメールを読みました／見ました。」\n\nAnd then, depending on the scenario be ready to follow up requested\ninformation/opinion etc.\n\nRegarding level of politeness:\n\n * If you want to say this to a very important person you do not often deal with and need to show reserve then the humble verb will be 拝見しました. \n * くださる is used to refer to the other person's actions done for you. \n * Humble forms such as お読みしました are used to describe actions you are doing for the other person to help them which may not apply to things have to as part of your job anyway!", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-28T01:53:52.137", "id": "14664", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-28T06:10:54.420", "last_edit_date": "2014-02-28T06:10:54.420", "last_editor_user_id": "1556", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "14656", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I would use\n\n> メール(を)拝見(いた)しました。 \n> I saw your email.\n>\n> メール(を)拝読(いた)しました。 \n> I read your email.\n>\n> メール(を)拝受(いた)しました。 \n> I received your email.\n\nfor \"I saw/read/received your mail\". Using 電子メール is fine, but not really\nnecessary. Maybe 電子メール is similar saying \"electronic mail\" in English.\n\nA more humble way of phrasing the first two would be\n\n> メール(を)拝見させていただきました。 \n> メール(を)拝読させていただきました。\n\nwhich might be\n\n> Thank you very much for your email. [More details/comments/questions\n> following.]\n\nFor a simple confirmation of receipt, the first version (e.g. 拝見いたしました) is\nmore appropriate.. For a detailed reply (or \"I saw your nice email\"), the\nsecond version (e.g. 拝見させていただきました) is more appropriate.\n\n**Note.** くださる is used to address other people, so 見てくださいました, with or without\nか or question mark, is always assumed to be a question addressed to someone\nelse, not a statement about yourself.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-28T13:52:21.707", "id": "14669", "last_activity_date": "2014-03-01T01:20:08.277", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "14656", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "As far as I can tell, there is no real difference between the potential form\n(-える or -られる, depending on the verb) and することができる: they can be used\ninterchangeably. That said, in normal conversation, you'll probably hear\n-える/-られる used more often, since it's much shorter.\n\nAlso, する itself has no potential form, so it can be replaced entirely by できる.\nThus, phrases like バスケすることができる can be shortened to バスケできる.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-02-28T05:55:59.183", "id": "14667", "last_activity_date": "2014-02-28T05:55:59.183", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4039", "parent_id": "14666", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "Short answer:\n\n 1. 得{え}る or うる is more literary. ことができる is slightly more formal than られる and both fit for everyday use.\n\n 2. ことができる and られる can only be used to describe humans' ability so they don't fit well with non-volitional verbs (無意志動詞). える or うる can also be used to describe possibility. E.g. ×あられる ○あり得る \n\n 3. Both ことができる and られる can be used when you are not allowed to do something, you don't have enough knowledge or skills to do something, or you don't want to do something. But it seems that people tend to use ことができる when they are not physically unable.\n\n 4. There are very rare cases that ことができる can occasionally be used with non-volitional. られる cannot.\n\n* * *\n\nI just realized your えます might refer to the -(r)eる potential form rather than\n得ます{えます}.\n\n 1. られる and -(r)eる are basically the same. But られる has more meanings than -eる, e.g. it can be used as a passive form.\n\n 2. -(r)eる works for almost all types of verbs, while られる generally only works with 一段動詞.\n\n 3. Although the meaning are the same, られる is longer than -(r)eる, which sometimes make it less favorable in certain situations. e.g.\n``` The number of results given by Google:\n\n 230 開けようとしても開かない\n 74 開けられない\n 13 開けようとしても開けることができない\n \n 67 声を出そうとしても出ない\n 20 声を出そうとしても出せない\n 3 声を出そうとしても出すことができない\n \n 277 声が出ない\n 255 声が出せない\n 162 声を出すことができない\n \n```", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-03-30T06:58:19.213", "id": "15133", "last_activity_date": "2014-03-30T22:18:44.347", "last_edit_date": "2014-03-30T22:18:44.347", "last_editor_user_id": "4833", "owner_user_id": "4833", "parent_id": "14666", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "出来る is the potential form (〜えます form, if you will) of する. As such, in common\nusage the best practice is to use the native potential form for all non-する\nverbs and できる for the rest. Proper construction of the potential form is as\nfollows:\n\n * Type I (〜う) verbs: Change -u to -eる (e.g. 行く => 行ける). This ending can also be further inflected (e.g. 行けます、行けない, etc.)\n * Type II (〜る) verbs: Change 〜る to 〜れる (e.g. 食べれる; informal) or 〜られる (e.g. 食べられる; formal. Also identical to the passive form).\n * Type III: 来る【くる】 becomes 来られる【こられる】. する, as noted above, becomes できる.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-03-30T07:25:55.453", "id": "15136", "last_activity_date": "2014-03-30T07:25:55.453", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4914", "parent_id": "14666", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "To answer the title question as a simple yes-no question, the only logical\nanswer would be \"Yes, it is.\" The phrase clearly uses a [敬語]{けいご}\ntwice,「[拝見]{はいけん}」 and 「いたす」, which satisfies the definition of\n[二重敬語]{にじゅうけいご}.\n\nIs the phrase 「拝見いたしました」 \"incorrect\" then? According to me, no, it is not. Why\nnot? Because it is in such wide use and it just sounds normal and natural if\nyou have a native ear. It carries none of the \"wordiness\" (and if I may,\n\"funniness\") of some of the other examples of 二重敬語 such as 「お[分]{わ}かりになられる」\nand 「お[召]{め}し[上]{あ}がりになられる」.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-03-01T00:27:32.067", "id": "14672", "last_activity_date": "2014-03-01T00:27:32.067", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14670", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "Let us get the phrases straight if we want to discuss them.\n\nYou wrote 「Aを[心配]{しんぱい}かける」 twice, so I do not think it was a typo. The only\ncorrect particle to use in that expression is 「に」. 「を」 is not possible.\n\nIf you or anyone is unfamiliar with this usage of 「に」, I just happened to talk\nabout it in another thread a few days ago. [君に話しがある How does this\nwork?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/14603/%e5%90%9b%e3%81%ab%e8%a9%b1%e3%81%97%e3%81%8c%e3%81%82%e3%82%8b-how-\ndoes-this-work)\n\nSo, the two expressions in question are:\n\n> Ａ[を]心配[させる]な。（Both 「を」and「に」are possible.）\n>\n> Ａ[に]心配[かける]な。（Only「に」 is possible.）\n\nThese two basically mean the same thing even though they are structured\ndifferently. They both mean:\n\n\"Do not make A feel uneasy.\", \"Do not give A anxiety.\", etc.\n\nSince I am a Japanese-speaker, I shall let you and others form your own\nEnglish translations that satisfy your needs. The phrases do not mean anything\nfar from what I said above, though.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-03-01T06:29:42.900", "id": "14674", "last_activity_date": "2014-03-01T06:29:42.900", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "14673", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "帰る, sometimes translated as \"to go home\" is the preferred way to say \"to go\nback\", when you speak about your home country, your home town, your parents'\nhome, etc.\n\nFor example,\n\n> I have to go back to Australia next month. \n> 来月オーストラリアに帰らないといけない。 (or any other version of \"have to\")\n\nIf you've lived in another country, then saying\n\n> 来月イギリスに帰る。\n\nsounds like you are thinking of Britain as your home country.\n\nA more conceptual way to think about it is the following:\n\n * かえる refers to something or someone returning to the place where he/she/it belongs, in some sense. For people, it's 帰る; for objects, it's 返る.\n\n * もどる refers to something or someone returning to a place he/she/it has been before. For both people and objects, it's 戻る.\n\nThe difference between かえる and もどる is like the difference between a closed\nloop with a basepoint and a basepoint-free closed loop.\n\nYou can use 帰る for returning to your apartment, even if it's not in your home\ncountry:\n\n> もう、今日は帰る。 \n> I'll head back [to my apartment in Tokyo].\n\n戻る is fine, too:\n\n> 東京に戻る。 \n> I'll go back to Tokyo.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-03-01T18:21:17.433", "id": "14679", "last_activity_date": "2014-03-01T18:21:17.433", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "14675", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]