Datasets:

---

p1atdev

/

japanese-stackexchange

like 3

[ { "body": "My understanding is that it's a matter of intent. In English, you'd never say\n\"The car went to work\" because cars can't _do_ things. People may make the car\ndo things, but the person was the intent behind the action.\n\nJapanese expands this concept so that \"this thing made me laugh\" is weird\nsince _things_ largely have no intent. Perhaps \"this thing is amusing\" since\nthat holds no intent or perhaps \"the fates amuse me (with this thing)\".", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-21T15:30:20.290", "id": "15519", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-24T12:40:15.543", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-24T12:40:15.543", "last_editor_user_id": "3974", "owner_user_id": "3974", "parent_id": "15518", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "Disclaimer: I'm nowhere near being good enough at Japanese to answer questions\non this site but since you asked, here we go:\n\nI think the animate/inanimate distinction is only a particular case. The\ngeneral distinction is based on viewpoints. _From A Dictionary of Basic\nJapanese Grammar_ (DBJG):\n\n> \"The speaker usually describes a situation or an event from his own\n> viewpoint rather than from others' when he is involved in the situation or\n> the event.\"\n>\n> \"It's easier for the speaker to take the viewpoint of a person in the\n> sentence subject position than to take the viewpoint of a person in other\n> positions.\"\n\nThe way I see it, the speaker chooses the viewpoint for his sentence in this\norder of preference (going from what's closest to him to what's the furthest\naway): himself, someone from his group (family, school, colleagues...), the\nhearer, a third person who isn't from his group, something.\n\nThis has multiple consequences :\n\n**1: The 1st person subject can easily be left out (as it's the default\nviewpoint).**\n\n**2: Some verbs (あげる、くれる、もらう) _DEFINE_ the viewpoint of the sentence (of the\ngiver, receiver and receiver respectively):**\n\nThis makes a sentence like *私が田中さんに本をくれた ungrammatical because of a conflict\nof viewpoint (choosing the viewpoint of the receiver (くれる) while the speaker\nis the giver. In order to make the viewpoint coincide, あげる should be used).\n\nThis is also why くれる isn't used when the speaker and the hearer are neither\nthe giver nor the receiver. The speaker then tends to take the viewpoint of\nthe subject with either あげる or もらう.\n\nThis is also true of auxiliaries like いく and くる:\n\n> 私はどろぼうにおそいかかっていった/*きた.\n\nくる expresses the idea of going towards the speaker's viewpoint.\n\n**3: The speaker tends to take the viewpoint of human beings rather than the\nviewpoint of inanimate things (which are at the end of the list).**\n\n**4: Some passive sentence feels unnatural (from DBJG):**\n\n> (私の)息子は私に叱られた。 \n> The viewpoint should be the one of the speaker, but there the subject is\n> his son.\n\n**5 The speaker can't express others' feelings with adjectives like 悲しい which\nexpress the sadness of the speaker.**\n\nHe has to use verbs like 悲しがる or 悲しむ \"to look sad\", or basically any\nconstruction that tends to describe the scene from his viewpoint:\n\n> 彼女は悲しそうだ She looks sad. \n> 彼女は悲しいということだ I heard that she is sad.\n\nAnd so on.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-22T11:09:21.733", "id": "15530", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-24T03:19:57.940", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "4822", "parent_id": "15518", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "I agree with Alox that it has to do with viewpoint. I tried to write an answer\nyesterday, but it quickly became too long, so I didn't post it. I'm trying to\nmake it shorter this time. Some information are already covered by Alox's\nanswer, so I would repeat it again.\n\n* * *\n\nIn conclusion, in some situations, both Japanese and English tend to avoid\nchoosing human as the subject. But Japanese tends to use passive while English\ntends to use causative.\n\n* * *\n\nJapanese tends to take the viewpoint of human beings. I think it's also true\nform other languages. It just that different languages use different ways to\nexpress it.\n\n笑う is a kind of unintentional emotional activity. In Japanese, there are\nseveral patterns that are used to express such kind of things.\n\n 1. [something]が [someone]に [action]される (maybe more literally: that something is done happens to somebody)\n\nThis applies to many verbs, but mainly verbs expressing emotions\n\n``` 成功が待たれる\n\n 対応が急がれる\n 挙動が不審に思える\n \n```\n\n 2. [something]が [someone]には [action]しい\n``` 結論は疑わしい\n\n \n```\n\n 3. [someone]が [reason]に [action]する\n\nThis applies to a limited number of verb, include 笑う, 驚く, etc.\n\n``` アメリカの軍事力には驚いた\n\n これには笑った\n \n```\n\n 4. [someone]が[something]を [action]させられる\n\nThis generally works for all verbs\n\n``` 彼の話には笑わされた\n\n 私は、この『○○』を読んで、考えさせられた\n \n```\n\n 5. [something]が[action]させられる\n``` その映画は考えさせられる\n\n \n```\n\n 6. [something]を[action]させる[something]\n``` (読者に)深く考えさせる作品\n\n \n```\n\n 7. [something]を[action]させられる[something]\n``` 深く考えさせられる作品\n\n \n```\n\n 8. [something]が[potential verb]\n``` 笑える話\n\n 泣ける映画\n \n```\n\nI'm not good at English, but I also noticed several patterns, which can't be\nliterally translated into Chinese (and Japanese).\n\nIt seems that, English tends to say\n\n 1. [something] makes [somebody] [do]\n``` it makes me think/laugh...\n\n \n```\n\n 2. [something] [affects] [somebody]\n``` it reminds me\n\n \n```\n\n 3. [somebody] is [affected by] [something]\n``` I'm amused\n\n \n```\n\n 4. [something] is [affect]-ing\n``` It's interesting\n\n \n```\n\n 5. [something] is [do]-able\n``` It's questionable\n\n \n```\n\n 6. [something] [does] [somebody]\n``` it sounds good\n\n \n```\n\nIt becomes clear that, Japanese tends to use passive while English tends to\nuse causative.\n\nI think it's not because of the animate/inanimate distinction, just that\nJapanese tends to say [for some reason] [something] [is changed] while English\ntends to say [some reason makes something to change]\n\n```\n\n 風で窓が開いた\n \n```\n\nI think most people here don't read Chinese, so I won't write much about\nChinese.\n\nChinese is a little similar to English. In Chinese, we tend to say\n`[something] makes me [do]`. But we don't use dummy subject. So we will not\nsay something like \"it makes laugh\", instead, we say \"I laugh\".\n\nThere are also some 可～s in Classical Chinese, e.g. 可笑, 可嘆, etc.\n\n* * *\n\n大曽 美恵子（2001）『[感情を表わす動詞・形容詞に関する一考察](http://hdl.handle.net/2237/8042)』\n\nいい論文を見つけました。ぜひ読んで頂きたいと思います。\n\n興味深いことに、Chocolateさんが、無生物を主語とする使役文が好まれないため、あまり使わない(normally you don't say it\nthis way in Japanese, because the Japanese language tends to avoid using\n無生物主語(inanimate subject) , especially in verbal/casual communication.\n)と判断された「物が人を～させる」構文は、この論文によると、まったく問題ない文になります。\nなお大曽は、「通常、日本語の使役文の主体は[…]有生物であって、無生物を主語とする使役文[…]は成り立たない」「無生物を主体として取る感情動詞の使役文は日本語では特殊であると言える」などと述べています。\n\n```\n\n あのドラマは大人を楽しませてくれた\n 音楽は人を楽しませる\n 酒は今日も私を悲しくさせる\n \n```\n\nなどなど\n\n私は、修飾語に使われている「[something]を[action]させる[something]」の文型として、「深く考えさせる作品」の例を挙げましたが、「[something]が[somebody]に[action]させる」ような文型については書いていません。少なくとも、「られる」のほうが普通かなと思っています。\n\nまた、大曽は、「ヲ格をとる感情動詞が[…]使役受身文にならない[…]」とし、次の例を挙げています。\n\n```\n\n （５７）＊父は兄の出世に喜ばされた。（←兄の出世は父を喜ばせた。）\n （５８）＊大人はあのドラマに楽しまされた。\n \n```\n\n感情動詞でない場合なら、私は、「考えさせられた」の例を挙げているので、問題ないと思います。\n\nご参考までに", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-22T13:45:39.610", "id": "15532", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-24T08:24:07.730", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-24T08:24:07.730", "last_editor_user_id": "4833", "owner_user_id": "4833", "parent_id": "15518", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "Your latter interpretation is correct. \"遊びで戦っているのではない\" basically means\n\"本気で戦っている\". Without context, it is hard to infer whether they like the fight\nor not, though.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-22T02:41:11.963", "id": "15525", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-22T02:41:11.963", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5112", "parent_id": "15522", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Well, to start off, お猪口 is the typical cup you see when sake is served hot. It\nlooks kind of like a ceramic shot glass, just with straighter sides and a\nlittle shorter.\n\nさかずき are flatter and disc-like. As for how to write it, my dictionary confirms\nthe preferences listed in EDICT: 杯 is listed first, followed by 盃. Unless I go\nto the 国語辞典 within the application, it leaves off the other two. Given the\nfact that the latter is a 人名用 and the former is 常用, that would appear to\nindicate that 杯 is the way to go, however Wikipedia (and, in fact, the\ndisplays you've been reading) appear to prefer 盃.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-22T14:38:01.880", "id": "15534", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-23T16:27:55.643", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-23T16:27:55.643", "last_editor_user_id": "4914", "owner_user_id": "4914", "parent_id": "15527", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I think さかずき normally refers to something that looks like this:\n \nand can also be used as a general term for sake cup, including おちょこ: \nI think さかづき is probably an archaic way of spelling it in hiragana(or\nkatakana?). Nowadays we normally spell it as さかずき. As for 杯 and 盃... both look\nokay to me, though I think I learned it as 杯 at school... some people say 盃 is\na 俗字(informal variant?) for 杯 but I'm not sure.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-23T16:58:19.783", "id": "15543", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-23T17:07:52.960", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-23T17:07:52.960", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15527", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "It would probably be 拍車をかける, which means to spur, encourage, accelerate etc.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-23T20:02:59.910", "id": "15547", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-23T20:02:59.910", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5212", "parent_id": "15528", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "I will parse it as this:\n\n```\n\n (1)=一本のバラがそうである\n \n (2)=自分が今ここに生きていること\n (3)=自分や神と言った人間を越えた大きな存在\n (4)=無条件で喜ばれ\n \n (A)=(1)ように、(2)が(3)に(4)ている\n This part seems to be the hardest part, it basically means:\n バラが、人間である自分に喜ばれるように\n 自分が、神と言った、人間を超えた、大きな存在に喜ばれる\n \n (5)=(A)と気づく\n \n (6)=歯を食いしばって\n (7)=力みが抜けて\n (8)=前を向く勇気と力が、穏やかな喜びとともに、心の内側から沸いてくる\n \n (B)=(5)とき、(6)でも、(7)(8)\n \n (C)=(B)のではないでしょうか\n \n```\n\nWhen (5), even if (6), you still (7) (8), aren't you?\n\nDainichi has provided an English translation. It's seems that my understanding\nis at least not far wrong. So I merged my comment into the answer. It's not a\ntranslation.\n\n> If you know there is someone who is greater than you and says “I'm happy to\n> see you ~~alive~~ / You make me happy”, you will forget all loneliness and\n> dread and feel greet joy. Realizing the value and importance of the\n> existence of yourself, that is what Emerson called “living for the moment”.\n\nAs for why 喜ばれている is used, it's may be related to another\n[question](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/15532/4833). You can think\nit's just a passive form.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-23T08:57:48.463", "id": "15542", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-24T06:11:28.973", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.863", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "4833", "parent_id": "15529", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "The important thing is to understand the overall syntactic structure of the\nsentence. That is not easy for a sentence of this size, and you will need\nsemantic clues to guide the parsing.\n\nLet me suggest some analytic steps you can go through.\n\n 1. First, you might like to know what そうである refers to. Let's see some of the candidates (look for verb phrases):\n\n * 今ここに生きている\n * 無条件で喜ばれている\n * 心の内側から沸いてくる\n\nThe third option \"Arise from within your heart like a rose\" is not likely.\nRoses do not arise from within your heart. The first option, \"live here and\nnow like the rose\", I guess could theoretically work, but it makes more sense\nfor it to be \"unconditionally appreciated, like the rose\". Also, if\n一本のバラがそうであるように referred to 今ここに生きている, it would be more likely to be 一本のバラのように,\nsince they are so close to each other.\n\n 2. Next step could be to break down the top level sentence. Again, if you strictly look at syntax, there might several ways to parse it, but what makes the most sense is:\n\n> ... 気づく時、... 心の内側から沸いてくるのではないでしょうか \n> When you realize ..., ... arises from within your heart.\n\n 3. Once you've broken down the top level sentence, break the parts down recursively. I'm not going to do all the steps for you, but hopefully you get the picture. \n\nThis is my take on the translation. It might not be the most idiomatic\nEnglish, but it relatively true to the original sentence structure.\n\n> When you realize that - just like a rose (is appreciated) - your current\n> existence here is unconditionally appreciated by yourself and greater beings\n> such as God, do you not feel calm even if you were clenching your teeth, and\n> do not the power and courage to go on, together with a serene pleasure,\n> arise from within your heart?\n\nThe main point is: If you only think about syntax, there are often multiple\nways to parse a sentence. To get the right parse, you need to understand the\nmeaning of the words, so they can guide you.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-24T05:42:57.950", "id": "15551", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-24T05:51:49.010", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-24T05:51:49.010", "last_editor_user_id": "1073", "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "15529", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "As far as I know, there's nothing like the Joyo list for Okinawan, so there's\nno \"right\" way in that sense. Ryukyu University is probably the closest thing\nto an authority in this area; I'm pretty sure they would write \"カリー サビラ\" (note\nspace!). I couldn't find it in their Shuri-Naha dialect dictionary, but they\ndid have \"クヮッチー サビラ\":\n\n<http://ryukyu-lang.lib.u-ryukyu.ac.jp/srnh/details.php?ID=SN11854>\n\nMy understanding is that they use katakana because their orthography is to be\nunderstood as strictly sound-based; not sure if it's also a political\nstatement to emphasize the language/dialect distinction.\n\nHowever, Ryukyu University are not philosopher-kings of the Ryukyus and so the\nlanguages there are written in all kinds of ad-hoc ways. In particular a lot\nof people write in hiragana because nowadays those are the \"friendly\"\ncharacters, the ones kids learn first and the default for non-foreign words.\n\nI don't think it's possible to boil down the preferences of the entire speech\ncommunity, but my subjective impression (as an outsider) is that people who\nare passionate about the language as part of their cultural heritage, with no\nparticular connection to linguistics as an academic discipline, do tend to\nprefer hiragana.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-05T10:40:52.897", "id": "15758", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-05T10:40:52.897", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "531", "parent_id": "15533", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "Well, I guess the best advisor will be Google. (I'm using exact seach here)\n\nかりいさびら - 24 hits\n\nかりーさびら - 102 000 hits\n\nカリイサビラ - 1 810 hits\n\nカリーサビラ - 794 hits\n\n嘉例さびら - 554 hits\n\n佳例さびら - 3 hits\n\nSo judging from the Google opinion - かりーさびら is your choise.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-06T17:46:06.983", "id": "15784", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-06T17:46:06.983", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5278", "parent_id": "15533", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "When you ask 「それはいくらですか」 you already make the question sound polite by\nincluding です and not dropping は. There are much more casual versions of the\nquestion, e.g. 「それいくら？」.\n\nThis question is typically used by a customer when asking for a price. You\nwouldn't use honorific in this case as when you address a shop assistant as a\ncustomer, you don't address someone of a higher status. If anything, it's\nactually the other way round, a customer has a higher status.", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-22T23:19:01.167", "id": "15536", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-22T23:19:01.167", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5041", "parent_id": "15535", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "I normally say \"すいません、これいくらですか。\" and I don't think this sounds impolite. I\nthink my mother uses \"いくらですか。\" or \"おいくらですか。\", and sometimes \"これ、おいくら？\". I\nthink おいくらですか？ sounds politer and a bit feminine, and おいくら？ sounds feminine\nand elegant. \n\n\"Why is the honorific \"おいくら\" not really taught?\"＞＞ Maybe it's because おいくらですか\n/ おいくら is more used by older people and textbook publishers think that\nstudents of Japanese are generally young??", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-23T06:36:41.810", "id": "15539", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-23T07:20:11.337", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-23T07:20:11.337", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15535", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "If we exclude words where the お／ご has become effectively part of the word\n(お茶）, there are two uses of honorifics, to show respect and to be polite (or\nsound more elegant). Your use falls into the latter category. Its more\nfeminine but not wrong. The book \"Japanese for all occasions\" by Taeko Kamiya\nadvises not adding honorifics excessively.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-23T07:08:05.300", "id": "15540", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-23T07:08:05.300", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "15535", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "As a non-native, I'm not certain if there is a perfectly native way to express\nthis. Hence, my answer will focus on refining what's presented.\n\nGetting started, by using 汝【なんじ】 in the first half you're definitely trying to\ngive it an archaic feel; if you're not deliberately doing that, 自分 would be a\nbetter choice.\n\nUsing 歩く in the first sentence literally means \"to walk\", but comes off as a\nbit stilted to me; 進む【すすむ】 (\"to advance\") is what I've more often come across\nin such situations. Also, the original English is in the imperative, so the\ntranslation should reflect this.\n\nAs such, my rendering for the first part would be:\n\n> 自分の仁道を進め。\n\nThe second part is a little more difficult. The original English is \"Let\npeople talk,\" however the words you've chosen—when arranged for proper\ngrammar—ask that the hearer forgive indiscreet remarks. By not specifying\nwhose remarks to forgive, it creates further ambiguity.\n\nAs such, the translation depends on the nature of the talking you're referring\nto. If you really did mean it as an admonition to forgive others'\nindiscretions, then I would revise it to something along the lines of the\nfollowing:\n\n> 人の放語を許せ。\n\nIf you're really meaning simply \"allow people to speak\", then I would probably\ngo with something more along the lines of the following, which is literally\nmore along the lines of \"listen to what people have to say\":\n\n> 人の言葉を聞け。", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-23T02:19:56.737", "id": "15538", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-23T02:19:56.737", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4914", "parent_id": "15537", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I will have a try.\n\n```\n\n 人ノ言ヲ懼レズ、己ノ道ヲ進メ\n ひとのげんをおそれず、おのれのみちをすすめ\n \n```\n\nor\n\n```\n\n 己ノ道ヲ行キ、人ノ言フニ任セヨ\n おのれのみちをゆき、ひとのいうにまかせよ\n \n```\n\nThere is a saying I love very much, but much harder to understand than my\ntranslations, if you are not familiar with 漢文.\n\n```\n\n 千万人ト雖モ吾往カン\n せんまんにんといえどもわれゆかん\n \n Original text: 自反而縮。雖千萬人吾往矣。 -- 孟子　公孫丑上\n Explanation given by 大辞林: \n 自ら省みて正しければ，敵対者や反対者がどんなに多くとも，恐れることなく自分の信ずる道を進もう。\n \n```", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-23T07:48:36.073", "id": "15541", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-27T09:07:27.110", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-27T09:07:27.110", "last_editor_user_id": "4833", "owner_user_id": "4833", "parent_id": "15537", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "> Line 6 Char 2; I would say is likely せ but I've not come across any instance\n> where stroke 3 can extend below stroke 2, nor can I find a Kanji that comes\n> closer. It this correct?\n\nYou wrote ふせ. It should be 少女.\n\n> Line 5 char 4; I would say is likely 這, since I can find a font that has the\n> radical 言 with a vertical carrot on top instead of a bar, however that font\n> doesn't have 這. Is changing top bars to carrots common?\n\nI don't know why you're calling them \"carrots\" but yes, it's common.\n\n> Line 4 char13; 石 is really small, so I would expect to radical attached to 亦\n> but as I fail to find a matching Kanji, I have to assume the tininess is\n> just inconstancy in Kanji size?\n\nYeah, this is strange. I'm hoping someone else will answer on this... It looks\nlike a radical attached to 亦, but like you I can find no such kanji. ブル石亦\ndoesn't make any sense either though lol. I would like to say that they just\nmis-wrote it, but I would be more confident saying that if I could guess what\nword they actually wanted to write.\n\nEDIT: From the context in the following paragraph, I'm fairly sure they meant\nto write ブル跡. It doesn't have any useful results on google, but it has a\nprecedent in ブラ跡 which is a common word (ブラジャーの跡→ブラ跡、、、ブルマの跡→ブル跡).\n\n> Did I get anything else wrong?\n\n這 **ゆ** せたい should be わ. Yes, writing the start of the 2nd stroke of わ、れ、ね\nlike this is common.\n\n舌 **む** should be を.\n\n柔 **う** かい should be 柔らかい.\n\n肉体 **む** should be を too.\n\nブルマの **尓** should be 布{ぬの}.\n\n息触む should be 感触を.\n\n舌のサイドで **じながう** should be 感じながら.\n\nJust like reading someone's handwriting in your native language, some of it\ncomes down to figuring it out from the surrounding context/word. The verb 這う\nis never going to become 這ゆせる, 肉体む doesn't make any sense, etc.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-23T18:51:22.067", "id": "15545", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-23T20:48:08.170", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-23T20:48:08.170", "last_editor_user_id": "3010", "owner_user_id": "3010", "parent_id": "15544", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "Looking up the character `亦` on its own shows 1) it is a kanji variant of\n`また（又)`, and 2) that it has several 人名 readings. So I'm gonna go out on a limb\nand say `石亦` is possibly the name `いしまた` or `いしばた`.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-23T19:19:44.797", "id": "15546", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-23T19:19:44.797", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "15544", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "I think the difference is that 習う、学ぶ can be done by yourself, whereas 教わる\ncan't be done just by yourself: you need someone (or something) else to teach\nyou. Note that 教わる is \"to be taught.\"\n\nWhen you say\n\n> 授業で教わる\n\nyou implicitly mean that you were taught by a teacher. On the other hand, you\naren't implying that you were taught by someone in\n\n> 授業で学ぶ\n\nIn the latter example, the class could have been a self-studying session where\nyou teach yourself (you don't use 教わる when you teach yourself).", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-24T16:25:27.310", "id": "15561", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-24T16:25:27.310", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5212", "parent_id": "15553", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "As a more general note, you can also use 教わる in a faux-passive kind of way\nlike you would use 教えられる, like その人に日本語を教わった。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-24T23:49:22.210", "id": "15568", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-24T23:49:22.210", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "15553", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "教わる and 習う are almost interchangeable when you say:\n\n> 田中先生に習っています。田中先生に教わっています。I'm learning from Tanaka sensei. / I'm in Tanaka\n> sensei's class.\n>\n> 小学校の時、田中先生に習いました。田中先生に教わりました。I learned from Tanaka sensei / I was in Tanaka\n> sensei's class when I was in elementary school.\n>\n> ピアノを習っています。ピアノを教わっています。I'm taking piano lessons.\n\nI think 教わる is more used by older people. Your ma or grandma might ask\n今日は何を教わったの？ then you'd reply つるかめ算(を)習った。(I don't know why, maybe 教わる is\npoliter than 習う? but you'd say 教えていただいた/教えていただきました, which is the humble form\nof 教えてもらった/教えてもらいました, to sound respectful to the teacher.)\n\n今日、授業で教わったこと, 授業で習ったこと, 授業で学んだこと sound almost the same to me, in meaning.\n学んだこと sounds more formal and can also mean \"something I became aware of /\nrealized from today's lesson (something more, something deeper than what you\nwere taught)\". 習った/教わった sound more passive and 学んだ sounds more active to me.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-25T06:53:05.857", "id": "15582", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-25T07:36:41.363", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15553", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "どれくらい, どれぐらい, どのくらい, and どのぐらい are used interchangeably.\n\n> お金、どれくらいある？/お金はどれくらいありますか。 \n> お金、どれぐらいある？/お金はどれぐらいありますか。 \n> お金、どのくらいある？/お金はどのくらいありますか。 \n> お金、どのぐらいある？/お金はどのぐらいありますか。\n>\n> どれくらいお金ある？/どれくらい(の)お金がありますか。 \n> どれぐらいお金ある？/どれぐらい(の)お金がありますか。 \n> どのくらいお金ある？/どのくらい(の)お金がありますか。 \n> どのぐらいお金ある？/どのぐらい(の)お金がありますか。\n\nAll sound fine to me. どれくらい, どのくらい etc. modify a 用言 (=ある/あります) and どのくらい **の**\n, どれくらい **の** etc. modifiy a 名詞 (=お金).", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-25T08:42:09.703", "id": "15584", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-25T14:51:08.837", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15554", "post_type": "answer", "score": 13 }, { "body": "**どれぐらい と どのぐらい**\n\nサイズや量や数に対しては \"どれぐらい\" を使っていることが多くて、 期間の場合は \"どのぐらい\" が使われていることが多いかなと思います。\n\n例： 1. どれぐらいの大きさであれば宜しいでしょうか。 2. その車を買うのにどれぐらいのお金が要るだろう。 3.\nあと、どれぐらいのりんごがこの箱に入れるかな。 4. 区役所までバスでどのぐらいかかりますか。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2019-06-23T04:33:10.277", "id": "69012", "last_activity_date": "2019-06-23T04:33:10.277", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "34450", "parent_id": "15554", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "In the effort of making it sound more natural in written English, I would\ntranslate it as\n\n> I guess saying \"it's too much trouble\" and thus we have a simplified meal\n> can't really be helped, and I'm trying to avoid forcing her to do it anyway.\n\nI believe you are right, that それ in this sentence indeed refers to 料理を作ること.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-24T10:02:29.123", "id": "15559", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-24T10:02:29.123", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5187", "parent_id": "15555", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes! I think your interpretation is fine, and given the context I think \"anti\"\nmakes sense. There are several prefixes for negation, but adding one in\nunconventional ways is fine so long as it fits the general pattern of use.\nThat said, however, it's not necessarily the most \"normal\" way. For example,\nsaying something like 非かえるくん and 非ぼく is kind of goofy, but it's clear that's\nwhat the writer is going for. In general the use of a prefix in itself\nshouldn't be too problematic; it's just the context that dictates how good it\nsounds.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-24T09:41:54.353", "id": "15558", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-24T09:41:54.353", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "15557", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "I think that you are right about the \"Heights\". Keep in mind that lots of\nplaces here in North America are called \"Heights\" even though they have no\nconnection with height, hills, or anything nice at all. It's just a way of\nmaking them seem nicer than they actually are; in essence a marketing ploy.\nIt's similar to the use of words like \"acres\" in upper class residences and\nretirement homes, even though they actually have no proximity to anything you\nwould really call \"acres\". Of course, it could be a japanese word, but since\nit's written in Katakana, I doubt it very much.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-24T23:27:13.433", "id": "15567", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-24T23:27:13.433", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5213", "parent_id": "15560", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Chacha was lady Yodo's childhood name, eldest daughter of Oichi, Oda\nNobunaga's sister. Trying to find the meaning myself.. That first kanji looks\nlike it's from Ocha, which is tea... But that's only the reach of my amateur\n\"otaku Japanese\"... I can read hiragana and katakana, but I only know a few\ndozen kanji, probably less than 100, which is not a lot. >_<", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2016-07-23T06:49:08.337", "id": "36916", "last_activity_date": "2016-07-23T06:49:08.337", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "16242", "parent_id": "15564", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "こそ is appended to a word to emphasise it. It can replace particles は or が -\nyou can form a sentence using the pattern 「AこそB。」. It has similar meaning of\nequivalence as「AはBだ。」but gives the statement more emphasis:\n\n> 恐怖こそ自由。 (emphatic)\n>\n> 恐怖は自由だ。 (normal statement)\n\n(Note: this is not the only pattern of こそ usage.)\n\n* * *\n\nOne of the meanings of ども is \"(derogatory) second or third person plural\n(implies speaker is of higher status than those referred to)\" (source\n[WWWJDIC](http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/%7Ejwb/cgi-bin/wwwjdic.cgi?1C)). 「豚ども」\nin this case is plural - \"pigs\", giving it derogatory meaning.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-25T00:26:10.213", "id": "15570", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-25T06:31:24.303", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "5041", "parent_id": "15569", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "AこそB sometimes means B matches A the best or A matches B the best. Both A and\nB might are something you might already know.\n\nWhen you emphasize the last part, it's often something unusual. When you\nemphasize the former part, it's often something mistakable. You can also say\nこそが and こそは to make it clear, but because of the nature of こそ, both が and は\ncan be omitted and こそ often has a dual function.\n\nSaying 恐怖こそ自由 is something like 自由 is the best description of 恐怖, 恐怖 is what\nwe called 自由. They are exactly the same thing.\n\nI'm surprised that dictionaries don't cover this frequent usage. More\nexamples:\n\n```\n\n 太陽こそは、あらゆる生命の源泉\n かわいいこそ正義\n こちらこそすみません\n この俺こそ伝説の勇者だ\n \n```\n\n> I know that it emphasizes the previous word, but is that enough to form a\n> statement?\n\nAs I explained, は or が after こそ is often dropped. だ is often omitted in many\nsituations, for example, in tittles, slogans or definitions. Without だ, it's\nstill a complete sentence.\n\nかわいいこそ正義 is equal to かわいいこそ正義だ. You can also say かわいいは正義 or かわいいが正義だ, etc.\nThey are still complete sentences.\n\nSzymon has explained ども.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-25T05:41:22.590", "id": "15581", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-25T06:24:41.823", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-25T06:24:41.823", "last_editor_user_id": "4833", "owner_user_id": "4833", "parent_id": "15569", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "I think ～よう is often used to express a feeling such as you are “thinking”,\n“considering”, “planing”, “deciding”, “guessing” or something.\n\nYou say “帰ろう”, “寝よう”, “買おう” to yourself when you are making a decision. “帰る”\n\"寝る\" “買う” may be inappropriate because it's nether a “judgement” (because you\nalways know exactly what you will do) nor a “statement” (because nobody needs\nthis information.) You just directly express this kind of feeling using “～よう”\nno matter there is a listener or not. I think expressing one's emotions is\nsomething you often do without any reasons.\n\n～ましょう might be used in certain situations, In novels, some people (e.g. お嬢様)\njust use the polite form exclusively. In narratives, the speaker is aware of\nthe existence of the audiences, so he uses the polite form. But the ～ましょう in\nthis case is not the speaker's feeling, but the the character's. Maybe the\nauthor of the children's book deliberately chose the polite form throughout\nthe book, did he?\n\nWhen you are speaking to a listener, you often change ～よう to ～ようと思います and ～よう\ncarries some additional meanings. It seems that they think ～よう sounds too\ndirect. They think 気持ちを抑えめに表現する＝丁寧に表現する.\n\nI think これを買いましょう often implies the speaker decided to buy, tell the listener\nand ask for confirmation.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-25T05:08:31.710", "id": "15578", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-25T05:15:19.080", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-25T05:15:19.080", "last_editor_user_id": "4833", "owner_user_id": "4833", "parent_id": "15571", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "やめときます would be the て-form of 止{や}める with the auxiliary verb おく, which has a\nnumber of meanings but in this case probably indicates that the speaker will\ngo ahead and stop doing something in anticipation of a certain result, or that\nthey are admitting that a situation is a certain way and will leave it as it\nis.\n\n> 止{や}めて＋おきます＝止{や}めときます\n\nIt would literally mean that the speaker will stop doing something, or give up\non doing something in order to leave things as they are. As you've mentioned,\nboth interpretations could idiomatically be translated as “I had better not\n(do it/anything),” or “I will pass (on doing it/anything).”", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-25T02:23:05.087", "id": "15573", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-25T03:22:44.707", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-25T03:22:44.707", "last_editor_user_id": "3634", "owner_user_id": "3634", "parent_id": "15572", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "Linguistics is indeed a science, however every science has its fundamentals\nand standardized terms. To pull from chemistry, you don't hear scientists\nsaying that you can't call iron and uranium both metals due to the fact that\nthey have different properties (e.g. radioactivity). Where needed, you can\nindeed specify \"non-radioactive metal\" vs. \"radioactive metal\", but having\nslightly different properties does not change their categorization if the\nqualities that define the category are still there.\n\nSo it is with linguistic terminology. As used in English, we classify words in\nthe following manner:\n\n * **Verbs:** action words\n * **Nouns:** people, places, things, or concepts\n * **Adjectives:** words that describe nouns\n * **Adverbs:** words that describe how an action is performed\n * **Pronouns:** words that take the place of nouns\n\nAs it turns out, this classification system works to classify a lot of words\nin Japanese as well. 動詞, as the characters themselves state, are action words.\n名詞 are nouns. 形容詞 describe nouns and 代名詞 take their place.\n\nGranted, there are cases where Japanese words can overlap across these\nboundaries (e.g. 形容動詞), but in those cases we coin new terms to explain the\nnuances and make them fit into the existing framework (e.g. \"adjectival\nverbs\", in this case)—we don't just throw the whole framework out and say that\nthe two can't be compared.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-25T04:37:35.907", "id": "15577", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-25T04:37:35.907", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4914", "parent_id": "15575", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Looking in dictionaries, it doesn't seem like a hard rule, but I get the\nimpression that while both ほじる and ほじくる are used in the literal sense, _to\npick or dig_ , when used in the figurative sense, _to pry_ , usually ほじくる is\nused.\n\n> And further that the kanji spelling itself is not used currently. Is this\n> correct?\n\nThat's a slight modification of what I find:\n\n> [Q] Why do some entries have the kana part first with the kanji following in\n> <<...>>? \n> [A] That happens with entries that are tagged as \"uk\" (usually kana). Since\n> the kanji forms are less common, it makes sense to display the more common\n> kana forms first.\n\nIt's usually written with kana, but that's not necessarily a specifically\n\"current\" phenomenon.\n\nDon't mean to nitpick, but another comment:\n\n> ... synonymous but differently sounding readings of the one kanji term.\n\nWhile not wrong, I think the better way to think about on'yomi is: \"The same\nkanji applied to two (near-)synonyms\". That's not uncommon, by the way e.g.\n食{く}う and 食{た}べる. Here the okurigana makes the reading clear, though.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-25T09:46:19.953", "id": "15585", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-25T13:16:14.663", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-25T13:16:14.663", "last_editor_user_id": "1073", "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "15580", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I searched [_The Balanced Corpus of Contemporary Written Japanese\n(BCCWJ)_](http://www.kotonoha.gr.jp/shonagon/) using the freely accessible 少納言\ntool. I found the following results:\n\n```\n\n (はな|鼻)を?ほじ[ら-ろっ]　　　　8 results\n (はな|鼻)を?ほじく[ら-ろっ]　　　4 results\n (はな|鼻)を?穿[ら-ろっ]　　　　　0 results\n \n```\n\nTo explain the above, and to explain how to reproduce these results:\n\n 1. I used the regular expression pattern `(はな|鼻)を?$` in the 前文脈 (\"preceding context\") field to mean \"search term is preceded by はな or 鼻 optionally followed by を\". \n 2. I used the regular expression pattern `^[ら-ろっ]` in the 後文脈 (\"following context\") field to mean \"search term is followed by any hiragana in the /r/ row or small っ\".\n 3. For the search term itself, in which regular expressions are not allowed, I used `ほじ`, `ほじく`, and `穿` respectively. \n\nThe results I found are fairly small in number, but if they reflect wider\nusage accurately, they indicate that the most common collocation is 鼻をほじる--\nalthough 鼻をほじくる is used as well--and they indicate that neither ほじる nor ほじくる\nis commonly written in kanji in this phrase. (In all twelve results, I found\nthat 鼻 was written in kanji, not kana.)\n\nBased on this, I recommend writing 鼻をほじる in this particular context.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-25T10:44:22.307", "id": "15586", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-25T10:44:22.307", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15580", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "Based on [this article](http://nihonshock.com/2009/10/crazy-kanji-highest-\nstroke-count/) (skim to the bottom), apparently someone actually used it to\nwrite their name as recently as the 1960s (which means he probably was given\nthe name prior to the postwar reforms limited what names could be given to an\nassigned set).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-25T19:01:47.037", "id": "15592", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-25T19:01:47.037", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4914", "parent_id": "15587", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Generally speaking these are read using the 音読み, and most frequently occur in\npairs (e.g. 日米【にちべい】, 日独【にちどく】).\n\nI actually did some trolling through EDICT and a couple other sources to\ncreate a master list of these, and came up with the following list:\n\n```\n\n 豪 ごう Australia\n 爾 る Argentina\n 墺 おう Austria\n 白 ぱく Belgium\n 戊 ぼ Bolivia\n 伯 ぱく Brazil\n 勃 ぼつ Bulgaria\n 加 か Canada\n 智 ち Chile\n 中 ちゅう China\n 華 か China\n 漢 かん China\n 哥 こ Colombia\n 玖 きゅう Cuba\n 捷 しょう Czech Republic\n 丁 てい Denmark\n 埃 あい Egypt\n 英 えい England\n 洋 よう Europe\n 芬 ふん Finland\n 仏 ふつ France\n 独 どく Germany\n 銀 ぎん Guinea\n 希 き Greece\n 蘭 らん Holland\n 洪 こう Hungary\n 氷 ひょう Iceland\n 印 いん India\n 尼 に Indonesia\n 愛 あい Ireland\n イ い Israel\n 伊 い Italy\n 日 にち Japan\n 和 わ Japan\n 約 やく Jordan\n 良 ら Latvia\n 馬 ま Malaysia\n 満 まん Manchuria\n 墨 ぼく Mexico\n 蒙 もう Mongolia\n 緬 めん Myanmar\n 乳 にゅう New Zealand\n 児 に Nicaragua\n 朝 ちょう North Korea\n 諾 だく Norway\n 帛 はく Palau\n 巴 ぱ Panama\n 秘 ひ Peru\n 比 ひ Philippines\n 波 ぽ Poland\n 葡 ぽ Portugal\n 普 ふ Prussia\n 羅 ら Romania\n 露 ろ Russia\n 新 しん Singapore\n 南阿 なんあ South Africa\n 韓 かん South Korea\n 蘇 そ Soviet Union\n 西 せい Spain\n 瑞 すい Sweden\n 瑞 すい Switzerland\n 叙 じょ Syria\n 台 たい Taiwan\n 泰 たい Thailand\n 突 とつ Tunisia\n 土 と Turkey\n 烏 う Ukraine\n 宇 う Ukraine\n 米 べい USA\n 瓦 が Vanuatu\n 委 い Venezuela\n 越 えつ Vietnam\n \n```\n\nSome notes on the above:\n\n * It's not an oversight that Sweden and Switzerland have the same character; that's how they're listed in the dictionary.\n * Japan and China each have several variations. Generally speaking it's hard to go wrong defaulting to 日中【にっちゅう】 when talking about international relations. Beyond that it's probably best left to a native to clarify the nuances of each.\n * Hungary also has two characters; of these my impression based on research is that 洪【こう】 is the preferred one in Japanese.\n\nAlso, if you're looking for continents, you've got the following:\n\n```\n\n 阿 あ Africa\n 南極 なんきょく Antarctica\n 亜 あ Asia\n 欧 おう Europe\n 北米 ほくべい North America\n 南米 なんべい South America\n```", "comment_count": 11, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-25T18:52:20.333", "id": "15591", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-26T08:14:25.640", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-26T08:14:25.640", "last_editor_user_id": "4914", "owner_user_id": "4914", "parent_id": "15588", "post_type": "answer", "score": 16 }, { "body": "If I read aloud this sentence, I omit the parenthesis part or convert it to\nmore understandable expression like\n\n> 鉄血宰相、ドイツ語ではEiserner Kanzler、の異名を取る\n\nThe most common use of those single-kanji country names is the\npairs/combinations of countries such as [日米]{にちべい}, [米中]{べいちゅう}, [日韓]{にっかん},\n[日中韓]{にっちゅうかん}, and some language names such as [英語]{えいご}, [仏語]{ふつご},\n[独語]{どくご}. But ふつご and どくご are rarely heard although they are written in the\ndictionary. ふらんすご and どいつご are more used definitely. I think it's because\npeople tend to use easier expression for hearing.\n\nIn writing, especially when one wants to reduce the number of characters (eg.\nTwitter and newspapers), single-kanji country names are often used. However,\nwhen speaking, except for words which are frequently heard such as [日米]{にちべい}\nand [米軍]{べいぐん}, single-kanji country names are mostly converted to original\nnames (eg. [米政府]{あめりかせいふ}, [仏大統領]{ふらんすだいとうりょう}, not [米政府]{べいせいふ} nor\n[仏大統領]{ふつだいとうりょう}).\n\nThis may be a characteristic habit among people using ideogram characters.\nSome characters are really useful for abbreviation, but reading them\nstraightforward is not appropriate to convey the idea in oral communications.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2016-07-12T04:38:08.797", "id": "36594", "last_activity_date": "2016-07-12T04:38:08.797", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "16065", "parent_id": "15588", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "A tricky issue with many implications! As a single character, it should just\nbe read _doku_. But it is regarded as the abbreviation of 独逸語 _doitsugo_ or\nshorter 独語 _dokugo_ which Japanese and also Koreans (under Japanese rule) have\nchosen to refer to the German language in the 19th century. Most Japanese\nnatives would read it _doitsugo_ or _dokugo_. As the single kanji can refer to\nthe people, their country, and their language, in this case you have to add 語\n_go: language_ in your mind. 独逸 usually should be read _doku-itsu_ , not\n_doitsu_ as the character 独 _doku_ usually never has the reading _do_. Drawing\non the Dutch _duits_ for _deutsch_ (German) it could easily be written with\nphonetic katakana. In this case, however, political intention overturned and\ntwisted the established On-reading _doku_ , i.e., there is no consistent rule\napplying to similar instances.\n\nThere is even more below the surface of this issue. Why was the reading\ntwisted and the character 独 with a _beast classifier_ chosen and not a\nharmless character like 都 _to_ or 度, 土, 戸 which are all read _do_ in Japan? To\nreally understand the political intention and East Asian country naming policy\none often has to go beyond rote vocabulary memorization and have a look at the\nrarely explained ideology behind. The country naming policy of Japan and other\nEast Asian countries is originally based on the Chinese/East Asian 華夷思想 _Huáyí\nSīxiăng (J. Kai Shisô):Thought that the own culture is superior and contempt\nof others regarded as_ 夷 _retarded Uncivilized or ‘animals’ (and vermin) below\nhuman beings_ (also 中華思想 _Zhōnghuá Sīxiăng (J. Chûka Shisô): Superior Land In\nThe Middle Ideology_ ). If you’re in Japan, best look up these terms in\nencyclopedias of your local or university library. East Asians, intellectuals\nor other, however, usually are silent and do not openly inform about this\nstate policy. With the Japanese and Korean choice of 独, this kind of naming\ntoday continues only with the naming of the _Germans_ , their country, and\ntheir language. Certainly, diplomats of the German-speaking countries should\nwork towards a decent naming. The 犭 _beast classifier_ is traditionally used\nto name inimical peoples or countries one wants to put down as outsiders.\n\nTake e.g. the name character for the Mongols up into Japan’s Edo period. As in\n濛犭虎 _Môko: Mongol(s)_ , the 犭 _beast classifier_ was added to the character 虎\n_ko: Tiger_ for further ‘beastification’ of their whole people. This\nideological addendum here has no influence on the pronunciation. Compare e.g.\nthis use in the ukiyoe series _Kôso Goichidai Ryakuzu_ (1831) of Utagawa\nKuniyoshi) as retaliation for their attacks on Japan in the thirteenth\ncentury. While in this case the _beast classifier_ can be removed without\nchange of pronunciation, in the choice of 猶 _Yû: trick, scheme_ for the _Jews_\nin East Asia and Japan dropped all of a sudden after WWII it cannot. Here\nagain it also is not just the otherwise often relatively harmless pride for\nthe culture of one’s own realm, but the deliberate despite of others as beasts\nand treatment as outsiders. Understanding this is a matter of study of East\nAsian thought and history. Note that all these examples were established\nbefore the world wars. This is not sheer coincidence: The usage of the 犭\n_beast classifier_ started during China’s Warring States period 2500 years ago\nand therefore naturally breathes and sows aggression. I.e. in this case as as\nin others you cannot separate the pronunciation and ideology of Chinese\ncharacters! I hope that after full two years the question is now answered to\nyour satisfaction.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2016-07-14T07:01:28.820", "id": "36648", "last_activity_date": "2016-07-14T07:01:28.820", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "16106", "parent_id": "15588", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "No, there is no silent ん. But the \"length\" of ん can be very short, because ん\nsounds a lot like single consonant 'N' (or 'M') without a vowel. Other\nJapanese letters have a vowel, like 'かKA', 'しSI', 'ずZU', 'のNO'.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-25T18:19:46.687", "id": "15590", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-25T18:19:46.687", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5228", "parent_id": "15589", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "There is no silent ん. As senshin noted, ん + vowel might not _sound_ like the ん\nis there, but it really is. Another good example is 範囲 _han'i_. It's a softer\nsound than the /ng/ in the middle of _singing_ , but don't let that fool you.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-26T00:30:01.677", "id": "15598", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-26T00:30:01.677", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "15589", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "**General comment**\n\nIf you are a learner then you are still training your ears to pick up sounds\nnot in your own language. I was told one of the sounds most commonly misheard\nby foreign ears is the \"t\" in 自転車 which most of us hear as \"d\". (According to\na comment & link below, many people do say \"d\" but either way, even as I type\n自転車 now I subconsciously type a \"d\" and only realise when the wrong kanji come\nup.)\n\nGiven that none of the other posts agree with you, it sounds like these\npeople, like me, can hear the ん but that is not to say your ears are playing\ntricks on you:\n\n**ん followed by \"vowels\" and \"near-vowels\"**\n\nWhen ん is followed by a vowel or near-vowel type of sound, which I think\napplies in all your examples, it is also one the more difficult sounds to say\nas well as hear, and the two activities are very closely related. I still\nstruggle to pronounce 任意 passably. Another difficult word is 禁煙. After a while\nI worked out that there was \"y\"-type of sound in many of these words and by\ninserting a small \"y\", I found Japanese were more likely to recognise them in\nmy speech.\n\nLikewise, in the case of 税金を the を is generally accepted as \"wo\" in roman\nletters and the combination of the \"n\" and the \"w\" is giving rise to a\ndifferent sound from what you expect to hear.\n\nThe linguists and native speakers on this site may have a different view about\nthis \"y\" and can explain the origins better than me. I think its roots go back\nto the \"yi\" and \"ye\" sounds no longer recognised in standard 平仮名. But, given\nthat the English speaking world calls the currency \"Yen\", and than is pretty\nclose to what I hear when people say ３千円 or一万円, I thinks its a good \"working\nrule\".\n\n**Other nuances**\n\nThere maybe other differences or subtle nuances as to how ん is pronounced for\ndifferent words not captured by 平仮名. The \"m\" sound in 日本橋 comes to mind\nalthough that is not so subtle. It also worth mentioning that some say the ん\nsound can be closer to the \"n\" in \"stung\" rather than in \"stun\".\n\nPitch is another very obvious example of something not captured in the writing\nbut if the language came before the writing system then it must be inevitable\nthat that system has pragmatic approximations.\n\nI suppose these approximations could also have a strong influence on how the\nlanguage is spoken but that is outside scope of your question and the real\nlinguists could tell us more.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-26T00:42:29.510", "id": "15599", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-29T15:25:59.903", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-29T15:25:59.903", "last_editor_user_id": "1556", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "15589", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "ん has different pronunciations(allophones) depending on surrounding context.\n\n * [m] before /p/, /b/ and /m/\n * [n] before /d/, /t/, and /n/\n * [ŋ] (What some might know as \"ng\") before [k] and [ɡ].\n * [ɴ] at the end of prosodic units. This is close to [ŋ] but pronounced further down in the throat.\n * Before vowels, /j/,/w/,/r/,/s/,/z/ and /h/, it is pronounced as a nasalized version of the preceding vowel.\n\nThis varies slightly based on speaker and register, but works as a general\nguideline. According to this, your example 税金を /ze:kiɴo/ would be pronounced\n\n> [~iĩo]\n\nHowever, the nasality of the nasal vowels often tends to spread to the\nsurrounding vowels by a phenomenon called \"nasal assimilation\". This causes\nthe pronunciation to become\n\n> [~ĩ:õ]\n\nLikewise, はんい would become\n\n> [hã:ĩ]\n\nYou mention in a comment that you don't hear anything nasal in it, but that\nmight be because you're not used to listening for nasal vowels.\n\nFinally, just to illustrate that nasal assimilation isn't a concept as alien\nas you might expect, it's quite common in English too. For example, the word\n\"can't\" is commonly pronounced [kã:t].", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-28T00:50:46.483", "id": "15625", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-28T00:56:40.583", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-28T00:56:40.583", "last_editor_user_id": "1073", "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "15589", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

[ { "body": "切れる【きれる】 can be used as a suffix to indicate an end to something. In this\ncase, it's appended to 死に to form 死に切れる, which indicates that something ends\nwhen it dies.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-25T23:32:22.130", "id": "15595", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-26T03:56:23.290", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-26T03:56:23.290", "last_editor_user_id": "4914", "owner_user_id": "4914", "parent_id": "15594", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "In this context, きれる does not mean \"to be cut\", but rather attaches to the 連用形\n(-i form) of a verb and means \"to be able to completely [verb]\". cf. the EDICT\nentry for 切れる:\n\n> (suf,v1) (16) to be able to do completely\n\nWhen used in this sense, きれる is typically written in kana rather than as 切れる.\n\nSo, we have 死にきれる (that's the verb 死ぬ, not the noun 死 + particle に) = \"to be\nable to die completely\" or, more or less equivalently, \"to be completely\ndead\", which maps onto \"to be exterminated\" pretty well.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-25T23:32:49.247", "id": "15596", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-25T23:57:54.543", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-25T23:57:54.543", "last_editor_user_id": "3437", "owner_user_id": "3437", "parent_id": "15594", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "In addition to what you've got listed there's also:\n\n * わけが分からない, indicating that you don't know why something is happening\n * もうしわけない／もうしわけありません, which is a formal way of apologizing (literally translated, it means \"there is no excuse [for what happened]\")", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-26T02:16:17.803", "id": "15601", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-26T02:16:17.803", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4914", "parent_id": "15600", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "If this is a programming question, it belongs on Stack Overflow. I'm going to\nassume it's a linguistic question for now, however, based on the graphics.\n\nOf the two examples, option 1 is preferred. The primary reason for this is\nthat while most Japanese words written in kanji have readings that correspond\nto specific characters, there are several words for which this is not the case\ndue to _[gikun](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gikun#Gikun)_. For example:\n\n * 大人【おとな】\n * 今日【きょう】\n * 今朝【けさ】\n * 山手線【やまのてせん】\n\nThe short of it is that breaking them apart for each character can suggest an\nassociation where it doesn't exist, and using one style consistently is\ngenerally preferable.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-26T03:55:18.460", "id": "15603", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-26T05:13:11.130", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-26T05:13:11.130", "last_editor_user_id": "4914", "owner_user_id": "4914", "parent_id": "15602", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "「フレーミングミス」?\n\nIn normal conversation you'd say 「(足が)切れてる。」or「(頭が)切れちゃった」.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-26T15:54:31.747", "id": "15609", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-26T15:54:31.747", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15604", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "A million years ago, when I first came to Japan, an American guy, who at that\ntime had been here decades, told me that, \"In Japanese, there is no concept of\ncommunication separate from the people involved.\" I think he was overstating\nthe idea, but coming from an English speaking perspective, it does shed light\non the issue you're talking about.\n\nIn English, we can say, \"I've never had a fish as delicious as _that_!\" Taken\nin complete isolation from any other context, this sentence contains no\nconcept of the type of dialogue where it might be taking place. The word\n\"that\" does not contain that information. And, in English, we don't really\ncare. It's all about the fish.\n\nHowever, in Japanese, it's not cool to just leave out an assumption of who the\nspeaker and audience are. You _have to_ have some model when speaking of the\nkind of dialogue that is taking place. When speaking of the \"deliciousness\" of\nthe fish, even though it's an ethereal aspect of the fish, it's still in\nrelation to people. Maybe it's bound to an physical fish, or to someone's\nopinion of a fish, but the concept nonetheless will always have a position\nrelative to two entities that are communicating about it.\n\nSo, I think the issue you're having is trying to see how `「こ・そ・あ」`words point\n_to_ things, without considering where they're pointing _from_. You're asking\nwhich of the three forms applies to a particular target, like the taste of a\nfish, but there is no one form like there is in English. In Japanese, maybe\nalways, whether it's known, proposed, assumed, guessed, or however else you\nget there, you have to have a conceptual model of both sides of the\ncommunication taking place.\n\n* * *\n\n_(In addressing concerns in the comments, I'm going to take a rather avant-\ngarde route to explaining what I'm talking about, and I am up front about the\nfact that I am using the attempt to answer this question as a way of helping\nboost my own understanding, so if someone thinks this is wrong in some way,\nplease do be constructive in your criticism.)_\n\nImage you're an author writing a book. You write a scene where your main\ncharacter, Betty Hughenot, enters a room where all the guests of a party are\ngathered and having a lively discussion. Just as she enters, the last sentence\nthat happens to be spoken is Joshua McDougal exclaiming, \"... I've never had a\nfish as delicious as that!\" As soon as Betty enters, though, the crowd turns\nto greet her, forgetting about Joshua, because she is a renown wit and\neveryone wants to hear what she's going to talk about. The story continues on,\nJoshua's remark is never referenced again, it was just something he happened\nto be saying when Betty opened the door.\n\nNow, your book goes on to be a huge success, and it will be translated into\nmany languages, including Japanese. When the Japanese translator has to\ntranslate Joshua McDougal's line of dialogue, she will go with:\n\n> {こんな、そんな、あんな}に美味しい魚は食べたことがない！\n\nThis is the ambiguity I think you're talking about. While Tim's very\ninformative answer is correct about some factors that help you select `こんな`,\n`そんな`, or `あんな`, the choice is always predicated on knowing enough about the\noverall context that the choice is pretty much decided for you. However, in\nthis case, we don't have that extra context to work with.\n\nThe translator must select one, but which one? The determining factors that\nwould ordinarily tell us which to choose have happened before Betty entered\nthe room, and are outside of the narrative. Maybe Joshua McDougal had just\ntaken a bite of a fish present in the room, in which case `こんな` would work.\nMaybe someone else in the room just finished eating a fish and was crying\nbecause it was so good, and Joshua, seeing that person's expression, remarked\non it, thus `そんな` would be right. Or, maybe in the room there is a painting on\nthe wall depicting a fish being handed down to a chef from an angel descended\nfrom heaven, and, looking at the painting and commenting on it wryly, `あんな`\ncould fit.\n\nMy point is just that you, as an author in English, didn't have to wrangle\nwith an exact decision on how it is that Joshua came to be saying that when\nBetty entered the room, because in English, \"as that\" stands alone as being a\nuniversal designation pointing at the deliciousness of the fish. Some fish,\nsomewhere.\n\nA translator almost certainly would avoid the problem altogether with an\nentirely different sentence structure. But, in keeping with the spirit of the\nquestion, let's assume the Japanese translator _has_ to use one of the `あ・そ・こ`\nwords, like the sentence you provide. In doing so, that translator _has to_\nchoose some model of where delineations are of in-group, out-group, and\nexternal to both, for the context of the sentence.\n\nLet's say that the translator asks her publisher boss to contact the author\nabout what exactly Joshua meant, but you've never thought about it that much,\nbecause your story is about Betty, and that statement was just filler. So, you\nsay it's okay for the translator to pick whichever one she likes. The\ntranslator rolls a dice and goes with `そんな`. Now, every Japanese person\nreading that translated book will think that Betty walked in on Joshua\nobserving someone else eating fish, or something like that. An impression\npeople didn't necessarily get with the English book.\n\nIt's a subtle, but extant, difference. In Japanese, everything(?) is assumed\nto have some relationship to a speaker and a listener, and that is built into\nthe language.\n\nI hope that helps make clear what I mean, and if someone thinks I've got some\npart of this wrong, please do join in the discussion, I just ask that you do\nso in the spirit of helping educate, not merely disagreement. Thanks!", "comment_count": 12, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-28T03:48:13.737", "id": "15628", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-30T06:48:16.647", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-30T06:48:16.647", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "119", "parent_id": "15607", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "The general rules for ko/so/a words in abstract situations are:\n\nそ-words usually refer to what was said previously \nこ-words are often used for matters of emotional importance to speaker \nあ-words are used in personal statements to refer to remembered things\n\nThese are illustrated in the following examples:\n\n> 港について船を降りた。そこで母が待っていた。\n>\n> この曲は始めのメロディが好きだ。ここはなんど聞いても飽きない\n>\n> 子どものころ、近くの公園でよく遊んだ。あの公園はまだ残っているだろうか。\n\nNote: The choice depends on the context (文脈), given in the examples above in\nthe previous sentence. In your examples we cannot say which is the correct\nchoice because you have not given the previous sentence.\n\n_Reference: JLPT 新完全マスターN３文法_\n\n**Additional comment on other rules**\n\nI think the above rules are needed for more complicated reading. I have seen\nthe other rules you mention in your comment used for conversations so perhaps\nthese are best looked at in context of spoken Japanese. I find too many rules\ncan be paralysing so my suggestion is to take a few “model examples” such as\nthe following, and then try apply those rules:\n\n> A: あれ、持っているの？ \n> B: あれ、あ、もっている\n>\n> C: 昨日、マークさんに会いました \n> D: あの人はずいぶんやせましたね\n>\n> E: 雨がよく降りますね。これは台風の影響ですよ\n>\n> F: 風邪をひいて、頭が痛いんです \n> G: それはいけませんね\n>\n> H: 昨日、車でびわ湖へ行って来たよ \n> J: その湖に魚がいたかい？\n>\n> K: いつアメリカへ行ったんですか \n> M: あれは去年８月でした\n\n_**Alternative rules [related general rules そ、こ、あ, given above]**_ \n(i) Distance can be physical or psychological. \n(ii) So-words can be used for things just mentioned by one of the speakers.\n[そ] \n(iii) Ko-words: The speaker feels closest to items described with ko-words [こ]\nand furthest from a-words [あ] \n(iv) A-words can be used to refer to something someone said or did in the past\nbut both speakers must have previous knowledge of it. [あ]\n\nApplication to above model conversations:\n\nA&B: (iv) \nC&D: (iv) - Both have previous knowledge of Mark \nE: (iii) - E uses kore to refer to “this thing that I am talking about” \nF&G: (ii) \nH&J: (ii) – “J” does not have “previous knowledge” to recall because he was\nnot there. \nK&M: (iv)\n\nNote: We have been focused on the application of ko/so/a words. The\napplication of kore/koko/kochira/konna etc may also require practice.\n\n_References: Based on explanations and examples in \"The Dictionary of Basic\nJpse Grammar\" and \"An Introduction to Advanced Spoken Japanese\"._", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-28T05:59:26.720", "id": "15631", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-04T15:16:56.307", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "15607", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "[Glancing on alc](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=slurred%20speech&ref=sa), it\nseems you can describe someone's words as 不明瞭 (as in 不明瞭な言葉・発語) or use the\nexpression ろれつがまわらない, which is basically \"to speak inarticulately.\" edict\nincludes \"slurring\" in its definition of this.\n\n[This page](http://www.naoru.com/noukousoku.htm) uses the phrase ろれつがまわらない in\nreference to stroke victims.\n\nParticularly this example seems to match that more medical sort of meaning:\n\n> If you have a loss of coordination and slurred speech in the cold outside,\n> you should come inside right away. \n> 寒い戸外にいてもし筋肉運動が失調し、言葉が不明瞭になってきたら、すぐに室内に入るべきである。\n\nDiscussion with user @Chocolate in chat has led me to believe that 吃る, while\nindicative of a similar speech phenomenon, is used more for\nstuttering/stammering in the sense of getting caught on the initial sounds of\nwords and _not_ the unintelligible stream of sound that slurred speech tends\nto be.\n\nNevertheless I am not 100% sure. My answer is based only on research and not\nprior knowledge.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-26T17:37:34.643", "id": "15611", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-28T00:32:41.203", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-28T00:32:41.203", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "15610", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "`[吃]{ども}る` means \"to stutter\", although I don't know if that completely\noverlaps with \"slurred speech\", or if it necessarily implies anything like a\nstroke, concussion, etc.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-26T20:15:21.837", "id": "15612", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-26T20:15:21.837", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "15610", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "I would like to add the following two terms to the existing answers.\n\n> 言語障害 \n> speech impediment\n>\n> [構語障害](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/homemed/11080/m0u/) \n> [dysarthria](http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-\n> conditions/dysarthria/basics/definition/con-20035008)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-27T02:07:20.317", "id": "15616", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-28T01:10:37.867", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-28T01:10:37.867", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "15610", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "How about:\n\n> [言葉]{ことば}or[発音]{はつおん}or言っていること が [聞]{き}き[取]{と}りづらいor聞き取りにくい \n> or \n> [滑舌]{かつぜつ}が[悪]{わる}い (Not good at speaking smoothly and clearly)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-27T16:30:54.843", "id": "15622", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-28T15:43:40.050", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-28T15:43:40.050", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15610", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "I think 「二番目」 just means \"second\" as \"second in order\" which is not really a\ncounter of people but a way of expressing order, including order of people.\nThe king first calls a servant and then calls the second (in order servant).\n\nQuickly looking in the internet, I found some other examples of applying 「二番目」\nto people:\n\n> **二番目の女** から本命彼女になる方法 ([link](http://slism.net/love/how-to-become-first-\n> woman.html))\n>\n> **二番目の男** でもいい、と告白されました。 ([link](http://www.ca-\n> girlstalk.jp/talk/detail/282748))\n>\n> **二番目の子**\n> が生まれてから、上の子と接する時間が少なくなった私。([link](http://www.shimajiro.co.jp/kosodate/ikuji/resistance/hahakodomo/kawaii/post_470.shtml))", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-26T22:04:06.753", "id": "15614", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-26T22:17:30.220", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "5041", "parent_id": "15613", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "I understand `~たところで` as \"even if you try ... it's not possible that...\". As\nsuch, I don't think it's really about intention, it's more about an impossible\nsituation (though maybe it can be argued that the impossible outcome is the\nintention).\n\nYour sentence might be finished with 「もう間に合わない」- making it on time is not\npossible despite the effort:\n\n> 走ったところで、もう間に合わない。 (Even if we run, we won't make it on time).\n\n* * *\n\nAs for `するところだった`, I understand it as \"something almost happen/didn't happen,\nit was close\". It's often used with phrases like\n「もうちょっとで」,「もう少しで」,「[危]{あや}うく([危]{あぶ}なく)」 to show that it was really close to\nsomething happening or not happening. There may be intention involved but it's\nnot the focus of this structure and sometimes the intention may be less clear.\nExamples might be:\n\n> もう少しで乗り遅れるところだった。 \n> I almost missed the train. (It was my intention to board that train.)\n>\n> もう少しで階段から落ちるところだった。 \n> I almost fell down the stairs. (Here the intention is less clear. People\n> generally don't want to fall down the stairs but it's a rather \"passive\"\n> intention.)\n\nIn the case of your sentence, I understand it as:\n\n> お伝えするのを忘れるところでした。 \n> I almost forgot to pass the message. (I wanted to do it. I almost forgot\n> but I just remembered.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-27T12:23:54.437", "id": "15619", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-27T15:12:52.190", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-27T15:12:52.190", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5041", "parent_id": "15617", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "They could all be translated to 'when' in English but:\n\nAとB in this case indicates that A first happens, then immediately after B\nhappens. This is the case in your example!\n\nたら can have more uncertainty in it, i.e. it can be used to express sentences\nwhere you'd use 'if' in English.\n\nI think of とき as 'the time when' or 'everytime when'.\n\nJust offering my two cents here. I am still learning too!:) I'm not good\nenough to provide the lengthy grammatical replies you usually get on this\nsite, so sorry if it's a bit short. Anyway, at this level I find shorter\nanswers more helpful. Hope you agree:)", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-27T16:08:16.960", "id": "15621", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-28T16:52:27.297", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-28T16:52:27.297", "last_editor_user_id": "4157", "owner_user_id": "4157", "parent_id": "15620", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "### Causality\n\nIn broad terms, I've noticed three kinds of constructions that loosely\ncorrelate to \"if / then\". The main differences between these appear to be\ndifferences in emphasis and causal relationship.\n\n * 行くと XX \nTells us _whenever_ someone goes, XX happens. XX is an inevitable consequence\nof the verb.\n\n * 行けば XX \nTells us that _only if_ someone goes, XX happens. The verb is a precondition\nof XX.\n\n * 行ったら XX \nSeems to be the most neutral. If [verb], then XX; or possibly, after [verb],\nthen XX. This is less causally strict, and seems a bit more casual in that\nrespect: \"if you happen to go, or on the off chance that you go, then XX\".\n\n### Timing\n\nVarious constructions are used to describe the order of events. Among these,\n\n * 行くと XX \nThis still has strong causal overtones, so this is probably best glossed as\n\"whenever [verb], XX\".\n\n * 行ったら \n * 行ってから \nThese two are often regarded as synonymous when describing the order of\nevents. One teacher of mine even suggested that -たら was a contraction of -てから,\nthough it bears noting that Shogakukan, Daijirin, and others state that the\n-たら ending is the potential form of past auxiliary た, itself a contraction of\nたる, a contraction of て + ある. \nThe basic sense is \"[verb] happens, and then ...\"\n\n * 行くとき \nLiterally, \"the time when [subject] goes\". This more specifically refers to\nthe point in time when the [verb] happens.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-03T22:05:21.367", "id": "16287", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-03T22:37:00.643", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-03T22:37:00.643", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "15620", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "「ことになる」 means \"it has been decided/it has been arranged\". The focus is on the\nfact that the decision is not made by the person being the topic of the\nsentence but by someone else (e.g. employer, parents).\n\nFor example:\n\n> 留学することになりました。 \n> It has been decided that I will study abroad.\n\nYou passage can be thus translated as:\n\n> 森田さんは、ヴァージニア州立大学を卒業してから日本の映画の会社に就職することになっている。 \n> It has been decided that Morita-san will get employment at a Japanese movie\n> company after graduation from Virginia State University.\n\n* * *\n\nNote that there is a similar structure 「ことにする」 which conveys the meaning that\nthe decision is made by yourself. For example:\n\n> 留学することにしました。 \n> I have decided to study abroad.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-28T00:23:10.650", "id": "15624", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-28T00:23:10.650", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5041", "parent_id": "15623", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "~~In modern Japanese~~ , honorific verbs are not further conjugated into\ninvolitional action*（自発）, passive or potential. If any, it's double honorific.\nSo is your example.\n\nDouble honorific is often reputed wrong, but actually it had been used for\ncenturies and is still used today. Some people (with a certain political view)\nstarted to insist we should no longer use it after WW2.\n\n * In theory, involitional action, passive and potential could connect to honorific conjugations but people no longer use it today. Many people will consider it even a grammatical error.\n\n(* examples of involitional action: 泣けた・泣けてきた： burst into tears)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-28T08:52:04.997", "id": "15633", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-29T06:22:53.287", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-29T06:22:53.287", "last_editor_user_id": "4092", "owner_user_id": "4092", "parent_id": "15626", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "> Is the second form a contraction of the first?\n\nYes. 行かされる is a contraction of 行かせられる. (That said, I'm not sure how this came\nabout etymologically.)\n\n> Can all 五段 verbs follow this pattern? For example, could 読ませられる be replaced\n> with 読まされる?\n\nYes. All 五段 verbs may follow this pattern. Thus, 読まされる may be used as the\ncausative passive form of 読む.\n\n> If this usage is due to a contraction, is there a similar pattern for 一段\n> verbs? For example, would 出させられる be able to be replaced with an alternate\n> version?\n\nNo: while it might _seem_ like you could contract 食べさせられる to *食べさされる, the\nlatter form is not used; i.e. there is not a similar pattern for 一段 verbs.\nHence, the causative passive of 出る【でる】 must be 出させられる【でさせられる】, not\n*出さされる【でさされる】.\n\nNote that the irregular verbs 来る【くる】 and する also do not admit a contracted\nform of the causative passive - these remain 来させられる【こさせられる】 and させられる,\nrespectively.\n\n> Which usage is used most frequently?\n\nWhile this will vary depending on context, broadly speaking, the contracted\nform is more common, in general. (At least, according to a native-speaker\nteacher of mine - unfortunately, I don't have a better source for this\nassertion.)\n\n> Is there any difference in nuance between the two?\n\nAccording to [this article](http://home.alc.co.jp/db/owa/jpn_npa?sn=74), yes:\nthere is a difference in nuance between the two. The article uses the\nfollowing two sentences to illustrate the difference between the two forms of\nthe causative passive:\n\n> ×彼の話には笑わせられた。 \n> 彼の話には笑わされた。\n\nThe first sentence is identified as unacceptable because the form 笑わせられた\nimplies that the speaker was actually forced to laugh, while the form 笑わされた\nmerely implies that came to laugh as a result of some event or happening.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-28T04:49:21.810", "id": "15630", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-28T05:35:58.657", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-28T05:35:58.657", "last_editor_user_id": "3437", "owner_user_id": "3437", "parent_id": "15627", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "More detail about how the causative and passive suffixes evolved.\n\nThe causative ( _-a_ )せる arose from just plain old す ( _su_ ), itself the\norigin of the ubiquitous modern verb する ( _suru_ , \"to do\"). The original\nmeaning was \"to do [something]; to make XX do [something]\" -- i.e., this\nserved as a causativizing or transitivizing suffix.\n\nMeanwhile, the passive ( _-a_ )れる similarly arose from just plain old る ( _ru_\n). The original meaning was \"[something] happens\" -- i.e., this functioned as\na passivizing or intransitivizing suffix.\n\nIn both cases, the root monosyllabic 助動詞 ( _jodōshi_ , auxiliary verb) had the\nclassical Japanese conjugation pattern called 下二段 ( _shimo nidan_ , \"lower\ntwo-step\"). The \"lower\" part means the conjugated verb ending alternates\nbetween _u_ and _e_ , contrasting with 上 ( _kami_ , \"upper\") verbs that\nalternate between _u_ and _i_. As Japanese developed, the root suffix was\nlater conjugated into the 未然形 ( _mizenkei_ , incomplete form) of せ or れ, with\nthe verbalizing suffix る added onto the end again.\n\nFor modern 五段 ( _godan_ , \"five step\") verbs (so called for the five different\nvowels that can appear on the end of the verb stem during conjugation), the\nold root form す can still persist for the causative, resulting in valid\ngrammatical forms like いかす for いかせる, or のます for のませる.\n\n(Note that sometimes the resulting causative form might sound identical to\nanother verb, such as 置かす _okasu_ \"to make someone put something somewhere\",\nwhich sounds identical to 犯す _okasu_ \"to violate, to rape\". In such cases, the\nfuller causative form of 置かせる _okaseru_ is probably preferable.)\n\nAs such, 行かす is not actually a contraction of 行かせる, and is instead the older\nform.\n\n* * *\n\nThe causative and passive endings attach to the 未然形 ( _mizenkei_ ,\n[irrealis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irrealis_mood) or incomplete form) of\nthe verb stem.\n\nFor _godan_ verbs, the _mizenkei_ is the stem form ending in _-a_ , such as 行か\n( _ika_ ) for 行く ( _iku_ ), 積ま ( _tsuma_ ) for 積む ( _tsumu_ ), etc. The\npassive in classical Japanese was just る for _yodan_ verbs (the precursor to\nmodern _godan_ verbs), developing later into れる, by the same _mizenkei_ + る\npattern described below for 出る ( _ideru_ ). Similarly, the causative was just\nす, developing later into せる as _mizenkei_ + す.\n\nFor _nidan_ (only found in classical Japanese) and _ichidan_ verbs, where the\n_mizenkei_ stem is the same as the _ren'yōkei_ (continuative) stem, the\npassive in classical Japanese was らる, developing later into られる. The causative\nwas さす, developing later into させる.\n\n* * *\n\nAs an aside, the す・る dichotomy for transitive / intransitive persists in\nnumerous modern verb pairs, such as 出る ( _deru_ , to go out) and 出す ( _dasu_ ,\nto put something out). These two verbs originate from the now-obsolete root\nverb 出づ ( _idzu_ , possibly _idu_ in even older stages of the language). This\nverb was also a _shimo nidan_ verb. The classical passive or explicitly\nintransitive form of a verb is [stem in _mizenkei_ ] + る. For _idzu_ as a\n_shimo nidan_ verb, this would be _ide_ + _ru_ , forming _ideru_. Over time,\nthe initial _i-_ dropped off, producing modern _deru_.\n\nThe causative or explicitly transitive form of _idzu_ **should** be [stem in\n_mizenkei_ ] + す, or _ide_ + _su_ = _idesu_ , but this pattern is slightly\nirregular and produced _idasu_ instead, later shortening to _dasu_. (The\n_shimo nidan_ causative / transitive pairs like this that I've looked at all\ntake _-eru_ and _-asu_ , instead of the expected _-eru_ and _-*esu_.)\n\nOther transitive / intransitive pairs like this include:\n\n * 増える / 増やす ( _fueru_ / _fuyasu_ ), \"to grow or increase by itself\" /\"to make something grow or increase\" ( _shimo nidan_ root)\n * 溶ける / 溶かす ( _tokeru_ / _tokasu_ ), \"to melt or dissolve by itself\" / \"to make something melt or dissolve\" ( _shimo nidan_ root)\n * 漬かる / 漬かす ( _tsukaru_ / _tsukasu_ ), \"to be in a liquid; to become pickled\" / \"to stick something into a liquid; to pickle something\" ( _godan_ root -- つく -- regular passive / causative formation, with idiomatic development over time)\n\n* * *\n\n**TL;DR** : Long story shorter, non- _godan_ verbs cannot take the shorter\ncausative form of す ( _su_ ) or the shorter passive form of る ( _ru_ ), due in\npart to historical development, and due in part to other related verb forms\nthat already take a bare す or る.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-13T00:51:36.730", "id": "15911", "last_activity_date": "2021-06-01T16:08:13.020", "last_edit_date": "2021-06-01T16:08:13.020", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "15627", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "@ハイドン and @senshin\n\nHi, I realize this is an old thread, but for anyone coming here for info,\nhere's a clarification about 五段 verbs (also called Group 1 verbs or U-verbs.)\n\n> > Can all 五段 verbs follow this pattern? For example, could 読ませられる be\n> replaced with 読まされる?\n\n> Yes. All 五段 verbs may follow this pattern. Thus, 読まされる may be used as the\n> causative passive form of 読む.\n\nAccording to both my Japanese teacher and my wife, who are both native\nJapanese, 五段 verbs ending in す do not follow this patter.\n\n> Ex: 話す = (O)話させられる (X)話 _ **ささ**_ れる\n\nThis may be due to the resultant double さ. It also seems to jibe with the fact\nthat 一段 verbs, 来る, and する also don't take the shorter ending. They all would\nhave a double さ as well, since the short version would come from the same base\nさせられる.\n\n> 食べる = (O)食べさせられる (X)食べ _ **ささ**_ れる\n\n> 来る = (O)来させられる (X)来 _ **ささ**_ れる\n\n> する = (O)されられる (X) _ **ささ**_ れる", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-02-05T20:30:26.327", "id": "98500", "last_activity_date": "2023-02-05T20:30:26.327", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "54337", "parent_id": "15627", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "You can use 降りる. User @Chocolate is also fond of 出る\n\n> 高速を降りる \n> 高速を出る\n\nYou can use these in the same way to express your idea of getting off of one\nform of expressway onto another.\n\n> 首都高を降りて高速(or whatever)に入る・乗る\n\nJust to address your original guesses:\n\n出発する is to depart, as in the place of origin.\n\n下車する is to get out of a car/vehicle.\n\n残す is to leave something in the same way that you might leave food uneaten.\n\n終了 is when something finishes.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-28T08:59:10.167", "id": "15634", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-28T09:39:06.717", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-28T09:39:06.717", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "15632", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 }, { "body": "\"get off the Shuto onto a \"proper\" expressway out of Tokyo, like the 中央道.\"\n\nIn this case, I'd also say:\n\n> 首都高を抜けて中央道に入る drive out of/through Shutokou and continue onto Chuoudou", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-29T02:36:49.660", "id": "15644", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-29T02:36:49.660", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "128", "parent_id": "15632", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I've heard the straight-up katakana ランニング used in this way before. The\nfollowing example sentence from 大辞泉 seems to support that as well:\n\n> 健康のため毎朝ランニングをする。\n\nHere are the definitions for ランニング and ジョギング, per 大辞林:\n\n> **ランニング** \n> 走ること。\n>\n> **ジョギング** \n> ゆっくり走ること。競走前のウォーミング-アップ，気分転換や健康のために行われる。\n\nBased on the definitions as written, it would appear that the same\ndistinctions between the two words are maintained in Japanese.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-28T11:23:13.540", "id": "15636", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-29T16:05:28.660", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "4914", "parent_id": "15635", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "For an opening to a \"support\" or service email, you can often start off with\n`いつもお世話になっております` to affirm your \"business\" relationship with them (even if you\ndon't really have one).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-28T17:05:35.423", "id": "15640", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-28T17:05:35.423", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "15637", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "I think anything will do for informal emails, but definitely not 拝啓 or 早々 as\nthese are only used in snail mails. Something like どうも or 元気にしてる？ would be\nfine.\n\nIn a business setting it's much more complicated (I would even say bizarre),\nand you should check with your colleagues as the format varies between\ncompanies or even projects (and some people take offence when the emails don't\nconform to them). Here are some general resources on the subject\n([link](http://www.sweet.cside5.com/businessletter/2.htm),\n[link](http://www.aa.alpha-net.ne.jp/mamos/about/mailhows.html),\n[link](http://www.tku.ac.jp/~densan/blog/2007/12/post_23.html))", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-30T10:56:39.157", "id": "15656", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-30T10:56:39.157", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "15637", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "As you say, `拝啓` and `早々` are too formal for emails.\n\nOpening with `いつもお世話になっております` is appropriate for the emails of requesting\nsomething if you belong to the company and write as an employee of the\ncompany, but I think it's too formal for an email to friends.\n\nI suggest following format:\n\n```\n\n [to name]さん、こんにちは\n \n [from name]です。\n \n [contents]\n \n よろしくお願いします。\n \n [signature]\n \n```\n\nClosing with `よろしくお願いします` is natural for the email of requesting something.\nAnd it is polite but not too formal. If you want the more formal closing, you\ncan say `ご検討のほど、よろしくお願いします` or `よろしくお願い致します`.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-01T03:49:56.583", "id": "15673", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-01T03:49:56.583", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5264", "parent_id": "15637", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "聞いてた sounds like \"Are you listening?\" 聞いた is closer to \"Did you hear about\nthat?\"", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-28T17:47:38.027", "id": "15641", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-28T17:47:38.027", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5112", "parent_id": "15638", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I think both is OK but なんどもあります sounds more common.\n\nたくさん also goes more natural with small things happening a lot, like\n転{ころ}ぶ、失敗{しっぱい}する.\n\nFor example:\n\n> 何度{なんど}も失敗{しっぱい}しました <- \"I failed many times\"\n>\n> たくさん失敗{しっぱい}しました <- Same meaning but each failure sounds more numerous and\n> less severe\n>\n> 何度{なんど}も成功{せいこう}しました <- \"I succeeded many times\"\n>\n> たくさん成功{せいこう}しました <- \"I succeeded a lot of times\", which sounds a bit strange", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-30T10:36:26.563", "id": "15655", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-30T10:41:08.190", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-30T10:41:08.190", "last_editor_user_id": "5041", "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "15643", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "It's short for `の家{うち}`.\n\nYou will normally see the abbreviation `んち`:\n\n> (1a) 俺 **の家** に来い。 \n> (1b) 俺 **んち** に来い。 \n> (2a) お前 **の家** に行きたいなぁ。 \n> (2b) お前 **んち** に行きたいなぁ。\n\nBut in cases where there is already an ん before the abbreviation (like おばあちゃん\nends in ん in this case) we just see `ち`:\n\n> (3a) タモリさん **の家** に行きたい。 \n> (3b) タモリさ **んち** に行きたい。 \n> (4a) 明日麻美ちゃん **の家** に行く。 \n> (4b) 明日麻美ちゃ **んち** に行く。\n\nSo your sentences means:\n\n> おばあちゃん **の家** から帰ってきたら夏休みも後半って感じするなー", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-29T20:06:46.797", "id": "15647", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-29T20:13:22.897", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-29T20:13:22.897", "last_editor_user_id": "3010", "owner_user_id": "3010", "parent_id": "15645", "post_type": "answer", "score": 22 } ]

[ { "body": "I think Jisho.org is incorrect on that one. 不正直 would not mean \"dishonor\". \nI'd translate rather as `Dying is dishonest`, or `To die is to be dishonest`,\nbut it'd be a weird sentence.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-30T10:19:42.977", "id": "15653", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-30T10:19:42.977", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "15649", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "引っ【ひっ】張って【ぱって】離す【はなす】と更新【こうしん】(します。)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-30T10:18:42.180", "id": "15652", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-30T10:25:49.160", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-30T10:25:49.160", "last_editor_user_id": "4914", "owner_user_id": "5081", "parent_id": "15650", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "Facebook app (for Android) has it as:\n\n> 下{した}へスライドして更新{こうしん}...\n\n", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-30T11:33:50.697", "id": "15657", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-30T11:33:50.697", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5041", "parent_id": "15650", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 }, { "body": "Gmail app for Android:\n\n> 下にスワイプして更新\n\n", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-30T20:52:06.547", "id": "15670", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-30T20:52:06.547", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "15650", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

[ { "body": "According to [this](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%9B%B7%E9%96%80) article\non Wikipedia, the name 雷門 first appeared in senryū (川柳) poetry of Edo period\nbut it's not clear how it came to be used.\n\nIt's also interesting that the official name of the gate is full on-reading\n風{ふう}雷{らい}神{じん}門{もん} and it comes from the two statues of Shinto gods 風神{ふうじん}\nand 雷神{らいじん} which stand inside the gate. The official name is written at the\nback of the lantern.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-30T10:30:13.847", "id": "15654", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-30T10:30:13.847", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5041", "parent_id": "15651", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "作詞{さくし} on its own refers to the act of writing lyrics and not the person. It\nis being used to credit the lyricist but does not technically have that\nmeaning. Compare it to saying \"Lyrics: John Doe\" in English. \nNext you have 作曲{さっきょく}・編曲{へんきょく}, which is composition and arrangement. \nLast is 歌{うた}, and the singer is 山根{やまね}麻衣{まい}, or Mai Yamane.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-30T12:22:19.897", "id": "15661", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-05T05:23:25.347", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-05T05:23:25.347", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "15660", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "Looks like you're hearing it incorrectly. The phrase you want is\nお願{ねが}い致{いた}します. 致します is the humble form of します, so it's really just a more\npolite way to say お願いします.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-30T12:37:39.640", "id": "15663", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-30T12:37:39.640", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "15662", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "Would be helpful to see further context, but in this case I would interpret it\nas \"Documentation\". I would use the word 「ネット会議」to describe a web conference.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-30T14:20:55.323", "id": "15665", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-30T14:20:55.323", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5255", "parent_id": "15664", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "Ok, after a while I improved a little and could understand how to translate\nit.\n\nIt means \"Document sharing\".", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-10-30T04:55:29.270", "id": "19326", "last_activity_date": "2014-10-30T04:55:29.270", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "664", "parent_id": "15664", "post_type": "answer", "score": -2 }, { "body": "I don't think 資料共有 can be shortened into 資料共. In any occasion.\n\nActually I first read it as しりょうども; 資料 + 共 (ども: somewhat derrogative plural\nsuffix usually used only for people) which didn't make sense. I never thought\nof the word 共有 (きょうゆう) until you mentioned it, and I don't think anyone of\nJapanese native speakers would.\n\nThen what is this? Sorry I don't have an answer...", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-11-06T14:40:28.707", "id": "19397", "last_activity_date": "2014-11-06T14:40:28.707", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "7667", "parent_id": "15664", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "> as far as I can guess it's close to the second one here.\n>\n\n>>\n［副助］名詞、名詞に準じる語、副詞、活用語の終止形、助詞などに付く。それ以外にも適当なものがあるという気持ちを含めて、ある事柄を例示的に示す意を表す。…でも。「彼に―相談したらいい」「電話―してください」\n\nMaybe you're right.\n\nなり in this case describes that there's an available way you can choose\ndirectly, but it seems that you are still able to choose another way.\n\n * 「彼になり相談したらいい」 could be \"You may ask him (or another person.)\"\n * 「電話なりしてください」 could be \"Call me (or use another way to communicate with me).\"\n\n> (Your translation) we have to think about fight preparations and the way to\n> win.\n\nThis なり doesn't mean \"and\". If I translated this phrase, it would be...\n\n> we have to think about the way to win **such as** fight preparation.\n\nBecause なり denotes a specific example as I explained above.\n\n* * *\n\nFYI, if this phrase contained two なり like this:\n\n> 戦う準備なり勝つ方法 **なり** を考えていかないといけないが…\n\nThis should be translated as\n\n> we have to think about fight preparations **or** the way to win (or other\n> things we need).", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-30T18:07:38.907", "id": "15667", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-30T18:07:38.907", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "5260", "parent_id": "15666", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "Your guess is correct.\n\nThe readings that end with -you were borrowed from southern China (possibly\nthrough Korea) in the 5th and 6th centuries. They are known as go-on 呉音.\n\nThe readings that end with -ei were borrowed from northern China during the\nTang dynasty, 7th - 9th centuries. They are known as kan-on 漢音.\n\nYou can find a table of go-on/kan-on sound changes\n[here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kan-on).", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-30T20:43:57.300", "id": "15669", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-30T20:49:02.020", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-30T20:49:02.020", "last_editor_user_id": "170", "owner_user_id": "170", "parent_id": "15668", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "All of the examples you cite rhyme (modulo tone) in Mandarin: 平 píng, 兵 bīng,\n明 míng, 京 jīng, 令 lìng. In fact the first four even rhyme exactly in Middle\nChinese (bjæŋ, pjæŋ, mjæŋ, and kjæŋ, respectively; all level tone), and the\nlast one is very close (leŋ + falling tone). In go-on, these rimes are\nreflected as -yau (or perhaps -yaũ), which become -yō in modern Japanese, and\nthe corresponding kan-on has -ei.\n\nIncidentally, the reason why 平 has a voiced initial in go-on is because it has\na voiced (= 全濁) initial in Middle Chinese as well. This is reflected in\nMandarin as the rising tone. As a general rule, Middle Chinese voiced initials\nbecome unvoiced in kan-on (and indeed, in most modern varieties of Chinese).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-01T00:24:42.287", "id": "15672", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-01T00:24:42.287", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "578", "parent_id": "15668", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "> what is the effect that the artist is trying to achieve?\n\nThe reason they often use complex kanji and ateji is quite simple, they might\nthink it's cool.\n\nThey seem to think they are viewed as better than other people if they appear\nto know a lot of complex words and idioms.\n\nPeople who write this kind of lyrics would say \"To express our delicate and\ncomplicated worldview, we had to use many of kanji\". But I think this is based\non the same idea.\n\nOn the other hand, it looks somewhat juvenile, at least not something\npreferred by a learned person. So most people who like this kind of lyrics\ncould be from younger generations, in their teens or 20s.\n\n> But of course natives are exposed to so much kanji, so can it be assumed\n> that they can handle pretty much any ateji or rare kanji thrown at them?\n\nBasically no.\n\nI think \"赤く腫れた目 **掠** れた **聲** \" or \" **微睡み** の淵で目蓋に **揺蕩う** \" is too\ndifficult for most of us to read properly (but we could read depending on its\ncontext) because you know, their kanji and yomigana are rarely used in our\nlife. We can see this sort of kanji only in novels with ruby(furigana). Yet\nabout ateji, such like [\"Diamond dust (てんしのささやき)\", \"幻想 (あした)\", \"音楽\n(メロディ)\"](http://kittttttan.web.fc2.com/7/glossary/7words), it's hard to\nimagine there're people who can read those words except for the lyrics writer.\n\n> using kanji unnecessarily comes across as either pretentious or overly\n> formal\n\nYes.\n\nUnnecessary kanji usage out of [Jo-yo kanji\ntable](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_j%C5%8Dy%C5%8D_kanji) looks like\nself-satisfaction from many people's view.\n\nEnglish, difficult kanji, yomigana, and ateji, we Japanese cannot read lyrics\nwithout help. Karaoke songs are accompanied by readable lyrics.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-01T06:30:22.867", "id": "15674", "last_activity_date": "2022-02-02T17:49:18.970", "last_edit_date": "2022-02-02T17:49:18.970", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "5260", "parent_id": "15671", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "You can use ガーデニングする (do gardening) for gardening.\n\nガーデニング is a generally used term in today's Japan.\n\nSo you can say...\n\n * 趣味の一つとして、ガーデニングを始めた。 (As one of my hobby, I started gardening.)\n * ガーデニング用品を買う。 (Buy tools for gardening.)\n * 子供と一緒にガーデニングした。(I gardened with my children.)\n\nIf you don't prefer this word, you can use [園芸]{えんげい}する (do gardening)\nalternatively.\n\nガーデニング sounds more modernized compared with 園芸. If you do something in\ntraditional Japanese-styled garden, you cannot use ガーデニング.\n\n[造園]{ぞうえん} or [築庭]{ちくてい} sounds like creating large-scale garden from scratch.\n\n[庭師]{にわし}する(Do gardener) is not a correct Japanese verb.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-01T07:39:38.220", "id": "15676", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-01T08:00:04.857", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-01T08:00:04.857", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5260", "parent_id": "15675", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 }, { "body": "In addition to knjname's answer, you can use `庭いじりする` for gardening.\n(Literally it means `to play with the garden`.)\n\n`庭いじり` is a very common word for casual hobby gardening. (\n<http://matome.naver.jp/topic/1LwIE> )\n\nAnd also `庭仕事する` is common for gardening. (Literally it means `to work on the\ngarden`, but doesn't necessarily mean working as a job.)\n\n`築庭する` sounds like very professional gardening.\n\nAnd `庭師する` is wrong, as knjname says.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-02T02:53:37.573", "id": "15693", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-02T02:53:37.573", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5264", "parent_id": "15675", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "This becomes clearer if you consider the whole sentence. Let's say we have two\nfacts:\n\n> ドーナツが一個しかない。そのドーナツが腐っている\n\nWe can change this to\n\n> ドーナツが一個しかなく、しかもそのドーナツが腐っている\n\nTo indicate \"in addition to that\", or \"on top of that\".\n\nSeparate from this, let's say we wanted to eat lots of donuts. Given the facts\nwe might say:\n\n> ドーナツが一個しかないのは悪い。そのドーナツが腐っているので、もっと悪い\n\nThis can be made more natural by changing it to:\n\n> ドーナツが一個しかなく、なお悪いことにそのドーナツが腐っている\n\nSo there are two different meanings here. One is that something happened on\ntop of another thing, and that there is a bad situation, which became worse.\nCombining these, we can say:\n\n> ドーナツが一個しかなく、しかもなお悪いことにそのドーナツが腐っている", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-02T00:24:34.110", "id": "15692", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-02T00:24:34.110", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "15677", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "I'd say something like 行く意味ある？, 行った方がいい？, 行くべき？", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-01T12:05:36.910", "id": "15679", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-01T12:05:36.910", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "15678", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "I don't know how (un)natural it might sound, but what about かい／がい (`甲斐`)?\n\n> * {来訪, 訪問}のし甲斐がある\n> * {訪ね、訪れ}甲斐\n> * 甲斐のある{来訪, 訪問}\n>", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-01T15:21:33.047", "id": "15681", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-01T15:21:33.047", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "15678", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "Also\n\n行ったら満足しますか？\n\nWould I be satisfied if I go?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2016-01-25T19:15:58.040", "id": "30713", "last_activity_date": "2016-01-25T19:15:58.040", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "12347", "parent_id": "15678", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "> What's a natural way of saying \"Is it worth a visit?\" in Japanese? Something\n> like 「訪れ価値がある？」?\n\n見て[行って] おくべきですか？ should be one of the natural words to ask about it, though it\nseems to be seldom written on the net.\n\nIf 行く意味ありますか？ works, then 行く価値ありますか？ should also work or might sound better\nthan the former, but both sound a little too disrespectful to the place to my\nnative ears.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2017-08-02T00:17:03.040", "id": "51943", "last_activity_date": "2017-08-02T04:05:49.213", "last_edit_date": "2017-08-02T04:05:49.213", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "22422", "parent_id": "15678", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "This construction is usually followed by が or けれど and means something like\n\"yes, one does X **but**...\". It conveys the meaning that there's a caveat -\nthe statement is true but there's a condition/fact that modifies its meaning,\nsoftening it or negating to some extent. It's used to justify your actions\n(\"Yes, it was expensive but I needed it (so I bought it).\"), providing an\nopposing view in a soft way (\"Yes, it's nice but it's too dark (so I won't buy\nit).\"), etc.\n\nDon't worry about the fact that the verb or adjective is repeated twice - it's\njust the way the structure is built.\n\nNote that this structure also exist for な-adjectives: な-adj ことは な2-adjだ.\n\nIt's best to understand it based on examples.\n\n> 高{たか}かったことは高{たか}かった。。。 \n> It was expensive but... _(I liked it so I bought it anyway)_\n\n> 笑{わら}うことは笑{わら}うがおかしくない。 \n> _(Yes, )_ I laughed but it wasn't really funny.\n\n> 便利{べんり}なことは便利{べんり}だが、高{たか}すぎる。 \n> _(It's true)_ It is convenient but it's too expensive.\n\n> 安{やす}いことは安{やす}いがたちがわるい。 \n> _(You may think)_ It is cheap but the quality is poor.\n\n* * *\n\nReference\n\n * \"A Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar\", page 206. 「ことは」structure's explanation - translated as \"indeed one does something alright, (but ~); indeed ~ (but ~); do ~ (but ~)\".\n\n * \"A Dictionary of Intermediate Japanese Grammar\", page 205. 「ことは」structure is compared to 「～ないこともない」. It is stated that both structure are used to not give an unconditional statement. The former is used to answer affirmative questions, the latter negative questions.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-01T20:56:03.580", "id": "15689", "last_activity_date": "2022-03-16T06:48:36.433", "last_edit_date": "2022-03-16T06:48:36.433", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "5041", "parent_id": "15682", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I see two big problems with your sentence:\n\n 1. In your sentence, 受けている doesn't relate in a natural way to what follows. \n\n 2. 楽{たの}しい is an adjective, but you're conjugating it as though it's the non-existent verb 楽{たの}す. (Actually, because the kanji are the same, it looks like a form of 楽{らく}する, but I don't think that's what you intended.)\n\nI think you could simplify it a little, connecting the two parts with 〜て:\n\n> 日本語の授業を **受けていて楽しかった** （です）\n\nHere I used the past form of 楽しい, which is 楽しかった. I put です in because I\nimagined that you were talking to your teacher so politeness would be\nappropriate, but of course whether you want to be polite depends on context,\nso I put it in parentheses.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-01T22:22:53.060", "id": "15690", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-01T22:22:53.060", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15683", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "If you must use ものだ/もんだ, I'd suggest\n\n> 日本語の授業を受けるのは楽しいものだ(よ)。 \n> 日本語の授業を受けるのは楽しいもんだ(よ)。 \n> 日本語の授業を受けるのは楽しい(です)(よ)。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-01T22:58:00.783", "id": "15691", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-12T23:29:10.910", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-12T23:29:10.910", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "15683", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes, `におい` is just \"a smell\". It is in fact neutral, but without `いい` in front\nof it, I usually perceive it as a bad one (as I also do with \"smell\" in\nEnglish). Like if you say, \"What a smell!\" in English, I think most people\nwould take this to mean a bad smell rather than a good one.\n\nAlso, to say \"smells\" or \"producing a smell\", the form is におい・かおり **が** する.\n\n> * 台所はにおいがしています。 → A smell is coming from the kitchen.\n> * 台所はかおりがしています。 → An aroma/good smell is coming from the kitchen.\n>\n\nNote that you will often hear `いいかおり` even though it's kind of redundant.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-01T17:47:27.520", "id": "15685", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-01T17:53:09.623", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-01T17:53:09.623", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "15684", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

[ { "body": "`〜てほしい` is used when you want someone else to do something. I've never heard\nit used in reference to one's own desires (and in fact, may be ungrammatical).\n\nRelated:\n\n * [Wanting Someone To Do Something (てほしい Structure)](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/15504/78)\n * [When to use 欲しがる instead of 欲しい](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/2524/78)\n * [Aren't がる and たがる the same thing?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/3839/78)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-01T19:11:46.840", "id": "15687", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-01T19:11:46.840", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.260", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "15686", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 } ]

[ { "body": "Using まめ is correct in the context of getting a blister on your sole.\n\n水疱 and 水ぶくれ have same meaning, but the former one is academic term. \n火ぶくれ is only used for it caused by burns.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2015-07-11T16:01:38.677", "id": "25622", "last_activity_date": "2015-07-11T16:01:38.677", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "10593", "parent_id": "15694", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "If the kanji for that word is not part of the list of joyo kanji, you should\nprobably go for the kana equivalent. The word is already sort of done for you\nin this sense. The ones that you're already familiar with, like 魚, 鳥, 馬, 牛,\netc. are all common, and you were able to come up with them pretty easily.\nSomething like 欅 though... could you read that? No? Neither can a lot of\nnative speakers, and that is connected to it not being included in the joyo\nkanji.\n\nThere are kanji for most of these things, and native speakers might know a few\nof them, but in general they are the territory for people who like to go above\nand beyond. These are the kinds of things you'll find on the upper levels of\nthe 漢字検定, almost at a level of trivia knowledge.\n\nIf a kanji is joyo, then theoretically everyone should be able to read it. If\nit's not, then there's no guarantee, and as the kanji itself gets more obscure\nthe more likely it is to be kana only. For a hard rule, though, joyo is going\nto be where you go.\n\nThat said, however, it _is_ possible to take kanji that do appear on the joyo\nlist and write them in kana anyway. An example in your post is クマ. Sometimes\nyou might see this written in kana, even though its kanji, 熊, is on the joyo\nlist and common enough to be widely known. But when it appears in compounds,\nlike in アライグマ, it will not be written in kanji.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-02T08:49:42.930", "id": "15700", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-02T15:06:54.737", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-02T15:06:54.737", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "15695", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I might say something like\n\n> ８歳のころ... 10歳のころ... そして、それ以降はいろいろな考えを[回]{まわ}った。", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-02T15:05:46.903", "id": "15706", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-02T15:05:46.903", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "15697", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "> Do Japanese have a similar expression for “the list goes on”? \n>\n\nI don't think we have an exact equivalent but\n[alc辞書](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=list%20goes%20on&ref=sa) translates it\nas this: \n\n> [数]{かぞ}え[上]{あ}げればきりがない。／[例]{れい}を[挙]{あ}げればきりがない。 \n> まだまだたくさんの例がある。 \n>\n\nI personally think\n[[枚挙]{まいきょ}にいとまがない](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E6%9E%9A%E6%8C%99%E3%81%AB%E6%9A%87%E3%81%8C%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84)\nis close, but it sounds quite literary.\n\n> \"When I was 8, I wanted to be a go player. When was 10, I dreamed of\n> becoming a novelist. The list goes on.\" \n>\n\nI think you could say it like this:\n\n> 8歳の時は、碁打ち(or プロ棋士)になりたかったです。10歳の時は、小説家になりたかったです。[他]{ほか}にもいろいろなりたいものがありました。/\n> 他にもなりたいものがたくさんありました。 \n> or \n>\n> 8歳の時は、碁打ちになりたかったです。10歳で、小説家になりたいと思いました。その後も/その他にも、いろんな[職業]{しょくぎょう}に[憧]{あこが}れました。/\n> 他にもいろんなものになりたいと思いました。 \n> etc...", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-03T05:35:39.823", "id": "15717", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-03T05:35:39.823", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15697", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "I don't think this is で used as temporal particle. I would read it as でも\nmeaning \"either or\", \"both...\" as in ＡでもＢでも.\n\nThis applies to all nouns, for example:\n\n> 英語でも日本語でもOKです。 \n> English or Japanese, both are OK.\n\nSo your sentence could be translated as:\n\n> 日本では昼間でも夜でもタクシーを拾うことができる。 \n> Day or night, you can catch a taxi in Japan.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-02T07:02:41.537", "id": "15699", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-02T07:02:41.537", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5041", "parent_id": "15698", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "As Szymon says, you have not given an appropriate example: In your sentence でも\nis being used to give two options but で can be used to indicate when something\nfinishes or a duration:\n\n_-> finishing time:_\n\n> 仕事は５時で終わります。 \n> My work finishes at 5pm.\n\nYou could also use に but whereas に is a more general particle that gives the\ntime at which an event occurs (ie when work finishes) the で places more\nemphasis on the time an activity lasts for.\n\n_-> duration:_\n\n> 無色受想行識さんは3日でこのレポートを書いた。 \n> 無色受想行識 wrote this report in three days.\n\nYou have not asked about use of に so I assume you know it is not used with all\ntemporal expresssions but, for reference, the general rule is that if the time\ncan be specified with a digit then に is used (eg Xmas day is 25 Dec -> クリスマスに）\n\n_Reference: Dictionary of Basic Jpse Grammar_", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-03T06:54:00.603", "id": "15718", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-03T08:33:57.430", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-03T08:33:57.430", "last_editor_user_id": "1556", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "15698", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "It's used by characters in movies etc. depicting typically edo-period. It's\nallegedly how lower-ranking (lower social status) people talked to higher\nranking people in those times. I don't know if this is actually the case, but\nthat's the stereotype.\n\nWhen used in today's setting, the speaker is joking.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-02T23:46:25.890", "id": "15712", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-02T23:46:25.890", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "15701", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "小学校{しょうがっこう} is from about ages 6-12, 中学校{ちゅうがっこう} 13-15, and 高校{こうこう} is\nabout 16-18 years of age. As far as examinations the important ones are\nusually in the last years of their respective schools for entry into a school\nof their choosing (受験{じゅけん}). The school year is usually trimestered with\nexaminations at the end of each (期末試験{きまつしけん}).\n\nEdit: Additionally, the school year begins in the spring, not the fall like a\nlot of western countries.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-02T13:52:44.653", "id": "15705", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-02T21:18:30.713", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-02T21:18:30.713", "last_editor_user_id": "5041", "owner_user_id": "5255", "parent_id": "15703", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Strictly speaking, there is a slight diffference in nuance between the two. If\nyou asked, however, if most native speakers actually used the two forms\n\"correctly\" in different situations, the answer would definitely be negative.\n\nThe difference is in the degree of humility expressed. 「僕ら」 expresses a\nsomewhat higher degree of humility about the speaker himself and his gang than\n「僕たち」 does.\n\nWould we expect Japanese-learners to know this and use the two forms according\nto the occasion? I am not even going to answer that because y'all should know\nwe are the kind of people who will praise you frantically if you can say more\nthan two Japanese words with the thickest foreign accent.\n\nSeriously, though, I feel that native speakers actually know deep inside about\nthat degree of humility thing even if we might not be careful enough to use\nthe two forms differently in our daily lives. I say this because I do know\nthat very few of us, if any, would ever use phrases like\n「[先生]{せんせい}ら」、「お[師匠]{ししょう}さんら」, etc. where we know that we are expected to\nshow respect. 「僕ら」 is different because it refers to the speaker himself and\nhis company.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-04T11:40:34.410", "id": "15740", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-04T11:40:34.410", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15709", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "Here are two possible guidelines:\n\n 1. **Follow existing practice.** Write things the same way you see other people do it. The large majority of native speakers have been exposed to a lot of written language, and they can often follow existing practice without putting much thought into it.\n\nNot everyone writes everything the same way, so expect to find a fair amount\nof variation. Most people do follow certain practices, though--you'll rarely\nfind function words written in kanji, for example, with only a few exceptions.\n\nAnd of course, you can always consult a corpus such as\n[BCCWJ](http://www.kotonoha.gr.jp/shonagon/) if you're curious about how a\nparticular word is written.\n\n 2. **Following prescriptive rules.** You can buy a dictionary such as the [NHK漢字表記辞典](http://www.amazon.co.jp/%EF%BC%AE%EF%BC%A8%EF%BC%AB%E6%BC%A2%E5%AD%97%E8%A1%A8%E8%A8%98%E8%BE%9E%E5%85%B8-%EF%BC%AE%EF%BC%A8%EF%BC%AB%E6%94%BE%E9%80%81%E6%96%87%E5%8C%96%E7%A0%94%E7%A9%B6%E6%89%80/dp/4140112999) and follow its suggestions when you aren't sure. Or you could try not to use readings and kanji that aren't on the [official Jōyō kanji chart](http://www.bunka.go.jp/kokugo_nihongo/joho/kijun/naikaku/kanji/joyokanjisakuin/). But there are many kanji on the chart with readings you'll never see people use--when was the last time you saw someone use the kanji 虞? \n\nSome dictionaries give information about how individual words are written,\nespecially monolingual dictionaries. Many mark non-Jōyō characters or readings\n--check the 凡例 section or front cover to find which symbols a particular\ndictionary uses. EDICT marks words that are \"usually kana\" with the\nabbreviation \"uk\".\n\nAny way you do it will involve a lot of memorization. But the more you\ninteract with the written language, the more you'll get a feel for which words\nare written which ways. If you aren't sure the kanji are correct or commonly\nused, you can do one of the following:\n\n 1. **Look it up.**\n\n 2. **Use kana instead.**\n\n 3. **Use furigana.**\n\nJust remember that you're trying to communicate and that **just about everyone\ncan read kana** , but not everyone can read rare kanji or unusual readings.\nPeople will understand if you write something in kana, even if that's not how\nit's usually written.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-03T03:09:46.827", "id": "15714", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-03T03:09:46.827", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15713", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "Simply:\n\n> やりにくい事を示す。\n\nIndicate something is hard to do. (Positive)\n\n> 簡単に出来ないことを示す。\n\nIndicate something is not easily done. (Negative)\n\nJapanese tends to drop a lot of pronouns, so it's ok to drop them most of the\ntime if the subject has been established through context or you are making a\ngeneralization.\n\nIn this case the active voice makes a lot more sense than the passive voice.\n\nやりやすい is okay to use, but the negative of it seems very strange, use やりにくい if\nyou're trying to convey the opposite meaning.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-03T05:00:00.000", "id": "15716", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-03T05:00:00.000", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5255", "parent_id": "15715", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "In line with the comment, take a look at the goo dict entry:\n\n<http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/120311/m1u/%E3%81%9A%E3%82%89%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A8/>\n\n> ［副］人や物がたくさん並び連なっているさま。ずらり。「著名人が―名を連ねる」\n\nWhile dictionaries can often be overly prescriptive and precise, it seems to\nme that the adverb here is _more specific_ than the verb, thus giving a\nspecific quality. It can also, as in the example, be used with 連なる. So there\nis a separate job for each of these verbs and adverbs, and they have their own\ncontent to contribute.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-03T10:20:06.847", "id": "15720", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-03T10:20:06.847", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3131", "parent_id": "15719", "post_type": "answer", "score": -1 }, { "body": "`ずらっと` indicates the speaker is impressed at how abundant and neat the line\nis. So it has to be an impressive number of things, and the line has to be\nneat.\n\nFor example, this is definitely ずらっと:\n\n\n\nWhereas this is border line because it's not that impressive number of\nplayers:\n\n\n\nThis is 並んでいる but clearly not ずらっと as there are only two people:\n\n\n\nThis can be said to be 並んでいる, but clearly not ずらっと because the line is not\nneat: \n\n**EDIT** : \n並ぶ means there is some parallelism and can be used quite liberally. For\nexample in horse racing, one might shout 「並んだ！」when more than two horses\noverlap in the course (e.g. see\n[this](http://race.sanspo.com/keiba/images/20140112/ope14011215460004-p1.jpg)).\n\nYou can't use 並ぶ when it's a completely unorganized cluster, but if there is\neven a vaguely recognizable structure of lines (which can be multiple\ncolumns), it can be used.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-03T23:21:53.050", "id": "15731", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-04T08:52:57.000", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-04T08:52:57.000", "last_editor_user_id": "499", "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "15719", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "目 means 目で, with eyes.\n\nThe kanji 撃 sometimes means to hit, to touch, or to reach without hindrance,\nwhich is etymologically similar to the 届ける part in 見届ける, つける part in 見つける,\netc. But the original meaning is not preserved in compound verbs any more.\n\n[大辞泉](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E6%92%83?dic=daijisen&oid=20893400) gives a\ndifferent explanation,\n\n```\n\n ［常用漢字］　［音］ゲキ（慣）　［訓］うつ\n １ 強くうち当てる。「撃柝(げきたく)／射撃・衝撃・打撃・鼓腹撃壌」\n ２ 武力を加える。攻める。「撃退／迎撃・攻撃・襲撃・出撃・進撃・突撃・排撃・反撃」\n ３ 感覚に触れる。「目撃」\n \n```\n\nBut ３ is not very convincing to me. 強く(うち)当てる is better.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-03T13:43:11.437", "id": "15724", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-03T15:36:06.740", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-03T15:36:06.740", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4833", "parent_id": "15721", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "There is a difference between the two and it is the kind of difference that\ncould easily be lost in translation.\n\nYou say 「そうなんだ」 when you basically have no doubt about what you have just\nheard from the other person. You have learned something new and you are\nchiming in with him.\n\n「そうかな」 is different in that you have an amount of doubt about what you have\njust heard. You may have a different opinion regarding the matter.\n\nThis is why using a translation like \"Is that so?\" in understanding the two\nJapanese phrases in question might not help greatly because it could be used\nin both situations, could it not?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-03T15:38:16.070", "id": "15725", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-03T15:38:16.070", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15722", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "I think that そうかな corresponds (loosely) to \"Oh, really?\" or \"Is that so?\" or\n\"Oh, you think so?\", and そうなんだ to \"I see\" (as you might expect: the former is\na question, the latter a statement, both in Japanese and in English).\n\nな is a variant of ね, here in particular with the feel of asking _yourself_ a\nrhetorical question. I wouldn't go as far as saying that you are doubting the\nstatement, but you _wouldn't be surprised, if it were false_.\n\n_Note_. In Japanese, そうかな (and そうですか) may also be used in a context, where in\nEnglish you'd simply say \"I don't think so\".\n\nP.S. そうなの? is a way of saying \"Is that so?\", which preserves the ambiguity of\nwhether you might be doubting the statement or just accepting it \"as is\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-03T16:48:48.923", "id": "15726", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-03T17:08:00.147", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-03T17:08:00.147", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "15722", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes, かい is softer than just か, but can also denote a yes-or-no question.\n\nExample:\n\n> 狂ったのかい？ _Are you mad?_\n\nThis is a yes-or-no question. I suppose that you could answer in a way other\nthan yes or no, but it seeks a yes or a no. It's also softer, possibly to\nplacate the person who is mad.\n\nHope this helps.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-03T20:26:33.710", "id": "15728", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-03T20:26:33.710", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5213", "parent_id": "15723", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "This usage of 「かい」, in real life, is largely limited to male speakers of the\nKanto region and even among those, they only use it with people that they know\nvery well and that are as old as or younger than the speaker. It must also be\nmade clear that it is very informal. Do not ever use it with a stranger or\nsomeone you have just met on the street.\n\nRegarding the softness, 「いいかい？」, for instance, surely sounds MUCH softer than\n「いいか?」. In fact, 「いいか？」 sounds pretty curt or condescending -- perhaps much\ncurter than many Japanese-learners would imagine if I may speak from my\nexperience with J-learners.\n\n「だい」 as in 「なんだい？ = \"What is it?\"」 is also largely Kanto-masculine-friendly.\n\nSince both 「かい」 and 「だい」 have a couple of widely different usages, I am being\ncareful not to mention (and confuse people) by discussing the usages other\nthan as a casual question-ender. In fact, @Chocolate left a comment ending\nwith a mostly-Kansai usage of 「かい」 as a joke but kindly removed it lest it\nmight confuse the learners. S/he used the \"urging かい\" to say\n「自分{じぶん}で答{こた}えんか～い」= \"Why don't you answer the question yourself?\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-06T00:16:50.020", "id": "15770", "last_activity_date": "2019-11-03T11:21:11.057", "last_edit_date": "2019-11-03T11:21:11.057", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15723", "post_type": "answer", "score": 20 } ]

[ { "body": "It's not a mistake, it's just a stylistic choice. They do it all the time:\n\n> [長野）松本山雅がホーム初勝利\n> 岐阜に１―０](http://www.asahi.com/articles/ASG4V452VG4VUOOB005.html) \n> [愛媛）愛媛ＦＣ、松本山雅に競り負け\n> ４戦白星なし](http://www.asahi.com/articles/ASG533F1VG53PFIB001.html) \n> [岐阜）船来山古墳群、国史跡へ調査本腰\n> 近畿外で最大級](http://www.asahi.com/articles/ASG4Z5K8DG4ZOHGB00Q.html) \n> [長野）ＳＫＦ、バレエ二山さんと共演へ\n> ９月](http://www.asahi.com/articles/ASG4X51RXG4XUOOB010.html) \n> [青森）原発の電源喪失防げ\n> 東北電が送電線工事公開](http://www.asahi.com/articles/ASG4R447BG4RUBNB002.html) \n> [茨城）原電がウェブで資料公開\n> 東海第二の安全審査巡り](http://www.asahi.com/articles/ASG4Q3GY5G4QUJHB001.html) \n> [長野）上高地で開山祭\n> 観光シーズン本番に](http://www.asahi.com/articles/ASG4W4QTVG4WUOOB00C.html)\n\nI only spent about 30 seconds looking through headlines to find these examples\n--I'm not picking out anything rare. You've probably noticed that each one\n\"tags\" the article with the name of a prefecture:\n\n> 長野県（ながのけん） \n> 愛媛県（えひめけん） \n> 岐阜県（ぎふけん） \n> 青森県（あおもりけん） \n> 茨城県（いばらきけん） \n> 岩手県（いわてけん）\n\nYour example \"tags\" the article as being relevant to 岩手県.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-04T01:56:17.803", "id": "15736", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-04T01:56:17.803", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15729", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "1) Yes, the お is an honorific but it cannot be dropped in this case. We just\nnever say ススメ[品]{ひん}.\n\nSince this is fairly informal writing, the author is \"granted\" the stylistic\nchoices that are not allowed in formal writing.\n\nThe word could have been written お勧め、おすすめ、オススメ、おススメ, etc. but the author\napparently thought おススメ would fit best. As an average Japanese-speaker, I have\nno problem with this choice --- none. It looks nice and light. Point is that\nit would NOT make the author look one bit more educated or sofisticated if\ns/he opted for お勧め or お薦め.\n\n2）Yes. As I stated above, オススメ is totally natural and acceptable in informal\nwriting. In formal writing, however, it is out of the question.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-04T02:07:48.483", "id": "15737", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-04T02:07:48.483", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15732", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "It makes perfect sense.\n\n「クイズ」 is like a small \"test\". \"To take a test\" = 「テストを[受]{う}ける」. 「受ける」 is by\nfar the most natural and often-used verb for this.\n\n例文を読んだ後で 受ければ いい点が取れるようです means:\n\n> \"It seems like we/you could make a good score if we/you took (the quiz)\n> after reading the example sentences\"", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-04T01:04:04.423", "id": "15735", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-04T01:04:04.423", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15733", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Let me just improve on your attempt.\n\n> だれが来てもいいですが \n> **少なくても** \n> 一人は \n> 必ず \n> 来させて下さい\n>\n> Anyone can come, but \n> **at least** \n> 1 person \n> definitely \n> please make so. come\n\nThis illustrates the drawback of translating from an SOV language to an SVO\nlanguage word by word as well as the difficulty of translating a word out of\ncontext (少なくても).\n\nStrung together as is, this would give something like\n\n> Anyone can come, but, please, definitely make at least one person come.\n\nA bit better would be\n\n> Whoever comes is fine, but please make sure that at least one person comes.\n\nI don't know where you got this sentence, but \"at least\" is also written 少なく\n**と** も (see [大辞泉 and\n大辞林](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E5%B0%91%E3%81%AA%E3%81%8F%E3%81%A8%E3%82%82?dic=daijirin&oid=DJR_sukunakutomo_-010)).", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-04T11:48:22.337", "id": "15741", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-04T11:48:22.337", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "15734", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "> **だれ** が来てもいいですが\n\nFirst it is not written 誰か、but 誰 which is someone so:\n\n```\n\n Someone may come but,\n \n```\n\nThe rest could follow with:\n\n```\n\n even if few\n one person\n definitively\n have it come\n \n```\n\ntranslated this way with each peice is rather unmeaningful so in one go, I\nwould correct your translation to:\n\n```\n\n Someone may come, but even if few, have at least one person come please.\n Or\n Someone may come, but even if few, make sure that at least one person come please.\n \n```\n\nOr with similar wording. Hope it answered your question.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-08T18:23:27.827", "id": "15818", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-08T18:26:23.017", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-08T18:26:23.017", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5313", "parent_id": "15734", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "It was a common practice during the Edo and Meiji periods and on through\nTaishou and early Shouwa periods.\n\nWomen's names back then tended to be short (mostly two-syllable long and\nsometimes just one as OP's example) and surprisingly simple compared to their\npresent-day counterparts. Baby girls were often named literally after simple\nplant, flower and animal names, such as\nまつ(pine)、きく(crysanthemum)、うめ(plum)、とら(tiger)、かめ(turtle)、たつ(dragon), etc. They\nwere by and large written in kana as well because people selected these names\nfor their sounds, not for their meanings.\n\nThese names just sounded \"better\", \"cuter\" and/or \"more rhythmical\" if the\nhonorific 「お」 was added. This 「お」 was for expressing affection, not\nnecessarily respect.\n\n「さん」 was also added depending on who was addressing (or referring to) whom.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-04T07:11:05.357", "id": "15739", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-04T07:11:05.357", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15738", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

[ { "body": "I think there is no other way to answer your question than:\n\nThere is only one 々 character; any differences you are seeing are variation in\ntypefaces/handwriting.\n\nFonts can vary quite a bit in their proportions, and 々 is technically a symbol\nand not a kanji (as far as I'm aware), so that's further reason why typeface\ndesigners might treat it differently (from each other and from kanji) and give\nit special sizing.\n\nFour fonts, different sizing:\n\n", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-05T01:50:03.820", "id": "15746", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-05T01:50:03.820", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "315", "parent_id": "15745", "post_type": "answer", "score": 14 } ]

[ { "body": "There are various agent suffixes or just plain nouns that get used in\nJapanese, as opposed to the one straightforward _-er_ suffix in English.\nYou've mentioned a few, but all with the on'yomi -- the kun'yomi get used too\nfor at least the following:\n\n * 手 \n_shu_ in on'yomi compounds, _te_ in kun'yomi compounds \n選手 _senshu_ -- \"chosen hand\" → player chosen to be on a team \n選び手 _erabite_ -- \"choosing hand\" → someone who chooses, a chooser \n買い手 _kaite_ -- \"buying hand\" → a buyer\n\n * 者 \n_sha_ in on'yomi compounds, _mono_ in kun'yomi compounds \n初心者 _shoshinsha_ -- a beginner \n曲者 _kyokusha_ -- someone very skilled in the performing arts; a crafty or\ncunning person \n曲者 _kusemono_ -- a crafty or cunning person\n\n * 人 \n_jin_ or _nin_ in on'yomi compounds, _hito_ or variations thereof in kun'yomi\ncompounds \n商人 _shōnin_ -- business person, shopkeeper, merchant \n商人 _akindo_ (from _akibito_ ) -- business person, shopkeeper, merchant \n仲人 _chūnin_ -- a go-between \n仲人 _nakōdo_ (from _nakabito_ ) -- a go-between\n\nIn reference to your question about how to say \"drinker\", there are some\nidiomatic and cultural issues in translating between English and Japanese that\nrequire unpacking. For instance, Japanese doesn't have any implication of\n\"alcohol\" when you say that someone \"drinks\". So if you just say 飲む人 ( _nomu\nhito_ ), it's too vague to mean anything terribly useful -- this means\nsomething like \"someone who drinks [some unspecified liquid], someone who\nswallows [something unspecified]\". The question that arises in the mind of the\nlistener here is, \" _What_ does this person drink? Water? Soup? NyQuil?\". If\nyou want to specifically say that \"someone drinks _alcoholic beverages_ \", you\nhave to be specific in Japanese: お酒を飲む人 ( _osake o nomu hito_ ), \"a person who\ndrinks alcoholic beverages\".\n\nRegarding the broader question of creating agent nouns from verbs, it really\ndepends on the verb and the context. The most basic way is [verb or verb\nphrase in plain form] + _hito_ , as in the \"drinker\" example above. Most of\nthe 手・者・師・家 etc. examples tend to be idiomatically constrained.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-13T07:54:35.490", "id": "15916", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-13T07:54:35.490", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "15748", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "≦ is used everywhere in Japan, unless it's a paper written in English.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-06T00:37:07.443", "id": "15773", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-22T16:50:25.503", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-22T16:50:25.503", "last_editor_user_id": "499", "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "15750", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "I remember I only used ≦ in elementary and middle schools, but in collage\n(computer science major), everyone switched to ≤. I forgot about high school.\nSo I'm sure both are used, but unless it's something scientific, I think most\npeople use ≦.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2018-05-12T07:23:12.590", "id": "58581", "last_activity_date": "2018-05-12T07:23:12.590", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "29903", "parent_id": "15750", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "\"Chi\" is a pretty common morpheme but seldom used as a word, except in certain\nfossilized phrases. \"Ichi\" is unambiguously an independent word. So they are\ndifferent in that respect. I would call it a qualitative difference; others\nmay disagree.\n\nWhether that difference is sufficient to allow one as a Wiktionary entry but\nreject the other depends on Wiktionary policy, I guess. FWIW the Kojien has\n\"genzaichi\" but not \"genzaiichi\", so Wikipedia is not in bad company.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-05T09:47:34.267", "id": "15756", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-05T09:47:34.267", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "531", "parent_id": "15751", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "​I get the feeling that 現在位置 is more likely to be used when the [present\nposition] is rapidly or continuously changing.\n\nJust to show [You are here], ​現在地 would do fine.\n\nI'm glad others agree :\n\n> <http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q14159500254>\n>\n> * 「地」は陸地を尺度とした位置という意味が強いので、たとえば航空機が上空で使うなら「現在位置」の方が良いのではないでしょうか。\n>\n\nGreat point. In a SciFi, ​現在地 wouldn't usually be used about a place on Mars.\n\n> *\n> 「現在位置」を検索すると、GPSとかカーナビとか何かのアプリとか出てくるので、動いている人や物を示す時は「現在位置」の方を使うのかなと感じました。\n>\n\n\"現在地点\" is more precise than 現在位置 -- See\n[https://www.google.co.jp/?gws_rd=ssl#q=%22%E7%8F%BE%E5%9C%A8%E5%9C%B0%E7%82%B9%22&tbm=bks](https://www.google.co.jp/?gws_rd=ssl#q=%22%E7%8F%BE%E5%9C%A8%E5%9C%B0%E7%82%B9%22&tbm=bks)\n\n\"現地点\" is curious. At least 90% of the news articles seem to be using it\nincorrectly -- See\n[https://www.google.co.jp/?gws_rd=ssl#q=%22%E7%8F%BE%E5%9C%B0%E7%82%B9%22&tbm=nws](https://www.google.co.jp/?gws_rd=ssl#q=%22%E7%8F%BE%E5%9C%B0%E7%82%B9%22&tbm=nws)\n\n誤記でも誤用でもなく、「現時点」と似た意味の「現地点」という言葉が流行っているのか？\n\n> kimanity.blog53.fc2.com/blog-entry-533.html 現地点での. 2007-06-02\n> 時間の流れの上のある一瞬を表す「時点」のかわりに「地点」を使っている例をよく見かけます。\n> 多くは「現時点」を「現地点」に取り違えるというもので、これはうろ覚えというよりは勘違いの部類かもしれません。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2016-09-27T18:47:26.710", "id": "39530", "last_activity_date": "2016-09-28T07:02:26.380", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "16344", "parent_id": "15751", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "彼女 is the word you want to use. Use of ガールフレンド is very uncommon now and would\nsound a bit like a misguided effort by an old person to sound hip, or\nsomething. If you use it though, it will mean romantic partner. To refer to\nfemale friends, people use 女友達.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-06T00:35:32.910", "id": "15772", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-06T00:35:32.910", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "15752", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "Without doubt, the most common ways to directly express \"lover\" in spoken\nJapanese are 彼女, 彼氏, 恋人, 付き合っている人, etc.\n\n「ガールフレンド」 is a misleading word even for native Japanese, and it stands\nsomewhere between \"100% lover\" and \"100% pure female friend without romantic\nfeelings\". And I agree that \"ガールフレンド\" is seldom used in modern spoken\nJapanese, maybe because it's long and also ambiguous.\n\nHowever I don't think this word is dead nor old-fashioned; you may have seen\nby googling that there is actually a famous and popular smartphone game named\n\"ガールフレンド（仮）\" published very recently. I think the current practical use of\nガールフレンド is express 恋人 euphemistically, or to emphasize the sense of chastity\nor platonic relationship compared to directly saying 恋人.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-08T17:02:28.397", "id": "15813", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-08T17:02:28.397", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "15752", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "The 『デジタル大辞泉』 does not list the reading `へつ`, so I'd call it an error.\n<http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/197949/m1u/%e9%96%89/>\n\nThe dictionary 学研漢和大辞典 does not list any words with this reading either.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-11-18T16:20:28.337", "id": "19570", "last_activity_date": "2014-11-22T13:42:55.977", "last_edit_date": "2014-11-22T13:42:55.977", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "7739", "parent_id": "15753", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "As others have noted, the reading `へつ` is not listed in other dictionaries,\nsuch as デジタル大辞泉. But that could be a measure of the lexicographer's rigor. So\nat this point, maybe it's an error, maybe it's not.\n\nAdditional evidence is found in the corresponding Chinese reading of `閉`. The\ncoda /-tu/ typically corresponds to Middle Chinese coda /-t/, which would be\npreserved in modern Cantonese. However, 閉 in Cantonese is /bai3/. So `へつ` is\nlikely an error.\n\nBut looking at [Baxter & Sagart's Old Chinese reconstruction\n(2011)](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Baxter-\nSagart_Old_Chinese_reconstruction), `閉` has the following forms (bearing in\nmind the well-documented /p/ to /h/ lenition in Japanese):\n\n> MC: pejH\n>\n> OC: *pˁit-s {*pˁi[t]-s}\n\nAn important note on time periods: Old Chinese (OC) was around 1200 ~ 300 BC,\nwhich makes for an extremely unlikely candidate for borrowing into Japanese.\n(音読み are generally borrowed from around 700 AD and later.)\n\nMy e-dictionary lists the commmon 漢音 reading of `へい`, and a rarer (and older)\n呉音 reading of `はい`. No 唐音 reading listed.\n\nSo we can say with some degree of confidence that `へつ` is unlikely to be an\n音読み for `閉`. Although, I guess it's always possible that `閉` was\nanachronistically used as ateji for `へつ` in some obscure piece of literature.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-11-19T07:54:04.163", "id": "19581", "last_activity_date": "2014-11-19T07:54:04.163", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "4229", "parent_id": "15753", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I found this in a kanji dictionary from 1920s.\n\n<http://kindai.ndl.go.jp/info:ndljp/pid/936724> (set コマ番号 to 866 and you see\nthe page)\n\nIt lists four sounds for 閉, but none of the following 熟語 has a sound other\nthan ヘイ. I guess this kind of description (ヘツ、ヘチ。方結切。屑。) originally originates\nin classical Chinese hanzi dictionaries like 廣韻 or 康煕字典.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-11-19T08:40:12.567", "id": "19583", "last_activity_date": "2014-11-21T03:49:59.877", "last_edit_date": "2014-11-21T03:49:59.877", "last_editor_user_id": "7667", "owner_user_id": "7667", "parent_id": "15753", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "This is not an _error_ , as some of the other answers may suggest.\n\nThe [Kangxi Dictionary](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kangxi_Dictionary)\nrecords the following additional definition under「閉」:\n\n> 《廣韻》方結切《集韻》《韻會》必結切《正韻》必列切， **音鼈。義同。**\n>\n> [_Guangyun_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guangyun), [Fanqie\n> rime](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fanqie) [方]{ほう}[結]{けつ};\n> [_Jiyun_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jiyun) and\n> [_Yunhui_](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8F%A4%E4%BB%8A%E9%9F%BB%E4%BC%9A%E6%8C%99%E8%A6%81),\n> Fanqie rime [必]{ひつ}[結]{けつ};\n> [_Zhengyun_](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%B4%AA%E6%AD%A6%E6%AD%A3%E9%9F%BB),\n> Fanqie rime [必]{ひつ}[列]{れつ}. **Same sound and meaning as「[鼈]{へつ}」.**\n\nWhat's going on here is that「閉」, in some Chinese texts, was used as a phonetic\nloan for「[鼈]{へつ}」, and this usage was recorded in [Middle\nChinese](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_Chinese) rime dictionaries like\n_Guangyun_ and _Jiyun_. Japanese _on'yomi_ largely corresponds to the\nphonology in these dictionaries and thus may inherit these rare\nreadings/usages.\n\nThe readings are there for advanced Chinese literature study if you consult a\ndictionary, for completeness purposes. There are a lot of obscure _on'yomi_\nthat you may find in dictionaries which come from this kind of phonetic\nborrowing in characters (this is practically the Chinese version of _ateji_ ),\nand most of the time you can safely ignore them.\n\n* * *\n\n_On'yomi_ given are for [_Kan'on_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kan-on)\nreadings.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2018-10-02T14:07:24.577", "id": "61922", "last_activity_date": "2018-10-02T14:29:50.347", "last_edit_date": "2018-10-02T14:29:50.347", "last_editor_user_id": "26510", "owner_user_id": "26510", "parent_id": "15753", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "First, 「迎えられた」 here is purely honorific, not passive voice. The two forms just\nhappen to be written the same way and only the context will tell you which one\nit is being used for.\n\nSo, why is a seemingly rather simple honorific form like「迎えられた」 being used\nwhen it is talking about the Emperor?\n\nAs I implied in my comment above, the reason is that this sentence's main\ntopic (and also its grammatical subject) is 「この[特別公開]{とくべつこうかい} = \"this\nspecial opening (of the Palace facilities)\"」, not 「[天皇陛下]{てんのうへいか} = \"the\nEmperor\"」.\n\nHad this been a sentence announcing that the Emperor had his 80th birthday\n(let us say, yesterday), using \"the Emperor\" as its grammatical subject, it\nwould have used a more elevated honorific verb form and have read something\nlike this:\n\n> 「天皇陛下は[昨日]{さくじつ}８０[歳]{さい}の[傘寿]{さんじゅ}をお[迎]{むか}えになられました。」\n\nNote: Deep down, I am hesitant in calling the original writing a \"sentence\"\nbecause it ends in a noun -- 「もの」 instead of a verb but I called it a sentence\nfor the sake of smooth conversation.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-05T14:05:07.700", "id": "15762", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-05T14:05:07.700", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15755", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "きつね (foxes) are regarded sacred animals in Shintoism, being servants of the\ngod of harvests ([稲荷]{いなり}神).\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/OOZCe.jpg) \n(source: [martle.net](http://photo.martle.net/photos/tem_00008.jpg))\n\n(The sign on the 鳥居 (Shinto archway) says 稲荷大神.)\n\nAccording to legend, a fox's favourite food is 油揚げ (deep-fried tofu slices).\nStripes of 油揚げ are what makes きつねうどん きつねうどん. (By the way, 油揚げ can also be\nsliced up and filled with 酢飯 (sushi rice) and sesame to make いなり寿司.)\n\nI'm not aware of any similar explanation for たぬきうどん, whose characteristic\ningredient is 揚げ玉 (which you might also come across as 天かす, although there is\na difference between the two). My guess would be that the name たぬきうどん was\ncoined by analogy.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-05T14:20:38.680", "id": "15763", "last_activity_date": "2019-02-18T09:10:16.303", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "15757", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "According to the German book \"Der Tanuki\", たぬきうどん (Tanuki-udon) were invented\nduring a food shortage related to the Second World War. The proper ingredients\nof tempura udon were too expensive for many customers but the taste of just\nthe fried batter could be had quite cheaply so tempura-udon was served without\nthe filling. This was jokingly explained as the filling having been stolen by\nTanuki, in reference to the legends of Tanuki-tricksters. The meal became\npopular and the name stuck.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2017-10-21T17:51:22.550", "id": "53958", "last_activity_date": "2019-02-18T16:56:33.383", "last_edit_date": "2019-02-18T16:56:33.383", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "26224", "parent_id": "15757", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "It is an interjection (感動詞), as indicated in the dictionary\n[definition](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E3%81%97%E3%82%81%E3%81%97%E3%82%81?dic=daijirin).\nSo you can use it as such. You could say just `しめしめ、、、` for example, with the\n\"remaining\" part (explaining the interjection) implied. As you could say just\n`やれやれ` for example.\n\nBut as you noticed, it is more something one says to himself (even if it is\nvoiced), so you wouldn't express it in the same way as `やった！` for example,\nwhich you could also shout to the whole world to hear. A bit like a chuckle is\nnot really for others to hear for example. You would typically picture someone\nusing this interjection as grinning. There's more details about this part of\nthe definition [here](http://zokugo-dict.com/12si/simesime.htm):\n\n> しめしめは人に聞こえないような声や心の中で呟くといったように密かに喜ぶ際に使われる。\n\n* * *\n\nOn the meaning itself:\n\n`しめしめ` has been abbreviated from\n[`占めた`](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E5%8D%A0%E3%82%81%E3%81%9F?dic=daijirin)\nwhich is can be used exactly the same (as an interjection) and has the same\nmeaning. It gives more insight into the meaning though:\n\n> 動詞「占める」の連用形に助動詞「た」が付いた語。「自分のものにした」という意から\n\n`占めた` is used as \"having made one's\", as in \"having mastered / pwned something\nor someone\". So you could use it when you figured out a problem or when you\ncaught someone in your trap for example.\n\n> しめしめ、私の作戦通りだ。 (source: alc)\n>\n> しめた，この問題なら解けるぞ\n> ([source](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E5%8D%A0%E3%82%81%E3%81%9F?dic=daijirin))\n\nAs a last note, it can also be used in anticipation for such an outcome:\n\n>\n> 実際に物事が思い通りに進み始めていなくても、そうなるための方策を思いついたり、人が自分のしかけた罠にかかるといった思い通りに進む兆し・キッカケが感じられたときにもしめしめという", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-05T21:42:09.410", "id": "15768", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-05T21:42:09.410", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "4533", "parent_id": "15759", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "You can be \"simply late\" or \"later than you are supposed to be\".\n\n遅くなります can be used in both cases but tilts towards the former. Both 遅刻する and\n遅れる can only be used for the latter.\n\nFor example, すみません、遅れます/遅刻します is a definite admission of guilt, but\nすみません、遅くなります would most commonly be interpreted as \"I'm not later than I'm\nsupposed to be, I'm just later\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-06T00:23:46.907", "id": "15771", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-06T00:41:44.223", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-06T00:41:44.223", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "15760", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "This looks like modern \"浮かべる\" but it is actually classical \"浮かぶ\" (四段, \"to\nfloat\") plus what is traditionally taught as the \"り\" auxiliary verb (助動詞).\n\nEtymologically, of course, it is really just \"ari\" attached to the ren'yokei\n連用形/infinitive: /ukabi/ + /ari/ = /ukab(y)eri/, /ukab(y)eru/ adnominally (as\nin this case). Frellesvig calls this the \"morphological stative\".\n\nSo, in terms of meaning, this 浮かべる is roughly equivalent to contemporary\n浮かんでいる.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-05T15:13:48.567", "id": "15764", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-05T15:13:48.567", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "531", "parent_id": "15761", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 } ]

[ { "body": "In a nutshell, you should not use it unless you are trying to create a\nspecific effect.\n\nThese grammars originally developed in artistic writing to add an artistic\neffect. Allegedly, newspapers adopted them to save space, and also because\nthey make the sentences more compact and let the facts stand out more. Apart\nfrom news paper articles, it's also used where compact description is\nbeneficial e.g. operation manuals, dictionaries etc.\n\nOverusing these are considered poor writing.\n\nKazuo Tatsuo, a journalist and essayist for example writes:\n\n>\n> 歯切れのいい文章にしたい、という理由もあるのでしょう。体言止めを使うといかにも新聞記事らしくなるから、という人もいるでしょう。たしかに、体言止めを上手に使うことで、独特の味をだした新聞記事があることは認めます。ですから体言止め、助詞止めをいっさい使うなというつもりはありません。乱用はいかがなものかといっているのです。", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-06T00:07:54.060", "id": "15769", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-06T00:12:54.807", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-06T00:12:54.807", "last_editor_user_id": "499", "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "15765", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "**Dropping だ**\n\nThis can be done in two circumstances:\n\n * In speech, when trying to soften a sentence as opposed to the version with だ (say, if you are female).\n\n * In a newspaper (or report, etc.), **where it's actually an omission of である, not だ** ; i.e., when you are trying to be brief, pointed, and authoritative.\n\nNaturally, you can differentiate between the two via. tone and surrounding\nword choice.\n\n**Dropping する**\n\nThis is only done in newspapers/reports/etc.\n\n**When to use the \"newspaper style\"**\n\nNamely, dropping both 「である」 AND 「する」.\n\nI mainly refer to Enno Shioji's answer for this, but basically, I don't see\nany reason for the average speaker to use it ever. It's only needed in\nspecific contexts, where you can just look at surrounding media in that\ncontext and imitate the style.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-06T00:43:26.663", "id": "15774", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-06T00:43:26.663", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3097", "parent_id": "15765", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I moved my original comments to this answer because it may contain some\nhelpful information.\n\nThis is a collection of examples rather than a real answer, because I don't\nknow when and how to omit da, either. I might add more examples when I found.\n\n* * *\n\nI think だ/である is extremely likely to be dropped in **proverb-like** phrases,\n**parentheses** , **parallel** structures, and **definitions**. It's also\ncommon in **brief biographies** , **introductions**.\n\nExplaining when and why だ/である is dropped is beyond me. But I think it might\nbecause だ tends to be avoided because of its strong modal function (like よ, か,\netc.) while である or です sounds verbose and dull. So people occasionally choose\nan unusual form to **highlight** some points, somewhat like 箇条書き, **neat and\nforceful**.\n\nM‌aybe omission is more likely to happen in informative context rather than\nconversational context.\n\nI remember some examples that are not academic or newspaper style (mainly\nbecause they are impressive.) Let's see how they meet those criteria.\n\n>\n> 執事、それは仕える者。執事、それは傅く者。執事、それは主の生活全てをサポートする、フォーマルな守護者。そう、これは一人の少女の為に命をかけて闘う少年の、超バトル‌​‌​コンバットストーリーなのである.\n\n 1. proverb-like \n 2. definition. Exactly the same as AはBである\n 3. parallel structure. 執事、それは～者 are repeated three times\n 4. parentheses. They serve as a kind of background. But only the last sentence is really important and relevant.\n 5. introduction, as the last sentence says: this is a story about a 執事\n\n> 恐怖こそ自由！君臨こそ解放！矛盾こそ真理！それがこの世界の真実だ！\n\n 1. proverb-like\n 2. definition\n 3. parallel structure\n\n>\n> 外山恒一、３６歳、反管理教育運動を出発点に、異端的極左活動家となり、今時、政治犯として２年投獄され、現在に至るも、反体制知識人。では続いて外山恒一さんの政見放送です。\n\n 1. brief biographies\n 2. introduction, as the last sentence says: this is a political broadcast by 外山\n\n>\n> 神戸市生まれ。78歳。超甘党。目下糖尿病で苦しんでいる。心臓はボロボロ。もう長くない。墓は不要。葬式はしない。9歳よりヴァイオリン、目下作曲の修行中。クロマティックハーモニカ演奏。アルトサックス入門。\n\n 1. brief biographies. This is actually from a user profile\n\nWe can also find that last sentences end in different forms: だ, である and です.\n\nI also found the following example in a\n[paper](http://taweb.aichi-u.ac.jp/tgoken/bulletin/pdfs/NO8/07.pdf).\n\n>\n> 首都ワシントンの近郊を襲う無差別銃撃事件。犯人は高性能のライフルを使用。離れた場所から正確な射撃を繰り返し，罪のない人々を次々に殺害。今月2日から10日足らずで‌​犠牲者は8人目なった。現場からは『警察へ\n> 私は神様だ』と書かれたタロット・カードも見つかり，捜査当局は犯人像を解明する手がかりにしているが，依然として犯人の目星は‌​ついていない。\n\nThe paper explains this usage as “放送でも緊迫感を狙って体言止めを使う”. I think it might be\nsimilar to what I said“neat and forceful”.\n\nI used to think that dropping da in a user profile, the first paragraph of a\nbiography or an article of encyclopedia was nearly standard. Apparently, not\neveryone agrees. I found [a\ndiscussion](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia%3a%E4%BA%95%E6%88%B8%E7%AB%AF/subj/%E5%AE%9A%E7%BE%A9%E6%96%87%E3%81%AE%E4%BD%93%E8%A8%80%E6%AD%A2%E3%82%81)\non Wikipedia that some people find dropping da (体言止め) in definition sentences\n(定義文) or introduction sentences (導入文) of the first paragraph (冒頭段)\nuncomfortable (気持ち悪い)\n\n> 定義文を体言止めにするおかしな現象が非常に目につくのですが、このようなことが起きているのはなぜでしょうか？\n> 定義文を、キチンと述語を書かずに体言止めにしましょうというようなことが推奨されているのですか？\n> 気持ち悪いですね。なぜ「～は××である。」と書けないのでしょうか？--PeachLover- ももがすき。 2007年8月10日 (金) 14:36\n> (UTC)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-07T10:44:20.823", "id": "15795", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-07T10:44:20.823", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4833", "parent_id": "15765", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "なし isn't really used this way. Just in terms of how the language works\nidiomatically, I've more often heard this expressed by using a different verb\nfirst:\n\n * XX を忘れて出かけました。 \nI forgot my XX and left. → I left without my XX.\n\n * XX をテーブルに置いたまま出かけちゃった。 \nI put XX on the table, and with it still there, I left → I left with XX still\non the table.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-12T22:09:17.087", "id": "15907", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-13T01:42:10.383", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-13T01:42:10.383", "last_editor_user_id": "5041", "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "15775", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "I've googled and found this article, which makes sense to me.\n<http://oshiete.goo.ne.jp/qa/894749.html>\n\nConcrete examples to your asked usage of なしで or なしに could be\n\n```\n\n 地図なしに、旅行はできない\n 地図なしで、旅行はできない\n \n```\n\nwhich both sounds to be proper Japanese (for me). Their translation would be,\nas you might already knew, `Without map, I cannot travel.`\n\nTheir difference, I am still not very clear. I assume they are generally the\nsame.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2016-12-04T10:32:45.060", "id": "41450", "last_activity_date": "2016-12-04T10:32:45.060", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "10859", "parent_id": "15775", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "Because Chinese doesn't have voiced consonants. In Chinese, voiced /b/d/g/ are\njust variants of their voiceless counterparts. So you can't hear the\ndifference between voiced sounds and voiceless sounds.\n\nIt's hard to explain and learn by text. Instead, I recommend you practice it\nby listening and imitating.\n\nThe site [首都大学東京 mic-J 日本語教育 AV\nリソース](http://nihongo.hum.tmu.ac.jp/mic-j/home-j.html) may be helpful. (AV\nstands for Audio Visual I think.)\n\n[This tutorial](http://nihongo.hum.tmu.ac.jp/mic-j/VoAspNew/index.html) is\nspecially designed for Chinese speaker who can't hear voiced and voiceless\nsounds. [This](http://nihongo.hum.tmu.ac.jp/mic-j/VoAsp-china/index.html) is\nthe old version. (5 years old, I think.)\n\nThis tutorial contains video explanations and 100+ exercises. Try and see how\nmany you can hear correctly.\n\nFor Korean speakers who have the same problems, there is a [Korean\nversion](http://nihongo.hum.tmu.ac.jp/mic-j/VoAsp-korea/index.html), too.\n\nIf you don't speak Chinese or Korean, you probably need to learn Chinese or\nKorean first to be able to use it. )-: Anyway, try out Google Translator.\n\n**TIPS:** The voiced consonant at the beginning of a sentence is not always\nfully voiced. There is a big chance it's devoiced. Instead, the voiceless\nsound at the same position becomes aspirated. In this case, Chinese speakers\noften have no problems hearing it.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-06T06:21:27.557", "id": "15778", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-06T06:43:56.600", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-06T06:43:56.600", "last_editor_user_id": "4833", "owner_user_id": "4833", "parent_id": "15776", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

[ { "body": "There is no clear-cut etymological explanation, but some think there is a\nconnection. In _A History of the Japanese Language_ (2010), Frellesvig says:\n\n> The suffixes which attach to the infinitive [i.e. _renyokei_ ] are [...]\n> transparently agglutinating and their use as suffixes seems to be younger\n> [than suffixes attaching to the _mizenkei_ , which Frellesvig argues were\n> originally suffixes beginning with /a-/ and attaching directly to the verb\n> stem]. It is possible to view all of them as being derived from a few\n> elements which are also reflected in a number of other grammatical morphemes\n> in OJ. They fall into two groups: (a) forms in _k ~ s_ , and (b) forms in _t\n> ~ n_. It is likely that both sets reflect earlier copulas which were\n> morphologized.\n>\n> The _**k ~ s**_ forms involve both of the past tense auxiliaries, _-i(ki)_\n> and _-(i)kyeri_ (of which the modal past seems to be derived from the simple\n> past: _kyer-_ < _ki-ar-_ ). **The forms of the adjectival copula** [by this\n> he means endings like /-ki/, /-si/, etc.] **overlap to a large extent with\n> the past tense auxiliaries** [...] **This suggests that these are different\n> morphologizations of the same (copula) material, and lends further support\n> to the analysis of the adjectival endings as a restricted copula. Note also\n> that the _k ~ s_ alternation is exhibited by the adjectival copula\n> infinitive _-ku_ and the * _-su_ which takes part in formation of the\n> innovative negative forms** [here he means /-zu/ and so on, which he derives\n> from /-ni.su/] [...] **The morpho-syntactic similarities between the\n> adjectival infinitive and the negative infinitive are easier to explain if,\n> as suggested here, they originate in variant copla forms.** It is further\n> possible that the verb _se-_ \"do\", the focus particles _so_ and _ka_ [...]\n> and the demonstratives _ko_ and _so_ [...] are root-related to these forms.\n\n(Bold mine, everything in [square brackets] mine.)\n\nSo, there you go: a grand theory which does indeed link five of your six data\npoints (adjectival /-ki/, /-si/, and /-ku/ + verbal simple past auxiliary /ki/\nand /si/) together, albeit hand-wavily.\n\nIt's important to note that this is all speculation; by the time people\nstarted writing things down in OJ, any root-relations were long in the past.\nBut when it comes to proto-Old Japanese, very little speculation is as\ninformed as Frellesvig's.\n\nYour final data point, the similarity between the adjectival infinitive ending\n/-ku/ and the adnominal verb ending /-u/ (as dainichi says, the ending in\nquestion only happens to be /ku/ in verbs with a stem ending in /k/, like\n/ik.u/) doesn't fit into this pattern at all. Since the /k/ is a red herring,\nreally the only similarity is that it's a one-mora ending with the vowel /u/.\nBut note that for vowel-stem and irregular verbs the ending is /-(u)ru/;\nmeanwhile, in Eastern Old Japanese attributives sometimes end in /-(w)o/\ninstead of /-u/, but the adjectival /-ku/ ending never changes to an o-form.\nSo even the vowel similarity isn't all that strong. There doesn't seem to be\nmuch of a case for a connection there.\n\n**Edit:** Wait, I forgot one other non-repeated data point: infinitive /-i/\nfor verbs vs adnominal /-ki/ for adjectives. Here, too, though, it boils down\nto a single vowel -- and if you reject the connection between /-u/ and /-ku/,\nthere's not even a semantic connection. Nothing to explain, in other words,\nexcept maybe a very general \"How come so many OJ verbal/adjectival endings end\nin /i/ or /u/?\"", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-07T14:03:30.327", "id": "15797", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-07T23:07:48.947", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "531", "parent_id": "15779", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

[ { "body": "Capitalizing all letters to convey the meaning of shouting is rather used in\nthe internet than books but here's what I found in the Japanese translation of\nthe Harry Potter first book (Japanese title 「ハリー・ポッターと賢者の石」). I hope this can\nbe helpful anyway.\n\nLook at the first row, the shouted part is rendered in bold and a larger font\nsize. This is used consistently throughout the book.\n\n", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-06T11:14:13.500", "id": "15781", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-06T11:14:13.500", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5041", "parent_id": "15780", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "Exclamation marks are one way (as in English), and often a っ before an\nexclamation mark can give the effect of increased volume. They can even be\nrepeated or put into katakana for more emphasis.\n\n黙れ！ vs 黙れっ！ vs 黙れッッ！！\n\nJapanese writing also seems to have less rigor in its literature-writing rules\nthan English, so you can probably get away with repeating letters (黙れェェェ！),\nusing multiple exclamation points, etc., without being frowned upon too much\nby literati. At least that's true for light novels and games.\n\nThere are also emphasis dots as istrasci mentioned. I think these are probably\nenough tools to create a powerful effect if desired.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-06T16:04:41.327", "id": "15783", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-06T16:04:41.327", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "315", "parent_id": "15780", "post_type": "answer", "score": 14 }, { "body": "It's worth noting that until about 20 years ago, capital letters did not\nalways connote shouting in English either; in earlier decades, they rather\nimplied importance or formality (their straighter lines were easier to carve\ninto stone, and so they were once always used for monuments, hence the term\n\"capital\"). It was quite common to see all-capital texts from government or\nlegal sources, and you can still find all-capital sections in legal agreements\nto denote emphasis. The denotation of capital letters as a method for shouting\ngrew up along with the Internet, along with many other conventions for\nrestoring some of the flavor of spoken language to a pure-text medium.\n\nThere are plenty of other ways to show shouting in Japanese. Size, font\nweight, and exclamation points handle the job very well, and of course you can\njust add auxiliary text to say that a character was shouting. On the Internet,\nyou can add additional emotion by emoticons: (ノಠ益ಠ)ノ彡┻━┻ or (」゜ロ゜)」 can denote\nanger or despair, for example. Manga adds a lot of additional conventions,\nsuch as gigantic, page-filling letters, jagged type, angled snipes around the\nletters, enormous mouths, etc.\n\nCapital letters, however, are not one of the options, since there aren't any.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-06T22:35:30.043", "id": "15785", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-06T22:35:30.043", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "820", "parent_id": "15780", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "There is two ways I can see for your first sentence. First you could write it:\n\n> わからない。でも、言って下さい\n\nIn this case you would separate it in two sentences meaning: \"I don't\nunderstand. But say it\"\n\nIn which case, it is the closest if I try to not change your japanese\nsentence. If I go the other way around by trying to not change your english\ntranslation, I find it better to say:\n\n> わからなくても言って下さい\n\nOn your second sentence, few changes ought to be made. If what you want to say\nin english is \"Even every 3 hours is okay\", I would rather say it this way in\nJapanese:\n\n> [毎三時間]{まいさんじかん}でもいいです。", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-08T17:23:58.657", "id": "15815", "last_activity_date": "2022-01-28T21:19:02.127", "last_edit_date": "2022-01-28T21:19:02.127", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "5313", "parent_id": "15790", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "Both of your sentences are invalid.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-08T19:38:21.393", "id": "15819", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-08T19:38:21.393", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3097", "parent_id": "15790", "post_type": "answer", "score": -2 }, { "body": "Both of your sentences are valid, but the meaning are not exact what you think\nthem to be.\n\n> わからないでも言って下さい \n> Please say it without understanding.❌ \n> Please say it **even if** you don't understand.⭕️\n\nThe second sentence is good, except that you might have mixed up 2 and 3.\n\nでも should be considered as で + the particle も meaning \"even/also\". In the\nabove sentences, わからないで is a **whole word** , aka the te-form of わからない. So\nit's わからないで + も. The second sentence, the te-form of 二時間おき is 二時間おきで(the te-\nform of nouns and な-adjectives), and the sentence is 二時間おきで + も.\n\nSince も means \"also/even\", わからないで + も is literally \"even if not understand\".\n二時間おきでもいいです is literally \"even if every two hours, is good(いいです)\".\n\nSometimes you see でも at beginning of sentences meaning \"but\", but that's just\nshort for それでも, literally meaning \"even if that\", where it's それで + も, それで\nbeing the te-form of それ.\n\n> でも、俺は行かない. \n> But I will not go. \n> (Literal) Even if that, I will not go.\n\nSimilarly, sometimes you see sentences begin with では, or だから, or だけど, etc,\nthey are all contractions of それでは, それだから and それだけど.\n\nI'm not going to explain what is te-form or how it's used here in detail,\nbecause that will make this answer way too long, and there are already lots of\nresources dedicated to it online. But in short, you need the te-form when\nconnecting a clause to は or も\n\n> 全部食べ **る** もいい ❌ 全部食べ **て** もいい ⭕️ \n> 行かな **い** はダメ ❌ 行かな **くて** はダメ ⭕️", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2023-06-23T04:06:13.323", "id": "100048", "last_activity_date": "2023-06-23T04:06:13.323", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "39855", "parent_id": "15790", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "As I think you already understand,\n\n * 聞かせる is causative form (使役）of 聞く, 聞かされる is the passive-causative form（使役受け身). \n * Passive is often referred to as the \"suffering\" tense. The subject, the writer, is \"suffering\" from being made to either **ask** or **listen**.\n\nIf the verb clause is ~たら **and the action takes place in the past** then the\nfollowing expression cannot describe an action of the subject's volition.\n**Asking** would be a volitional action. **Listening** (or being made to\nlisten) is not necessarily volitional(see note) and therefore:\n\n\"As a result of\" meeting his friend on the train, the writer had to (or was\n\"made\" to) listen to the following story [which his friend told him on the\njourney]....\n\nI would read the sentence as:\n\n> 友達に_遭ったらこんな話を聞かせられた\n\nrather than\n\n> 友達に________聞かせられた\n\nbecause the second event was result of the first.\n\n聞いた fits to the extent that the writer still hears the story but you lose the\nnuance that he had to listen because (I imagine) he could not get off the\ntrain and he could not ignore his friend who would not shut up/who was very\nupset and wanted someone to listen to him(whatever), so I doubt it is\ncircumlocutious but these phrases can be difficult to translate directly.\n\nNote: You could argue that that if the verb is passive-causative then neither\naction is volitional but \"made to listen\" is less volitional and more natural\nthan \"made to ask\".", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-07T11:36:08.520", "id": "15796", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-08T02:53:02.230", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-08T02:53:02.230", "last_editor_user_id": "1556", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "15791", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "かも is short for かも知れない【しれない】, which loosely translates as \"probably\". In this\ncase, \"It **might well be** the beginning of a solution,\" would be a good\ntranslation.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-07T08:10:48.370", "id": "15793", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-07T08:10:48.370", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4914", "parent_id": "15792", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "For one, you are confusing transitive (起こす) and intransitive (起きる) verbs. Your\n\"immediate thought\" would be\n\n> Please wake up at 6am tomorrow. \n> 明日、6時に **起きて** ください。\n\nSecondly, you should keep in mind that the direct object (here, of the\ntransitive verb 起こす) may be omitted, whence\n\n> 明日、6時に起こしてください。 \n> Please wake [someone] up at 6am tomorrow.\n\nwhere [someone] = me is implied.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-07T15:11:35.353", "id": "15799", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-07T15:11:35.353", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "15798", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "のだ at the end of a sentence is usually what you called “explanation modality”.\n(whether it's explanation or not.)\n\nのではない is often used to make a **partial negative** statement. This may be a\nover-simplification, but I can't think of a good explanation of its function.\nThe の works like a nominalizer or a quote mark.\n\nIf you say 俺はやらなかった, it means I didn't do it. \nIf you say 俺がやったんじゃない, it means the thing happened, but it's not done by me.\n\nIt may be worth mentioning that, **both のではない and のだ** can sometimes be used\nto **correct an existing proposition.** e.g.\n\n> **俺が** やった **んじゃない** 。 **あいつ** がやった **んだ** 。\n\nSometimes you want to empathize “you are thinking wrong”, so you use both\nのではない (to correct the proposition before it) and のだ (to correct the listener's\nthought).\n\n> **俺が** やった **んじゃない** **んだ**\n\nAlthough I don't think the last んだ means the same as the んだけどな in your\nquestion, it's still a modality のだ, because without んだ it's still a valid\nsentence.\n\n* * *\n\nIt seems that you can read Japanese tutorials, so I added some Japanese\nresources.\n\n庭{には}三郎{さぶろう} mentioned のではない in his book [日本語文法概説{にほんごぶんぽうがいせつ} 43.1.3\n部分否定](http://www.geocities.jp/niwasaburoo/43hitei.html#43.1):\n\n> 「～のではない／わけではない」は、「部分否定」とは違いますが、全面的な否定ではない、という意味では近い用法です。\n```\n\n> １　資料を全部見たの／わけ　ではない。\n> ２　この事典を調べたのではない。\n> cf.　この事典は調べなかった。\n> \n```\n\n>\n> 例１では、部分否定になっていますが、例２では他の何かと対比しているように感じます。\n>\n> 複文で理由などを表す節があると、「～のではない」の否定はその節を焦点 とします。\n```\n\n> 金が欲しいから行ったのではない。\n> \n```\n\n>\n> 「行った」のですが、その理由は「金が欲しいから」ではない、ということになります。\n\nHe says のではない or わけではない is not the same as **partial negation** but similar to\nit. It may sound like the part being negated **contrasts** with something\nelse. It can also be used to negate reason or purpose clauses.\n\n[中上級を教える人のための日本語文法ハンドブック](http://books.google.com/books?id=0eprLex8sr0C&lpg=PA303&ots=4JMrwWxAty&pg=PA301#v=onepage&q&f=false)\nhas a more detailed explanation at p.301\n\n> なお、「のではない」のあとには否定した要素に対応する「正解」[...]が続くのが普通です。\n\nIt says **のではない is usually followed by a correction**.\n\n工藤{くどう}真由美{まゆみ} 's\n[～のではないの意味と機能](http://kamome.lib.ynu.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/10131/2850/1/KJ00004463679.pdf)\nis a more exhaustive study. After reading it, you will know why I say “partial\nnegation” is over-simplification. I quickly went through it. Its explanation\nmight be different from mine (e.g. whether のではない is the negative form of the\nmodality のだ), but it definitely contains valuable information.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-08T07:08:19.047", "id": "15803", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-09T03:14:01.717", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-09T03:14:01.717", "last_editor_user_id": "4833", "owner_user_id": "4833", "parent_id": "15800", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 }, { "body": "**_Comment_**\n\nIn my experience, once you get to this level it is sometimes easier to\nunderstand these intuitively because you can understand a lot from the context\nand the way the person says the phrase.\n\nBreaking them down can get quite complicated because grammatically there is a\nlot going on: I have given two ways to analyse 〜たんじゃない but I think they both\nhave merit.\n\n**_Analysis_**\n\nMy take on\n\n> 「…あの犯行予告、俺がやったんじゃないんだけどな。」 \n> \"I wasn't the one who issued that threat, but no matter.\"\n\nis:\n\n> 「・・・」\n\nー＞ Spoken Japanese, might even contain colloquialisms that seem contradictory\njust as they do in English (\"I haven't eaten none of them.\")\n\n> \"but no matter...\"\n\nー＞ Spoken English also leaves some things unsaid and that seems to be case\nhere. I have not seen the film so I don't know what happens next or before but\nI guess you will understand from the context.\n\n> あの犯行予告、\n\nー＞ The topic of conversation. あの indicates both parties know what they are\ntalking about.\n\n> 俺がやった\n\nー＞ I did it\n\n> 俺がやった **ん**\n\nー＞ Something that I did. ん＝の which is a nominaliser like こと. Generally used\nfor things closer to speaker.\n\n> じゃない\n\nー＞ Negates what comes before it ie: 俺がやったんじゃない= Not something that I did.\n\n> 〜たんじゃない\n\nー＞ result of putting (やっ)た＋ん＋じゃない together:\n\nIn Japanese: 〜たんじゃない＝〜のではない＝わけではない＝〜というわけではない \nIn English: ＝\"it is not that ~ but rather that,\" ; only the ~part of the\nstatement is negated\n\n> んだ\n\nー＞ Means same as のです, the sentence ending used for explaining something, and\nalso often to show emotional importance of what comes before it. (So for\nexample, you would tell a doctor: 頭が痛いんです because you want to communicate that\nit matters.)\n\n> けど\n\nー＞ Equivalent to \"but\" (like が) and in spoken Japanese the following phrase is\noften left unsaid because it is obvious from context. It is performing a\nsimilar function to the \"but, no matter...\" in the English translation. (Or to\ntake another example; 「先生、頭が痛いんですが・・」＝ \"Doctor, my head really hurts [, please\ncan you give me something for it?]\")\n\n> な\n\nー＞ Means same as ね、〜 \"know what I mean?\". な is a harsher more masculine\nversion. It is often used to emphasise the importance of what comes before it\nand to seek empathy from the listener.\n\nIf you put all these together you end up with something close to the\ntranslation.\n\n_References_\n\nI expect you already have references for all the basic components but possibly\nnot 〜たんじゃない because it colloquial? Since writing this I noticed it is covered\nin the detail of item 3 in 新完全マスターN３、文法, p38.\n\nUnderstanding this kind of colloquialism is tested at JLPT N1 (聴解). If you\nwant to wok on this you could try one the text books for that exam.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-09T00:26:00.300", "id": "15823", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-12T23:14:39.017", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-12T23:14:39.017", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "15800", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "んだ According to my lecturer's explanation, many sources refer to んだ as\nexplanation modality, and it is true many times, you can come across んだ when\nthe sppeaker is giving explanation. However according to his explanation the\nreal function of んだ is to soften up the question and statement.\n\nI myself also try to deepen my skills regarding this topic, I just wanted to\nadd my experience about it.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2015-05-31T04:32:54.073", "id": "24662", "last_activity_date": "2015-05-31T04:32:54.073", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5392", "parent_id": "15800", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "This is an example of where using J-E dictionaries has the potential to fail\npretty spectacularly. Literally 臨海 might mean \"seaside,\" but there is more to\nit than just that. 臨海学校 is a special sort of school outing wherein kids go to\nstudy for a few days by the sea in the summer, I think especially targeted at\nkids who live in cities or are otherwise normally unable to go to the ocean.\nIt seems to have a real 'summer camp' type of vibe to it, with various fun\noutdoor events, games, activities, and general mischief, and the kids lodge\ntogether for a few days away from home. The official curriculum is listed on\nthe [Wikipedia\npage](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%87%A8%E6%B5%B7%E5%AD%A6%E6%A0%A1) that\nAsh posted. There's a similar event called 林間学校{りんかんがっこう}, which happens in\nthe fall and is more for woods/mountains.\n\nI won't delve too deep into the cultural implications or what the event is\nlike since that's more into culture and outside of the realm of language (I\nthink), plus I'm not _that_ familiar with it in general. But the important\npart to realize is that beyond the notion of a seaside school it is a more\nculturally loaded term. For example, if you were to say \"summer camp\" to a\nperson of Western cultural origins, it would evoke a lot more than just\n\"camping in the summer.\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-08T00:12:38.300", "id": "15802", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-08T09:56:20.807", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-08T09:56:20.807", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "15801", "post_type": "answer", "score": 15 }, { "body": "Indeed it should be understood as some kind of short \"summer camp\" with the\nclassroom.\n\nOn a side note using paid-for ENG-JP electronic dictionary in my case returned\n\"seaside school\" as well (strangely the french one did better for once with\nthe better \"colonies de vacances\"). So I do not think that is has anything to\ndo with the price of the dictionary. Especially since the culprit here (Jim\nBreen's dictionnary) has often more numerous and detailed entries than several\ncommercial dictionaries.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-08T09:10:22.220", "id": "15806", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-08T09:10:22.220", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5312", "parent_id": "15801", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "From experience of sending a lot of business e-mails with customers in Japan,\nthere doesn't seem to be a preferred way of writing it. It seems to be more\ndepending on your age and where you learned it. Example:\n\nTake the simulation with katakana. For me - and to many of my Japanese friends\nthat I've asked - it should be written as シミュレーション, but in several of the\nmails I recieve some write it as シュミレーション. Older customers write the latter\nwhile younger write the former. This is also the case of other words such as\nexcel-file which some writes エキセル and others エクセル.\n\nBack to your question, this is the same situation. There is no general rule\nfor when it should be either one. There are certainly other opinions about\nthis but from my 10 years of experience, this is the conclusion I have drawn.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-08T11:35:30.827", "id": "15808", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-08T11:35:30.827", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5225", "parent_id": "15807", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "Observations seem to indicate the extended version is preferred. I tend to\nliken it to some British English accents where the final R is more of an\nextended A sound (e.g. \"bar\" sounds like \"baa\").", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-08T11:54:14.653", "id": "15809", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-08T11:54:14.653", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4914", "parent_id": "15807", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "Japanese 国語審議会 (National Language Council) recommends longer (with ー) forms\nsince 1991. So foreign words in textbooks for elementary school students\nusually have trailing \"ー\".\n\n<http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/hakusho/nc/k19910628002/k19910628002.html>\n\n> 注3 英語の語末の‐er, ‐or,\n> ‐arなどに当たるものは，原則としてア列の長音とし長音符号「ー」を用いて書き表す。ただし，慣用に応じて「ー」を省くことができる。 〔例〕 エレベーター\n> ギター コンピューター マフラー\n\nJapanese version of Microsoft Windows switched from \"マイ コンピュータ\" to \"マイ\nコンピューター\" as of Windows 7, according to this recommendation.\n\n「コンピュータ」→「コンピューター」に MSが表記ルール変更\n<http://www.itmedia.co.jp/news/articles/0807/25/news090.html>\n\nHowever, as the article above explains, another standard from Japanese\nIndustrial Standards (JIS規格の表記ガイドライン JIS Z 8301) has long said that \"ー\" should\nbe omitted if the word is long enough, while convention always takes\nprecedence.\n\n<http://kikakurui.com/z8/Z8301-2011-01.html>\n\n> a)その言葉が 3 音以上の場合には，語尾に長音符号を付けない。\n>\n> b)その言葉が 2 音以下の場合には，語尾に長音符号を付ける。\n\nSo your choice depends on the situation. Technologists and scientists tend to\nprefer shorter versions, while news media for general populations usually\nprefer longer ones.\n\n(Here's NHK's policy:\n<https://www.nhk.or.jp/bunken/summary/kotoba/gimon/159.html>)\n\nBut anyway, in general, most Japanese don't care at all in their daily lives.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-08T14:40:55.580", "id": "15810", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-08T15:32:06.443", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "15807", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 }, { "body": "The \"ー\" at the end of the word is often (although not necessarily) omitted if\nit is a tech/computer related term. Even if \"ー\" is dropped, it comes back when\nit is read aloud. This applies to all three words in the question (\"browser\"\nis written \"ブラウザ\" and read \"ブラウザー\", for example), although the case for\n\"driver\" is special in that if it refers to a driver of a car it is written\n\"ドライバー\" and if it refers to a device driver it is written \"ドライバ\". To provide\nthe example in the other way, since \"curator\" \"キュレーター\" isn't related to tech,\nthe \"ー\" is never omitted.\n\nMore examples:\n\n * tech/programming: \n * transistor \"トランジスタ\"\n * constructor \"コンストラクタ\"\n * destructor \"デストラクタ\"\n * IT coordinator \"ITコーディネータ\"\n * non-tech: \n * destroyer \"デストロイヤー\"\n * coordinator \"コーディネーター\"\n\nI remember seeing this rule explicitly written out somewhere in [「30日でできる！\nOS自作入門」](http://hrb.osask.jp/), and it matches my personal experience too. Not\nto discredit naruto, but I am pretty sure common Japanese people are not aware\nof any of the rules specified in that JIS spec ; p", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-09T11:37:05.370", "id": "15828", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-09T14:05:33.767", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-09T14:05:33.767", "last_editor_user_id": "5317", "owner_user_id": "5317", "parent_id": "15807", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "`〜で働いた` is fine for literally \"worked at\". But I more often hear `〜に[勤]{つと}める`\nmeaning \"employed for/by 〜\"; usually in the `〜ている` form (\"am currently\nemployed for/by 〜\"). In this case, I think you'd just use the simple past\ntense.\n\n> IBMに勤めたことがある。そして、BestBuyにも。\n\nAlso, see this post about a unique employment situation: [Employed by one\ninstitution but work for\nanother](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/6157/78).", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-08T16:37:22.890", "id": "15812", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-08T16:53:11.930", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.863", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "15811", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "In casual conversation I think you can say:\n\n> A: (前は)どこ(orどこの会社)にいたの？/いたんですか。 \n> B: ((ずっと)前(は))IBMにいた/いました。あと、BestBuyにもいた/いました/いたことがあります。etc. \n>\n\n... using the verb いる(居る), or \n\n> A: (前は)どこに(orどこの会社に/どこに仕事(に)/仕事(は)どこ(に))行ってたの？/行ってたんですか。 \n> B: ((ずっと)前(は))IBMに行ってた/行ってました。あと、BestBuyにも行ってた/行ってました/行ってたことがあります。etc. \n>\n\n... using the verb 行く. \nOf course you can say:\n\n> A: どこに勤めてたの？/勤めてたんですか。 \n> B: IBMに勤めてた/勤めてました/勤めてたことがあります。etc. \n>\n>\n> A: どこで働いてたの？/働いてたんですか。 \n> B: IBMで働いてた/働いてました/働いてたことがあります。etc. \n>\n\n... using 勤める/働く. I think using いる/行く would be more colloquial.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-08T17:15:42.620", "id": "15814", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-08T23:06:58.117", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15811", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]