Datasets:

---

p1atdev

/

japanese-stackexchange

like 3

[ { "body": "Yes, 終止形 can be used as a command like in this manga. Translation: \"Then stand\nup right away!\"\n\nIt sounds like a parent or a school teacher ordering their kids to do\nsomething right away. It's weaker/friendlier than 立て but stronger than\n立ってください.\n\nSuch use of 終止形 is not usually heard in military organizations, so I feel the\nperson on the right is being rather friendly rather than dignified as a\nsupervisor.\n\nNegative form is also possible. Example: 「(教室で先生が)そこ、喋らない！」「ごちゃごちゃ反論しない！」", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-08T18:03:24.360", "id": "15817", "last_activity_date": "2021-01-25T02:51:25.793", "last_edit_date": "2021-01-25T02:51:25.793", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "15816", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes, it's possible if the 連用形{れんようけい} of the first verb does not have\nokurigana. For example:\n\n * `見{み}る` → `見-` → `見上{みあ}げる`\n * `着{き}る` → `着-` → `着始{きはじ}める`\n * `寝{ね}る` → `寝-` → `寝落{ねお}ちる`\n\nAnd so on.\n\nEven in cases when the compound verb does have middle okurigana, it may be\nomitted for brevity, e.g. especially in newspapers. With nouns created from\nsuch verbs even the ending okurigana may be dropped if the word is common\nenough:\n\n * `引{ひ}き取{と}り` → `引取{ひきと}り` → `引取{ひきとり}`.\n * `受{う}け付{つ}け` → `受付{うけつ}け` → `受付{うけつけ}`\n\n(I think `受付` is actually the prevalent form these days)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-08T21:36:20.980", "id": "15822", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-08T21:36:20.980", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3295", "parent_id": "15821", "post_type": "answer", "score": 14 } ]

[ { "body": "You're taking the third place (第3位) and you're either throwing it away if it's\nfour or below (四捨) or you add one to the next place if it's five or above\n(五入).\n\nAs a result, the third place is gone, and you're only left with two decimal\nplaces.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-09T03:20:59.923", "id": "15825", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-09T03:20:59.923", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15824", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "I think the problem comes from \"小数第２位未満\", but not he latter part.\n\nFrom the sentence, it should mean that a decimal place after the second\ndecimal point is generated. Like:\n\n3.1415 ≈ 3.14\n\nAs the decimal places goes further, the actual number it represents becomes\nsmaller. I think this is what 未満 comes from. It means:\n\nwhen a decimal place that is not big enough to be represented by the the\nsecond decimal place is generated, then ...\n\nSo, to you question:\n\nDoes 「四捨五入」 make the decimal places less than the mentioned number or\nsomething else entirely?\n\nNo. It does not mean that. snailboat has already given what 「四捨五入」 means. It\nmeans to round up. The whole sentence you gave should be translated:\n\nIf a fraction with MORE than 2 decimal places is generated, round up to 2\ndecimal places.\n\nP.S Sorry for the English. Any edit is welcome.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-09T05:53:41.003", "id": "15826", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-09T05:53:41.003", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "903", "parent_id": "15824", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Many kanji dictionaries list name readings separate from 音 and 訓 readings.\nWhen I look up 七 in 新漢語林, I see the following readings listed under names:\n\n> かず \n> しち \n> **な** \n> なな\n\nSo yes, I think in this case each one is read な, although _most_ of the time\noutside of names it is not read as simply な, and it may not always be read\nthat way inside a name, either.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-09T14:17:53.257", "id": "15831", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-09T14:17:53.257", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15830", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "\"A teacher is the most important person for a student\"\n\nBecomes...\n\n\"A teacher is the most important person from the point of view of a student\"\n\n... and then...\n\n\"Teacherはstudentのviewから見るとmost importantなpersonです。\"\n\n\"Teacherはstudentの視点から見ると最もimportantな人物です。\"\n\n\"先生は学生の視点から見ると最も重要な人物です。\"\n\n\"先生は学生にとって最も重要な人物です。\"", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-10T03:23:45.833", "id": "15838", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-10T08:26:26.493", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-10T08:26:26.493", "last_editor_user_id": "119", "owner_user_id": "5322", "parent_id": "15832", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "Both 「先生は学生にいちばんたいせつな人です」and「がくせいは先生がいちばんたいせつな人です」are good, but 先生は 学生に\n**とって** いちばん… would be better and 「がくせいは先生がいちばんたいせつな人です」 are ambiguous because\nit can mean ...\n\n 1. Students are people for whom their teacher is most important. \n 2. Students are people who find their teacher most important.\n 3. Students are people whom the teacher find most important.\n 4. Students think of their teacher as the most important person.\n 5. For students, their teachers are the most important person.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-10T10:10:28.847", "id": "15845", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-10T10:10:28.847", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4092", "parent_id": "15832", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "> XX is the most important [noun] for YY.\n\nFor \"(person A) is the most important person for (person B)\", you can say:\n\n> まささんは、ちよこさんにとって[一番]{いちばん}[大切]{たいせつ}な人です。 \n> ジュリエットは、ロミオにとって一番[大事]{だいじ}な人です。 \n> [母]{はは}は、私にとって[最]{もっと}も大切な人です。 \n> [妻]{つま}は、[僕]{ぼく}にとって最も大事な人です。etc. \n>\n\n... rather than まささんは、ちよこさんにとって最も[重要]{じゅうよう}な[人物]{じんぶつ}です。... probably because\n大事な人/大切な人 sound more personal. \n\nYou'd rather use 最も重要な人物 in:\n\n> 彼は[我]{わ}が[社]{しゃ}にとって最も重要な人物です。 \n> (He is the most important person for our company.)\n\nFor \"XX is the most important for YY\", you can say like: \n\n> デッサンは、[美術]{びじゅつ}を[学]{まな}ぶ人にとって最も重要/大切/一番大事etc.です。 \n> (Dessin is the most important for art students.) \n> [料理人]{りょうりにん}にとって、[嗅覚]{きゅうかく}は最も重要/大切/一番大事etc.です。 \n> (For a cook, sense of smell is the most important.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-14T07:49:47.030", "id": "15937", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-14T08:41:41.217", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-14T08:41:41.217", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15832", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "This doesn't directly answer your question for the exact wording, but a common\nspeech \"closing\" I've heard is\n\n> ご[清聴]{せい・ちょう}ありがとうございました → Thank you very much for your attention\n\n**Note** : Don't confuse this `[清聴]{せい・ちょう}` with this `[静聴]{せい・ちょう}` that has\na slightly different meaning.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-09T17:44:43.897", "id": "15834", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-09T20:42:58.517", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-09T20:42:58.517", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "15833", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "Conversational Japanese by Anne Kaneko offers the following to close a speech\nof some length (note):\n\n> 今日私の話が少しでも参考になればうれしく思います。ありがとうございました。 \n> I hope my speech today has been helpful. Thank you very much.\n\nAccording to my learner's logic, you could modify this statement to say\ninteresting instead of helpful, by replacing 「参考になれば」with「 面白くなれば」.\n\nWhen I first read your question, I thought 「面白かったらうれしい」might be safer. As\nthese are concluding remarks, I think the only difference is that where as\n「面白くなれば」 emphasizes that for you to be \"happy\" the audience have to find the\ntalk interesting, 「面白かったら」conveys the message that IF the audience found the\ntalk interesting then you are \"happy”.\n\nI should be interested to see comments from others on my two alternative\nsuggestions. Perhaps if you are doing this in a class you have a teacher who\ncould give you feedback you can share here?\n\nNote: for a short speech, this book advises you should just bow and say thank\nyou.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-12T22:57:34.543", "id": "15909", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-13T00:15:35.220", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-13T00:15:35.220", "last_editor_user_id": "1556", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "15833", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "You're right, this is a form of だ. You're probably used to seeing な following\n_na_ -adjectives. It can be considered the form of だ that appears before\nnouns:\n\n> キレイだ ← Here, だ ends a clause. \n> キレイな花 ← Here, だ changes to な before the noun 花.\n\nBut when だ follows a regular noun, it typically doesn't take the な form. The\nmain exception is when it comes before certain noun-like things including わけ\nand の:\n\n> リンゴだ ← Here, だ ends a clause. \n> リンゴなの ← Here, だ changes to な before the nominalizer の.\n\nThe same thing happens in your sentence:\n\n> あいつが犯人だ ← Here, だ ends a clause. \n> あいつが犯人なわけ ← Here, だ changes to な before the formal noun わけ.\n\nIt changes form to な.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-10T03:48:39.817", "id": "15841", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-10T06:19:13.353", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-10T06:19:13.353", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15835", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "I'm Japanese.\n\nThe differences between ば/と/たら are difficult.\n\nJapanese also ask similar questions:\n<http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1115354691>\n\nIn short, \"と\" needs proof of happening for next sentence. \"たら\" don't need\nproof, wishful word also used after たら.\n\n* * *\n\nAssign these three sentence to variables for simplicity.\n\n## S1する(means \"do S1\") = ごんは、家に着く\n\n## S2する(means \"do S2\") = ウナギを家の外に置い\n\n## S3する(means \"do S3\") = 言いました\n\nand then,\n\nごんは、家に着くと、ウナギを家の外に置いて、言いました。\n\ncan transform to\n\nS1すると、 S2して、S3する。\n\nDo S1, and then, do S2, and do S3.\n\n* * *\n\nSimply stated, there is little difference. But, と implies to us the \"certainty\nof next sentence\" after the former sentence, we can read it comfortably.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-10T03:15:26.403", "id": "15837", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-10T04:04:55.090", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-10T04:04:55.090", "last_editor_user_id": "4091", "owner_user_id": "5322", "parent_id": "15836", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "Both events in your sentence take place in the past and the application of 〜たら\nand 〜と is slightly different.\n\nAs Yang Muye says, と is often used in stories to **objectively** describe\nevents and the conjunctive すると is often used to set up the scene for what\nhappens next. Momotaro, the peach boy is sometimes given as an example of this\nuse of と.\n\n**〜たら on the other hand cannot be used if the actor has control over the\nsequence of events which is the case here.**\n\nThis use of と is different from the \"conditional-と\" which is used to mark a\ncondition that brings about an uncontrollable event. In such cases S2 cannot\nbe volitional and the following sentence (not set in the past) is\nungrammatical:\n\n> 今日、仕事が早く終わると君の家に寄るよ。*\n\n**Objectively** is the operative word in all this. The following sentence is\nincorrect because the writer is too closely involved in the events:\n\n> 私は家へ帰ると晩ご飯を作った。*\n\nThe て-form is more natural:\n\n> 私は家へ帰ってから晩ご飯を作った。\n\nAnd the following sentence is acceptable because even though the writer is\ndescribing his own activities, he has distanced himself from them:\n\n> 去年、クリスマスの日に私の町のレストランがすべてしまっていた。私はその時、家へ帰ると自分で晩ご飯を作った。\n\n_Reference: A students' guide to Jpse Grammar by Naomi Hanaoka McGloin_", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-10T03:29:00.480", "id": "15839", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-11T15:01:12.060", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-11T15:01:12.060", "last_editor_user_id": "1556", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "15836", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "ごんは、家に着いた **(then what happened?) すると** 、ウナギを家の外に置いて、言いました。\n\nと puts a little more emphasis on what happens next. It makes your narration\nsound vivid. It can also imply some kind of relation between two consecutive\nactions. e.g. **causality or immediacy.**\n\nと seems very common in stories and novels. すると is also a conjunction.\n\n* * *\n\n## Reference\n\nI found an explanation in 庭三郎's\n[現代日本語文法概説](http://www.geocities.jp/niwasaburoo/49jouken.html#49.4)\n\n> 過去の事実を客観的に叙述するこの用法は、「～と」の基本的な用法の一つです。小説などで事態の描写に多く使われます。\n>\n> (One of the basic usages of と is to narrate events in the past objectively.\n> It's frequently used in descriptions in novels.)\n\n \n\n> 「～と」は、同一主体の連続的な動作を描写することができますが、これは「～たら」にはない用法です。\n```\n\n> 船は、汽笛を鳴らすと、静かに岸壁を離れていった。（？たら） \n> 彼女は、顔を上げると、きっぱりとこう言った。\n> \n```\n\n>\n> (と can be used to describe sequential actions of the same agent while たら\n> cannot.)\n\n豊田豊子 wrote [a series of papers](http://repository.tufs.ac.jp/simple-\nsearch?query=%E6%8E%A5%E7%B6%9A%E5%8A%A9%E8%A9%9E%E3%80%8C%E3%81%A8%E3%80%8D%E3%81%AE%E7%94%A8%E6%B3%95%E3%81%A8%E6%A9%9F%E8%83%BD)\non と.\n\n```\n\n 豊田豊子1978「接続助詞『と』の用法と機能(1)」『日本語学校論集』5\n 豊田豊子1979「発見の『と』」『日本語教育』36 \n 豊田豊子1979「接続助詞『と』の用法と機能(Ⅲ)」『日本語学校論集』6\n 豊田豊子1982「接続助詞『と』の用法と機能(Ⅳ)」『日本語学校論集』9\n 豊田豊子1983「接続助詞『と』の用法と機能(Ⅴ)」『日本語学校論集』10\n \n```", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-10T03:33:16.147", "id": "15840", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-10T05:41:26.737", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-10T05:41:26.737", "last_editor_user_id": "4833", "owner_user_id": "4833", "parent_id": "15836", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "Here, this 接続助詞 \"と\" works not as conditional. It simply connects another\nsentence which happened immediately after that. Almost the same meaning as\n\"すると\" or \"そして\".\n\nThis site explains several uses of 接続助詞 \"と\":\n\n<http://blog.livedoor.jp/liangliangliaoba/archives/6029734.html>\n\n> 異なった主体が同時またはほぼ同時に起こる場合\n>\n> * 学校につくと、ベルが鳴った。\n> * 家に帰ると日が暮れた。\n> * 道を右に曲がると、駅が見えた。\n>\n\nThe last one translates not as \" _If_ I turned right, I saw a station\", but as\n\"I turned right, _and then_ I saw a station.\" And so on.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-10T05:50:26.057", "id": "15842", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-10T06:08:28.073", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-10T06:08:28.073", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "15836", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "I think in daily conversation it would be [指]{ゆび}の関節. 指関節 will sound\ntechnical.\n\nEDIT: I think both ゆびかんせつ and しかんせつ can be used, but I'm not 100% sure. As for\n指の[節]{ふし}, this isn't technical and can be used in daily language but I think\nit's a bit more uncommon and sounds a tiny bit archaic.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-11T09:26:49.397", "id": "15872", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-11T15:02:03.797", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-11T15:02:03.797", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "15843", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "We don't particularly read, but just see them.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-10T10:13:46.777", "id": "15846", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-10T10:13:46.777", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4092", "parent_id": "15844", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "Of course the signs are primarily meant to be seen & understood, rather than\nread.\n\nI think the signs, if they had to be read (as in \"It says X here\"), would be\nread as literally as possible\n\n> 押 おす \n> 引 ひく \n> 男 おとこ \n> 女 おんな \n> 危 あぶない きけん \n> 開 あける あく ひらく \n> 閉 しめる しまる とじる \n> 酒 さけ\n\nThe only odd one out is 危, but 危険 and 危ない are practically interchangeable in\nmost situations. (Depending on the train operator, you'll hear 危ないですから... or\n危険ですから..., when being warned about an incoming train.) The word is sometimes\nwritten as [危険]{あぶない} at railway crossings. So, 危 allows you to choose\naccording to context. (Of course, the main difference being that 危ない is more\neasily understood by small children and a tad less formal than 危険.)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-10T11:11:26.993", "id": "15847", "last_activity_date": "2017-03-23T12:37:43.507", "last_edit_date": "2017-03-23T12:37:43.507", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "15844", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "In brief, 費やす is used to say something was used badly (wasted/squandered).\nUnless that is what I want to communicate, I refrain from using it.\n\nI see that my dictionary (プログレッシブ英和）gives two meanings: one to spend and one\nto squander - see examples below - but for the sake of clarity I suspect most\npeople follow my practice (but am open to comment).\n\nExamples:\n\n> Spend\n>\n> 毎日30分を英語のヒアリングの練習に費やしている \n> I spend 30 minutes every day trying to improve my aural comprehension in\n> English. \n> 彼はその本を書くのに3年の労力を費やした \n> It took him three years' hard work to finish the book. \n>\n>\n> Waste/squander\n>\n> つまらないことに時間を費やす｜waste time doing unimportant things \n> 宝石に無駄な金を費やす｜waste [squander] one's money on jewelry", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-10T15:46:33.470", "id": "15854", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-11T00:09:37.980", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-11T00:09:37.980", "last_editor_user_id": "1556", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "15848", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "I think イグサという植物の茎を編んで is an adjunct that tells us _how_ the main clause verb\n作られています happens. That is, it's similar to the English:\n\n> _tatami-omote_ is made [by weaving rush stalks]\n\nNote that the English has one passive ( _is made_ ) and one non-finite verb (\n_weaving_ ). It corresponds fairly well to the Japanese, in which 作られている is\npassive and 編んで is non-finite. There's no need for the other verb to be\npassive, just like in English _weaving_ doesn't need to be passive.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-10T15:12:23.747", "id": "15853", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-10T15:12:23.747", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15849", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "The このままで in このままでいいんだよ。 modifies the いい adverbially, meaning \"It's okay to be\njust the way you are / just the way we are / It's okay to let it just the way\nit is\", whereas the このままで in いかないで。このままで。 means このままでいてください or\nこのままでいさせてください。(≒ Please stay where you are. / Please stay just as you are /\nLet us be just the way we are), いてください/いさせてください being left unsaid/implied.\n\nこのままで is written in Hiragana in modern Japanese.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-10T18:31:57.493", "id": "15861", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-10T18:42:36.260", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-10T18:42:36.260", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15850", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "I think you can say...\n\n> 本日は(or今日は)、XXについて[話]{はな}したいと思います。\n\nor\n\n> 本日は、XXについてお[話]{はな}ししたいと思います。(to sound more formal)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-10T16:22:37.450", "id": "15858", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-10T16:22:37.450", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15855", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

[ { "body": "How about parsing it as:\n\n> 『いまは何も考えないように』と努め、私は次へと進む。\n\nor\n\n> 『いまは何も考えないように(しよう。)』と努め、私は次へと進む。\n\nSo I think your translation is correct.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-10T16:12:57.610", "id": "15857", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-10T16:12:57.610", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15856", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "**For the case of 散歩, both are grammatical but with a slightly different\nmeaning.**\n\n<https://youtu.be/5zpAze8KPtw?t=368>\n\n * use を for \"going across\" (in and out) of something\n * use で for \"moving/circling inside\" of something\n\nAs mentioned in the video, while 通ります cannot use で since it only carries the\n\"across\" meaning, 散歩 can use either because in the 'exercise' context it can\nhave the meaning of \"circling inside the park\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2020-09-02T18:02:14.963", "id": "80462", "last_activity_date": "2020-09-02T18:02:14.963", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "37266", "parent_id": "15859", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Put simply, the particle へ is derived from the noun 方{へ}.\n\nBjarke Frellesvig provides a brief explanation in his book _A History of the\nJapanese Language_ (page 132).\n\n> … The noun _pye_ \"side, direction\" was being grammaticalized as an\n> _allative_ case particle _pye_ , but in the Old Japanese period had not yet\n> acquired that status.\n\nAs for pronunciation, sound changes would have likely proceeded something like\n*pye > *pe > *ɸe > *we > e.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-12T02:30:08.413", "id": "15888", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-12T02:52:47.313", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-12T02:52:47.313", "last_editor_user_id": "5328", "owner_user_id": "5328", "parent_id": "15860", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "As ファルキエッレ stated, the particle へ is cognate with the noun, variously spelled\n方 or 辺, and probably derives from it. This has been a very productive noun,\nappearing as a component of many terms in modern Japanese:\n\n * 芦辺 _ashibe_ , \"reed-covered bank\"\n * 海辺 _umibe_ , \"seaside\"\n * 夕べ _yūbe_ , \"last night, yesterday evening\"\n\nSome modern JA terms aren't necessarily even recognized as compounds:\n\n * 前 _mae_ , \"front\", compound of 目 + 辺 \"eye-wards; visible place\"\n * 家 _ie_ , \"home\", probably a compound of 寝 + 辺 \"sleeping place\"\n\nThis へ may also be cognate with 瓮 ( _he_ , \"container\"), from which we get 鍋\n_nabe_ , \"pot\", compound of 肴 + 瓮 \"side-dish container\".\n\nRegarding the use of へ as a particle meaning something like English \"to\" or\n\"towards\", we already see such usage as long ago as in the\n[_Man'yōshū_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man%27y%C5%8Dsh%C5%AB) poetry of\nno later than the mid-700s:\n\n * [Poem 3696](http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/japanese/manyoshu/Man15Yo.html#3696): \n新羅奇敝可 伊敝尓可加反流 \n_Shiraki he ka / Ihe ni ka kaheru_ \nI'll go back to Silla [the kingdom in the north of the Korean peninsula] or to\nhome...\n\nPerhaps in reflection of the noun's sense of \"place, general area\", the\nparticle へ in the ancient texts denoted \"towards, in the direction of\" rather\nthan denoting a specific arrival location, and was more often used to indicate\nfaraway places rather than anywhere close by. In contrast, に was used to\ndenote a specific arrival location and was used for closer places. The vaguer\nconnotations of へ (\"in the direction of a place\") still persist to some extent\nin modern Japanese and contrast with the more specific connotations of に\n(\"specifically to a place\").", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-12T20:28:49.670", "id": "15902", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-14T08:21:21.190", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-14T08:21:21.190", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "15860", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "As an example, if I'm told this I might expect the fireworks to start...\n\n```\n\n すぐ花火が始まります-> 0 min - maybe 5 min\n すぐに花火が始まります-> 0 min - maybe 5 min\n もうすぐ花火が始まります-> maybe 5 min - maybe 20 min\n \n```\n\ni.e. もうすぐ isn't immediately, more like \"very soon\". As for すぐ vs すぐに I don't\nthink there is a difference.\n\n**EDIT** : The actual time these word indicates depends heavily on the context\nand listener. The times above are completely made up.\n\nFor example if I'm told this, I might expect my scores to go up...:\n\n```\n\n すぐ学力が上がりますよ\n -> I can expect them to go up within 3 months? \n もうすぐ学力が上がりますよ\n -> it won't get better now, but they will start to get better after at some point, maybe in a month?\n \n```\n\nBut somebody else may have a completely different expectation.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-11T11:06:00.063", "id": "15873", "last_activity_date": "2017-01-06T03:41:13.817", "last_edit_date": "2017-01-06T03:41:13.817", "last_editor_user_id": "4091", "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "15862", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "There could be various explanations from Japanese native speakers. Mine is\njust one of them. I hope it could be helpful for your question.\n\nもうすぐ: もうすぐ春が来る。\n\n\"もうすぐ\" = \"Just a little longer and\"\n\nAt the end of winter, we sometimes find a sign of spring and say \"Spring is\ncoming.\" \"もうすぐ春が来る\"\n\n\"もうすぐ\" doesn't only mean \"soon\" but \"sooner than expected before,\" because in\nthe winter we can't wait until spring. Strong demand for spring makes us feel\n\"Spring will come in the far distant future.\" However, at the end of winter,\nwe can find a hint of spring and realize as much about the coming of spring.\nIn such situation, we say \"もうすぐ春が来る！\"\n\n\"もうすぐ１０時になるよ。早くしてね。\" = \"It's almost 10 o'clock. Hurry up!\"\n\n\"もうすぐ\" here means \"earlier than you expected\" or \"If you are not careful, or\nyou'll drop behind the time.\" \"もうすぐ\" is used as mental time sense.\n\n\"もうすぐ花火が始まるよ。うかうかしていると見逃すよ！\"\n\n* * *\n\n\"すぐ\" and \"すぐに\" means \"instantaneous\" or \"straight\"\n\n\"１階を掃除したら、すぐに２階も掃除してね\"\n\nYou have two scenes in sequential order and scene changes without a pause.\n\n* * *\n\n\"もうすぐ春が来る！\" いよいよ、待ちに待った春が来ると言う感じがある。春の到来を待っていたので、それが長く感じられていた。それがもうすぐそこに来る。\n\n\"すぐに春が来る\" 冬が終わったら、冬と春の中間のような季節は感じられずに、春が来る。\n\n\"すぐに新しいボスが来る\" 前任者が離任して間を置かずに、新任のボスが来る。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2017-01-06T04:00:59.407", "id": "42302", "last_activity_date": "2017-08-17T07:41:37.657", "last_edit_date": "2017-08-17T07:41:37.657", "last_editor_user_id": "22698", "owner_user_id": "19219", "parent_id": "15862", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "Here are two suggestions. I think both are ok and other variations are\npossible. It would be interesting to hear people's comments.\n\n> It is not very well known that Japan is about the same size as the state of\n> California and much bigger than most European countries.\n>\n> The fact that Japan is about the same size as the state of California and\n> much bigger than almost every country in Europe is not very known.\n\nThe \"fact that\" aligns the sentence to \"ということ”, \"almost every\" is close to\n\"ほとんど\".\n\nI am taking it that both facts are not well known.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-11T00:40:05.927", "id": "15864", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-11T00:40:05.927", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "15863", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "I think 自然 sometimes means 川や湖、植物、動物、虫. I still remember a sentence in a\nfamous article:\n[空気と水、それに土などという自然があって](http://www.ne.jp/asahi/ca2/kirsch/tsushin19.htm).\n\nIt's interesting that both sentences explain 自然 by themselves.\n\n> たくさんの川や湖、植物、動物、虫など(＝)多くの自然 \n> 空気と水、それに土という(＝)自然があって.\n\nによって here means “because of” or “by means of”.\n\nIn the second sentence, 自然 doesn't look like a subject in English otherwise\nthere will be two subjects (自然 and 公害). You may think there is something like\n“regarding” or “concerning” before it. You may also think 自然 modifies 問題.\n\n> The pollution is getting to be a problem of Japanese nature because of the\n> industrialization since 1960s.\n\nこれからも means “in the future”, “from now on”.\n\nどうやって means “how” “in what way”, “by what means”.\n\nていく means something like “to go on doing” “to do continuously” or “forever”.\n\nか marks the end of an embedded question. The whole question\n(これからも日本の自然をどうやって守っていく) functions like a noun, which serves as the object of\n考える.\n\n> We have to think about how to protect Japanese nature forever from now on.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-11T04:21:14.297", "id": "15866", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-11T05:42:55.223", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-11T05:42:55.223", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4833", "parent_id": "15865", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "今思うと thinking back now, when I think back\n\nWhen you see phrases like 思うと, 見ると, 振り返ると, 考えると etc., the following sentence\nis the content or result of the verb.\n\nI think the と between よかった and 思います is necessary. There might be an error in\nyour quote.\n\nよかった is a kind of interjection. It is not just “good”, but “fortunate”. You\nare glad you have already studied it.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-11T05:37:22.013", "id": "15868", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-11T06:44:33.363", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-11T06:44:33.363", "last_editor_user_id": "4833", "owner_user_id": "4833", "parent_id": "15867", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "It's always written in hiragana. I can't tell you why though. Allegedly it was\nnamed しゃぶしゃぶ because of the sound it makes when you take the beef slice\nthrough the hot water twice with your chopsticks.\n\nThe word しゃぶしゃぶ is never used for other purposes than to refer to the cuisine,\nat least in contemporary Japan.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-11T07:05:44.870", "id": "15870", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-11T07:05:44.870", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "15869", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "To keep things a little simple, I'll just extract one example of each case\nfrom all the ones you have on your sheet.\n\n> サリさんは日本語{にほんご}が分{わ}かります。\n\nThis is fairly straightforward. It says, \"Sally _understands_ Japanese.\"\n\n> サリさんは日本語{にほんご}ができます。\n\nHere, we're saying Sally has an ability for Japanese. A very direct, slightly\nclunky, translation might be something like, \"Sally is Japanese-capable.\" You\nmight want to see [this answer about the implications of\n`できる`](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/2719/119).\n\nSo, which would you choose? Well, just like when speaking English, saying\nsomeone understands Japanese, and that one is capable of Japanese, convey\nlargely the same general idea, and in most daily conversation you probably\nwon't go wrong exchanging one for the other. The difference is a matter of\nnuance. The first seems, to me, to lean towards the idea that if you speak\nJapanese _to_ Sally, she'll understand you. The second seems to convey more\nthat Sally can speak Japanese back to you.\n\nHope that helps.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-11T14:38:52.833", "id": "15877", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-11T14:38:52.833", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:43.857", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "119", "parent_id": "15874", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "(1) こと nominalizes a verb, so はなすこと is \"speaking\". \n(~が)できます means \"can (do)~\", so you can say: \n\n> はなすことができます。I can do + speaking → I can speak. \n> [日本語]{にほんご}をはなすことができます。I can do + speaking Japanese → I can speak Japanese. \n>\n\nLikewise, \n\n> かんじをよむことができます。I can read kanji. \n> すしをつくることができます。I can make sushi. \n>\n\n* * *\n\n(2) かた is \"way of ~\"/\"how to\", so はなしかた is \"way of speaking\"/\"how to speak\". \n(~が)わかります means \"I know~\"/\"I understand~\", so you can say: \n\n> はなしかたがわかります。I know + the way of speaking. → I know how to speak. \n> [日本語]{にほんご}のはなしかたがわかります。I know + the way of speaking + of Japanese → I know\n> how to speak Japanese. \n>\n\nLikewise, \n\n> かんじのよみかたがわかります。I know how to read kanji. \n> すしのつくりかたがわかります。I know how to make sushi.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-11T13:59:23.743", "id": "15876", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-11T15:13:27.767", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-11T15:13:27.767", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15875", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "For the second sort of grammar correction, I go with:\n\n> もしかしたら、「correct or what I imagine to be correct thing」でしょうか。\n\nFor the first type:\n\n> すみません、「what I meant to say」と言いたかったんです。\n\nIf what I said wound up being rude:\n\n> 失礼いたしました。違うこと、「correct thing」、と言いたかったんです。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-12T09:11:57.800", "id": "15894", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-12T15:47:36.953", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-12T15:47:36.953", "last_editor_user_id": "29", "owner_user_id": "4091", "parent_id": "15878", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "I often just use/hear `じゃなくて〜`.\n\n> これは兄がもらった贈り物だ。あっ、じゃなくて、兄 ** _に_** もらった贈り物。\n\nAlso, I know of `[元]{もと}へ`, but I don't know how much it's actually used.\nHere's an example my dictionary gives.\n\n> 次の計算問題は22プラス12…元へマイナス12です → The next problem in calculation is 22 plus 12...\n> no, [I take that back / correction] ─ (I mean) minus 12.\n\nI also seem to remember hearing `改めて(言う)...` from some people, but I might be\nmaking that up.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-12T15:46:14.423", "id": "15898", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-14T16:13:57.677", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-14T16:13:57.677", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "15878", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "It would literally be:\n\n> [科学]{かがく}が好きになり[始]{はじ}めました。 \n>\n\n...using the verb なる(成る;grow/become) and 始める. But I think you could also say\nit as:\n\n> 科学が好きになってきました。 \n>\n\n...using なる and the subsidiary verb くる(来る).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-11T16:26:14.743", "id": "15880", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-11T16:44:29.227", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-11T16:44:29.227", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15879", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "I think that 好きになった, as in [Chocolate's\nanswer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/15880/1628) is the best literal\nway of saying \"I started liking...\".\n\nAnother very common way of expressing the same sentiment is to use 気に入{い}る.\nOften translated as \"favourite X\" in the expression お気に入りのX, when used in the\nverb form 気に入った it aptly describes that you started liking something, the past\ntense here pointing at the transition to the \"state of liking\". So,\n\n> I started liking science. \n> 科学が気に入った。", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-11T21:35:53.997", "id": "15883", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-11T22:26:37.123", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.863", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "15879", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I don't know of any dictionary or reference book, but since 御 is most often\nwritten as お or ご, as appropriate, you could check the Balanced Corpus of\nContemporary Written Japanese (BCCWJ, 少納言,\n<http://www.kotonoha.gr.jp/shonagon>) as the proper way of \"doing Google\ncounting\".\n\nFor 忙しい and 自分 the numbers are\n\n> お忙しい 217 results \n> ご忙しい 0 results \n> お自分 8 results, all of which are in fact なお自分, i.e. unrelated to 御自分 \n> ご自分 835 results\n\nI guess you already know, but for the record, this confirms that it should be\n御{お}忙しい and 御{ご}自分.\n\nJust to show that this also works with words which don't follow the rule \"お\nfor native Japanese words, ご for Sino-Japanese words\":\n\n> お電話 393 results \n> ご電話 0 results \n> お会計 30 results \n> ご会計 0 results\n\nAnother, quick and dirty way would be to check whether your IME already\nrecognizes one or the other as a unit. (My IME knows お忙しい and ご自分, but\nsuggests 語忙しい or 尾自分 and parses the latter ones as ご＋忙しい and お＋自分. Similarly\nfor 電話 and 会計.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-11T18:47:21.343", "id": "15882", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-13T06:26:46.170", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-13T06:26:46.170", "last_editor_user_id": "125", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "15881", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 } ]

[ { "body": "について is a fixed expression meaning \"regarding, concerning, ...\" (here \"about\"\nalso works) and [derives from 就く or\n付く](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E3%81%AB%E5%B0%B1%E3%81%84%E3%81%A6?dic=daijisen&oid=14047000),\nalthough it is usually written in かな.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-12T00:23:56.533", "id": "15885", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-12T00:23:56.533", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "15884", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "もらいたい・いただきたい's usage is waving these days. It originally takes dative に for\nthe marker of the agent, but people have started to use nominative as well, as\na result, the situation is being more or less confusing. i.e.\n父母や教師達には…考えていただきたいものだ → 父母や教師達は…考えていただきたいものだ", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-13T03:52:31.210", "id": "15913", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-13T03:52:31.210", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4092", "parent_id": "15884", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "From a grammatical point of view I think it could be rephrased as:\n\n> (私は、)父母や教師達 _に_ は、もっとよく子どもの教育について、考えていただきたい{ものだ/と思う}。 \n>\n\n-私は = I = the subject for 考えていただきたい \n-父母や教師たちに = for parents and teachers = the subject for 考える \n-もっとよく = more seriously <--- modifies 考える. \n-子どもの教育について = about children's education <--- modifies 考える. \n-考えていただきたい* = the humble form of 考えてもらいたい = (I) want (someone) to think. >> I want parents and teachers to think (more seriously about...). \n-ものだ >> [goo辞書#5-㋑](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/219726/m0u/) emphasis \n\n*いただく is the humble form ([謙譲語]{けんじょうご}) of もらう.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-13T07:58:08.037", "id": "15917", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-13T09:01:06.937", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-13T09:01:06.937", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15884", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "(This is supplementary to Chocolate's answer.)\n\nIf you put everything together then we get:\n\n> I would like parents and teachers to think much more about their childrens'\n> education.\n\nNote that:\n\n * いただきたい makes the sentence from the viewpoint of the writer. \n\n * Parents and teachers are the topic (marked by は): that is to say, the focus of the speaker/writers utterance. \n\n * ものだ indicates the sincerity or importance the writer places on the statement.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-13T12:41:16.500", "id": "15918", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-13T12:49:39.100", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-13T12:49:39.100", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "15884", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Without further context, it would appear to mean \"is there anything about\nJapan that you like, other than the characters 日本?\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-12T21:00:32.383", "id": "15905", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-12T21:00:32.383", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "15886", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes, it can. I remember my teacher at school (here in Japan) sometimes using\n頑張りましょう when talking about activities that he would not directly take part in.\nHe was however peripherally involved, like being the one setting the test he\nwas referring to with his 頑張りましょう。\n\nI'd say that there needs to be at least a link between the person using this\nform and the activity. It doesn't need to be a direct link, but the speaker\nneeds to be involved in some way by either the activity or its outcome.\n\nSimilarly I have heard narrators using this form in documentaries on TV.\nAgain, even though they do not perform the action necessarily, the action and\noutcome impacts the course of the documentary and also hence also the\nnarrator.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-07-23T00:47:42.687", "id": "17913", "last_activity_date": "2014-07-23T00:47:42.687", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3494", "parent_id": "15889", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "たぐい is the only word that's interchangeable to 'kind' or 'sort'. 'type' is\nタイプ. 分類 and 種類 are close to 'category'. In addition, you can say その手の人 for\n\"that kind of person\".", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-12T05:21:07.920", "id": "15891", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-12T05:21:07.920", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4092", "parent_id": "15890", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "Don't forget about words like そんな, どういう, あのような, etc! I think you mostly don't\nneed a separate noun.\n\nFor a sense like\n\n> The health care provider will choose the best **type** of insulin for you\n> ...\n\nwhere there may be specific describable \"versions\" or \"types\" of something\nthat come to mind (with different purposes etc.), 種類 seems like a good fit. It\ndoesn't seem to apply well to people.\n\n分類 feels more like \"category\" or \"classification\"... a bit more technical. You\ncan use it when you talk about what group something falls into. It can also be\nused as a verb, unlike the other two.\n\nたぐい is a generally applicable word for \"kind\" -- but maybe a bit verbose\nfeeling since you introduce an unnecessary noun? その類の話・人. You're explicitly\ncategorizing by introducing the noun and yet being vague at the same time by\nusing \"that kind\" instead of saying what you really mean, so it has the\npotential to imply a stereotype or be a bit judgmental... hmm. It's not always\nlike that though, and is probably the closest to \"kind\" as a noun.\n\nNot a native speaker so I hope my intuition isn't too wrong on this one.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-12T06:55:59.717", "id": "15893", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-12T06:55:59.717", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "315", "parent_id": "15890", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "It can also be written as:\n\n> 『そんなことを聞いては失礼か』とも思ったが、どうしても聞かずにはいられなかった。\n\nThe と is the case particle as a quotative marker, and the も is the binding\nparticle. I think it's like \"I also thought that it might be rude to ask such\na thing, but...\", the \"also/も\" implying that you were thinking about other\nthings, too.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-12T16:55:32.207", "id": "15899", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-12T17:10:19.323", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-12T17:10:19.323", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15892", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "As an adjectival phrase modifying a noun, の tends to be used more often in the\nmodern language, as mentioned by Yang Muye. Sometimes its use is more of a\nmatter of emphasis or style, as in your second example.\n\n * 琵琶湖の向こう岸に虹 **の** 立つのを、麻子は見た。\n\nHere, the bold の is used to subtly alter the meaning. Translating this is\nsubjective, but might be useful to demonstrate:\n\n * 琵琶湖の向こう岸に虹 **の** 立つのを、麻子は見た。 \nAsako saw the rising **of** the rainbow on the opposite shore of Lake Biwa. \nvs.\n\n * 琵琶湖の向こう岸に虹 **が** 立つのを、麻子は見た。 \nAsako saw the rainbow rising on the opposite shore of Lake Biwa.\n\nIn the latter example using が, the rainbow becomes the subject of the embedded\nclause, **虹** が立つ, with the emphasis on the subject. Meanwhile, in the former\nexample using の, the emphasis is on the verb itself, 虹の **立つ** , with the\nemphasis on that verb.\n\nHope that helps explain things. :)", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-12T18:23:58.647", "id": "15900", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-14T07:20:54.400", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-14T07:20:54.400", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "15895", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "なんか in this context is used to emphasize the contemptuous feeling towards the\nobject placed before it. So, because this person is busy, she doesn't have\ntime to watch TV, which this person seems to see as a waste of time.\n\nI'm not aware of appropriate direct translation of this word in English, so\nyou may need to get creative in order to express the negative feeling.\nSomething like \"I'm too busy to be wasting my time watching TV\" would work.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-12T22:31:02.797", "id": "15908", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-12T22:31:02.797", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5336", "parent_id": "15896", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "> \"大きそう and 大きい見える both mean that something looks/appears big. What is the\n> difference between them?\"\n\nFor starters, 大きそう is grammatical, while 大き **い** 見える isn't. :) The latter\nwould have to be 大き **く** 見える to work: since the adjective 大きい is immediately\nfollowed by a verb, the adjective ending in い must change to the adverb ending\nin く.\n\n大きそう often doesn't really mean \"it _looks_ big\" in the literal sense of \"look\"\nas something's visual appearance. If something is just plain old big, folks\nwill generally just say 大きい. The -そう on an adjective stem without the final い\ncomes across more as \"it _seems_ like ...\" So 大きそう comes across more as \"X\n_seems_ big.\" This might imply a relative comparison (which is probably the\nconnotation of the uses that Chocolate mentions).\n\n(Note also that -そう after an adjective that includes the final い indicates\nreported speech -- \"I've heard that XX is YY; apparently XX is YY\". So 大き\n**い** そう would be \"[someone told me] that XX is big.\")\n\nWhether to use -そう or -く見える also depends on the grammatical context: what\ncomes next in the sentence? If someone is trying to say \"X _seems_ big, but it\nisn't really\", you might run across something like the following:\n\n * 大きそうに思えるけど、実は些細なことだ。 \n_Ōkisō ni omoeru kedo, jitsu wa sasai na koto da._ \nIt might seem big, but actually it's just a minor thing.\n\nAlternately, you could say:\n\n * 大きく見えるけど、実は些細なことだ。 \n_Ōkiku mieru kedo, jitsu wa sasai na koto da._ \nIt might look big, but actually it's just a minor thing.\n\nNote also that 見える implies something visible. If you say おいしそう, it might be\nthat something _looks_ delicious, or _sounds_ delicious, but if you say\nおいしく見える, you're saying that something specifically _looks_ delicious.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-12T20:53:36.080", "id": "15904", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-13T17:07:06.230", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-13T17:07:06.230", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "15897", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "For general purposes, if something is \"scalable\", we mean it can be expanded\nor extended usefully. Expansion or extension in this sense is 拡張 ( _kakuchō_ )\nin Japanese. So to say it's extend _ible_ , we would say it is 拡張可能 ( _kakuchō\nkanō_ ). The quality of being extendible / scalable would be 拡張可能性 ( _kakuchō\nkanōsei_ ), or possibly just 拡張性 ( _kakuchōsei_ ).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-13T01:03:15.287", "id": "15912", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-13T01:03:15.287", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "15910", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "The Japanese Wikipedia article at\n[同訓異字](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%90%8C%E8%A8%93%E7%95%B0%E5%AD%97),\nspecifically the\n[動詞の例](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%90%8C%E8%A8%93%E7%95%B0%E5%AD%97#.E5.8B.95.E8.A9.9E.E3.81.AE.E4.BE.8B.EF.BC.88.E6.85.A3.E7.94.A8.E7.9A.84.E3.81.AA.E3.82.82.E3.81.AE.E3.81.AF.E9.99.A4.E3.81.8F.EF.BC.89)\nsection, leads me to think that pitch accent isn't important for this term.\n\n * The examples listed for the うむ ( _umu_ ) reading, for instance, include 生む ( _ùmú_ , \"to bear, to produce\") with the flat _heiban_ pitch pattern and 膿む ( _úmù_ , \"to swell, to become swollen\") with the high-initial _atamadaka_ pitch pattern.\n\n * Similarly, the list for the きる ( _kiru_ ) reading includes both the _heiban_ 着る ( _kìrú_ , \"to wear [clothing]\") and the _atamadaka_ 切る ( _kírù_ , \"to cut something\").\n\nLooking further down in the\n[形容詞の例](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%90%8C%E8%A8%93%E7%95%B0%E5%AD%97#.E5.BD.A2.E5.AE.B9.E8.A9.9E.E3.81.AE.E4.BE.8B)\nsection reinforces this.\n\n * For あつい ( _atsui_ ), the examples include both the _heiban_ 厚い ( _àtsúí_ , \"thick\") and the _nakadaka_ 暑い ( _àtsúì_ , \"hot [weather]\"), 熱い ( _àtsúì_ , \"hot [to the touch]\").\n\nIn light of this variation in pitch accent, I think 同訓異字 is the term you're\nlooking for, at least for kun'yomi terms.\n\n* * *\n\nAlong the same lines, I just had a poke around the JA WP page at\n[同音異字](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%90%8C%E9%9F%B3%E7%95%B0%E5%AD%97) for\non'yomi terms. There is much less apparent pitch accent variation in these\nlists, but there _are_ some examples, such as:\n\n * 孝行 ( _kóòkòò_ , atamadaka, \"filial piety\") and 高校 ( _kòókóó_ , heiban, \"high school\")\n * 次官 ( _jíkàǹ_ , atamadaka, \"undersecretary, vice minister\") and 時間 ( _jìkáń_ , heiban, \"time, hour\")\n\nSo for on'yomi terms, 同音異字 looks like the term you want.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-13T17:48:27.067", "id": "15924", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-13T18:05:59.940", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-13T18:05:59.940", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "15914", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "I think there are no consistent rules for transcribing foreign words to\nkatakana and thus the task of reverting the process is even harder.\n\nThe most obvious hurdle will be deciding whether ラリルレロ should be La Li Lu Le\nLo or Ra Ri Ru Re Ro (or something completely different), e.g. レディー is either\nlady, or ready.\n\nMoreover, there are many source languages, like English, Portuguese, French,\nGerman. For example, another — not so serious, but obvious — question is\nwhether カクコ should be Ka Ku Ko, or Ca Cu Co, cf. カルテ _Ger._ Karte and かるた\n_Pt._ carta (although かるた is now written Karuta in English).\n\nSo, I think that a better name for your project is not to make a converter,\nbut to build a database, which you might do by building a simple converter and\nhaving users \"teach\" the best guess. (Google Translate has users teach it\ntranslations, so does [Detexify](http://detexify.kirelabs.org/classify.html).)\n\nA 外来語 dictionary file would be a good place to start.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-13T14:12:54.103", "id": "15920", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-13T14:12:54.103", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "15919", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "If you're sure you'll die and I'll read your letter after your death, then\nyou'd say:\n\n> あなたがこの手紙を読むころには、私はもう死んでいるでしょう。 \n> あなたがこの手紙を読んでいるころには、私はもう死んでいるでしょう。 \n> (Literally: I will already be dead when you read this letter.)\n\nIf I won't read your letter if you survive, then you'd say:\n\n> あなたがこの手紙を読んでいるということは、私はもう死んでいるということでしょう。 \n> あなたがこの手紙を読んでいるということは、私はもう死んでいるのでしょう。 \n> (Literally: If you're reading this letter, then it means that I'm already\n> dead.)\n\nIf you're not sure that I'll read your letter, but you're sure that it'll be\nonly after your death that I can read it, then:\n\n> あなたがこの手紙を読んでいるなら、それは私が(もう)死んだあとでしょう。 \n> あなたがこの手紙を読むとすれば、それは私の死んだあとでしょう。 \n> (Literally: If you read this letter, it will be after my death.)\n\n(Sorry if I'm misreading your question.)", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-13T15:58:58.543", "id": "15923", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-13T17:33:59.927", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-13T17:33:59.927", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15922", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "Temporal sequencing in Japanese is quite complicated so to answer your\nquestion I am going to simplify the sentence, if I may, to:\n\n> If you have received this letter then I have (already) been killed in the\n> war.\n\n(This allows me to avoid questions about the use of 〜ている and resultant state\nverbs which is also complicated and not the main point of your question. It is\ncovered in other questions on this site.)\n\nThe た-form indicates that an action has been completed not that it took place\nin the past. If you use なら then the action becomes hypothetical in the sense\nthat it may or may not happen, or have happend, which is the situation when\nthe letter was written but not when the reader receives the letter. The\nimportant point is that in your scenario, if the first statement has come true\nthen the second statement will also be true. The sentence would then be:\n\n> この手紙をもらったのなら、私は戦争で殺されたのです。\n\nIf you want to add \"already\" then もう can be inserted after 私は.\n\nNeedless to say, when making such a statement the context has to be clear for\nthe reader to infer the correct meaning. And, as you can see from Chocolate's\nexcellent answer, the exact wording will depend on what exactly you want to\nsay but if you want to know how to make a simple statement about two future\ndependent hypothetical events then I think this is one model that should work.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-14T00:24:12.310", "id": "15928", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-14T00:41:55.007", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-14T00:41:55.007", "last_editor_user_id": "1556", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "15922", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "わけ here is from the kanji 訳 which you may have seen for example in 申し訳ありません.\nIt would literally be translated to \"sense\" I believe, but of course vary\nalong this line with the context.\n\nIn your case, we have:\n\n> ある訳ではありません\n\nYou are right for the ある and ではありません parts, if they would be seperate. In\ngeneral, you can see ある訳 as to \"have sense\", so something like ある訳ないんでしょう？\nwould be \"There is no way this/that is true/etc.\"\n\nTo answer your question, どこにでもあるわけではありません could be translated to \"There is no\nway that they are everywhere\" (hence there is no way you can find independent\ncinemas everywhere), and so to complete your translation:\n\n> \"Independent cinemas are different from multiplex ones as they have cheaper\n> tickets, but there is no way they are everywhere\".", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-13T19:00:54.710", "id": "15926", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-13T19:03:07.180", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-13T19:03:07.180", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "5313", "parent_id": "15925", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "Your translation is close, but a little off. The pattern `〜わけ{では・じゃ}ない` means\n\"Does not (necessarily) mean that 〜\". The `ある` here is for existence, not for\npossession. So it would translate as\n\n> * 独立系の映画館はシネコンと違っていて、チケットが安いのですが、どこにでもあるわけではありません。 → Independent theatres\n> differ from big multiplexes; the tickets are cheap(er), but they are not\n> (necessarily) found everywhere/all over.\n>\n\nI believe @Yakobu's translation is incorrect. To make a claim that \"there is\nno way they are everywhere\" seems too strong. `〜わけ{では・じゃ}ない` means the may not\nbe everywhere, although they _could_ be and the speaker just doesn't know it.\nThe point is that there is room for doubt. Here are some examples I've found.\n\n> * だからといってそれが間違っている訳ではない → \"This doesn't mean (that) it is wrong\" → It's\n> inferred that it _could_ be wrong.\n> * と言ってもそれは君が間違っていないというわけではない → \"However, that's not to say that you are\n> right (not mistaken)\" → It's inferred that you _could_ be right (not\n> mistaken).\n>", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-13T19:27:02.273", "id": "15927", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-13T19:27:02.273", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "15925", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "\"AするほうもAするほうだ\" basically means \"Those who do A are also to blame\", implying\nthere are other people who are also to blame.\n\n> 質問するほうもするほうです\n\n= The person who asked that question is also to blame (although the person who\nwas asked is not good, either.)\n\n> 作るほうも作るほうだが、売るほうも売るほうだ。加えて、買うほうもまた買うほうだ\n\n= I don't like those who make such things, and those who sell them. And even\nthose who buy them.\n\nOther examples:\n\n * 詐欺は犯罪だが、騙される方も騙される方だ。\n * 彼の命令は間違っていたが、黙って従った方も従った方だ。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-14T05:14:06.230", "id": "15931", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-14T06:09:22.190", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-14T06:09:22.190", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "15930", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "Compare the results of Google image search:\n[惣菜](http://www.google.com/images?q=%E6%83%A3%E8%8F%9C) vs.\n[おかず](http://www.google.com/images?q=%E3%81%8A%E3%81%8B%E3%81%9A).\n\n惣菜 and おかず refer to almost the same category of foods, but 総菜/惣菜 typically\nmeans prepared food sold in stores. Supermarkets always have お惣菜コーナー (sozai\nsection). Foods that do not spoil rapidly, like breads or snacks, are not\nconsidered 惣菜.\n\nDishes prepared at home are usually called おかず, not 惣菜 (at least in spoken\nlanguage).\n\n * コンビニで惣菜を買う: Good\n * コンビニでおかずを買う: Good\n * 家で作った惣菜: Sounds odd in daily conversation. Maybe OK in formal texts.\n * 家で作ったおかず: Good", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-14T05:54:43.963", "id": "15934", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-16T01:43:35.803", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-16T01:43:35.803", "last_editor_user_id": "3437", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "15932", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "The key part of this construction that implies a negative outcome is the\npassivity on the one hand, and the actions of the verbal phrases on the other\n-- the subject of these sentences is having something done to them, in a way\nthat is outside of their control, and that something is unpleasant or adverse\nin some way.\n\nOne construction I've run across in everyday English that comes close to this\nsame mode of expression is _at [person]_ or especially _on [person]_ : \"My dog\ndone died _on me_.\" Somewhat more idiomatic and colloquial translations of the\nsample sentences using this form might make the meaning more clear.\n\n * Taro _had_ a kid crying _at him_.\n * Taro _had_ his wife collapse _on him_.\n * Hanako _had_ the next-door students playing the piano all night _on her_.\n\nIn the last example sentence, the students playing the piano all night implies\na negative outcome of Hanako probably not sleeping very well.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-14T06:46:47.377", "id": "15935", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-14T06:46:47.377", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "15933", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 } ]

[ { "body": "Such 'ai-to-wai' euphonic changes seem to be, to some extent, common in\nJapanese.\n\n<http://oshiete.goo.ne.jp/qa/7623826.html>\n\nHowever, I'm afraid I really don't know whether someone around me is\npronouncing 他愛 as たわい, 具合 as ぐわい, etc. As a native Japanese speaker, I think I\ncan't even notice such 'ai-to-wai' euphonic changes in daily conversations.\nSomeone more sensitive than me might have a different impression about this.\n\nOne exception I can think of is Japanese family name 河合, which is definitely\npronounced \"かわい\", and its correct furigana is even かわい.\n\n(To make sure, correct furigana of 場合 is always ばあい, no matter how some people\npronounce this differently.)\n\n**EDIT:**\n\nI pronounced \"具合わるい\" or \"場合わけの計算\" quickly for several times, and to my\nsurprise, I found myself unconsciously inserting trace \"w\" sound before '-ai'!", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-14T07:51:39.523", "id": "15938", "last_activity_date": "2018-08-19T19:44:23.170", "last_edit_date": "2018-08-19T19:44:23.170", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "15936", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "Shogakukan's J-J _Ruigo Reikai Thesaurus Dictionary_ has this to say about\nusage differences for **衣服** and **衣類**.\n\n * 「衣服」は、主に外側に着る上着、ズボン、羽織の類についていう。 \n_Ifuku_ refers mostly to things like overcoats, trousers, and _haori_ worn as\nouterwear.\n\n * 「衣類」は、帯、靴下、肌着などまで含めて体に着けるものすべてに対する総称。 \n_Irui_ is a more general term that refers to all things that can be worn on\nthe body, including _obi_ , socks, and underwear.\n\nJust plain old **服** isn't included in the same thesaurus entry, appearing\ninstead under the entry for 洋服 (\"western clothes\"). Notably, 服 here in the\nthesaurus is glossed as \"a dress\" rather than \"clothes\", and the brief\nJapanese definition given in the thesaurus as common to both 洋服 and 服 states:\n\n * 和服に対して、西洋風の衣服。 \nContrasting with traditional Japanese clothing, western-style outerwear.\n\nThe JA-JA dictionary I have says:\n\n 1. ころも。着物。衣服。 \nRobes. Kimono. Outerwear.\n\n 2. 「洋服」の略。 \nShort for \"western clothing\".\n\nAs a further data point, the usage examples in Shogakukan's _Progressive\nJapanese-English Dictionary_ entry for 服 almost all suggest that 服 may imply\nmore of a set outfit. Here are a few excerpted examples (emphasis mine):\n\n * 戦闘服の兵士たち soldiers in battle **dress**\n * 道化師の服 a clown's **costume**\n * 結婚式の服〔男性の〕 a wedding **suit** / 〔女性の〕 a wedding **dress**\n * 警察官の服 a policeman's **uniform**\n * 彼は紺の服が似合う The navy blue **suit** becomes him.\n\n**服装** meanwhile has its own thesaurus entry, but the section about usage\ndiscusses only 装い in detail. The English gloss for 服装 is given as \"dress;\ncostume\", while the brief Japanese definition states:\n\n * 衣服およびその装飾品などを身につけた姿。 \nAppearance when wearing outerwear and other accessories.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-14T18:46:08.147", "id": "15944", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-14T18:46:08.147", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "15939", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

[ { "body": "Both ～によると and ～によれば can be used to mean \"according to\".\n\n\"A Dictionary of Advanced Japanese Grammar\" defines it as:\n\n> \"According to\", \"based on\". A compound particle that is used to identify the\n> source of the information provided in the sentence.\n\nAs for the difference between the two, it states:\n\n> _Ni yoreba_ can replace _ni yoru to_ without changing the meaning of the\n> sentence.\n\nAnd gives examples of two sentences with the same meaning, e.g.\n\n> その温泉{おんせん}は旅行雑誌{りょこうざっし}に **よると** 神経痛{しんけいつう}にいいそうだ。 \n> その温泉は旅行雑誌に **よれば** 神経痛にいいそうだ。 \n> One of the travel magazines said _(= According to one of the travel\n> magazines)_ that hot springs are good for arthritis.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-14T12:00:55.970", "id": "15941", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-14T12:28:06.510", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-14T12:28:06.510", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5041", "parent_id": "15940", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

[ { "body": "**From a hypothetical perspective** I'll concede that it's not impossible to\nbe effective in Japanese without kanji (after all, Korean is very similar in a\nnumber of critical ways here, and has been functioning largely without Chinese\ncharacters for 60 years—and North Korea has completely abolished their use),\nhowever there are many practical benefits to be gained from keeping them.\n\n**That said,** if you remove the kanji, it actually makes (written) Japanese\nmuch harder in several ways. The most important of these is that it makes it\nmore difficult to identify homophonic words.\n\nFor example, which meaning is the writer referring to when they use the\nfollowing words?\n\n * **sake:** salmon (鮭) or alcohol (酒)?\n * **hashi:** bridge (橋), chopsticks (箸), or end (端)?\n * **kami:** deity (神), paper (紙), or hair (髪)?\n * **kaeru:** to change (換える, 変える, 替える, 代える), to go home (帰る), or just a frog (蛙)?\n\nThese are just a small sampling among _many_ others possible candidates. These\ndon't even list out all possible homophonic examples for the ones I've called\nout.\n\nFurther, for experienced readers of Japanese, it becomes much harder to skim\nthrough things because the visual cues have been removed. Kanji aren't just\nthere to make people's lives difficult.\n\nAnother area in which Kanji are useful is that they provide a built-in system\nof roots, prefixes, and suffixes to use when learning the language. Now, it's\ntrue that other languages have this as well (most European languages get\ntheirs from Greek and Latin, for example), however kanji once again provide a\ndistinct benefit here. By having a defined visual representation, kanji\nprovide a specific, unambiguous clue as to the meaning of the word in which\nthey are being used.\n\nFor example:\n\n * 歯医者 = 歯 tooth, 医 medicine, 者 person = tooth + doctor = dentist\n * 文学 = 文 writing, 学 learning = literature\n\nFurther, this information is taught as part of learning the language—I've met\nseveral adults who speak English natively that were not aware of the concept\nof Greek and Latin roots. This awareness allows not just for the deciphering\nof new words you come across for the first time, but also enables someone to\nmake educated guesses when they need access to a word they haven't previously\nseen or used.\n\nFor example (from my own experience):\n\n * If you're trying to say something happened at the same time as something else, you could combine the knowledge that 同 means \"same\" and 時 means time to get 同時【どうじ】.\n\n**In short,** when approached with the right attitude and understanding, Kanji\nmake Japanese a far simpler language than many others, for the following\nreasons:\n\n * Japanese grammar is far simpler than most languages in critical commonly-used areas such as noun, verb, and adjective usage _(no need for separate conjugations, numerical agreement, gender agreement, etc.)_\n * Kanji provide a highly-visible method of guessing the meanings (and in compounds, many times the readings as well) of words that you have never come across before\n * In a similar manner, kanji provide a means of visualizing and constructing new words to fill needs much more fluidly than in most other languages", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-14T14:13:29.280", "id": "15943", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-14T14:19:10.220", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-14T14:19:10.220", "last_editor_user_id": "4914", "owner_user_id": "4914", "parent_id": "15942", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "For that, you might have to ask on a Chinese etymology site -- both meanings,\n\"to do\" and \"because of\", can apparently be ascribed to the underlying Chinese\nterm 為: with the reading _wéi_ for \"to do\", and the reading _wèi_ for \"because\nof\". See the entries on\n[MDBG](http://www.mdbg.net/chindict/chindict.php?page=worddict&wdrst=1&wdqb=%E7%82%BA)\nand [Mandarin Tools](http://www.mandarintools.com/cgi-\nbin/wordlook.pl?word=%E7%82%BA&searchtype=chinese&where=whole&audio=on).\n\nIn most cases of Chinese characters used in Japanese, the various kun'yomi for\nthe kanji weren't just picked willy nilly. In fact, the \"kun\" part of\n\"kun'yomi\" indicates the _meaning_ of the term in Japanese (i.e., the native\nJapanese word(s) that matched the meaning of the kanji), while the \"on\" part\nof \"on'yomi\" referred to the _sound_ of the term as read in Chinese (i.e., the\nsound of the foreign word that the kanji belonged to). If a single kanji had\nmultiple meanings, or a broad meaning that might have matched multiple native\nJapanese words, you wind up with cases like 為 that have multiple kun'yomi. If\na single kanji was imported into Japanese from multiple different Chinese\ndialects, or at multiple different points in Chinese history, you wind up with\ncases like 生 that have multiple on'yomi ( _sei_ , _shō_ ).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-15T07:41:51.977", "id": "15949", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-15T07:41:51.977", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "15946", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "Conventions: I will use 漢字 to represent Chinese words, and かな or [振り仮名]{ふりがな}\nto represent Japanese words.\n\n## なす/なる and “to make”\n\n為 is related to (and might have been the same as) 偽, “to forge”. Both なす and\nなる happens to translate to “to make” in Chinese.\n\nWhen you make “an object” you produce it. Sometimes the active and passive\ndistinction in Chinese is not so clear, e.g.\n\n> 漢文： **氷、水為之** 、而寒於水 \n> [書下]{かきくだし}し：氷{こおり}は、水{みず} 之{これ}を為して{なして}、而も{しかも}水{みず}より寒し{さむし} \n> Also: 氷{こおり}は、水{みず} 之{これ}と為りて{なりて}、而も{しかも}水{みず}より寒し{さむし} \n> Translation: “water makes ice” or “water turns into ice”\n\nThe difference is not clear.\n\n## なす/なる and “to do”\n\nWhen you make “an action” you do it. When you try to do something, you 為す{なす}.\nWhen something is done, it 成る{なる}. 為 is the process while 成 is the result.\nIt's similar to the difference between “look” and “see”. This distinction does\nnot exist in Japanese. なす usually implies なる.\n\n> 為すべきは人にあり、成るべきは天にあり \n> 為せば成る \n> Translation: where there is a will, there is a way\n\n## “To do” and “purpose/reason”\n\nIn Chinese, there is no question word meaning “why”. “Why” is expressed as\n“what to do” (何為 or 為何). Coincidentally, Japanese sometimes says “what to do”\nto express “why”, too, e.g. ～なんすれぞ(archaic) なにしに and どうして.\n\n> 何為ぞ{なんすれぞ}、去らざるや \n> なにしに、悲しきに見送り[奉]{まつ}らむ\n>\n> どうして、去らないのか \n> why don't you leave here? \n> 何しに来たんだ \n> What did you come here for?\n\n## ため and “purpose/reason”\n\nI think ため means “benefit”.\n\n～ために、～する means to do something so that it helps something else. The grammar is\nstraightforward, too. When you say “～を～にする” the result is “～が～になる”.\n\n## Conclusion\n\nため, する and 為 share the same meaning “for”. する, なす, なる and 為 share the same\nmeaning “to do”/“to make”\n\nAll the four words (ため, する, なす and なる) end up with the same kanji\nrepresentation 為.\n\n## A little more\n\nIt's not uncommon to see words meaning “be made” develop into copulas. 為 is\nalso a copula in Chinese. In this case, it's read as たり, which is a\ncontraction of とあり.\n\n> 漢文：為人臣者 \n> 書下し：人臣{じんしん}たる者{もの} \n> Translation: someone who is a servant", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-15T09:25:38.817", "id": "15958", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-16T00:19:21.630", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "4833", "parent_id": "15946", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "セレブ has a lot of meanings/feelings. Rich person, person who wears expensive\naccessories, person who is just famous, etc.\n\nFor example, I called a friend セレブ when he bought an expensive watch:\n\n```\n\n Friend> \"10[万円]{まんえん}の[腕時計]{うでどけい}[買]{か}ったんだ。\" (I bought a watch that costs 100,000-yen.)\n \n Me> \"へえ、お[前]{まえ}セレブだなあ。\" (Oh, you're セレブ, dude.)\n \n```\n\nThe original English word \"celebrity\" means a famous person, you know, while\nit doesn't mean \"rich people\".\n\nWhy セレブ means \"rich person\" is, I think, because most of \"celebrities\" seen in\ntelevision look so rich and wear expensive accessories. (e.g. Movie\nactors/actresses)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-15T08:37:51.807", "id": "15952", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-16T00:20:16.487", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-16T00:20:16.487", "last_editor_user_id": "125", "owner_user_id": "5353", "parent_id": "15947", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

[ { "body": "The translation is right and exact.\n\nBut I wonder why the word [版下]{はんした} is used in this sentence.\n\n[版下]{はんした} is a expert word used in the printing industry and means [原稿]{げんこう}\n(copy) or [下書]{したが}き (draft) in easier words.\n\nSo, what I want to say is, I and most Japanese speakers won't use the combined\nword [版下作品]{はんしたさくひん}.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-15T08:57:38.710", "id": "15954", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-15T08:57:38.710", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5353", "parent_id": "15948", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "An alternative translation that accounts for the センス:\n\n * センスで嗅覚も研ぎ澄まされることを覚えておこう。 \n_Of the senses,_ remember that your sense of smell will also be sharpened.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-15T08:01:31.660", "id": "15951", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-15T08:01:31.660", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "15950", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "> また、センスで嗅覚も研ぎ澄まされることを覚えておこう。 \n>\n\nThe で is like \"by\". You can rewrite the sentence as:\n\n> また、センス **によって** 、嗅覚も研ぎ澄まされることを覚えておこう。\n\nSo I think it literally says...\n\n> センスを研ぎ澄ませ！ \n> Sharpen your センス(=probably \"intuition\" as in @dainichi's comment)! \n> また、センスで嗅覚も研ぎ澄まされることを覚えておこう。 \n> And, remember that your sense of smell will also be sharpened by your\n> (sharpened) センス/intuition.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-17T09:54:22.430", "id": "15994", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-17T09:54:22.430", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15950", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "1: It's better to use `を` I think.\n\nReason: If you say `アレックスは削除してもよろしいですか`, people will think there are other\nthings/persons that supposed to be removed sometime. In other words, `は` is\njust not natural.\n\n2: `スタート` is correct to use in this circumstance.\n\nReason: `スタート` is widely used especially in games and competitions.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-15T09:08:15.777", "id": "15957", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-15T09:08:15.777", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5353", "parent_id": "15953", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "スタート would certainly be understood in the context you've got.\n\nExpanding a bit, if it's just an option on a starting splash screen (e.g. \"1P\nStart\", \"2P Start\"), you probably don't even really need to put it in\nKatakana.\n\nIf you're doing a game with a saved game feature, however, more often what I\ntend to see is the pair はじめから (from the beginning) and つづきから (continue from\nwhere you left off).", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-16T03:34:09.557", "id": "15977", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-16T03:34:09.557", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4914", "parent_id": "15955", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "This means:\n\n```\n\n Do your best in the final (match) ! After it finishes, please date with me.\"\n \n```\n\nI am a native Japanese speaker but I have never heard the expression ちょーなー. So\nI thought it's from a dialect and googled ちょーなー but I found nothing.\n\nThis word might be a combination of `ちょー` and `なー`, I think.\n\n`ちょー` is an abbreviation of `ちょうだい`, in a informal way.\n\nExample:\n\n```\n\n デートしてちょー。 (Date with me.)\n \n```\n\nOn the other hand, `なー` can be used in similar cases.\n\nExample:\n\n```\n\n デートしてなー。 (Date with me.)\n \n```\n\nSentences that ends with `なー` is mostly spoken by people who live in western\nJapan.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-15T09:38:01.727", "id": "15959", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-15T09:38:01.727", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5353", "parent_id": "15956", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "I grew up saying and hearing 「ちょーな」 said by others on a daily basis.\n\nThis is an expression from Nagoya dialect and 「～～してちょう（な）」 means the same\nthing as 「～～してほしい = \"I want you to ~~\"」 in Standard Japanese. The 「な」 is for\nemphasis and, therefore, is optional, and for extra emphasis, you can elongate\nthe 「な」.\n\n> Thus, 「[終]{お}わったらデートしてちょーなー。」 means \"When you're finished, I want you to go\n> out with me!\"\n\nOP should have provided more context so I could explain 「ファイナルがんばって！」. If the\nspeaker were talking to an idol, 「ファイナル」 would mean the final concert on a\ntour. We do say 「ファイナル」 for that.\n\nIf, however, people shorten ファイナルファンタジー to ファイナル, then that might be what it\nrefers to. I do not play those games, so I am clueless on this.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-08-26T01:50:55.133", "id": "18411", "last_activity_date": "2014-08-26T01:50:55.133", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15956", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "Your first translation, \"It could have become something better.\" is very good\ntranslation.\n\nLiterally, reading just one phrase `ならなかった`, it means \"did not become\".\n\n> (これは)もっと[安]{やす}くならなかった。 \n> (It didn't become more cheaper.)\n\nIn other cases - connected with `ものか(もんか)` for example - the meaning of\n`ならなかった` will change.\n\n> (これは)もっと[安]{やす}くならなかったものか。 \n> (This could have become more cheaper. / I wish it could be more cheaper.)\n\nMeanwhile, as you say, `もうすこし` can have a meaning \"a bit better\" in this case.\nBut, it's not enough to mean \"a bit better\" with just this phrase.\n\nIt can be understood that `もうすこし` means \"a bit better\" because a word `なんとか`\nis connected after that.\n\n> これはもう[少]{すこ}しなんとかならないのか。 -> これは (it)|もう少し (a bit)|なんとか (better)|ならないのか\n> (couldn't be)|。", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-15T12:12:33.897", "id": "15964", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-15T12:33:51.680", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-15T12:33:51.680", "last_editor_user_id": "5353", "owner_user_id": "5353", "parent_id": "15960", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "matreya is correct. にあたって could be replaced in the above sentences by とき\n'toki' meaning \"time\", and hence \"when\". The construction is grammaticalized\nfrom the case marker に plus a form of the verb あたる 'hit.intransitive'. For\ninstance as in\n\n矢は的にあたった。 The arrow hit the target.\n\nThe argument marked here with に is a directional complement of the verb. That\nthe construction にあたって is grammaticalized can be verified by the inability to\npause between the case marker and the verb. In my example, pausing is possible\nbetween the directional complement and the verb, hence the verb is fully\nlexical there. This construction belongs to a class of case marker-verb\nconstructions that have become grammaticalized constructions. Other such\nconstructions are にとって 'for', として 'as', or において 'in, at'. One should also keep\nin mind that にあたって belongs to a more formal register of speech, much as において.\nにとって and として, however, are widely used in spoken Japanese.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-17T00:15:15.890", "id": "15987", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-17T00:15:15.890", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5362", "parent_id": "15961", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "> 留学するにあたって(≒留学するときに)受けた説明は、とても役に立った。 \n> 討論を始めるにあたり(≒始める前に)、ちょっと注意をしておきます。 \n>\n\nI think you can use ～にあたって and ～にあたり interchangeably in most cases. I think\nboth can mean \"on the occasion of; at this time of; upon doing~~\". (～にあたり\nsounds more formal than ～にあたって to me.)\n\n> 留学するに **あたり** 受けた説明は、とても役に立った。 \n> (The explanation that I received when I was going to study abroad was very\n> useful.) \n> 討論を始めるに **あたって** 、ちょっと注意をして*おきます。 \n> (Before we enter into a debate, I'm going to give you some advice.)\n\n*The 注意をする means \"to give (someone) advice/warning\". --> See [goo辞書「注意」#3](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/je2/48222/m0u/)\n\nBy the way, にあたり/にあたって can follow a noun, as well as a verb:\n\n> 留学にあたって・・・ \n> 討論の開始にあたり、・・・ \n>\n\nI think they can also be replaced with に際し/に際して:\n\n> 留学(する)に際し(て)・・・ \n> 討論を始めるに際し(て)・・・/ 討論の開始に際し(て)・・・ \n>\n\n(As an aside, I think 「~~(する)にあたりまして/際しまして・・・」 is preferred in a formal\nspeech.)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-17T07:34:23.943", "id": "15992", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-19T23:30:08.870", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-19T23:30:08.870", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15961", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "It's a variant reading of 得る【える】, and is used to indicate possibility. The\nmost common place I've seen this construction is in ありうる (or more frequently,\nthe frustrated exclamation ありえない！, which is along the lines of \"It can't\nbe!\").\n\nIf it has any additional nuances beyond simple possibility, I'm afraid I'll\nhave to leave that to a native speaker to clarify.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-15T12:13:55.243", "id": "15965", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-15T12:13:55.243", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4914", "parent_id": "15962", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "Yes, ～うる (or ～える) can be thought of as a potential form. It's an auxiliary\nthat expresses \"can\", and it attaches to the continuative form (連用形) of a\nverb. That's the same form of the verb you use before the polite auxiliary\n～ます, so we get forms like these:\n\n```\n\n 　　ある　　　→　　ありうる \n 　　考える　　→　　考えうる \n 　　する　　　→　　しうる \n \n```\n\nIn kanji, this verb is written 得る, but in this auxiliary usage it's often\nwritten in kana.\n\nAs an independent verb 得{う}る is now uncommon--得{う} became 得{え}る in modern\nJapanese. But as an auxiliary expressing potentiality, both ～うる and ～える are\ncommon, though ～うる may sound a little older/more literary than ～える.\n\nMost conjugated forms besides ～うる itself begin with ～え, not ～う. So although\nyou'll see both ありえる and ありうる commonly enough, you'll only see ありえない and ありえて,\nnever *ありうない or *ありうて.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-15T13:19:24.213", "id": "15966", "last_activity_date": "2015-08-18T20:39:34.460", "last_edit_date": "2015-08-18T20:39:34.460", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15962", "post_type": "answer", "score": 14 } ]

[ { "body": "The first が is not a subject particle. In combination with 「...う」 and/or 「まい」,\nit means \"no matter\", or \"regardless of\". Here is an excerpt from\nスーパー大辞林｛だいじりん｝:\n\n>\n> (4)どんな事柄{ことがら}でもかまわない,の意｛い｝を表｛あらわ｝す｡｢…うが｣｢…まいが｣の形｛かたち｝をとる｡｢どうなろう―知｛し｝ったことではない｣｢行｛い｝こう―行｛い｝くまい―,君｛きみ｝の勝手｛かって｝だ｣\n\nThe first example can be translated to: \"No matter how it becomes, I do not\ngive a damn.\"\n\nAnd the second one: \"No matter you go or not, (I do not care). It's up to\nyou.\"\n\nMore examples can be found\n[here](http://www.jgram.org/pages/viewOne.php?tagE=%28yo%29uga,%28yo%29uto)\n\nTherefore the sentence you gave can be literally translated to \"No matter how\nmany people come, it does not matter.\"", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-15T16:47:50.870", "id": "15971", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-15T17:35:59.350", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-15T17:35:59.350", "last_editor_user_id": "5346", "owner_user_id": "5346", "parent_id": "15963", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "This first sentence is in the _[passive\nvoice](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_voice)_ , while the second\nsentence is in the _[active\nvoice](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_voice)_. Direct translations of\neach:\n\n * A new university building _was built_.\n * [Someone unspecified] _built_ a new university building.\n\nJapanese often omits the subject of the sentence if that subject can be\nunderstood from context, such as if the subject were already established\nearlier in the conversation or text.\n\nThe two clues about passive vs. active are 1) particles, and 2) verb\nconjugations. Chopping the sample sentences down to the bare bones for\ndemonstration, let's use the following:\n\n * ビルが建てられた。\n * ビルを建てた。\n\n### Particles\n\nThe two particles in our samples are が, indicating the\n[subject](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subject_\\(grammar\\)) of the verb, and\nを, indicating the [object](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object_\\(grammar\\))\nof the verb.\n\nIn the first sentence, ビル is followed immediately by が, telling us that this\nis the subject -- the building is the one doing the action. From an English\nspeaker's perspective, this might seem odd: buildings don't do much but sit\nthere. But in both Japanese and English, in the passive voice, the person or\nthing _being done to_ by the action of the verb is also the subject of the\nverb phrase: in **_an apple** is eaten_ or **_the bone** is chewed_, both\n\"apple\" and \"bone\" are the subjects of the verb phrases.\n\nIn the second sentence, ビル is followed immediately by を, telling us that this\nis the object -- someone else is doing the action to the building. This is\nmore straightforward from an English speaker's perspective: in _I eat **an\napple_** or _the dog chews **a bone_** , both \"apple\" and \"bone\" are the\nobjects of the verb action.\n\n### Verb Conjugations\n\nJapanese verbs change in various ways depending on the social context (who is\ntalking, who is listening, who is being talked about), time (when the action\nhappens relative to the time frame of the context, kinda like\n[tense](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_tense), but different --\nthis is called [aspect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_aspect)),\nand voice or [valency](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valency_\\(linguistics\\))\n(things like passive, active, causative). Here, we're only looking at the last\nbit.\n\nIn 建てられた, there's that extra られ that tells us that this verb is in the passive\nconjugation. See the [Wikipedia article on Japanese verb\nconjugations](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_verb_conjugations_and_adjective_declensions#Passive)\nfor more.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-15T16:08:08.220", "id": "15968", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-15T16:08:08.220", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "15967", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "# Answer\n\nCompletely different.\n\n# Reason\n\nFirst one's meaning is as same as you said.\n\nBut second one, `[新]{あたら}しい[大学]{だいがく}のビルを[建]{た}てました` doesn't mean same.\n\nThe point is a verb `建てる` (build/construct).\n\nFirst one, `建て|られ|た` is a passive and past tense form of `建てる`. The section\n`られ` expresses the passive form and `た` expresses past tense. So, it can be\ntranslated in English like:\n\n```\n\n 新しい大学のビルが建てられた。 -> A new university building was built.\n \n```\n\nWhy the second one doesn't have same meaning is, because `建てました` is a normal,\npast tense, and _polite language_ form.\n\nThus, the second one can be translated like:\n\n```\n\n 新しい大学のビルを建てました。 -> I built a university building.\n \n```\n\n# Reference\n\n_Polite language_ , [敬語]{けいご}, is an expression of a respect for the person\nyou're talking to. There are some group of _Keigo_ ; [丁寧語]{ていねいご},\n[尊敬語]{そんけいご}, and [謙譲語]{けんじょうご}.\n\nIn this case, `建てました` belongs to [丁寧語]{ていねいご}. If you want to speak the second\nsentence in normal language, it will be like:\n\n```\n\n 新しい大学のビルを建てた。\n \n```", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-15T16:12:44.823", "id": "15969", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-15T16:12:44.823", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "5353", "parent_id": "15967", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "It's a little bit of an apples-to-oranges comparison:\n\n```\n\n 建てられた　　　＝　　建てる　＋　られる　　　　　　＋　た (passive + past) \n 建てました　　　＝　　建てる　＋　　　　　　　ます　＋　た ( polite + past)\n \n```\n\nOne verb has the polite auxiliary 〜ます, the other has the passive auxiliary\n〜られる. Both verbs have the past auxiliary 〜た. But these are all separate\nvariables, and we can use any combination of them:\n\n```\n\n 建てる　　　　　＝　　建てる　＋　　　　　　　　　　　　　 ( )\n 建てた　　　　　＝　　建てる　＋　　　　　　　　　　＋　た ( past)\n 建てます　　　　＝　　建てる　＋　　　　　　　ます　　　　 ( polite )\n 建てました　　　＝　　建てる　＋　　　　　　　ます　＋　た ( polite + past)\n 建てられる　　　＝　　建てる　＋　られる　　　　　　　　　 (passive )\n 建てられた　　　＝　　建てる　＋　られる　　　　　　＋　た (passive + past)\n 建てられます　　＝　　建てる　＋　られる　＋　ます　　　　 (passive + polite )\n 建てられました　＝　　建てる　＋　られる　＋　ます　＋　た (passive + polite + past)\n \n```\n\nBut I think we can set aside the polite and past auxiliaries and just compare\npassive to active.\n\n* * *\n\n## Forming the passive\n\nLet's start with a basic active sentence:\n\n> 新しい大学のビルを建てた。\n\nLike many Japanese sentences, this one doesn't have an explicit subject.\nThat's fine, of course, but it'll be easier to talk about the passive here if\nwe put one in. We won't worry here about whether it's natural to do so or\nwhether we should use は. I'll just add 私が to the sentence:\n\n> 私 **が** 新しい大学のビル **を** 建てた。 \n> _I built a new university building._\n\nWe can make this into a direct passive with three steps:\n\n 1. Add 〜られる.\n\n> 私が 新しい大学のビルを 建て **られ** た。\n\n 2. Replace が with に, and replace を with が.\n\n> 私 **に** 新しい大学のビル **が** 建てられた。\n\n 3. Move the が-phrase before the に-phrase. \n\n> 新しい大学のビル **が** 私に 建てられた。\n\n(Japanese word order is flexible and the が-phrase doesn't _have_ to come\nbefore the に-phrase, but I include this step because I think it's the most\nbasic word order for a direct passive.)\n\nNow we've got a passive sentence:\n\n> 新しい大学のビルが私に建てられた。 \n> _A new university building was built by me._\n\nIn this sentence, just like in its English translation, the building is the\nsubject. (In Japanese the subject is marked with が, while in English it's\nmarked by its position at the beginning of the sentence.) The person who built\nit isn't the subject anymore--they now appear as 私に \"by me\", a phrase that\nappears later in the sentence.\n\nOf course, you might think \"by me\" sounds a little silly in English. That's\ntrue, and most often we'd leave it out in English. We can remove 私に in\nJapanese, too, but unlike in English we can also remove 私が from the active\nversion.\n\nLet's remove 私 from both versions:\n\n> 新しい大学のビルが建てられた。 \n> _A new university building was built. **(passive)_**\n>\n> 新しい大学のビルを建てた。 \n> _[I] built a new university building. **(active)_**\n\nAnd now we have sentences like yours. Hopefully you can see the difference :-)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-15T17:35:32.327", "id": "15972", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-06T03:40:05.320", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-06T03:40:05.320", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15967", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "`これから` doesn't have the meaning \"wants to do\". It simply means \"from now on\"\nin most cases.\n\nExample:\n\n```\n\n これからはじめます。-> I'm gonna start it from now on.\n これからが[正念場]{しょうねんば}だ。 -> From now on, this is the moment of truth.\n \n```\n\nReading Roy's comment, you can't understand what `これからだ!` means.\n\nOf cource, `これからだ!` is not an exception in the rule I mentioned above, but I\nassume that the person who said `これからだ!` is in fighting scene.\n\nEspecially in fighting moment, some special sentences / shouts are often used.\n\nLike:\n\n```\n\n かかって[来]{こ}い！ -> Bring it on! / Come on fight!\n これからだ! -> I can fight more (even if you think I can't)! / I'm not defeated!\n まだまだ! -> (Similar to `これからだ!` but more provocatively a bit.)\n \n```\n\nAnd they can be connected like:\n\n```\n\n まだまだこれからだ!かかって来い! -> I'm not defeated! Come on fight!\n \n```", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-17T15:47:20.093", "id": "15998", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-17T15:47:20.093", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5353", "parent_id": "15974", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "これからだ just means something like \"This is where it starts\" / \"This is just the\nbeginning\".\n\nIn the context you give (someone gets up after being knocked down) a few\nexpressions that could be used in English would be\n\n> That was just the warm-up! \n> You ready? \n> This is where it get's interesting! \n> I haven't even started! \n> We're not done yet!", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-17T16:00:10.097", "id": "15999", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-17T16:00:10.097", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "15974", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "Well, the Wisdom J-E dictionary lists the following examples for 飛行:\n\n * 夜間飛行【やかんひこう】: night flight\n * ニューヨークへ向けて【むけて】飛行する: fly to New York\n\nIt uses 便 along the same lines:\n\n * 彼はニューヨーク行きの3時の便に乗った: He took the 3 o'clock flight to New York.\n\nSo it seems like either of those would work. My instinct would say to go with\n便, personally. The other two feel more translated-from-English than Japanese.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-16T03:29:51.380", "id": "15976", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-16T03:29:51.380", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4914", "parent_id": "15975", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "飛行【ひこう】 means \"flight\" as in \"the act of traveling by air\". It's not used to\nmean \"flight\" as in \"Flight 437 departing from Milan...\" That term is\n航空便【こうくうびん】 in full, just 便【びん】 for short. 航空便 can also mean \"air service\", as\nin \"there is _air service_ (i.e. there are _flights_ ) between Hawaii and\nSamoa\", or \"air mail\" as an abbreviation of 航空【こうくう】郵便【ゆうびん】.\n\nSee [eow.alc.co.jp/航空便](http://eow.alc.co.jp/%E8%88%AA%E7%A9%BA%E4%BE%BF) or\n[eow.alc.co.jp/flight](http://eow.alc.co.jp/flight) for more.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-16T05:07:38.790", "id": "15978", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-16T05:07:38.790", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "15975", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "> most practical to learn first for a beginner \n>\n\nHow about [飛行機]{ひこうき}? Japanese kids learn it (and the verb 飛ぶ) before 飛行,\nフライト, and 便. \n\nSo you can say:\n\n> I've booked my flight. \n> 飛行機を[予約]{よやく}しました。(not *便を予約する. ?フライトを予約する) \n> \n> I have a flight home on the 22nd. \n> 22日の飛行機で([国]{くに}に)[帰]{かえ}ります。 \n> (You can use 便 / フライト too but I think 飛行機 is more common in daily\n> conversation) \n> \n> I hope I don't miss my flight. \n> 飛行機に[間]{ま}に[合]{あ}いますように。/飛行機に[乗]{の}り[遅]{おく}れなければいいですが。 \n> (not *便に間に合う / *便に乗り遅れる. You can use フライト too but I think 飛行機 is more common\n> in daily conversation) \n>\n\netc... using the word 飛行機! ^^ Hooray!", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-17T13:37:20.323", "id": "15997", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-17T14:43:18.867", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-17T14:43:18.867", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15975", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "They mean more or less the same thing. In terms of more subtle nuances, note\nthat 朝【あさ】 is the native Japanese word, while 午前中【ごぜんちゅう】 is derived from\nChinese. The Japanese language has many of these native / Sinic pairs that\nmean mostly the same thing, a bit like how English has many pairs of terms\nthat mean mostly the same thing, where one term in the pair originally came\nfrom Anglo-Saxon or other Germanic roots, while the other term in the pair\noriginally came from Latin or Greek roots. Just as in English, where the term\nthat was originally from Latin or Greek often comes across as slightly\n\"fancier\" or more formal, it's usually the same in Japanese, where the Sinic\nterm is often considered to be a higher\n[register](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Register_\\(sociolinguistics\\)).\n\nSo whether to say 朝に or 午前中に in your sample sentence is really a matter of\nsocial context and stylistic word choice.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-16T15:39:23.483", "id": "15980", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-16T15:39:23.483", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "15979", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "If you mean \"morning\", I think they're often interchangeable. The native\nJapanese 朝 is more common, and if I search the [_Balanced Corpus of\nContemporary Written Japanese (BCCWJ)_](http://www.kotonoha.gr.jp/shonagon/)\nfor your particular phrase, we find about a five-to-one ratio in favor of 朝:\n\n```\n\n 明日の朝に　　　　　50 results\n 明日の午前中に　　　10 results\n \n```\n\nIn general, I would say there's no difference in meaning. Both typically refer\nto \"morning\", which is most commonly the period of time after the sun rises.\nWhen I look up 朝 in dictionaries, they're ambiguous about when it ends--for\nexample, 明鏡国語辞典 says it can refer to either a short while after the sun rises,\nor it can extend all the way to roughly noon:\n\n> 夜が明けてからしばらくの間。また、夜が明けてから正午ごろまでの間。\n\nLiterally speaking, you might expect 午前中 to refer more properly to the twelve\nhours from midnight to noon, so that would be a difference in meaning. And in\ncertain contexts such as [weather\nforecasts](http://www.jma.go.jp/jma/kishou/know/yougo_hp/saibun.html), it has\nexactly that meaning, while 朝 is more restricted, so they aren't always strict\nsynonyms. But in many contexts, I think 午前中 refers to roughly the same span of\ntime as 朝.\n\nSometimes 朝 might be conceptualized more like a point in time, while 午前中 is\nalways a span of time thanks to 中. So 朝ずっと is a little unusual, but 朝からずっと\n\"ever since this morning\" is fine; and 午前中ずっと \"all morning\" is fine, while\n午前中からずっと is silly:\n\n```\n\n 朝ずっと　　　　　　1 result\n 午前中ずっと　　　　11 results\n 朝からずっと　　　　28 results\n 午前中からずっと　　0 results\n \n```\n\nI think Eiríkr Útlendi is correct that the Sino-Japanese 午前中 belongs to a\nslightly more formal register, but it's a common phrase and I think you can\nuse it in casual conversation if you like.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-16T16:44:06.000", "id": "15981", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-16T18:54:04.403", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-16T18:54:04.403", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15979", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "In terms of historical development, no, the 月 in 前 wasn't originally the same\ncharacter as 月 \"moon\". As you can see in the old Kangxi dictionary\n[here](http://www.kangxizidian.com/kangxi/0140.gif) (slightly left of the\ncenter of the page, towards the top), the old form of 前 was 止 on the top and 舟\non the bottom. The 止 on the top simplified into 䒑, and the 舟 on the bottom\ntransmogrified into 刖. See also\n[en.wiktionary.org/wiki/前#Translingual](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E5%89%8D#Translingual).\n\nUPDATE: Looking again at the Kangxi entry, I realized that there were two old\nvariants. The bottom part of modern 前 is based on the bottom part of the\nsecond variant of the old character, consisting of 舟 on the left and 刂 on the\nright. That 刂 piece is still there in 前, so the 月 portion of the modern 前\ncharacter is entirely derived from the 舟 part of the old character.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-16T17:22:59.617", "id": "15983", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-16T17:50:04.763", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-16T17:50:04.763", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "15982", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "As you yourself observe, 月 looks different on its own than as an element in 前,\n[in which it represents a simplification of\n舟](http://chineseetymology.org/CharacterEtymology.aspx?submitButton1=Etymology&characterInput=%E5%89%8D).\nSo no, they are not identical.\n\nAs an element in other characters, the element that looks like 月 variously\nrepresents other historical elements, including 肉, 舟, 丹, and 月 itself, among\nothers. In some characters the derivation is still significant in how they're\nwritten--there are variants of 錆 where the lower-right 丹 was simplified to 円\ninstead of 月, for example. A _lot_ of characters contain this element, so we\ncan expect to see some variation in how it appears.\n\nBut we can try to find patterns. When does the left side curve? Here are my\nobservations, based entirely on how I perceive the current forms of the\ncharacters, ignoring their history:\n\n 1. 月 itself is written with a curve.\n\n 2. In left-right characters where one side is written like 月, it is written with a curve:\n\n月肋肌肘肝肚肛朋股肢肪服肬肭肱胎胞胆肺朏胖脉胙胚胛胝脂脇胴 \n朕胸脈脆胱胼胯豚脱脚脳朖脛脯脹腔腕勝腆腑腋脾腓腰腫腺腹腸腱 \n腦腮腟腿腴腥膜膀膈膊膃膝膵膣滕膕膤臟膓膠膨膳膩膰縢臈臆謄膽 \n朦膾膿臉膸臍臑臓臘騰臚朧臙・明胡朔朋期朗朝\n\n 3. In certain characters descended from the above, it's also written with a curve:\n\n朋：萠崩堋棚弸繃鵬硼 \n明：萌盟 \n朝：廟潮嘲 \n胡：湖楜瑚葫糊醐蝴餬 \n朔：遡塑溯愬槊\n\n滕：藤籐 \n縢：籘 \n服：箙 \n豚：遯 \n肋：筋\n\n 4. In certain other characters it's also written with a curve:\n\n望・覇霸・閒燗癇・羸瀛贏・朞\n\n 5. The rest of the time, the left side of 月 is typically written straight:\n\n有肖肓侑肴肯肩育青冐郁宥胤削背胃前胥胄陏囿屑哨宵脅脊骨俞能 \n消娟悁涓捐兪峭悄狷脩梢情清剪猜脣偸逍淆菁揃喩随硝愉堕婿惰散 \n晴渭渝喟隋壻稍揄靖楕膏熊煎潸滑賄腎絹瑜蛸骭逾楡睛錆聾體髑髓 \n魘龕静猾愈精態榾趙誚蜻膂瘉骰酳厭撒請膚徹罷撤翦瘠銷磆箭墮蝓 \n蝟籠襲髏鶺鶻霄龍謂靜鞘諭骸輸覦骼隨踰橢鮪膺臀鍮瀞壓蹐膸臂癒 \n擶鵑繖髀擺羂鮹寵瀧髄蘢鯖羆壟隴轍霰瓏\n\nThese are just my own observations. They aren't intended to be taken as\nabsolute rules, and you may find variation in handwriting or in different\nfonts. For example, I've noticed that in some fonts on my computer, 潸 falls\ninto category 4 instead of 5. But I think that overall the above is relatively\naccurate.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-16T18:51:19.460", "id": "15984", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-18T18:32:36.210", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-18T18:32:36.210", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "15982", "post_type": "answer", "score": 13 } ]

[ { "body": "Not sure what dictionary you are using but according to プログレッシブ英和ー和英中辞典：\n\n> 手をつないで歩く｜walk hand in hand\n\nYou tell us this is spoken so the 手ぇ will be a colloquialism - see comment\nfrom Snail plane below - This lengthening applies to other short (monomoraic)\nwords such as 歯 and 目. （I recently read about this and will add the reference\nwhen I find it...)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-17T00:17:06.117", "id": "15988", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-17T10:03:06.787", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-17T10:03:06.787", "last_editor_user_id": "1556", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "15986", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "Yeah I love よつばと! too. The scene is Fuuka was broken-hearted, right?\n\nThe verb `つなぐ`, means \"connect\", \"link\", or \"join\".\n\nIn some cases especially in informal scene, post-positional particles like `を`\nand `に` are omitted.\n\nExample:\n\n```\n\n これから[店]{みせ}へ[行]{い}く。 -> これから店行く。 (I'm gonna go shopping.)\n \n ふーかはあしふといな！ -> ふーかあしふといな！ (Fuuka, your legs are thick!)\n \n だれがうまいことをいえと！ -> だれがうまいこといえと！\n (Literally: Who asked you to say that well put thing!)\n (Free: That's well put!)\n \n```\n\nAs a result, `[手]{て}ぇつないで[歩]{ある}いてたの` can be translated like:\n\n```\n\n [手]{て}ぇつないで[歩]{ある}いてたの = 手をつないで歩いてたの -> He was walking hand in hand (with a girl).\n \n```", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-17T00:47:27.767", "id": "15990", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-17T07:55:54.710", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-17T07:55:54.710", "last_editor_user_id": "5353", "owner_user_id": "5353", "parent_id": "15986", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "I believe those two (ことがある and 事がある) are the same construction in terms of\nmeaning and they only differ by the way こと is spelled.\n\nこと used as a grammatical construction, like the one in the question, is more\noften spelled using hiragana in modern Japanese.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-17T11:05:05.917", "id": "15996", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-17T11:42:01.503", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-17T11:42:01.503", "last_editor_user_id": "4091", "owner_user_id": "5041", "parent_id": "15995", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "# Answer\n\nIt's translated like:\n\n```\n\n A flower I took to use it as an evidence that I went to the flower garden on the hill (at the back of something like a house).\n \n```\n\n# Reference\n\nIf a person uses `(One's thinking) と、N`, s/he wants to use N along his/her\nthinking.\n\nLike:\n\n```\n\n 彼へのお[土産]{みやげ}にと、[買]{か}ってきたお[菓子]{かし}。 -> A candy I bought to make it a souvenir for him.\n 縄跳びで[遊]{あそ}ぼうと、[持]{も}ってきた[縄]{なわ}。 -> A rope I took to play rope-skipping.\n \n```\n\nPlease take a look at `に`.\n\nThe point is that some verbs are hid after `に`. Let's add `しよう`, `[思]{おも}って`,\nand `「」` to make it easier to understand.\n\n```\n\n 彼へのお[土産]{みやげ}にと、[買]{か}ってきたお[菓子]{かし}。 = 「彼へのお[土産]{みやげ}にしよう」と思って、[買]{か}ってきたお[菓子]{かし}。\n 縄跳びで[遊]{あそ}ぼうと、[持]{も}ってきた[縄]{なわ}。 = 「縄跳びで[遊]{あそ}ぼう」と思って、[持]{も}ってきた[縄]{なわ}。\n [裏山]{うらやま}の[花畑]{はなばたけ}へ[行]{い}った[証拠]{しょうこ}にと、[摘]{つ}んだ[花]{はな}。 = 「[裏山]{うらやま}の[花畑]{はなばたけ}へ[行]{い}った[証拠]{しょうこ}にしよう」と思って、[摘]{つ}んだ[花]{はな}。\n \n```\n\nYou can see that the hero (or else?) thought that he wanted to use `摘んだ花` as\n`裏山の花畑へ行った証拠`.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-18T03:30:06.263", "id": "16010", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-18T03:42:57.823", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-18T03:42:57.823", "last_editor_user_id": "5353", "owner_user_id": "5353", "parent_id": "16000", "post_type": "answer", "score": 16 } ]

[ { "body": "In classical Japanese, the 終助詞 「か」 and 「かな」 are always preceded by the 連体形.\nE.g.,\n\n> 限りなく遠くも来にけるかな。\n\n(Side note: The classical meaning of 「かな」 is slightly different from the\nmodern one. It is more like 「だなあ」.)\n\nSo, parsing those lyrics:\n\n> ［［［［［［開いたばかりの花］が散る］の］を見ていた］木立］の遣る瀬無き］かな。\n\nThat final の is actually a GA-NO converted が, which is [allowed because the\nclause is in its\n連体形](https://web.archive.org/web/20170811024526/http://www.meijigakuin.ac.jp/~hiraiwa/PDF/Hiraiwa_NGC_MITWPL39.pdf).", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-17T18:36:46.817", "id": "16006", "last_activity_date": "2019-09-09T20:54:10.113", "last_edit_date": "2019-09-09T20:54:10.113", "last_editor_user_id": "10045", "owner_user_id": "3097", "parent_id": "16001", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "The general rule is to write words with auxiliary function in kana, so it's\nusually written\n\n> 働かなくてはいけない\n\nSearching the Balanced Corpus of Contemporary Written Japanese (BCCWJ, 少納言,\n<http://www.kotonoha.gr.jp/shonagon>), なくてはいけない has 902 results from books,\nnewspapers, blogs, etc., whereas なくては行けない has only 4 results from internet\nsources (3 from Yahoo! ブログ, 1 from Yahoo! 知恵袋).\n\nOther examples of words with auxiliary function would be とき (as in 小さいとき) or\nみる (as in やってみる).\n\nなくては行けない only accounts for 0.4% of results, but 小さい時 for 41.9% and やって見る for\n5.2%. I think that this reflects how literal the expression is still felt to\nbe.\n\nIn any case, in your case it's quite clear that なくてはいけません should be written\nwithout kanji.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-17T17:48:13.710", "id": "16005", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-17T17:48:13.710", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "16002", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "Again, looking at the results from BCCWJ\n\n```\n\n 5576 ほうがいい\n 747 ほうが良い\n 1733 方がいい\n 4839 方が良い\n \n```\n\n方がいい is \"correct\", at least descriptively speaking, although the results also\nsuggest that if you're going to write 方 in 漢字, you might as well write 良い with\n漢字 as well.\n\nAs for the difference between 漢字 with the use of nouns and verbs, we can check\nfor nouns\n\n```\n\n 523 のほうがいい\n 73 のほうが良い\n 551 の方がいい\n 203 の方が良い\n \n```\n\nfor verbs\n\n```\n\n 3754 たほうがいい\n 502 たほうが良い\n 1181 た方がいい\n 3121 た方が良い\n \n```\n\nand for negated verbs (and negated i-adjectives)\n\n```\n\n 722 ないほうがいい\n 86 ないほうが良い\n 607 ない方がいい\n 188 ない方が良い\n \n```\n\nThis looks like 方 is slightly more often written in 漢字 when accompanying a\nnoun (この方 and その方 account for 51 results), and sightly more often written in\nかな, when accompanying a verb.\n\n(And lastly, そのほう has 53, その方 45 results.)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-17T18:49:35.777", "id": "16007", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-17T19:17:41.840", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-17T19:17:41.840", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "16003", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "I think one needs to distinguish two uses of ～そう. The one appears after a stem\nform, and is a derivational suffix of the na-adjectival class (NA). The other\none appears after a fully inflected expression, and is thus particle (P). Here\nare two examples:\n\n```\n\n a. その店、おいしそうだ。(NA) \n That shop looks tasty. (i.e. the food they sell there)\n b. その店、おいしいそうだ。(P)\n That shop's supposed to be tasty.\n \n```\n\nIn (a) the assumption for tastiness is derived from personal knowledge, in\nparticular from looking at something. Technically, this is called\n\"evidentiality\". In (b) the knowledge is derived from hearsay, i.e. we've\nheard from someone that something is to be the case. \nOnly the ～そう in (a) can appear with ～な:\n\n```\n\n c. おいしそうな店だ。(NA)\n a shop with tasty looking food\n d.* おいしいそうな店だ。(P)\n a shop I heard is tasty\n \n```\n\nExpression (d) is not possible, which is what the appearance of the asterisk *\ntells us. \nConcerning the combination of these two expressions with ～さ, this happens only\nin two cases. The adjective 良い（いい・よい） only has one mora in the stem. ～さ\nappears between ～そう（な）and 良い. See here:\n\n```\n\n e. それは良さそうだ。\n That seems good.\n f. 良さそうなもの \n something that seems good\n \n```\n\nThere is one other adjective, namely 無い（ない）, that also has only one stem mora.\nAnd again we find that ～さ serves to lengthen the adjective in order to let\n～そう（な）appear:\n\n```\n\n g. そういう提案は無さそうだ。\n Such a proposal doesn't seem to exist.\n h. 経験のあまり無さそうな人\n a person who doesn't seem to have much experience\n \n```\n\nThen there is, of course, also the negation suffix ～な（い）, which also has only\none stem mora. Personally I do insert ～さ but that may be considered\nsubstandard (see\n[here](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1112989636)).\nStill I'd say this:\n\n```\n\n i. 彼は来なさそうだ。\n He doesn't seem to come.\n j. 彼は来なさそうなタイプだ。\n He's the type who doesn't seem to come.\n \n```\n\nAnd the people in my environment, who all happen to be Japanese, do so, too.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-19T16:26:43.707", "id": "16045", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-19T16:26:43.707", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5362", "parent_id": "16008", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I don't think this is a very good question but rather than ignore it, I will\ntry to explain why in an answer.\n\nFirst let's confirm what you are asking:\n\nGrammatically \"i-adjectives\" and \"na-adjectives\" can combine with そう to form\nnew na-adjectives which decribe how a situation seems (as opposed to actually\nis). Examples include:\n\nおいしい ー＞ おいしそう（な）｜delicious -> looks delicious \n元気（な）ー＞ 元気そう（な）| healthy -> seems healthy\n\nThese adjectives can also combine with さ in a similar fashion:\n\nおいしい ー＞ おいしさ｜delicious-ness (how delicious it is) \n元気（な）ー＞ 元気さ | healthiness\n\nYou have noticed that the -そう combinations are all \"na-adjectives\" and\ngrammatically could be combined with さ to form some kind of noun and want to\nknow if this happens.\n\nWell, grammatically, we just demonstrated it is possible, and somebody has\neven found a tweet with such a combination. But, it is the first time I have\nseen such a construction used. It is certainly not something I have noticed\nbefore or been taught, although, like you, I might have played around with the\ncombination in my own mind.\n\n**But, more importantly, what \"words\" did you have in mind and how did you\nforesee this construction being used? If you considered this and showed it in\nyour question then it would have been more valid.**\n\nConceptually it might be easier to look at the English equivalents: \"looks\ndelicious\" is fine. \"How nice it is\" is better than \"delicious-ness\" but the\nlatter is still understandable, and an equivalent might exist in another\nlanguage. But, can you really go to the next stage and come up with a similar\nword in English (\"looks-delicious-ness\") that you would expect to find in\nJapanese? We could say \"how delicious it looks\", but this is a phrase and by\nitself sounds more like an assertion. You might conclude that the concept has\nto be expressed differently (in both languages).\n\nJapanese is very different from English so sometimes one does get a surprising\nanswer - somebody might read this and tell me that I am completely wrong and\nalthough I have not noticed it, ~そうさ(な）is a valid construction often used..\nbut I am not expecting that to happen.\n\nIt also important to focus on developing a practical feel for how the language\nworks. If you have got to the level of studying these constructions then I\nwould have thought you have a sense of how they are used and how many\ntheoretical combinations and conjugations are possible. So, just like English,\nonce things get unwieldy, there is probably a better, simpler way of saying\nit.\n\nLet's take another example:\n\n高い｜expensive. \n高そう｜looks expensive \n高そうさ｜\"looks expensive-ness\" (it does not really work in English either)\n\nNow if we really want to ask someone how expensive does something look, what\nwould we say?:\n\n高そうさはいくら／どのぐらいですか？\n\nor\n\nどのぐらい／どんなに高そうですか\n\nThe second sounds more natural to me, although I have never heard it said, and\nthere may well be a better way of saying it.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-21T15:25:19.863", "id": "16063", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-22T01:34:51.430", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-22T01:34:51.430", "last_editor_user_id": "1556", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "16008", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "Firstly, I searched Balanced Corpus of Contemporary Written Japanese (BCCWJ,\n<http://www.kotonoha.gr.jp/shonagon>) and all results were either\n\n 1. そうさ (as in そうだよ)\n 2. ごち **そうさ** ま\n 3. **そうさ** せる and its conjugations.\n\nHere is why I think ～そう+さ as you suggested cannot exist. It would consist of\ntwo parts, where\n\n * ～さ is describing a **quality** , an **_objective_ fact** about someone/something\n\n * ～そう is describing a **feeling** , a **_subjective_ assessment** of someone/something\n\nBy some general principle in Japanese of subjective feelings being orthogonal\nto objective facts (see this question: [When to use 欲しがる instead of\n欲しい](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/2524/when-to-\nuse-%E6%AC%B2%E3%81%97%E3%81%8C%E3%82%8B-instead-\nof-%E6%AC%B2%E3%81%97%E3%81%84)), you cannot combine そう and さ. Grammatically,\nそう works just like other na-adjectives, so there's no syntactical reason to\nassume you can't append さ to it. This is a semantic obstruction.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-21T16:05:33.000", "id": "16065", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-21T16:05:33.000", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:48.447", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "16008", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "ジャンルくじイラスト募集要項 states that they are going to hold a ジャンルくじイラスト企画 again this\nyear. Participants will be requested to draw a lottery with a topic written on\nit (=ジャンルが書かれたくじを引いて) at 例会 or その他の場所 and draw an illustration that's related\nto the topic written on the lottery (=それに書かれたジャンルのイラストを描く). If you want to\ndraw a lottery (=くじを引く人は、), their staff members (=学祭担当) will let you do so\n(=対応します) at 例会 or その他の場所. Participation is not obligatory (=参加は各自の自由). So I\nthink it means that the topic for your illustration will be determined by\nlottery.\n\n> デリケートなジャンルに関しては各自自重する（ディズニーとか） \n>\n\n各自自重する means 各自で自重してください, 各自で自粛してください or 自分たちで判断して自粛してください. I think they're\nsaying that you should refrain from drawing copyrighted characters such as\nDisney characters, so yes, I think they're saying \"fanart is not allowed\". As\nfor the デリケートな, I'm not sure but probably they meant to say 微妙な, \"sensitive\",\n\"iffy\" or \"something that requires (special) care/attention\"?", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-18T16:32:00.183", "id": "16025", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-19T03:07:19.553", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-19T03:07:19.553", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "16011", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "I think that 義理 \"social obligation\" is a neutral term when used to describe a\nfact, e.g. 義理のお父さん \"father-in-law\", but whenever it is intended to convey some\nsort of emotion, 義理 always has a negative (e.g. burdensome) connotation. (For\nexample, 義理チョコ, the chocolate every woman is obliged to give to their male\ncoworkers/boss for Valentine's day).\n\nEither your European teacher doesn't understand enough Japanese to be\nirritated by that, or he does understand Japanese well enough to know that\n_you_ don't understand enough Japanese. In either case, the intention of\ngiving a gift _will_ be understood.\n\nStill, if I were to choose, I'd choose some concept/word/short phrase that I\nfound particularly interesting/moving/profound and that has some connection\nwith you personally, with Aikido, or with your teacher (or all three).\n\n(Imagine for a second Aikido didn't have anything to do with Japanese. Would\nyou give a beautifully written version of \"debt\" to your teacher?)", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-18T05:57:15.223", "id": "16013", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-19T11:04:36.047", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-19T11:04:36.047", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "16012", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "報本反始 seems the exact word, I think. It means something like \"Thank you\n(teacher, parent or mother nature) for many things. I will keep practising.\"", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-19T08:46:24.033", "id": "16035", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-19T10:51:07.493", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-19T10:51:07.493", "last_editor_user_id": "5041", "owner_user_id": "5081", "parent_id": "16012", "post_type": "answer", "score": -3 } ]

[ { "body": "This humor appeared in the TV drama \"Legal High\" (リーガル・ハイ), first season, in\nthe first episode. The guy in question is named Sugiura (杉浦).\n\nIt doesn't really mean that the guy is lowly, it just means that he's a person\nwho doesn't make his presence felt at all, so even the automatic door doesn't\nrecognize him. The exact explanation in Japanese would be 存在感が無い .\n\nIt is not really an idiom. I have not heard of it often, besides the TV drama\nepisode.\n\n(*)BTW, it's a nice TV series and I'd recommend watching it, it's available by\nVOD.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2015-02-20T11:49:59.847", "id": "22910", "last_activity_date": "2015-02-20T11:49:59.847", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "9423", "parent_id": "16014", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "The first sentence says pretty much that her father's expressions of love were\nrough.\n\nFollowed by an example (your highlighted text)\n娘が父の事務所に顔を出すと、「おお、来たか！」というなり、娘の頭をヘッドロックのように抱きかかえた。\n\nI think if you notice the (娘が父の)事務所に顔を出すと it pretty much suggests that\n\"whenever she popped her face into the office\"\n\nThis is because \"to\" is used for things like the transitions of seasons.\nThings that happen with regularity. If there was less context and it was just\nlike \"hairu to\" (and when I entered~) then it could be a one-off instance.\nMost written cases using \"to\" will talk about events that repeat in whack-a-\nmole-ian fashion.\n\nGambatte kudasai! ^_^", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2015-03-08T06:06:01.217", "id": "23116", "last_activity_date": "2015-03-08T06:06:01.217", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "9542", "parent_id": "16016", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "# The rule between \"prior\" or \"posterior\"\n\nYou can judge the usage of `[先]{さき}` in a sentence if there is `これから` before\n`先` or not.\n\nIf there is `これから`, `先` expresses the posterior time.\n\nIf there is NOT `これから`, `先` expresses the prior time.\n\n# Exaplanation of the usage of `先`\n\nThere is a big hint that `[先]{さき}` expresses the RELATIVE past / future.\n\nI show you how `先` is used:\n\n> Figure 1: \"I do X before I do Y.\"\n>\n> \n\n* * *\n\n> Figure 2: \"I'm doing X before I do Y.\"\n>\n> \n\n* * *\n\n> Figure 3: \"I did X before I do / am doing / did Y.\"\n>\n> \n\n* * *\n\n> Figure 4: \"I do X in the future.\"\n>\n> \n\nPlease take a look at Figure 1 through 3. If you say `Yより先にXをする (I do X before\nI do Y)` or simply `先にXをする (I do X before something/sometime)`, you're\nmentioning that you do X before you do Y or something. (\"prior\" usage)\n\nNext, please take a look at Figure 4. If you say `*これから* 先にXをする (I do X in the\nfuture)`, you're mentioning that you do X in the future. (\"posterior\" usage)\n\nThe difference between the \"prior\" usage and \"posterior\" usage is that you say\nwith `これから` or without.\n\n`先に` without `これから` doesn't mean future in ordinary usage.\n\nAs a result, you can judge the usage if there is `これから` or not.\n\n# Answer to @dainichi 's comment\n\nMy answer is a point of view and doesn't cover other cases like he says.\n\nI'd like to say that, `先` with following `に` acts like an adverb while `先`\nwith `が` acts like a **noun**.\n\n## `先` with `が`\n\nThis is an idiomatic usage but not so special in terms of syntax. For example\n`先が思いやられる` is passive expression and can be converted into active one.\n\nImportant: There's no usage that `先` means prior thing if `先` acts like noun.\n\n> [先]{さき}が[思]{おも}いやられる = （[私]{わたし}は）先を思いやる (Translation: I worry about\n> future.)\n>\n> 先が[見]{み}える = （私は）先を見る (Translation: Watching the tip of long thing. Watching\n> distant place.)\n>\n> 先が[長]{なが}くない = 先は長くない (Translation: One has not long to live.)\n\nThis proofs that `先` acts like a noun with following `が`.\n\n## `先` with `この`\n\n`この` is similar to `これから` and are swap-able. It's hard to explain but `これから`\nsounds more explicit and longer span of time; speaker is talking about things\nto happen _from now on to far future_.\n\n> この先、[雨]{あめ}が[降]{ふ}るだろう。 (It will rain soon.)\n>\n> これから先、[彼]{かれ}は[立派]{りっぱ}な[大人]{おとな}になるに[違]{ちが}いない。 (I guess he'll become a\n> respectable person.)", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-18T13:01:52.087", "id": "16019", "last_activity_date": "2017-02-21T06:02:22.383", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "5353", "parent_id": "16017", "post_type": "answer", "score": 15 }, { "body": "I think, similar to 前{まえ}, it depends on the context. Maybe you could compare\nit to the English \"before\".\n\nYou might say (in a bit older-style English),\n\n> She lay the gift **before** him. ( _physically **in front of** him_)\n\nBut you could also say,\n\n> Page 50 is **before** page 51. ( _physically **preceding** page 51_)\n\nThere is some ambiguity in the usage if you try to restrict the idea to \"in\nfront of\" or \"behind\". It really depends on which way you're meant to be\nfacing in the context.\n\nI believe that the most common mental image for さき is the tip of a spear,\nbrush or pen if that helps. Also, it's easy to confuse さっき (which is always\nthe past or previous) with さき which could be either denote _past, future, in\nfront, behind, next_ or _previous_ depending on the context.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/rxJ8c.png)[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/RVc5N.png)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2017-02-21T06:45:26.087", "id": "43742", "last_activity_date": "2017-02-21T06:45:26.087", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "7055", "parent_id": "16017", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "I agree with `l'électeur` that it is quite common to pronounce `言{い}う` as\n`言{ゆ}う` for example...\n\n> そんなこと言{ゆ}った気{き}がしたな～\n\nHowever going back to ゆく\n\n`行{い}く` although often interchangeably pronounced `行{ゆ}く` when spoken, is also\nwritten that way commonly when referring to things like destination\n\n> 東京{とうきょう}行{ゆ}き電車{でんしゃ}まもなく発車{はっしゃ}いたします\n\nIn more detail (and taken from a Japanese Q and A site)\n<http://oshiete.goo.ne.jp/qa/1637122.html> - 日本語\n\n> > 『ゆく』は、時の経過を表し、『いく』は、人、物の移動を表す、と思いますが。\n>\n> The `ゆく` reading represents the passage of time, wheras `いく` is used when\n> referring to a person, representing the movement of goods.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2015-02-10T00:18:56.497", "id": "21705", "last_activity_date": "2015-02-10T00:18:56.497", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "9241", "parent_id": "16018", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "Oftentimes I come across this particular way of adjusting/mutating iku to yuku\nwhen talking about background/weather events.\n\nIt would not be wrong to put \"iku\" in its stead, but \"yuku\" is almost like a\n\"and so the rug goes on, being pulled out from under our feet\" as opposed to\n\"there he goes pulling the rug out\"\n\nOne would also say \"yuku\" for the transmigration of one's spirit upon death.\n\nIt's like a \"graceful drawing out\" or \"graceful drawing/dawning upon,\" where\n'yuku' dances. Iku would just not have the same effect.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2015-03-08T06:01:18.417", "id": "23115", "last_activity_date": "2015-03-08T06:01:18.417", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "9542", "parent_id": "16018", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "I interpret it as that being the \"kind\" of fondness this person has. It might\nmake more sense if you put quotes around it or add という.\n\n> 「お嫁さんにしたい」の好き \n> お嫁さんにしたいという好き\n\nお嫁さんにしたい is being used as a phrase to describe what kind of 好き it is but not\nin a way that follows the normal rules of grammar, or to put it more\nprecisely, not in a way that follows how you might expect the phrase\n\"お嫁さんにしたい\" to be used. That is to say, it's not \"I like you as a friend\" but\nrather \"I like you like 'I want you to be my wife.'\" Similarly, 好き is not\nbeing used in its normal sense of ～が好き but rather as a representation of the\nword itself. So for example, in English you can say \"cats are cute,\" but you\ncan also say \"'cats' is a cute word\" and still be correct even though you're\nsaying \"cats is.\"\n\nBasically these words and phrases are being nominalized and used as you would\nexpect a noun be used.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-18T15:20:49.357", "id": "16022", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-19T01:24:28.613", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-19T01:24:28.613", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "16020", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

[ { "body": "I don't think that is unusual at all. Which number you put first depends on\nthe context. If you are talking about the value of a devaluating currency, you\ncould well put the maximum first and then the minimum last.\n\nThat would be like saying that in English you'd never say something like \"this\nvariable can take any value from 2 to 1\". If a higher value is more desirable,\nit is likely to be said this way around. I'd certainly not blink or think\ntwice if I heard it said like this.\n\nAs for the lack of \"まで\", it is replaced \"相当\", so that's fine. In this case the\nbounds are not hard and fast values, so using \"まで\" would actually sound weird\nand something that indicates some uncertainty is more appropriate.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-07-23T00:39:17.237", "id": "17911", "last_activity_date": "2014-07-23T00:39:17.237", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3494", "parent_id": "16021", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "## となら\n\n> きさまとならまちがいなく勝てるぞ。\n\nIn simple terms, this is と (\"with\") + なら (\"if\"). Basically,\n\n> **If** it's **with** you, then there's no doubt I'm gonna win.\n\n## とやら\n\n> てめえの罠にまんまとかかってやる。完全体とやらになるがいい。\n\nThis one I was less familiar with. From the [Daijirin entry for\nやら](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%82%84%E3%82%89):\n\n> **やら**\n>\n> 〔「にやあらむ」の転である「やらん」から。中世後期以降の語〕 \n> 一 （ 副助 ） \n> 体言および体言に準ずる語，一部の副詞，助詞などに付く。 \n> ... \n> ② \n> 〔「とやら」の形で〕 はっきり言わずに，ぼかして言うときに用いる。 「山田と－いう人」 「どこと－抜けている人」\n\n\"Used to make something vaguer, without stating something definitively.\"\n\nSo in your sample sentence,\n\n> I'm'a let myself get caught in your trap. Go ahead and become \"complete\"\n> **or whatever you call it**.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-18T18:36:35.493", "id": "16027", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-19T07:06:57.697", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-19T07:06:57.697", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "16023", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "まんまと derives from うまうまと, with this reduplicated うま the same as the stem of\nadjective うまい \"tasty; skillful\". See [the Daijirin entry\nhere](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%BE%E3%82%93%E3%81%BE%E3%81%A8) for\nmore.\n\nAnalyzing your sample sentence (with [assistance from\ndainichi](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/16023/meaning-\nof-%E3%81%A8%E3%81%AA%E3%82%89-and-%E3%81%A8%E3%82%84%E3%82%89-in-these-\nsentences/16027#16027)), we get:\n\n> てめえの罠にまんまとかかってやる。 \n> -> ((てめえの)罠)に **まんまと** かかって やる。 -> ((your) trap) in **skillfully** get-\n> caught give-you[impolite]\n\nThe まんまと here implies (to me, at least) that the speaker maintains control of\nthe situation even as they say they will get caught in the listener's trap.\nThe やる also implies that the speaker, in getting caught, will be doing the\nlistener a favor somehow. These two together might be rendered in English as\nfollows:\n\n> I'm'a **let myself** get caught in your trap.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-19T08:06:23.633", "id": "16034", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-19T08:06:23.633", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.207", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "16026", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "A native reader may have more definitive understanding but my suggestion is to\nimagine\n\n(1) the statement with and w/o the adverb and\n\n(2) how the speaker would have said it and what words he might have\nemphasised: eg \"I let you catch me\" vs \"I let you catch me _easily_ \", or\nperhaps \"I neatly (conveniently?) let you catch me\".\n\nI think まんまと can be used with 罠にかかる by itself so it adds to the irony of the\nspeaker's statement, reminding us how we was in control all along. Without the\nadverb it becomes very factual, with the adverb we get a better insight into\nthe speaker's intention, and given the situation, he is likely to use one to\nexpress his feeling.\n\n* * *\n\nJust for reference I also looked at the following sample sentences from the\n\"プログレッシブ英和・和英辞典 to confirm my understanding of まんまと\n\n> まんまとだまされた｜ \n> I was neatly taken in.\n>\n> そうまんまとは逃がさないぞ｜ \n> I won't let you get away so easily.\n>\n> 彼はそうやって猿をまんまとおびき寄せた｜ \n> In that way he succeeded in enticing the monkey to approach.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-19T14:22:41.247", "id": "16041", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-20T01:10:16.523", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-20T01:10:16.523", "last_editor_user_id": "1556", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "16026", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "In case you don't want to or can't read the article Yang linked to, it begins\nby quoting two senses listed in the [日本国語大辞典]{にほんこくごだいじてん} which I will\nreproduce here in Japanese and translation:\n\n> ④感謝したり詫びたりする気持ちを含む挨拶（あいさつ）に用いる。内容も省略し、「どうもどうも」と重ねて用いることも多い。（以下、用例略。）\n>\n> ⑤あいまいな、または安易な挨拶のことばとして用いる（以下、用例略。）\n\nAnd my translation:\n\n> (4) Used as a greeting that include feelings of gratitude and apology.\n> Frequently, both the contents [for which one is grateful or apologizing] are\n> omitted and the word is repeated as \"dōmo dōmo\" (following usage examples\n> omitted). (5) Used as a greeting ambiguously or lightly.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-18T22:16:35.987", "id": "16029", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-20T07:33:29.937", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "4091", "parent_id": "16028", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "えっと is ubiquitous for this purpose. To buy yourself more time you can say\nえっとですね.\n\nそうですね is another option and carries the nuance of \"that's a good/valid\nquestion\". An English equivalent might be \"Right...\".\n\nYou can combine the two as\n\n> えっと、そうですね。[response] \n> そうですね。えっと、[response]", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-19T00:15:13.467", "id": "16031", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-19T02:06:31.737", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-19T02:06:31.737", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "16030", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "Or alternatively to えっと(ですね.), perhaps はい、わかりました。・・which also communicates\nthat you have understood the question in a positive manner.\n\n* * *\n\nI think your fundamental question has been jointly answered but it is worth\nmentioning:\n\n * The way you deliver these responses is important. そうですね for example can be used to express agreement or approval if said quickly or relucutance/discomfort/thoughtful consideration if said slowly. (And in a different situation, the expression can be also used to communicate a reluctant \"No\".)\n * There are other responses with English equivalents. For example,「いい質問です。」would work and, if you really want to buy time, you could repeat the question for audiences benefit.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-19T00:29:44.277", "id": "16032", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-19T08:52:16.360", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-19T08:52:16.360", "last_editor_user_id": "1556", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "16030", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "Since you mentioned \"well\", `(それ)じゃ(あぁぁあーあ〜)` is commonly used for this.\n\nAlso, I don't know if it's regional or not, but in Osaka many people also use\n`マー`. This is more unsure, along the lines of `あの`.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-19T15:57:29.010", "id": "16043", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-19T15:57:29.010", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "16030", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "tbh it's probably ポークロイン （see [google\nsearch](https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=%E3%83%9D%E3%83%BC%E3%82%AF%E3%83%AD%E3%82%A4%E3%83%B3)）", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-21T19:37:28.697", "id": "16066", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-21T19:37:28.697", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "16033", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "I'm not sure you'll find the exact equivalent to \"pork loin\" in a supermarket\nin Japan but I think you can find something close. \n\nIn a normal supermarket or butcher in Japan you'll find \"thinly sliced pork\nroast\" as「豚ローススライス」, 「豚ロース[薄切]{うすぎ}り」, 「豚ロースしゃぶしゃぶ[用]{よう}」, 「豚[肩]{かた}ローススライス」,\n「豚肩ロース薄切り」, 「豚肩ロースしゃぶしゃぶ用」 etc.: \n\n\n\nYou'll also find 「豚ロース[生姜]{しょうが}[焼]{や}き用」「豚肩ロース生姜焼き用」, \"pork roast for ginger\nflavored stir fried pork\", which is a bit more thickly sliced: \n\n\nOf course they have thick slices for steak and tonkatsu(pork cutlet)\nas「豚ロースとんかつ用」「豚肩ロースとんかつ用」「豚ロースとんかつ・ステーキ用」 etc.: \n\n\nAnd it's also sold in larger blocks as「豚ロース ブロック」「豚肩ロース ブロック」「豚ロース\n[塊]{かたまり}」etc.: \n ", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-23T05:52:53.480", "id": "16102", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-24T01:56:43.460", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-24T01:56:43.460", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "16033", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "For the ラ行, you are curling the tip of your tongue touching the alveolar ridge\n(between 5 and 4 in the picture). There is a large gaping whole in the middle\nof your mouth and the slightest build-up of pressure will \"break the seal\",\nwhich means that the airflow is very small, whence the initial `r` is hardly\naudible.\n\nIf you're pronouncing りゅう in the middle of a word, you can use the existing\nairflow through the mouth to slam your tongue onto the alveolar ridge to\nproduce a more audible `r`.\n\n(Please excuse the informal explanation, but I'm lacking vocabulary to make\nthis a more concise explanation.)\n\n", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-19T11:29:23.160", "id": "16037", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-19T11:48:38.953", "last_edit_date": "2017-03-10T09:42:44.170", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "16036", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Use から. It's not only used in \"polite\" speech (it doesn't actually matter what\nyou mean by that), but also in \"informal\" speech.\n\nIf から reminds you too much of K/J-Pop, you can sometimes replace this から by\nので/んで e.g.\n\n> Xをするから => Xをするので\n\nbut you'll likely end up sounding _more_ polite than when using から.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-19T13:00:37.123", "id": "16040", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-19T13:53:42.897", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-19T13:53:42.897", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "16038", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "The difference between 出る and 出てくる is that the later is specifically oriented\ntowards the speaker (and if included, which is not always the case, also the\nhearer). \nCompare the next two examples:\n\n> a. 家から出てきた。 \n> [Someone] came out of the house. \n> b. 家を出ていった。 \n> [Someone] left the house. OR [Someone] left for good.\n\nIn (a), we are located outside of the house, and the person inside the house\ncomes out. As a result he is outside with us. Since where we are is \"here\",\nthe person in the house moves to \"here\", i.e. comes. That is the meaning of\nthe verb くる. In (b), we are inside the house (=here), and the person leaves,\ni.e. moves from \"here\" to some other place that is not \"here\". And that's the\nmeaning of the verb いく. \nBut if you just use 出る then the locative specification (the information from\nwhere the person comes, and where the person moves to) is simply missing. \nHowever, there is also a temporal use of ～てきた・いった. That is not surprising\nbecause linguists know that many languages treat temporal expressions like\nlocative expressions. Most of the examples in @Yang Muye's comment under the\nquestion have a temporal meaning.\n\n> c. 雨が降ってきた。 \n> It had come to rain. \n> d. 物価は上がっていくだろう。 \n> Prices will go up from now on.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-19T16:48:53.727", "id": "16046", "last_activity_date": "2021-04-23T07:01:59.803", "last_edit_date": "2021-04-23T07:01:59.803", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "5362", "parent_id": "16044", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "One usage of this that I have seen might make a little more sense to you. It\nseems from the comments that 予習 for natives can be the simple act of\n\"previewing\" material before class or something like that. However, there are\nsituations where preparatory study is needed. The case that I'm talking about\nis with 修学旅行{しゅうがくりょこう}, or the trips that Japanese students usually take once\nduring elementary, junior high school and high school. So for example, in\nanticipation of a school's upcoming trip to Kyoto and Nara, the students will\ngo through a period of 予習 where they learn a bit about where they're going.\nThis might not be _the_ correct term for this kind of study, however, as a\ncommenter points out 事前学習 might be more appropriate. とはいえ, I do and have seen\n予習 used in this way.\n\nSorry if this comes off as more of an extended comment!", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-20T04:30:53.270", "id": "16052", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-21T01:17:41.613", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-21T01:17:41.613", "last_editor_user_id": "1797", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "16048", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "予習 means \"to prepare for a lesson\" (see\n[here](http://kotobank.jp/jeword/%E4%BA%88%E7%BF%92)). Its opposite is 復習,\nmeaning \"to review\", \"to rehease\" and/or \"to practice\" what one has learned\n([here](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E5%BE%A9%E7%BF%92)). \nThe kanji 予, pronounced あらかじめ, means \"beforehand\", \"in advance\", or\n\"previously\" ([here](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E4%BA%88?dic=daijisen)). The\nsecond kanji, 習, stands for 習う meaning \"to learn\"\n([here](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E7%BF%92%E3%81%86) meanings 1 and 2). \n予習 and 復習 are widely used in educational setting in Japan. University\ncurricula must state how much effort is necessary before and after class.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-20T18:58:03.233", "id": "16056", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-20T18:58:03.233", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5362", "parent_id": "16048", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "A bit too long for a comment.\n\nInstead of trying to answer with Japanese ideas and such, I'll try to give you\ninsight on a German perspective on what I think might be similar.\n\nIn Germany, during my school years, we were always encouraged (or demanded)\nthat we prepare for the next lesson of a subject by ourselves, in our own time\nat home (or 5minutes prior to the next class, depending on the student). This\nwasn't meant to make us learn new content by ourselves, but rather it was done\nso we'd familiarize ourselves with what's going to happen next.\n\nSay, in German language classes if you would be starting a new novel for the\nnext class it would be to make yourself aware of the general outline and\ncontext of that novel (what time and situation was it roughly composed in,\nwhat's it about etc.). In mathematics it might be to look at the next chapter\nso you aren't scared of the imposing graphs and formulas of it during class\nand wasting everyone's time. That is, this was in addition to the homework you\nlikely received for the current lesson.\n\nThese kind of things were commonplace for us, and usually required some 5 to\n15 minutes of 'Vorbereitung' (preparation). This time was not counted towards\nour homework alloted time, so both by system and mindset it was not part of\nany review of current material.\n\nI imagine 予習 could have a similar scope in Japan.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2018-02-08T08:02:13.020", "id": "56499", "last_activity_date": "2018-02-08T08:02:13.020", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "16048", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "「お寿司屋｛すしや｝さん」 is composed of 「お」,「寿司｛すし｝」,「屋｛や｝」 and 「さん」.\n\nHere, 「屋｛や｝」 is affixed to the name of some merchandise\n(「寿司｛すし｝」「魚｛さかな｝」「石｛いし｝」 etc.) or service （「クリーニング」「修理｛しゅうり｝」 etc.） to mean:\n\n * A shop selling the merchandise or providing the service or all those shops as a whole\n\n * The owner of a shop selling the merchandise or providing the service\n\nWhen 「…屋｛や｝」 refers to a shop, adding 「さん」 to it is in effect treating it as a\nperson (although I feel that native speakers may not have a very personified\nimage in their mind when using it). That shows slight intimacy (I guess\nintimacy can mean very close relationship in English but that's not the case\nhere) with and a certain degree of respect (since 「さん」 is in itself a suffix\nfor that) to the shop. It's generally colloquial and used a little bit more\noften by female speakers.\n\nThe 「お」 at the very beginning is a 丁寧語｛ていねいご｝ adding politeness, towards the\none that is talked to, to the whole expression.\n\nBonus:\n\n「さん」 can be seen to be directly suffixed to company names as well. But\naccording to [this page](http://nhg.pro.tok2.com/reserch-3/reserch1-119.htm),\nits level of acceptance varies a lot among native speakers.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-21T08:25:59.553", "id": "16059", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-21T08:59:42.200", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-21T08:59:42.200", "last_editor_user_id": "5346", "owner_user_id": "5346", "parent_id": "16049", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "ーさん can be used as a courtesy title to address or refer to others with certain\noccupations. eg:\n\n運転手さん \n肉屋さん \n看護師さん\n\nThe addition of the お prefix to your example is an example of お being used for\npoliteness, as opposed to respecting the position of the listener.\n\n_Reference: \"Japanese for all occasions\" by Taeko Kamiya, p13 & 17_\n\nIn my experience, when used with a shop or restaurant it tends to be a small\nbusiness. If we take 肉屋 as an example, in Japanese it translates as \"the meat\nshop\", which is slightly different from the English term \"The butchers\n(shop)\", which refers to tradesman rather than his wares. When I hear \"肉屋さん\" I\nassociate with either the shop or the butcher(s) himself (themselves)\ndepending on the context.\n\nAlso, although I have not seen this written down anywhere, to me this use of\nさん is somewhat similar to the way we might refer to a restaurant in the\nEnglish statement \"They have vegetarian dishes on the menu.\"", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-21T15:49:16.320", "id": "16064", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-21T23:53:09.960", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-21T23:53:09.960", "last_editor_user_id": "1556", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "16049", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "The translation of the first sentence sounds fine.\n\nFor the second one, \"destroy\" may be too general for 「くだく」 and \"be equivalent\nto\" sounds a little bit different to 「…の根本｛こんぽん｝は」. My suggestion is something\nlike \"The essence of destroying something is shattering the atoms that compose\nit.\" (I'm not a native English speaker, the wording may be awkward...)\n\nSince it's literally saying \"shattering the atoms\", i.e.「原子｛げんし｝をくだく」, not\n\"shattering something into atoms\", 「原子｛げんし｝`に`くだく」as in 「粉々｛こなごな｝`に`くだく」 and\n「微塵｛みじん｝`に`くだく」 may be more appropriate for the \"atoms are separated\" reading.\n\nAs to the 「いい」 that 非回答者 has pointed out, I guess it's something like\n\"understand?\" or \"all right?\" used when a teacher is explaining something to\nhis/her student(s) or in other similar circumstances.", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-20T09:24:06.597", "id": "16053", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-21T07:32:54.287", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-21T07:32:54.287", "last_editor_user_id": "5346", "owner_user_id": "5346", "parent_id": "16050", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "ばえる means 騒ぐ in 鳥取弁, the dialect of\n[Tottori](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tottori_Prefecture).\n\nけん is mostly used in the 九州 area and some parts of 四国 and can mean a range of\nthings. I am most familiar with から and some kinds of よ:\n\n### から\n\n * 今日は寒い **けん** 、コートを着た方がいいよ\n * 今日は寒い **から** 、コートを着た方がいいよ\n\n### よ\n\n * お茶いれた **けん**\n * お茶いれた **よ**\n\nOr\n\n * いや、昨日めちゃめちゃ面白かったんだ **よ** な〜\n * いや、昨日めちゃおもろかった **けん** な〜", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-11-07T13:13:36.210", "id": "19411", "last_activity_date": "2014-11-07T13:22:23.343", "last_edit_date": "2014-11-07T13:22:23.343", "last_editor_user_id": "7671", "owner_user_id": "7671", "parent_id": "16051", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "See [降る](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E9%99%8D%E3%82%8B) for its meaning\nexplanation. It basically says that something, such as rain or snow, comes\nfalling down over a wide area. The substance falling must be small, but\nplentiful. \nPlease note that the explanation given on the website cited includes the word\n落ちる. Hence, 降る is the more specific verb that must fulfill more conditions in\norder to be used correctly.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-20T18:35:44.920", "id": "16055", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-20T18:35:44.920", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5362", "parent_id": "16054", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "Straight from jawiki on カム/神:\n\n\"カムヤマトイワレヒコ、カムアタツヒメなどの複合語で「神」が「カム」となっていることから、「神」は古くは「カム」かそれに近い音だったことが推定される。大野晋や森重敏などは、ï\nの古い形として *ui と *oi を推定しており、これによれば kamï は古くは *kamui となる。\"", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-27T09:34:57.527", "id": "16139", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-27T09:34:57.527", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5432", "parent_id": "16057", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "大和言葉（和語）の複合語造語法に則ります。音韻交替です。\n\nThe following changes may happen when forming compound words:\n\n```\n\n 'e' turns into 'a' （雨宿り・金沢・船旅）\n 'i' turns into 'u' （くつわ・かむなぎ）\n 'i' turns into 'o' （木陰、木霊、最寄り）\n 'o' turns into 'a' （白髪・たなごころ）\n \n```\n\nIf the first syllable of the second word begins with an unvoiced consonant, it\noften becomes voiced. 連濁です。\n\n```\n\n 'ts' turns into 'tz'（横綱・手綱）\n 'f' turns into 'b' （まぶた）\n 't' turns into 'd' （酒樽）etc.\n \n```\n\nThis is like the English...\n\n```\n\n \"tooth\" -> \"teeth\"\n \"foot\" -> \"feet\"\n \"goose\" -> \"geese\" \n \"cow\" -> \"kye\" would be an older English example)\n \n```\n\n...except that it is used in _compound word formation_ rather than\npluralization.\n\nThese words that undergo this vowel-shift are very often compound nouns of\nJapanese origin （複合和語名詞）. Although this also happens in the 動詞 example of\n「くる」⇒「こない」.\n\n**_The class that these words belong to could be called 複合和語_** , though I\ndon't believe that term is in general use.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-08-20T08:00:35.493", "id": "18309", "last_activity_date": "2014-08-20T08:00:35.493", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "7055", "parent_id": "16057", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "So in short, you're looking for the variations of the question words and what\nthey mean, put into logical groupings. Is that on the mark?\n\nFormatting literal tables is a bit of a pain here, so I'll provide bulleted\nlists for each of the words here to explain in more details instead of using\ntable rows. The form will be as follows:\n\n**base** - meaning\n\n * base + か - meaning\n * base + も - meaning\n * base + でも - meaning\n\nFor quick reference, the basic principle is that adding か is similar to the\nEnglish prefix \"some-\", も is similar to the English \"every-\", and でも is\nsimilar to the English \"any-\". Whether it's positive or negative (e.g.\n\"everyone\" vs. \"no one\") is determined by the verb at the end of the sentence.\nThese are general rules though, so skim the list below, as there are a couple\nof words that don't use some of these endings.\n\nUnless otherwise noted, \"the dictionary\" will refer to the ウィズダム英和辞典 /\nウィズダム和英辞典 when used below.\n\n* * *\n\n**誰【だれ】** - who\n\n * 誰【だれ】か - someone\n * 誰【だれ】も - everyone\n * 誰【だれ】でも - anyone\n\n* * *\n\n**どなた** - polite form of who\n\nどなた does not appear to take any particles. See also どちら further down.\n\n* * *\n\n**何【なに】** - what\n\n * 何【なに】か - something\n * 何【なに】も - everything\n * 何【なん】でも - anything\n\nThe slightly less formal 何【なん】か is also in common use with the same meaning.\n\n何【なに】 is also combined with a limited number of set words to create other\ninterrogative words (e.g. 何者【なにもの】 _who_ , 何故【なにゆえ】 _why_ ). I haven't found\nmany examples documenting particles being added to these, but if they were to\nbe added it would be after the full compound, not directly after 何【なに】.\n\n* * *\n\n**どんな** - what kind of\n\nどんな does not appear to use any of the particles appended to the end.\n\n* * *\n\n**いつ** - when\n\n * いつか - sometime\n * いつも - every time, all the time\n * いつでも - any time\n\n* * *\n\n**どこ** - where\n\n * どこか - somewhere\n * どこも - everywhere\n * どこでも - anywhere\n\n* * *\n\n**なぜ** - why\n\n * なぜか - for some reason _(dictionary also suggests なんとなく, which I've personally heard more often)_\n\nなぜも and なぜでも don't exist.\n\nなぜ can be written in kanji as 何故 (similar to 何故【なにゆえ】 above), however the kana\nform is far more prevalent.\n\n* * *\n\n**なんで** - why\n\nなんで doesn't usually take additional particles (I imagine to reduce confusion\nwith なんでも, for example), however I have seen なんででも used a few times to mean\n\"for whatever reason\".\n\n* * *\n\n**どう** - how\n\n * どうか - somehow\n * どうも - somehow\n * どうでも - anyhow/however [it turns out]\n\nThe dictionary defines どうか and どうも as \"somehow\"; I'm not entirely clear on the\nspecifics of when to use either.\n\n* * *\n\n**どうして** - how/by what means?\n\n * どうしても - somehow\n * どうしてでも - any way _(may have seen this one once or twice, but it's comparatively rare. My usual dictionaries don't have it, but I did find it[here](http://www.wordreference.com/jaen/%E3%81%A9%E3%81%86%E3%81%97%E3%81%A6%E3%81%A7%E3%82%82).)_\n\nどうしてか doesn't exist. どうして is also sometimes translated as \"why?\".\n\n* * *\n\n**いかが** - how\n\nI can't find any examples of いかが taking additional particles.\n\n* * *\n\n**どの** - which\n\nI can't find any examples of particles being appended to どの. For meanings\nalong those lines, see どれ below.\n\n* * *\n\n**どれ** - which one (of 3 or more choices)\n\n * どれか - something (from among the options available)\n * どれも - every one\n * どれでも - any one\n\n* * *\n\n**どちら** - which one\n\nどちら is an amazingly flexible word. Its uses include:\n\n * which way?\n * polite form of どの・どれ\n * polite form of どこ\n * polite form of 誰【だれ】\n\nIn the context of \"which one\", I've found examples using 〜も and 〜でも, as\nfollows:\n\n * どちらも - everything\n * どちらでも - anything\n\nどちらか does not appear to exist. That said, 〜も and 〜でも appear to be usable\nfollowing the general principles outlined at the top of the post.\n\nどちら can also be shortened to the informal どっち, which likewise is commonly used\nwith 〜も and 〜でも without any major shifts in meaning.\n\n* * *\n\n**いくら** - how much\n\n * いくらか - a little bit _(少し【すこし】 is probably a more common alternative to this)_\n * いくらも - a lot of\n * いくらでも - as much as one wants; unlimited\n\n* * *\n\n**いくつ** - how many\n\n * いくつか - a few\n * いくつも・いくつでも - as many as", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-21T20:25:40.237", "id": "16069", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-21T21:53:02.310", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-21T21:53:02.310", "last_editor_user_id": "4914", "owner_user_id": "4914", "parent_id": "16058", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

[ { "body": "My take on your sentences if they finished 「読んだ。」 not 「読んで。」, which feels less\nnatural, is as follows:\n\n 1. I read the 6-page book. \n\n 2. I read the book [referred to] on the 6th page [of the pamphlet].\n\n 3. I read the 6th page of the book.\n\n 4. I read page 6 of the book. \nor \nI read the book's six pages.\n\nI would add one more sentence to your set but expect you are familiar with it:\n\n5. 本を６ページ読んだ。 \nI read 6 pages of the book\n\nWhen the counter comes after the noun it functions as an adverb telling you to\nwhat extent the verb is performed. Note that in example 5 we are not told\nwhich pages are read, it could be any six pages chosen at random. Usually this\ndoes not apply when the \"counter\" is connected to the noun by の (ie modifies\nthe noun). To take a famous example, Kurosawa's film \"The Seven Samurai\" is\ncalled \"七人の侍\" in Japanese because it is about seven particular samurai, not\nany seven random samurai. In English this meaning is conveyed by the word\n\"The\".\n\nThe above sentences have to be used in context to make sense. This is most\nobvious in number 2 which cannot be translated into English without adding\nsome context to the phrase itself in [...] and, even with these additions, the\ncontext is incomplete because we don't know what the pamphlet is.\n\n* * *\n\n_References_\n\nFor a more general explanation of context see the answer to the following\nquestion (on a different grammatical subject): [What's the difference between\nwa (は) and ga (が)?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/22/whats-the-\ndifference-between-wa-)\n\nFor further explanation of の modifying nouns: \"Making sense of Japanese\" by\nJay Rubin, p116", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-21T14:43:39.880", "id": "16062", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-24T00:23:22.060", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.397", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "16061", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Just given the archaeological record, any such Tamil claims seem unlikely in\nthe extreme, unless the proponents of this view also intend to make the Tamil\nthe ancestors of the modern Koreans.\n\nIn terms of material culture, the Yayoi people that became the modern Japanese\nwere pretty clearly from continental Asia, and they entered the Japanese\narchipelago from the Korean peninsula. They had metalworking and horses,\nunlike the Jōmon, and Yayoi pottery is more similar to mainland pottery than\nthe distinct and lavish designs seen in late Jōmon pottery (see towards the\nbottom of [the Wikipedia\narticle](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C5%8Dmon_Pottery)). The beginning of\nthe Yayoi immigration is often estimated at around 300 BCE, some 300 years\n_after_ the creation of some parts of the Tamil-language [Sangam\nliterature](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sangam_literature).\n\nLinguistically, [Old\nTamil](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_language#Old_Tamil) and Japanese do\napparently share the past / non-past distinction in verbs, with no future\ntense, and they apparently also share a vaguely similar negative construction.\nThere is also some distant similarity in the syntax, in that both are SOV\nlanguages with verbs at the end. However, past there, the languages don't seem\nall that related. Someone who is more familiar with Tamil and the Dravidian\nfamily may be able to elucidate more, but in general, the big differences I've\nnoticed are: 1) substantially different [consonant\ninventories](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_language#Consonants); 2)\ngrammatical person in verb constructions in Tamil, not found in Japanese at\nany stage; 3) grammatical gender in nouns in Tamil, also completely alien in\nJapanese; 4) no distinction between adverbs and adjectives in Tamil, which is\nmore like German than Japanese; 5) an apparent distinction between definite\nand indefinite in Tamil (compare English \"the\" vs. \"a\"), which doesn't really\nhappen in Japanese.\n\nGenetically, the Yayoi had more in common with the modern Koreans and Han\nChinese than they did with the Jōmon people that had been in the archipelago\nfor at least the preceding 10,000 years (some estimates push the Jōmon arrival\nback to around 30,000 years ago). [Some genetic\ntesting](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_people#Genetics) suggests a\nsimilarity between the modern Japanese people and some Southeast Asian and/or\nMelanesian populations. It bears noting that [Denisovan\nhominin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denisovan) descendants have been found\nin similar geographical locations, and given the original Denisovan finds in\ncentral Siberia, a counter-claim could be made that it wasn't ever the Tamil\nmoving into Japan, but rather a common ancestor population moving and\nbranching, with some branches possibly winding up in the Japanese archipelago\nand some branches possibly winding up in southern India. That said, this\nDenisovan genetic link may well have been via the Jōmon rather than via the\nYayoi.\n\nIn summation, a Tamil-Japanese link seems tenuous at best. Sure, humans get\naround, so I would be entirely unsurprised if some Tamil-specific genetic link\nsurfaces in the Japanese genome. That said, it appears to be extremely\nunlikely that the Tamil language or culture is in any substantive way related\nto the Japanese language or culture, unless some solid link can be found\nbetween a migrating Tamil-related population and the Yayoi, who [may have\noriginated from somewhere around Jiangsu Province in\nChina](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yayoi_period#Origin_of_the_Yayoi_people).", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-22T01:28:20.750", "id": "16077", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-22T01:28:20.750", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "16070", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "Certainly at some point Japanese fishermen shared drinks/conversation with\nTamil speakers somewhere along the coast of Malaysia & perhaps brought back\nsome colorful new vocabulary (or spouses) ... but that's very different from a\nlinguistic/etymological link on a grand scale.\n\nAs you say, Tamil (like many societies) has its proponents who claim it's the\noldest root of language, has the oldest written works, etc. It's far more\nabout ethnic/national pride than supportable claims. It is a very interesting\nlanguage, but like other Dravidian languages it has distinctive grammatical,\nphonological, and graphical features not found in historical or modern\nJapanese.\n\n * Tamil has always had gendered (pro)nouns, plural/singular distinction, and declension/inflection of nouns & verbs for numerous grammatical cases in a sentence. These are all still very common features among Indo-European languages, but they don't exist in Japanese (or Chinese, or Korean), which uses particles instead & doesn't even have plural nouns, much less gender or declension. \n * Tamil has distinctive sounds not a part of Japanese, including retroflex consonants, at least 3 different \"R\" variations, and nasal sounds. These are all an important part of the language (vs. merely a sign of dialect as a nasal \"が\" or rolled \"R\" might be in Japanese). Retroflex sounds common in China haven't even had an impact on Japanese over the past 3000 years, so I'd argue Tamil fails on this count as well.\n * A key argument for a grammatical connection seems to be that both are agglutinative languages. So are Turkish and all its cousins across Central Asia, Korean (the closest actual suspected influence), Eskimo dialects and Quechua. Not a compelling argument for Tamil specifically, but more in line w/what's already suspected about Asian migration patterns. \n\n * Tamil doesn't distinguish between voiced/unvoiced or aspirated/unaspirated consonants, which is the exact opposite of Japanese (and Korean), where proper differentiation of \"p/b\", \"k/g\", \"t/d\", and \"s/z\" is very important. \n\n * Tamil's abugida/syllabary represents at least twice as many phonemes as Japanese, so of course it can claim some similarities - but so can Spanish. If Tamil was so influential why has Japanese historically been so phonetically limited? Even accounting for \"lost\" phonemes & vowel differences you don't approach anything like Tamil's 200+ combinations. \n\n * I once worked w/a very polite & well-educated Tamil man who claimed the oldest written documents in the world are in Tamil ... and yet it had zero influence on Japanese writing. The oldest known written Japanese was in Chinese. To my knowledge Japanese has never been anything like Manchurian, Tibetan, Mongolian, Thai, or any other written language with even a remote connection to Brahmic scripts. \n\nThe only way there's a link, beyond those imported through Buddhism across\nAsia like other Sanskrit-related words, is if you trace ALL languages back to\na few shared ancestors - in that case, ok it's kind of like genetics, and\nthey're linked ... But in that case so is everything else so it's a\nmeaningless claim.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2015-03-06T18:39:46.270", "id": "23082", "last_activity_date": "2015-03-09T16:24:06.023", "last_edit_date": "2015-03-09T16:24:06.023", "last_editor_user_id": "6621", "owner_user_id": "6621", "parent_id": "16070", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "Tamil is orgin of all languages including sanskirit. Now you may not see\nconnection as things get deformed. I was shocked to find korean feel and even\nhave same words used in tamil. There is no language in the world outside india\ncloser to tamil than korean. Literally mind blowing. Whole culture is also\nfriggin same.\n\nOnly difference is skin and bone structure. That may be dure climatic\nconditions.\n\nHalf english words came from tamil.\n\nYING/YANG i thought it was chinese orginal.\n\nThen i realized its ingu/angu. Ne is same in tamil and chinese\n\nIf people research more almost all language came from tamil if they find its\noriginal root of every word.\n\nMy theory is african tamils went north to find ends of earth and moved east\nand west.\n\nsome russian island people speak dravidian style dialect and if we research\nmore australian polynesian and american indians probably spoke old tamil.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2016-04-24T02:25:14.447", "id": "33758", "last_activity_date": "2016-04-24T02:25:14.447", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "14248", "parent_id": "16070", "post_type": "answer", "score": -2 } ]

[ { "body": "They're both notable for the fact that in Classical Japanese they were part of\na very small group of verbs to consist of a single kana: す and く (寝【ぬ】 is the\nonly other one I've come across). As a result, the stem is a single consonant.\nAs a result, when endings were added it was necessary to change the vowel\nwithin said single kana. When things were standardized later on 〜る was\nappended to them, but the underlying changes remained.\n\nLooking at the classical patterns produces the following:\n\n_( **Notes:** where an ending is preceded by an asterisk, it indicates that\nthe change affects the first kana in the word. If you need a primer in\nClassical Japanese to understand the explanations below,\n[Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Japanese#Verbs) has a brief\nsummary on it.)_\n\n**TL;DR:** _す and く show a strong bias towards the same patterns as the\nprecursors to the modern Type II verbs. す can always be matched to a similar\npattern in at least one other verb group, whereas く stands alone when it uses\nこ. With the standardization of the language the 連体形 forms became the\ndictionary forms for them, however in practice they continue to use their\nclassical stems depending on the function of the ending being applied._\n\n* * *\n\n**未然形** Imperfective Form\n\n * サ変: *-e (す -> せ)\n * カ変: *-o (く -> こ)\n * 下二段: -e (たゆ -> たえ)\n\n下一段 is also -e, but that one is always -e, so I've left it out. す follows the\nsame pattern as 下二段, which is the root for many of our modern Type II verbs.\nく, on the other hand, is unique in being the only one to use -o in this form.\n\n**連用形** Continuative Form\n\n * サ変: *-i (す -> し)\n * カ変: *-i (く -> き)\n * 四段: -i (かく -> かき)\n * 上二段: -i (おつ -> おち)\n * 上一段: *-i (みる -> み)\n\nIn this group, 下二段 changes to -e, and so doesn't follow the pattern for our\nirregulars. That said, several other groups make the same shift to -i. This\nincludes two groups (上二段 and 上一段) that are significant contributors to the\nmodern Type II group. Most importantly here is the 上一段 group, which also digs\ninto the first character, even if it doesn't produce a visible change to it.\n\n**終止形** Terminal Form\n\n * サ変: -u (す -> す)\n * カ変: -u (く -> す)\n\nAll verbs in this one except the ラ変 group (あり、おり、はべり、and いますがり) end in -u. ラ変\nend in -i.\n\n**連体形** Attributive Form\n\n * サ変: *-uru (す -> する)\n * カ変: *-uru (く -> くる)\n * 四段: -u (かく -> かく)\n * 下二段: -uru (たゆ -> たゆる)\n * 上二段: -uru (おつ -> おつる)\n * 上一段: -ru (みる -> みる)\n\nHere we see a degree of consistency across all relevant groupings. Once again\nwe see a bias towards Type II behavior, since 四段 verbs are the only ones not\nto add る in this section.\n\n**已然形** Perfective Form\n\n * サ変: -re (す -> すれ)\n * カ変: -re (く -> くれ)\n * 四段: -e (かく -> かけ)\n * 下二段: -ure (たゆ -> たゆれ)\n * 上二段: -ure (おつ -> おつれ)\n * 上一段: -re (みる -> みれ)\n\nThis section is pretty much like 連体形 above, just with a different vowel.\n\n**命令形** Imperative Form\n\n * サ変: *-eyo (す -> せよ)\n * カ変: *-oyo (く -> こよ)\n * 四段: -eyo (かく -> かけよ)\n * 下二段: -eyo (たゆ -> たえよ)\n * 上二段: -iyo (おつ -> おちよ)\n * 上一段: -iyo (みる -> みよ)\n\nHere we see an interesting alignment where 四段 aligns with one of the Type II\nprecursor forms, while the other two Type II precursors match. す uses -eyo,\nplaying along with the hybrid group. く once again stands alone, the same way\nit did in the 未然形 group (and using the same vowel, as well).", "comment_count": 11, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-21T23:40:49.100", "id": "16073", "last_activity_date": "2018-03-20T16:19:35.947", "last_edit_date": "2018-03-20T16:19:35.947", "last_editor_user_id": "7810", "owner_user_id": "4914", "parent_id": "16071", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "どちら (very seldomly written as 何方), or the colloquial どっち. Both can also mean\n\"where (to)\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-27T08:37:28.573", "id": "16138", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-27T08:37:28.573", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5432", "parent_id": "16074", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "I suspect this might be an example of poetic license or even contraction. Note\nthat all of the 思ふ instances above follow on another mora from the お行, leaving\nopen the possibility that をしと思{おも}ふ, for example, was actually read as をしともふ,\nthus producing the expected mora count. I note too that 思う has a pitch pattern\nof おもう{LHL}, making the お effectively unstressed and more likely to be elided\nif preceded by another お sound. This kind of contraction is common in faster\ninformal speech, and might have been utilized for poetic effect.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-22T06:28:34.297", "id": "16084", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-22T06:28:34.297", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "16078", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "You can read (or sing) them as: \n\n■■■■■■□□ [を]{お}しとおも[ふ]{う}～－ (like ■■■■■□□□ おしとおもー)* \n■■■■■■■□ こころ[は]{わ} いとに～ \n■■■■■□□□ よられな[む]{ん}～－－ \n■■■■■■■□ ちるはな ごとに～ \n□■■■■■■■ －ぬきて とどめ[む]{ん} \n \n\n■■■■■□□□ さみだれに～－－ \n■■■■■■■■ ものおも[ひ]{い} [を]{お}れば \n■■■■■□□□ ほととぎす～－－ \n■■■■■■■□ よふかく なきて～ \n□■■■■■■■ －いづち ゆくら[む]{ん} \n \n\n■■■■■□□□ ゆ[ふ]{う}ぐれ[は]{わ}～－－ \n□■■■■■■■ －くもの はたてに \n■■■■■■□□ ものぞおも[ふ]{う}～－ (like ■■■■■□□□ ものぞおもー)* \n□■■■■■■■ －あまつ そらなる \n□■■■■■■■ －ひとを こ[ふ]{う}とて \n \n\n■■■■■□□□ いつ[は]{わ}と[は]{わ}～－－ \n□■■■■■■■ －とき[は]{わ} わかねど \n■■■■■□□□ あきのよぞ～－－ \n■■■■■■■■ ものおも[ふ]{う}ことの \n□■■■■■■■ －かぎり なりける \n \n\n■■■■■□□□ はるきぬと～－－ \n□■■■■■■■ －ひと[は]{わ} い[へ]{え}ども \n■■■■■□□□ うぐ[ひ]{い}すの～－－ \n□■■■■■■■ －なかぬ かぎりは \n■■■■■■■■ あらじとぞおも[ふ]{う} (like ■■■■■■■□ あらじとぞおもー)* \n \n\n■■■■■■□□ こころあらば～－ \n■■■■■■□□ いのちあらば～－ \n \n... in 8 beats.\n\n*When the [字余]{じあま}り(extra mora) is a 母音(vowel) or [撥音]{はつおん}(「ん」), it's often merged with the previous sound and they're read like a single mora, i.e.: \n\n> おしとおもう(6) → おしとおもお → おしとおもー / おしとおも(5) \n> あらじとぞおもう(8) → あらじとぞおもお → あらじとぞおもー / あらじとぞおも(7) \n>\n\nAnd as for the 字余り which is not a 母音 or 撥音, such as in 「こころあらば」「いのちあらば」, I\njust heard that it's added intentionally, so that the line or the song itself\nwould sound different and stand out from the other lines or other people's\nsongs. (I didn't know this, just this morning I asked someone who's studied\nclassical Japanese and 百人一首 at senior high...)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-22T08:28:28.123", "id": "16085", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-23T08:42:56.487", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-23T08:42:56.487", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "16078", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "The reason why such a pattern appears is, as currently understood, that\n_Japanese was not a mora-timed language yet_ at the time 古今和歌集 was compiled.\n\nUntil around the 16th century, meters were counted by syllable, or in other\nwords, by the number of vowel clusters. That makes adjacent vowels in a\ncontinuation can be freely merged into one unit, and a bare vowel syllable\nappears in the middle of words can be virtually \"discounted\" from the meter.\n\nAll of your examples involve hiatus, and easily fall under this pattern. This\nrule is considered **regular** ; tanka (waka) at that time was largely\nmanneristic being an important tool of communication and accomplishment among\nthe nobles, that shows little discretionary deviation in format.\n\nAn extreme example contains four out of five lines of a tanka seemingly have\nan excessive mora (字余り):\n\n> いせのうみに i-se-no-u-mi-ni: 6 \n> もしほやくあまの mo-si-fo-ya-ku-a-ma-no: 8 \n> かぜをいたみ ka-ze-wo-i-ta-mi: 6 \n> そらをしぼむる so-ra-wo-si-bo-mu-ru: 7 \n> きみにぞあるべき ki-mi-ni-zo-a-ru-be-ki: 8 \n> （[賀茂保憲女集](https://miko.org/~uraki/kuon/furu/text/waka/kamo/ym02.htm)）\n\nbut if you count vowel clusters:\n\n> i-se-n **ou** -mi-ni: 5 \n> mo-si-fo-ya-k **ua** -ma-no: 7 \n> ka-ze-w **oi** -ta-mi: 5 \n> so-ra-wo-si-bo-mu-ru: 7 \n> ki-mi-ni-z **oa** -ru-be-ki: 7\n\nwhich is perfectly normal. \n(I haven't found an all-字余り poem yet. Much appreciated if someone let me know\n:)\n\n[Another interesting example](https://kaken.nii.ac.jp/ja/file/KAKENHI-\nPROJECT-20520414/20520414seika.pdf) is a religious work by 最澄 that involves\nforeign words, which is rarely seen in the world of tanka:\n\n> あのくたら a-no-ku-ta-ra \n> さんみゃくさんぼだいの s **am** -mya-ku-s **am** -bo-d **ai** -no \n> ほとけたち fo-to-ke-ta-ti \n> わがたつそまに wa-ga-ta-tu-so-ma-ni \n> みゃうがあらせたまへ my **aũ** (?)-g **aa** -ra-se-ta-ma-fe\n\nAt first glance, it looks as if an extravagantly broken 5-10-5-7-9 verse in\nmora-counting, but still retains regular meter in syllables.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2020-04-19T16:52:19.593", "id": "76681", "last_activity_date": "2020-04-20T03:24:33.613", "last_edit_date": "2020-04-20T03:24:33.613", "last_editor_user_id": "7810", "owner_user_id": "7810", "parent_id": "16078", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "When a speaker pronounce `く`, speakers breathe out the air because of the\nvowel `u`.\n\nIt is _not impossible_ to hear that a speaker pronunce `く` as `く(ふ)` or just\n`ふ` in some situations.\n\nBut it's certain that `く` is written `ku` in Romaji and it doesn't have\nmultiple moras.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-22T15:05:28.953", "id": "16093", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-27T14:01:24.370", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-27T14:01:24.370", "last_editor_user_id": "5353", "owner_user_id": "5353", "parent_id": "16081", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]