Datasets:

---

p1atdev

/

japanese-stackexchange

like 3

[ { "body": "1. 彼はリンゴを見つめながら悩んだ。彼は、このリンゴを、今食べるべきだろうか？\n 2. 彼はリンゴを見つめながら悩んだ。私は、このリンゴを、今食べるべきだろうか？\n 3. 彼はリンゴを見つめながら悩んだ。「私は、このリンゴを、今食べるべきだろうか？」\n 4. 彼はリンゴを見つめながら悩んだ。このリンゴを、今食べるべきだろうか？\n\nIf I'm not mistaken, you're asking whether example 1 is natural in Japanese?\n\nExample 3 is the simplest and of course good. Example 2 omits かぎ括弧 and looks\nperfect in novels. You can just omit the subject as in example 4, and actually\nthis is the most common way, I think.\n\nAnd yes, the first example does make sense, and looks natural for me, at least\nif seen in serious novels. However it is the least common option of the four.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-22T14:45:48.490", "id": "16092", "last_activity_date": "2016-05-06T06:15:00.600", "last_edit_date": "2016-05-06T06:15:00.600", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "16083", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "Simply because シオン and カノス knows each other, and シオン is showing some respect\nfor her enemy, カノス, I guess?\n\n**EDIT:**\n\n(forget my previous answer.)\n\nSo カイム, シオン and カノス are friends, and they're trying to disturb and run away\nfrom someone not specified here?\n\nUnder this context, by \"いらっしゃい\", シオン is not requesting anything. This does not\nmean \"Come, please,\" nor \"Come on.\"\n\nJapanese いらっしゃい (or more politely, いらっしゃいませ) can mean \"please come,\" but it\nusually means \"Welcome\" or \"Glad to see you\" or even \"Hello (in stores,\netc.)\". シオン is showing her appreciation for カノス's joining the battle.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-22T14:12:36.677", "id": "16091", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-22T16:01:41.847", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-22T16:01:41.847", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "16087", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "\"I felt the person was just like me\" is the correct interpretation.\n\nThe author of the poem (passively) felt sympathy for the person waiting in a\nstation skipped by express trains. Hence the explanation\n「自分の人生は急行ではなく鈍行列車のようなものだ」.\n\nNote: Actually I think the meaning of this poem as a whole is very ambiguous\nand difficult to interpret, and 天声人語's explanation is one of the\npossibilities. I found an\n[article](http://blog.livedoor.jp/msktt/archives/52087283.html) that disagrees\nwith the 天声人語's explanation.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-22T16:53:58.650", "id": "16094", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-22T17:05:24.110", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-22T17:05:24.110", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "16089", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "One of my dictionaries, Shogakukan's _Kokugo Dai Jiten Dictionary_ , is pretty\ngood about including etymological information. Poking around in there, I've\nrun across two theories for the etymology of 思う that mirror the two broad\nsenses you mention here.\n\n * On the one hand, the おも in 思{おも}う may be cognate with the おも in 重{おも}い. Compare the English \"to weigh something\" as a synonym for \"to consider\", or \"to ponder\" and its relation to \"ponderous\" (i.e. \"heavy\").\n\n * On the other hand, the おも in 思{おも}う may be cognate with the おも in 面{おも}, with an underlying meaning of \"to appear on one's face, as an expression of emotion or thought\".\n\nThe three main senses listed are:\n\n> 1. （はたから見た様子を示す語が上にあって）そういう顔つきをする。（気持を）顔に表わす。 \n> To have such a facial expression (when preceded by a word indicating\n> appearance when seen from nearby). To express (an emotion) on one's face.\n> 2. 物事を理解したり、感受したりするために心を働かす。断定、推量、回想など種々の心の働きにいう。 \n> To use one's mind to comprehend or perceive something. Indicates various\n> ways of using one's mind, such as judgment, estimation, or recollection.\n> 3. ある対象に心を向ける。そちらへ強く心がひかれる。 \n> To turn one's mind to a particular object. To have one's mind drawn in a\n> particular direction.\n>\n\nThe entry includes sample sentences from the\n[_Kojiki_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kojiki), [_Nihon\nShoki_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihon_Shoki),\n[_Man'yōshū_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man%27y%C5%8Dsh%C5%AB), and\n[_Taketori\nMonogatari_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tale_of_the_Bamboo_Cutter),\nshowing that all three senses have been around for quite some time.\n\nLooking back at the poetry in your question, 思う here doesn't strike me as all\nthat ambiguous _as Japanese_ , but it may get tricky in translation, as the\nconceptual network of ideas expressed by 思う doesn't have a single analogous\nnode in the web of meaning expressed in English. Depending on context, it\ncould be \"think\", or \"feel\", or \"consider\", etc. And, for that matter, each of\nthese could probably be made to work in a translation of the poem above,\ndepending on how the rest of the translation were worded.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-22T19:32:56.927", "id": "16095", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-22T19:32:56.927", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "16089", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Shogakukan's _Kokugo Dai Jiten Dictionary_ states:\n\n> カルタ賭博から出た語 \n> A term from card gambling\n\nThe entry also gives 一{いち}か六{ろく}か as a synonym. This version may be more\nobviously related to dice gambling, but as mentioned in the discussion at\n<http://gogen-allguide.com/i/ichikabachika.html>, the 一 and 八 (or 六) here may\nnot directly indicate the numbers, and might instead be slang or jargon for\n[odds or evens](https://www.google.com/search?q=gambling+%22odds+or+evens%22).\nShogakukan's definition of \"choosing one of two choices\" seems to back this\nup, and the additional definition of \"leaving one's luck to fate and bravely\ndoing something\" and additional synonym of 伸{の}るか反{そ}るか suggests a kind of\n\"all or nothing\" implication.\n\nSo ultimately, this doesn't have to do with \"one to eight odds\", and instead\n一か八か indicates a 50-50 all-or-nothing gamble.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-22T22:23:37.737", "id": "16097", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-22T22:23:37.737", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "16096", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "Shogakukan gives much the same definition. However, I don't think that's\nnecessarily a big deal -- multiple terms of reference for a single part of\nspeech is not unknown in Japanese. 形容詞{けいようし}, for instance, have also been\ncalled 形状言{けいじょうげん} and 様言葉{さまことば}. I suspect the difference between 感動詞 and\n間投詞 might depend on which grammarian you ask. For what it's worth, the latter\nappears to be more of a direct translation of the English term \"interjection\".", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-23T05:09:32.223", "id": "16100", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-23T05:09:32.223", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "16099", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "From what I know, 感動詞 is the term more commonly found in Japanese language\ntextbooks and is the standard term used in discussions about the Japanese\nlanguage among linguists or translators. By contrast, 間投詞 is a synonym\ntypically glossed in dictionaries by referring to the entry on 感動詞.\n\nSeparately, the terms 形状言 and 様言葉 do not appear in any reference material I\nhave, including Kenkyushu'a J-E Dictionary, the Kojien or Meikyo J/J\ndictionaries, or any of the typical J/E online dictionaries. As far as I know,\nneither of these words exists in Japanese.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-23T15:53:44.810", "id": "16110", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-23T15:53:44.810", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5409", "parent_id": "16099", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "I'm not sure what's confusing you but... \n\nJapanese often omits the subject when it's obvious from the context, so your\nfirst sentence can be read as:\n\n> 『日本の中で食べ物は高い』と(私は)思う。 \n> (I think that food is expensive in Japan.)\n\nThe と is the case particle as a quotative marker. \nLikewise, your second sentence can be read as: \n\n> 『さけおさんは酒を飲まない』と(私は)思う。 \n> (I think that Sakeo-san doesn't drink alcohol.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-23T07:32:19.667", "id": "16103", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-23T07:32:19.667", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "16101", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

[ { "body": "I believe this is just an example of particle omission. Particles are often\nomitted if it's clear from context. In this case, the particle omitted is が.\nThat is to say, the fully expression would be:\n\n夜(が)遅い\n\n朝(が)早い\n\nThere's no hard fast rule specific to time of day and temporal adjective\n(there are\n[guidelines](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/3151/what-are-the-\nguidelines-of-omitting-particles)). Particle omission is something that you\nhave to learn when and how to do it by experience. If you're not fully\ncomfortable with it or you have any doubts on whether or not it's okay to\nomit, you should keep the particle to be on the safe side.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-23T13:16:26.550", "id": "16105", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-23T13:16:26.550", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.157", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1575", "parent_id": "16104", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "There actually **is** a rule governing the \"Noun + Adjective\" structures.\n\nThe noun must signify either a **spatial or temporal** unit such as\n[朝]{あさ}、[夜]{よる}、[空]{そら}、[天]{てん}、[奥]{おく}、 [時]{とき}、 [数]{かず}, etc.\n\nThe adjective must signify a **degree or quantity** regarding the preceding\nnoun. These include\n[早]{はや}い、[遅]{おそ}い、[高]{たか}い、[低]{ひく}い、[多]{おお}い、[少]{すく}ない、[深]{ふか}い, etc.\n\nThus, it is completely natural and correct to combine these nouns and\nadjectives in the \"noun + adjective\" order without using particles.\n\nLastly, since adjectives do conjugate in Japanese, these expressions are also\noften used as adverbial expressions modifying verb phrases.\n\nExamples of **_adjectival_** usages: 夜遅い、朝早い、空高し、数多い、時遅し, etc.\n\nExamples of **_adverbial_** usages: 夜遅く、奥深く、数少なく、天高く、朝早く, etc.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2014-09-28T02:02:24.547", "id": "18831", "last_activity_date": "2020-01-11T12:02:23.390", "last_edit_date": "2020-01-11T12:02:23.390", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "16104", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "I think the 2nd sentence is not grammatical, it lacks the particle を of the\n3rd sentence. However, in speech people might use the 2nd one over the 3rd\none.\n\nThe first sentence has a different meaning than the 2nd/3rd one.\n\n```\n\n 1) I read six pages of (this) book\n 2/3) I read the sixth page of the book. \n \n```", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-23T17:37:58.947", "id": "16111", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-23T17:45:54.420", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-23T17:45:54.420", "last_editor_user_id": "5179", "owner_user_id": "5179", "parent_id": "16106", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "As a part of a sino-japanese word you get カン・ケン readings as you suggest.\n\nMy sense is that if you just see the character lying about somewhere, the\nreading is あいだ.\n\nThe [Japanese wiktionary](http://ja.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E9%96%93) has some\nhelpful ideas in its list of meanings for the character in Japanese, namely 4,\n6, and 7 where they think it only works for ま\n\n> 6.部屋。\n\nwhen it means a room, it is always ま\n\n> 1. めぐりあわせ、運、タイミング。\n>\n\nWhen it refers to timing it is always ま\n\nAs a parenthetical, it can also be pronounced ま in a \"compound\": [合間]{あいま}.\nCf. all of the room words ([居間]{いま}). And even あいだ in [間柄]{あいだがら}\n\nThere's also a set list of phrases where ま seems to be used:\n\n```\n\n 間に合う\n いつの間\n 束の間\n \n```\n\nBut at least I would say the character used for native Japanese words is あいだ\nunless otherwise known to be ま.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-23T15:20:46.440", "id": "16109", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-26T06:03:08.740", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-26T06:03:08.740", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4091", "parent_id": "16107", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "Both readings can mean \"between\" (see meanings 1, 2, 4, and 5 of\n[_aida_](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/949/m0u/) and first meaning of\nthe noun [_ma_](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/206542/m0u/%E3%81%BE/)).\nBut _aida_ seems to be more common to express a space between two (or more)\nthings, while _ma_ expresses a space as such, or the type of partition of a\nspace (see the second and third meaning of the noun _ma_ ), such as a floor\nplan.\n\n_aida_ can carry the temporal meaning \"during, while\" (meaning 3 of _aida_ ),\nand following a nominal marked with _-no_ it can mean \"among\" (meaning 6 of\n_aida_ ).\n\n_ma_ can also express a period of time, as in the above-mentioned 間もなく 'ma-mo\nna-ku', or 間に合う 'ma-ni a-u'. It can, more specifically, express the moments\nduring a conversation when nothing is said (meaning 6 of the noun _ma_ ). \nThere are further, specialized meaning of both words, and there are, of\ncourse, also some instances of grammaticalized use (the temporal meaning\n'during, while' of _aida_ would fall in this class, imo).\n\nTo summarize, _aida_ means mostly \"between\", while _ma_ means \"space\", its way\nof partitioning, and \"period of time\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-25T17:05:15.787", "id": "16119", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-25T17:05:15.787", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5362", "parent_id": "16107", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "It looks like やけど derives from 焼け + 処, i.e. \"burnt place\", and was sometimes\nalso written 焼（け）所. cf. [語源由来辞典](http://gogen-allguide.com/ya/yakedo.html):\n\n> やけどを漢字で「火傷」と表記するのは、意味からの当て字。 \n> やけどの「やけ」は「焼け」、「ど」は「所」「場所」などを意味する「処」で、「焼け処」が語源である。 \n> 井原西鶴の浮世草子『好色二代男』に「脇腹を見たまへば、焼所ありありと」とある。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-23T20:53:33.380", "id": "16113", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-23T20:53:33.380", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3437", "parent_id": "16112", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "Shogakukan's _Kokugo Dai Jiten Dictionary_ backs up senshin's answer, listing\nthe following for the term's etymology:\n\n> 「焼け処（ど）」の意。「やけと」とも \n> Meaning 焼{や}け処{ど} (\"burnt place\"). Also read as _yaketo_", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-23T21:05:00.243", "id": "16114", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-23T21:05:00.243", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "16112", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "Isn't this \"ワンピースは実在する！\" from this anime/manga? It's not related to dresses or\nswimsuits.\n\n * <http://youtu.be/bFb5h9hl9Ig?t=2m3s> (at around 2:03)\n * <http://opwymtk.sakura.ne.jp/mystery/tcotop.html>\n\nIn this manga, ワンピース is a name of \"ultimate treasure\" searched by pirates, and\nvery little is known about it. Characters in the manga even do not know\nwhether ワンピース is a touchable object; it may be a name of some magical power,\nor a city, and it may be just a baseless rumor.\n\nSo in this context, \"ワンピースは実在する\" means \"One Piece does exist in reality. It's\nnot a mere legend or rumor.\" The fansub movie above translates this as \"One\nPiece does exist,\" which I think is perfectly correct, but I find nothing\nwrong if you translate this as \"One Piece is real.\"\n\nBesides that context, of course, \"(something) is real\" cannot always be\ntranslated as \"実在する\". If you want to say something like \"This one-piece dress\nis a real one manufactured in Italy in 1850,\" use **本物** , not 実在する.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-25T18:22:42.783", "id": "16120", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-25T18:31:49.950", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-25T18:31:49.950", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "16117", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "I think you might be getting deceived by the English word \"souvenir\" in\nthinking 土 + 産 has no meaning connection to みやげ. The English word tends to\nmean something you buy for yourself to remember your travel. The Japanese word\nis for things you buy to give to others that reflect the cuisine of where you\ntravelled.\n\n産 means [either to birth a child or to produce goods or the goods necessary\nfor life.](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/90052/m0u/)\n\nAnd 土 means earth, dirt, and some other things but particularly relevant is\nthat it means 地方 (\"geographic area\" but much more colloquially used than the\nheady-sounding English equvalent). [Thanks snailboat for the improvement!]\n\nSeems like a 熟字訓 to me. Moreover, [the Japanese\nWikipedia](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%86%9F%E5%AD%97%E8%A8%93)\nspecifically lists it as one stating:\n\n> その **土地** の特 **産品** 、旅先で仕入れた品物、記念品。土産物（みやげもの/どさんぶつ）。", "comment_count": 15, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-25T22:05:17.457", "id": "16122", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-26T01:46:12.393", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-26T01:46:12.393", "last_editor_user_id": "4091", "owner_user_id": "4091", "parent_id": "16121", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "Shogakukan's _Kokugo Dai Jiten Dictionary_ has this to say about the etymology\nof みやげ (my additions in [square brackets]):\n\n>\n> 「みあげ」の変化で、「みあげ」は「見上げ」、すなわち、よく見て、人に差し上げる品の意という。あるいは「御（み）上げ」か。「どさん（土産）2」と意味が近似するところから「土産」の字を当てる \n> A shift from _miage_ , where _miage_ means 見{み}上{あ}げ, in other words, to\n> look something over and then give it to someone. Alternately, may be from\n> 御{み}上{あ}げ [where the _mi_ is an honorific]. The spelling 土産 is used given\n> the similarity of meaning with sense 2 of 土産{どさん}.\n\nThat sense 2, _a gift [for others] from an area where one has visited_ , arose\nas an extension of the kanji-based meaning of _product of a specific area_.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-27T18:40:43.587", "id": "16146", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-27T18:40:43.587", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "16121", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "I think this よって comes from the verb 寄る{よる} which means \"to visit, to drop by\"\nin this case. Your sentence thus means:\n\n> ゆうびんきょくによってかえります。 \n> I'll drop by the post office and come back.\n\n* * *\n\n～によると is used as \"according to\" (see [よると or よれば？ Which one is \"according\nto\"?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/15940/%E3%82%88%E3%82%8B%E3%81%A8-or-%E3%82%88%E3%82%8C%E3%81%B0%EF%BC%9F-which-\none-is-according-to/15941#15941)).\n\n～によって can mean \"by way/method\", \"depending on\", \"because of\" (see [What´s the\ndifference between による, により and\nによって?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/3649/what%C2%B4s-the-\ndifference-\nbetween-%E3%81%AB%E3%82%88%E3%82%8B-%E3%81%AB%E3%82%88%E3%82%8A-and%E3%80%80%E3%81%AB%E3%82%88%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6)).\n\nNeither of them can be applied to \"post office\" in this sentence though.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-26T07:05:27.553", "id": "16124", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-26T07:29:25.073", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.207", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "5041", "parent_id": "16123", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "I think it's the second sense for 訪れる in Wiktionary:\n\n> 季節・状況などがやってくる。\n\nOther dictionaries give similar definitions. Here's the relevant sense from\n広辞苑:\n\n> （ある時期・状況などが）やってくる。「春が訪れる」「世界に平和が訪れる日」\n\nSo 最初に訪れる３月末 would mean something like \"the first March 31 that arrives\",\nalthough _arrive_ is a bit literal and we probably don't need to use it in\ntranslation, so your larger phrase would perhaps look something like this:\n\n> \"by/until the first March 31 after [you] turn 66 years old\"\n\nI can't really make the translation more natural since you didn't supply much\ncontext, or even a complete sentence, but hopefully it gets the meaning across\n:-)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-26T10:51:09.290", "id": "16126", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-26T10:51:09.290", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "16125", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "When you use それは~です you can think of it like saying \"that's a ~\". In the case\nyou mention you should use です.\n\nあります is the equivalent of there is/are and to have, depending on the context.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-26T19:26:10.173", "id": "16128", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-26T19:26:10.173", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4600", "parent_id": "16127", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "それは椅子です = That is a chair. (as in \"that thing is a chair\") 椅子があります = There is\na chair. (as in \"a chair exists\" somewhere)", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-26T20:45:46.203", "id": "16129", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-26T20:45:46.203", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3875", "parent_id": "16127", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "it could actually be either, depending on the context.\n\n> 「それは椅子です」 - that's a chair / that would be a chair\n>\n> 「何？椅子ないかってー？そりゃ、椅子ありますよ」 - What? If we have chairs? Why, of course we have\n> chairs.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-27T13:40:38.367", "id": "16143", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-28T05:33:57.393", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "5432", "parent_id": "16127", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "逃げたくなった is the past tense form of 逃げ+たく+なる which consists of 動詞「逃げる」 + 助動詞「たい」\n+ 動詞「なる」.\n\n逃げ >> 連用形(continuative form) of 逃げる >> run away \nたく >> 連用形(continuative form) of the volitional たい >> want to \nなった >> the past tense form of なる(成る) >> become \n\nSo it's like \"became to want to run away\", i.e. \"started to feel like running\naway\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-27T03:46:45.560", "id": "16131", "last_activity_date": "2014-09-05T10:39:00.117", "last_edit_date": "2014-09-05T10:39:00.117", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "16130", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 }, { "body": "逃げたくなった is:\n\n * 逃げる = \"to flee\", in its stem form (連用形) → 逃げ\n * ～たい = the suffix that expresses wanting to do, conjugated to ～たく (again, the 連用形)\n * なる = \"to become\", in past tense → なった\n\nSo this means something to the effect of \"it became the case that he wanted to\nget away\".\n\nFor the sentence as a whole, I would offer a translation like \"he began to\nwant to get away from the difficulties of being a celebrity\".\n\nFor \"he did not want to get away\", you would indeed use 逃げたくな **か** った.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-27T03:47:07.577", "id": "16132", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-27T10:14:53.753", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-27T10:14:53.753", "last_editor_user_id": "3437", "owner_user_id": "3437", "parent_id": "16130", "post_type": "answer", "score": 22 } ]

[ { "body": "シャブ is common slang for crystal methamphetamine.\n\nRegular newspapers usually use the more politically-correct 覚醒剤【かくせいざい】, which\nliterally means \"stimulant drug\", but nearly always refer to methamphetamine\nor cocaine. This being a tabloid (and perhaps because the term is a little\nmore specific), they went with the stronger word シャブ, but out of that [typical\nfaux-coyness about \"loaded\" terms in Japanese\nmedia](http://www.geocities.co.jp/WallStreet/4845/odio/kinku.html) (*), opted\nto censor it.\n\nAs for the wider context, it's a bit off-topic, but:\n\nFamous 80s artist ASKA was [recently arrested for possession and use of said\nstimulants](http://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/html/20140527/k10014750641000.html).\nThe ~~恋人~~ 愛人 part probably refers to the \"friend\"/\"girlfriend\" (didn't follow\nthe details too closely) that was charged alongside him (and whose house would\nhave apparently been used to store and consume the narcotics).\n\n*: Apparently, it's really bad if kids get to see a slang term for drug spelt out on a subway ad, but totally fine if they get their fill of half-naked, boob-cupping, barely-legal models on the same ad.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-27T04:37:43.297", "id": "16134", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-27T10:43:20.080", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-27T10:43:20.080", "last_editor_user_id": "290", "owner_user_id": "290", "parent_id": "16133", "post_type": "answer", "score": 14 } ]

[ { "body": "As has been noted in the comments, 代わり【かわり】に is the construction you are\nlooking for.\n\nWhen referring to discrete objects, it usually takes the following format:\n\n> object of desire + の + 代わりに + favor performed in return\n\ne.g. このリンゴの代わりに何をくれる？\"What will you give me for this apple?\"\n\nIn the case of your request, there are a couple of other ways it can be\nphrased to achieve a more natural feeling:\n\n * If you're simply talking about an exchange, try using 〜てあげる代わり【かわり】に:\n\n> 英語【えいご】を教えて【おしえて】あげる代わりに日本語【にほんご】を教えて【おしえて】ください。 \"In exchange for teaching\n> [you] English, please teach [me] Japanese.\"\n\n * If you're already teaching them bits of English, then you can express the sentiment that you're already giving something by using the plain form of the verb + から (\"therefore\"):\n\n> 英語【えいご】を教えて【おしえて】あげるから、代わり【かわり】に日本語【にほんご】を教えて【おしえて】ください。 \"I'm [already]\n> teaching [you] English, so please teach [me] Japanese in exchange.\"", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-27T07:17:26.190", "id": "16136", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-27T07:55:02.403", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-27T07:55:02.403", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4914", "parent_id": "16135", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "I think the most common way to express \"In exchange for helping you, please\nhelp me\" is simply\n\n> （私が）Aするから、（あなたは）Bして\n\ni.e.\n\n> 英語を教えるから、日本語を教えて。\n\nthough this of course doesn't explicitly include \"in exchange\", much like the\nEnglish phrase \"I'll do this, so please do that\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-27T08:33:46.823", "id": "16137", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-28T02:56:25.433", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-28T02:56:25.433", "last_editor_user_id": "5432", "owner_user_id": "5432", "parent_id": "16135", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "To pick some examples:\n\n * 何を食べたい？ 食べたいものは何？\n * 何を見た？ 見たものは何？ \n * どこに行った？ 行った場所はどこ？ etc.\n\nDid I get the idea correctly? If so, then I would argue that the difference in\nfeelings of those two are rather subtle/insignificant. If you use them in\nspeaking, your tone of voice would be more influential than the different\nconstruction of these phrases.\n\nThat said, this subtle difference does exist --- the latter phrases are more\ninterrogating --- because questions in Japanese, in practice, are indicated\nalmost solely by the intonations (i.e. higher pitch to the end) rather than\ngrammars, so the word/phrase that has such a pitch is emphasized as a core of\nthe question.\n\nP.S. as istrasci mentions, どこ出身？ is a common very casual way, but 出身どこ？ is as\ncommon as that.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-27T19:58:45.013", "id": "16147", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-27T22:35:28.710", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-27T22:35:28.710", "last_editor_user_id": "5442", "owner_user_id": "5442", "parent_id": "16144", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "(The following is based on something I originally worked out for myself. There\nmay be other views but it seems to hold.)\n\nAs the first answer says, the difference between these two expressions will\nlargely depend on context - the situation, how they are said etc. - and the\nnuance is probably slight but worth understanding.\n\nThe particle の is often used to replace が and therefore I would suggest that,\n**to the extent it exists** , the difference between 出身はどこ and どこの出身 is\nsimilar to the difference between using は and が but with the some provisos.\n\nAs が places emphasis on what comes before it and は places emphasis on what\ncomes after, and you have effectively reversed the word order, you could argue\nthat the emphasis on どこ has not substantially changed, even if we extend these\nexpressions into more \"complete\" formal questions:\n\n> 田中さんはどこの出身でしょう？ \n> 田中さんの出身はどこでしょう？\n\nThe main proviso is (as pointed out in the response to the previous question:\n[noun + の +\nadjective](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/14056/noun-) ) that\nreplacing が with の softens the impact, and places emphasis on what comes after\nの.\n\nYou could analyse this further but given the two expressions are not that\ndifferent, I would suggest stopping here and moving to look at the difference\nbetween between は and が in more extreme and varied cases. There are several\nexplanations. I find the one by Kuno, cited on this site the most useful.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-10T15:56:29.273", "id": "17349", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-11T13:40:13.443", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.740", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "16144", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "The `ぶり` in `5年ぶり` comes from the verb `振る` which is usually read `ふる`, but\ncan also be `ぶる`. The kanji is not often used (in my experience) in this\ncontext. It means \"shake\" or \"wave\", but I'm not sure how that really plays\ninto these time expressions.\n\nAs a verb ending (`〜ぶり`), it can mean \"way of doing\"; similar to `〜[方]{かた}`,\nbut I believe more subjective. Here, `振る` takes the meaning of \"assume\",\n\"pretend\", \"put on\", or \"pose as\". For example, `高ぶる` means to be arrogant --\n\"assuming\" a high position. So you can see the verb ending comes from this.\n\n> * 話し振り → Way of speaking → One's (assumed) mannerisms of speech\n> (subjective)\n> * 話し方 → Way of speaking → How to speak (methodically; objective)\n>\n\nAs far as `ぶり返す`, I cannot tell from all the definitions in my dictionaries if\nthis is the same `ぶり` or not, so I'll defer that question to someone else.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-27T21:19:23.300", "id": "16150", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-27T21:19:23.300", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "16148", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "### Spelling\n\nIn reply to istrasci's final comment, the _buri_ in _burikaesu_ is the same 振る\nas _furu_ , and can be spelled in kanji as 振り返す. That said, the _buri_ is more\noften spelled in kana to make the voiced reading explicit.\n\n### Phonology\n\nChanging an _h-_ or _f-_ on the front to the voiced _b-_ variant is common in\nthe latter element of compounds (see <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rendaku>),\nexplaining why _-fur-_ changes to _-bur-_ in compounds.\n\nWhen the _fur-_ is in word-initial position, the shift to voicing can imply\nsome kind of pejorative meaning, as noted by a number of linguists. From\nLaurence Labrune's [_The Phonology of\nJapanese_](http://books.google.com/books?id=ix9r6CbEl6IC) (2012), p.102:\n\n> The voiced obstruents which appear word-initially in Yamato words come from\n> the following sources. First, one finds a number of cases which result from\n> secondary voicing of an originally unvoiced obstruent, whose phono-pragmatic\n> function is to introduce a pejorative or expressive connotation.\n\n### Semantics (Meaning)\n\n振る _furu_ is ultimately cognate with the _furu_ in classical _furuu_ , modern\n震{ふる}える \"tremble, shake, vibrate, quake\". The _furu_ on its own can mean\n\"wave, shake\", but it also has a range of other meanings, a number of which\nimply \"the movement of a thing as a whole\". That underlying sense might be\nwhere derived term 振り _furi_ came to include meanings such as \"likeness; kind;\none's appearance, style, or behavior\".\n\n_-Buri_ as the latter element in compounds derives from this _furi_ , and can\nbe found in words like 身振{みぶ}り \"body language, how one moves, appearance\", or\n女振{おんなぶ}り \"a woman's face or appearance\".\n\nWhen appended to a time-related noun or phrase, _-buri_ again carries stronger\nconnotations of \"whole, entire\", in terms of \"the _whole_ XX amount of time\nhas passed\". 三週間ぶり would mean \"it's been three whole weeks [since ...]\". 久しい\nliterally means \"eternal; a very long time.\" 久しぶり is thus often an\nexaggeration, similar to English \"it's been forever!\" even though the speaker\nand listener might have seen each other recently.\n\nFor the _buri_ in _burikaesu_ , the meanings given for this verb are generally\nnegative, suggesting that the voicing is indeed pejorative. Whereas\n_furikaesu_ can mean simply \"to turn something back\", _burikaesu_ means \"to\nget worse again, as said of a previously improving situation.\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-27T22:38:22.670", "id": "16153", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-06T20:54:02.770", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-06T20:54:02.770", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "16148", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "German and Japanese similarities here are purely coincidental. Japanese\n_-chan_ derives as likely baby-talk from regular suffix _-san_. Similarly, we\nhave regular _-sama_ (which itself is the source of _-san_ ) and baby-ish\n_-chama_. See also most any JA-JA dead-tree dictionary, or [the Daijirin entry\nhere](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%A1%E3%82%83%E3%82%93) (see the third\nentry down), clearly stating:\n\n> 〔「さん」の転〕 \n> (Alteration of _san_ )\n\nAs for first recorded use, I couldn't find any listing of citations in my\ndictionaries. It's clearly been around since at least some time before\n[Natsume Sōseki's 1906 novel\n_Botchan_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Botchan).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-27T21:46:11.717", "id": "16151", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-27T21:46:11.717", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "16149", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "Yes, it's most likely a coincidence. We can see this by comparing several\ntitles:\n\n```\n\n 　さま　　ちゃま\n 　さん　　ちゃん\n \n```\n\nThe formal さま, which is clearly Japanese, was shortened to さん, which is now\nthe most common and general title, and is more or less unmarked. さん was\nfurther reduced to the hypocoristic ちゃん, which is also very common, though not\nquite as much; and there is also a variant ちゃま reduced from さま in similar\nfashion at a later date, which is the least common of the four.\n\nThe earliest cite for ちゃん in 精選版 日本国語大辞典 is 1813, and for ちゃま it is 1900-01.\nAlthough both are after Japan had first been exposed to German, I think the\nlarge majority of borrowings from the German language were from the Meiji era\nand later (1868-), following [the opening of the international borders in\n1853](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sakoku). To me it seems like the simplest\nexplanation is that given by dictionaries, that ちゃん is derived from さん, and is\nnot related to German _chen_.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-27T21:46:34.377", "id": "16152", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-27T22:04:39.870", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-27T22:04:39.870", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "16149", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "Both versions are acceptable. The choice of particle shifts the emphasis\nslightly.\n\n> こんなに大きなももはみたことがない。\n\nIn both cases, こと is added after the verb to turn it into a noun meaning \"the\nexperience of having done X\". In this case みたこと is treated as a property of\nthe peach. Thus it stresses the action of seeing over the object of the peach.\n\nCompare with the bolded English translation: \"I've never **seen** such a big\npeach before!\"\n\n> その歌を聞いたことがありません。\n\nIn this case, the use of を links the verb + こと to the song. As such we're not\ntalking about a property of the song in this case, but rather about the\nexperience of having heard the song. Thus the song remains in the foreground,\nreceiving emphasis.\n\nCompare with the bolded English translation: \"I've never heard **this song**\nbefore!\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-28T02:35:12.047", "id": "16157", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-28T04:25:03.957", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-28T04:25:03.957", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "4914", "parent_id": "16154", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I disagree with Kaji's analysis. While Kaji's is the textbook answer\nconcerning the question when _-wa_ is used, the explanation remains opaque. \nRather there is a _-wa_ after _momo_ in the first example, because we can\nassume that the speaker has, at some time, seen big peaches. The one referred\nto in the sentence, however, is, among those seen, the biggest. \nThat is not the case with the second example, though. I understand the\nsentence to imply that the speaker hasn't heard that specific song before, but\nnot that s/he has NEVER heard **a song** before. \nSo, the answer to your question is: yes, both particles are good, but they\nimply different things about the noun to which they are attached.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-28T08:28:19.680", "id": "16168", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-28T08:28:19.680", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5362", "parent_id": "16154", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "If you simply say \"I have never heard that song before\", the natural one is\nその歌は聞いたことがない or その歌を聞いたことはない.\n\nSince その歌を聞いたことがない appearantly lacks the topic part, it can be correct only\nwhen it's (1) inversion of 聞いたことがないのはその歌だ (it's that song that I haven't\nheard) or (2) a part of coherent sentences like 「その歌を聞いたことがない。それで…」\n(interchangeable to その歌を聞いたことがないので) or 「わたしは・・・。・・・。その歌を聞いたことがない」.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-28T15:55:50.437", "id": "16175", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-28T15:55:50.437", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4092", "parent_id": "16154", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "Combining Thomas's answer with Marcus's comment on the question, I think I've\ngot it, but neither response is really complete on its own. I'd like to\nposition the answer in the way that I'm thinking about it, so that I can (1)\nmake sure this is correct, and (2) help those who might think like me.\n\nIt's all about whether the noun feels like a direct object or a topic. If it's\nsomething particular, a specific instance of an object, directly being acted\nupon by a transitive verb, that's obviously a case for using を. \"This song\",\n\"those people\", \"the red car\", etc.\n\nIf, on the other hand, the noun is more nebulous, not easily enumerated, it\nmight feel more like a topic.\n\nOK, example time.\n\n> その歌｛うた｝を聞｛き｝いたこと・・・ \n> the experience of listening to that **particular** song\n\nを is the natural particle here because we're doing something to a particular\nobject (that song). Contrast and compare with the following sentences\ninvolving 歌...\n\n> その歌｛うた｝を聞｛き｝いた。 \n> listened to that song\n\nUsing を here is fine and natural. It's the normal phrasing.\n\n> その歌｛うた｝は、聞｛き｝いた。 \n> regarding that song, (I have) listened to it\n\nUsing は here is grammatical, but would be odd to say out of context. Imagine\nthat two people are going through a bunch of songs. \"concerning that song...\n_[pause while thinking]_... I've heard it.\" It sounds fine in that context.\n\n> 歌｛うた｝は聞｛き｝いたこと・・・ \n> the experience of listening to songs (in general)\n\nWithout a particular song in mind, 歌 can refer to songs in general. In this\ncase, は can work since \"songs in general\" feels like a topic. Or maybe more\nimportantly, \"songs in general\" isn't a direct object you can apply a\ntransitive verb to.\n\n> その歌｛うた｝は聞｛き｝いたこと・・・ \n>\n\nI'm not sure how you'd translate this; it sounds odd to me. It sounds to me\nlike you'd separate it along the lines of: \"concerning this song\" ... \"the\nexperience of having listened to it\". The は almost forces a pause, for me.\n\nIt's kind of a roundabout way of getting there, but I think this is what\nMarcus meant when he said 「こんなに大きな・・・」 is a setup for は. \"a peach as big as\nthis\" is more suited as a topic of a sentence. It's not referring to any one\npeach, it's referring to a class of peaches.\n\n> こんなに大｛おお｝きな桃｛もも｝をみた\n\nEssentially, this sounds strange because を isn't attached to an object or set\nof objects.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-28T18:02:52.377", "id": "16177", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-28T18:02:52.377", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5275", "parent_id": "16154", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "護る is used more to guard someone. There's a sense of security and guarding.\nInstances of this can be seen in words like 護衛、援護、擁護、警護 etc\n\nA use of 護る can be in a sentence like 陛下を護る、主君を護る\n\n守る is used to defend or protect something. Words that use 守 include those like\n守備、攻守, 守衛\n\nUses of 守る: 宝を守る、陣地を守る、城を守る etc.\n\nSo one's used to guard, the other is used to protect Hope that helps", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-28T02:10:06.857", "id": "16156", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-28T02:15:46.843", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-28T02:15:46.843", "last_editor_user_id": "5436", "owner_user_id": "5436", "parent_id": "16155", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "Basically 守る is the more general and common word for \"protecting, guarding, or\nkeeping someone / something.\"\n\nThe 訓読み 「[護る]{まもる}」 is not listed in 常用漢字表 (thus it's not taught in schools),\nand it can be only specifically used to protect/guard something from foreign\nattacks.\n\n * 約束{やくそく｝を守る ( _keep a promise_ ): Good\n * 約束を護る: Not good\n * 秘密{ひみつ}を守る ( _keep a secret_ ): Good\n * 秘密を護る: Not good\n * 法律｛ほうりつ｝を守る ( _uphold/obey the law_ ): Good\n * 法律を護る: Not good, or maybe OK if you mean \"to protect the law itself from being altered badly\"\n\n * 祖国{そこく}を守る/護る ( _protect the homeland_ ): OK\n\n * 打撃{だげき}から身{み}を守る/護る ( _protect oneself from damage_ ): OK\n * サッカーのゴールを守る/護る ( _guard the goal_ ): OK\n\nPersonally, I always use 守る for all those purposes, and regard 護る as the word\nonly for novelists or songwriters.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-28T05:33:09.247", "id": "16162", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-28T13:51:29.633", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-28T13:51:29.633", "last_editor_user_id": "5306", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "16155", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "My personal feeling...\n\nThe most often use of 「護」 of 「護る」 is when god defends somebody. We use\n「神の御加護がありますように」 as \"I hope god bless you\". And their is a 「護国神社」 in every\nprefecture.\n\nOr parents defends their kids, we call 「保護者」, adults who are legally\nresponsible for kids.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-28T09:17:47.313", "id": "16171", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-28T09:17:47.313", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5069", "parent_id": "16155", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "There are a couple issues here.\n\nFirst off, the 次 here is about the next 役員 or board / committee member, not\nabout the next meeting.\n\n> **次の役員** が決まらなくて \n> **the next board member(s)** が not decided \n> 随分長く掛かりました \n> it [the meeting] took a really long time\n\nSo basically, the man is saying that the _last_ meeting (that the woman\nmentions) took a really long time, because the meeting couldn't / didn't come\nto a decision about the next member(s).\n\nThere is no mention of the next meeting.\n\nSecondly, Japanese doesn't really have grammatical tense in the same way that\nEnglish does. (This part is more tangential to your question, so if your eyes\nglaze over reading this, no worries. :) ) Strictly speaking, [grammatical\ntense](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_tense) is where verbs\nconjugate depending on the completedness of the action in relation to **now**.\nWhat Japanese has is more specifically [grammatical\naspect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_aspect), where verbs\nconjugate depending on the completedness of the action in relation to **the\ntimeframe of the current context**. (Read the [Aspect vs. tense\nsection](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_aspect#Aspect_vs._tense)\nfor a comparison of the two.)\n\nAs such, it's grammatically possible to say things in Japanese like 昨日起きるところで\n\"yesterday just before I **wake up** \" (the context is _yesterday_ , and the\nspeaker, at the point being described, has not yet woken), or 明日あの本を読みきれた後で\n\"tomorrow after I **finished reading** that book\" (the context is _tomorrow_ ,\nand the speaker, at the point being described, will have finished reading).\nEnglish doesn't work this way, so just translating word-for-word might get you\nconfused. It took me a while to wrap my head around this difference.", "comment_count": 13, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-28T04:02:23.910", "id": "16159", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-28T04:02:23.910", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "16158", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "Shogakukan's _Ruigo Reikai Thesaurus Dictionary_ has this to say about\ndifferences in meaning and usage:\n\n> 「大きい」は、「夢が大きい」「大きく夢みる」のように述語として、また\n> 連用修飾語としても使うが、「大きな」は「大きな…(名詞)」という言い方でしか使わない。 \n> _Ōkii_ is used as both predicate and as a continuative modifier as in _yume\n> ga ōkii_ , _ōkiku yume miru_ , but _ōkina_ is only used in the format of\n> _ōkina_...(noun).\n>\n> 物事の程度や、関わる範囲などが大であるという意で名詞を修飾する場合、その名詞が「問題」「影響」など抽象名詞のときは、「大きな」を用いることが多い。 \n> When modifying a noun to mean that a thing's degree or relevant scope is\n> large, _ōkina_ is used more often when the noun is abstract, such as a\n> \"problem\" or \"effect\".\n\nThere's also a table indicating different valid and invalid constructions,\nwhich I've clumsily recreated below. The - indicates an invalid use, while the\n△ indicates an acceptable but less-common use.\n\n> ～声 | 声が～ | ～問題に発展する | ～影響がある | ～拍手で迎えられる \n> 大きい 〇 | 〇 | △ | △ |\n> 〇 \n> 大きな 〇 | － | 〇 | 〇 |\n> 〇\n\nAs shown above, both 大きい声 and 大きな声 would be equally valid. The person who told\nyou that 大きな should be used more for non-physical things might have used the\nwrong word; given the description above, the distinction appears to be\n_abstract_ vs. _concrete_ , rather than _physical_ vs. _non-physical_.\n\nGrammatically, 小さい and 小さな have the same usage constraints as 大きい and 大きな. The\nthesaurus does not, however, mention any differences in _abstract_ vs.\n_concrete_ between 小さい and 小さな.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-28T07:06:17.247", "id": "16165", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-28T07:18:16.193", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-28T07:18:16.193", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "16160", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 } ]

[ { "body": "How about...\n\n> (話が)わからなくなりました。(←わかる(解る)+ない(無い)+なる(成る)+ました)(rather than just\n> わかりません。/わからないです。/I don't understand.) \n> or \n> (話に)ついていけていません。(←つく(付く)+て+いく(行く)+て+いる(居る)+ません)(rather than just ついていけません。/I\n> can't follow.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-28T06:22:56.753", "id": "16164", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-28T08:14:06.717", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-28T08:14:06.717", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "16163", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "The expression I encounter more often among Japanese than the one by Chocolate\nis\n\n```\n\n 訳が分からない \n wake-ga wakar-ana-i \n \n```\n\nThe meanings of _wake_ vary. Here, we're looking at the meanings 2-4 of the\nlemma 訳 (see [here](http://www.weblio.jp/content/%E3%82%8F%E3%81%91) but\nscroll down a bit to find 訳), namely how something comes to be the case\n(meaning 2), the meaning of what people say (meaning 3), and how stuff works\n(meaning 4). \nThat should cover it.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-28T08:19:21.363", "id": "16167", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-28T08:19:21.363", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5362", "parent_id": "16163", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "There are several other options that grammatically I don't see anything wrong\nwith (though sometimes I tend to be too 教科書っぽい). Although I get the feeling\nthat saying any of these directly **_to_** someone would be a little off-\nputting.\n\n> **[迷]{まよ}う** ー To be lost; can be used metaphorically\n>\n> * (お前の)言うことに迷っています → I'm lost on/I don't get what you're saying\n>\n\n>\n> \n> **[惑]{まど}う・[戸惑]{と・まど}う・[当惑]{とう・わく}する** ー Be puzzled; perplexed; confused\n>\n> * (お前の)言うことに当惑しています → I'm confused by what you're saying\n>\n\n>\n> \n> **[掴]{つか}む・[把握]{は・あく}する** ー To grasp, hold; metaphorically as \"understand\"\n>\n> * (お前の)言うことを掴んでいません・把握していません → I don't get what you're saying\n>", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-28T18:00:10.193", "id": "16176", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-28T18:00:10.193", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "16163", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "Not sure whether the expression 【[頭]{あたま}が[回]{まわ}らない】(translates roughly as \"I\ncan't wrap my head around it\", but it's an idiom so there is no perfect\ntranslation) can be used in this way, but I am not a native speaker so I can't\ntell you whether it is appropriate or whether my translation is missing\nsomething.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2017-05-18T02:30:51.120", "id": "47535", "last_activity_date": "2017-05-18T02:30:51.120", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "21802", "parent_id": "16163", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "I think the most \"Japanese\"-like way to respond to that is to reply that you\ndon't understand fully. It comes up often in literature: よくわからないけど、...\n\n...and then defer or offer support/empathy.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2017-05-19T22:54:46.917", "id": "47595", "last_activity_date": "2017-05-19T22:54:46.917", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "21684", "parent_id": "16163", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "This \"ものには\" means \"Things\".\n\n\"All things have order.\" or \"All things are set in the sequence.\"\n\nIn this case, translation might be\n\n> Of course, the target task in the dungeon is defeating the Boss but you\n> should do something before do it.\n\nAnd I'd like you to post the next phrase, I guess there is a clue in it.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-28T08:58:56.997", "id": "16170", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-28T10:17:20.713", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-28T10:17:20.713", "last_editor_user_id": "5041", "owner_user_id": "5069", "parent_id": "16166", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "I guess you could use the word 人{ひと}なつこい。 You can use it when referring to a\nfriendly dog (towards people) so I guess it could be applied to cows too.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-28T12:30:29.490", "id": "16173", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-28T12:30:29.490", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5041", "parent_id": "16172", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "I realize there is already an accepted answer-- but I thought I would mention\nmy personal experience with this.\n\nIn March I went to a language school in Tokyo for the month and tried\nsomething very similar to you while trying to describe my cat who is very\n\"friendly.\" I was told by my teacher that `親しい` only applies to humans, and\nfor animals one should use `フレンドリー` which is functionally a 形容動詞 (Na-Adj).\n\n> ◯ 彼女は親しい友達です。\n>\n> × 私の猫は親しいです。 \n> ◯ 私の猫はフレンドリーです。\n\nWhile this is a loan word, which I hate using, I believe it is in common use,\nas it was told to me by a native Japanese person.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-29T14:53:55.923", "id": "16196", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-29T14:53:55.923", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "3261", "parent_id": "16172", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "どういうXX here is like English \"what kind of XX\". It's slightly vaguer with more\nroom for expansion, and could come across as slightly more humble or non-\nconfrontational on the part of the speaker. In terms of rhythm and idiom,\nどういう状況ですか starts with どういう, immediately indicating that this is a question,\nrather than 状況は何ですか, where we're halfway through the utterance before there's\nany hint that it's a question. By starting with a clear question phrase, the\nlistener is primed to think of an answer. This doesn't map very well to\nEnglish, in that the word orders and emphases are quite different from _What\nkind of situation_ (or perhaps the more literal translation of _how would you\nsay [about] the situation_ ) vs. _What is the situation_ , where the English\nin all these cases starts with a question word.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-28T23:28:56.697", "id": "16180", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-29T05:49:19.180", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-29T05:49:19.180", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "16178", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Japan still sends a significant amount of mail by post, particularly\n[年賀状{ねんがじょう}](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_New_Year#Postcards) (new\nyear postcards). A large portion of the population has a list of the addresses\nof all the people they are supposed to send cards to each year.\n\nWhen you move, you send a 引っ越しハガキ to let folks know what your new address is,\nso that they can update their address in their list and make sure that there\nis no unexpected 年賀状 delivery failures at New Year.\n\n(It's generally just a simple postcard that says 'We've moved!' and 'stop by\nif you're in the area!' or the like. If you buy a new apartment many companies\nwill give you a stack of postcards with a picture of the apartment and the\ncompany that built it so that you can just use those to send to your friends\nand save you some effort/give them some free exposure)\n\n[](http://blog-\nimgs-24-origin.fc2.com/i/s/a/isa2staff/HN-204b.jpg)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-29T07:31:46.117", "id": "16182", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-29T07:31:46.117", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3300", "parent_id": "16179", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "When I saw \"引っ越しハガキ\", two post cards came up in my mind. First one is as jmac\nand Chocolate describe, letter to notify your acquaintance that you moved.\n\nAnother one is the letter you send to your post office, to transfer mails you\nreceived to new address. <https://www.post.japanpost.jp/question/108.html>\n\nIf you get this post card and write down your former and new address, and\nmembers (usually it's your family), just drop it to post box.\n\nMails to your former address will be delivered to your new address for 1 year.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-30T03:35:31.960", "id": "16208", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-30T03:35:31.960", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5069", "parent_id": "16179", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "When you say 「A [対]{たい} B」, the balance between the words on both sides of the\n「対」 is of utmost importance. Both word A and word B MUST have the same level\nof formality and phonetic impact.\n\nIdeally speaking, the two words should be both Sino loanwords, both Japanese-\norigin words, or both katakana words. Using this technique will help the\nJapanese reader/listener retain the phrase itself and the explanations more\nclearly.\n\nYour phrase 「[拒絶反応]{きょぜつはんのう} 対 [受]{う}け[入]{い}れ」 has a problem in combining a\nsharp-sounding, on-reading word (拒絶反応) and a softer-sounding Yamatokotoba\n(受け入れ). 拒絶反応, naturally, sounds more formal than 受け入れ. Native speakers of any\nlanguage are very sensitive to these types of imbalances.\n\nYour main concern seems to be whether or not your phrase is grammatical. It is\nactually grammatical. It is even difficult for a \"A 対 B\" structure to be\nungrammatical. All you need is two nouns if your only concern is grammar.\n\nFinally, my actual word suggestions. (You should have given us more context, a\nbackground story, etc. if I may be honest.)\n\n拒絶、[疎外]{そがい}、[排除]{はいじょ} vs. [容認]{ようにん}、[受容]{じゅよう}、[了承]{りょうしょう}、[承諾]{しょうだく}\n\nAgain, as I stated, no one could recommend one word over the other without\nknowing what you are writing or speaking about.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-08-12T14:13:51.217", "id": "18213", "last_activity_date": "2014-08-12T14:13:51.217", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "16181", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "It depends on the situation but in this case 彼 is 'he', あちら is 'that person'.\n彼 is just a little bit more friendly, あちら is formal.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-29T11:30:43.010", "id": "16190", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-29T11:56:58.417", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-29T11:56:58.417", "last_editor_user_id": "5041", "owner_user_id": "5454", "parent_id": "16183", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "彼 is strictly male and means \"he\" rather than \"that person over there\". Worth\nnoting is that the he/she pronouns aren't as commonly used in Japanese as in\nEnglish and 彼 can also mean \"boyfriend\". あちら is rather polite/stuffy for \"that\nperson (over there)\" but it can also mean \"over there\" or \"overseas\".\n\n> あちらがお父様ですか？ Is that (person standing over there) your father?\n\nThe most common expression for \"that person\" is however あの人, though it might\nbe a little bit too casual depending on the context. A very impolite form\nthat's sure to offend, on the other hand, is あいつ (or あのやつ).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-30T02:11:13.503", "id": "16207", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-30T02:11:13.503", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5432", "parent_id": "16183", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "> ヨークシャープディング食べたことある？ / を食べた ことが ありますか？\n\nYou can use them when you want to ask the experience. First one is friendly\nway, last one is formal way.\n\nFor example, Have you ever eaten Yorkshire Pudding?\n\nThen\n\n> ヨークシャープディングを食べましたか？\n\nThis one is just asking the fact that if you had a pudding. For example, Did\nyou eat Yorkshire Pudding in this mornig?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-29T11:48:17.047", "id": "16192", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-29T11:48:17.047", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5454", "parent_id": "16184", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "The format:\n\n> ◯◯を食べた ことが ありますか\n\ntranslates to:\n\n> Have you ever eaten ◯◯?\"\n\nYou could also ask if they sometimes eat yorkshire pudding in a similar\nfashion:\n\n> ◯◯を食べる ことが ありますか\n\nThis translates roughly to:\n\n> Do you eat ◯◯?\n\n* * *\n\nThe second question you mentioned:\n\n> ヨークシャープディングを食べましたか？\n\nIs asking in the context of some time frame in the past. It **could be**\nrecent, or it could be in the past as well.\n\nFor example, if your friend is talking about a time they went to some\nrestaurant in the past maybe you could ask if they ate yorkshire pudding at\nthat time by using the above.\n\nHowever, if you have no context to ask about, it would probably just apply to\nrecent time, like that day or something.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-29T18:33:57.043", "id": "16200", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-30T05:53:16.810", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-30T05:53:16.810", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5459", "parent_id": "16184", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "If you are referring to whether a person has ever done something, then the 「x\n～たことがあります」form is what you need. Interpreted, it means \"to have an instance\nwherein (subject) did (x)\".\n\n> ヨークシャープディング食べたことある？ / を食べた ことが ありますか？\n\nThese ask if the other person has had the experience of eating Yorkshire\npudding. However, as you are probably aware, the first form is more casual\nthan the \"neutral polite\" latter form.\n\n> ヨークシャープディングを食べましたか？\n\nThis one refers to whether the person asked has performed the action within\nthe current context -- that is, for example, an English food buffet or a party\nwhere said dish is available. It translates to \"Have you eaten (some of the)\nYorkshire pudding?\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-08-05T05:23:58.703", "id": "18122", "last_activity_date": "2014-08-05T05:23:58.703", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "6961", "parent_id": "16184", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "I made the following list this morning using the [_Balanced Corpus of\nContemporary Written Japanese (BCCWJ)_](http://www.kotonoha.gr.jp/shonagon/)\nusing the freely available 少納言 tool. Overall, the corpus has 11728 results for\nどういう, and it shows a maximum of 500 results for any given query. To overcome\nthis limitation, I searched for どういう and sorted the results by the 後文脈\n(\"following context\") column. I scanned the list for words that appeared\nmultiple times, and using these results I made a list of collocates to search\nfor.\n\nI ran queries for a number of terms, trying to filter out false positives\nwherever possible, and then constructed a revised main query by ORing the\nresults I'd found so far inside a negative look-ahead assertion, using these\nresults to repeat the process. However, very large REs appear to fail, so I\nwas only able to cover about 80% of the results.\n\nSearching for about two hours, I found the following:\n\n```\n\n ２３５８　どういうこと|事|コト\n １３０３　どういうふう|風　　　　(1140 of which are followed by に)\n １１８４　どういう意味|いみ\n ５４６　　どういうもの\n ５２１　　どういうわけ\n ２３０　　どういう人|ひと\n １９７　　どういう形\n １７２　　どういうところ|所\n １６５　　どういうよう\n １２８　　どういうつもり\n １２３　　どういう関係\n １１３　　どういう時|とき\n １１１　　どういう理由\n ９１　　　どういう状況\n ７６　　　どういう状態\n ６３　　　どういうの\n ５９　　　どういう点\n ５５　　　どういう対応\n ５２　　　どういう影響\n ４４　　　どういう場合\n ３７　　　どういう話\n ３７　　　どういう気持ち\n ３６　　　どういう訳\n ３５　　　どういう内容\n ３５　　　どういう経緯\n ３４　　　どういう問題\n ３４　　　どういう態度\n ３４　　　どういう条件\n ３４　　　どういう仕組み\n ３３　　　どういう行動\n ３３　　　どういう結果\n ３３　　　どういう基準\n ３２　　　どういう反応\n ２９　　　どういう立場\n ２９　　　どういう目的\n ２７　　　どういう方\n ２７　　　どういう仕事\n ２６　　　どういう性格\n ２５　　　どういう神経\n ２５　　　どういう心理\n ２４　　　どういう人物\n ２４　　　どういう根拠\n ２４　　　どういう位置\n ２３　　　どういう役割\n ２３　　　どういう種類\n ２２　　　どういう考え方\n ２１　　　どういう男\n ２０　　　どういう心境\n ２０　　　どういう国\n ２０　　　どういう言葉\n ２０　　　どういう感じ\n ２０　　　どういうお考え\n １９　　　どういう顔\n １９　　　どういうこっ(たちて)\n １８　　　どういう意図\n １７　　　どういう生活\n １７　　　どういう場所\n １６　　　どういうメリット\n １５　　　どういう判断\n １５　　　どういう女\n １４　　　どういう情報\n １４　　　どういう趣旨\n １４　　　どういう指導\n １４　　　どういう考え\n １４　　　どういう会社\n １４　　　どういうタイプ\n １４　　　どういうやり方\n １３　　　どういう手続|手続き\n １３　　　どういう見解\n １２　　　どういう病気\n １２　　　どういう認識\n １２　　　どういう場面\n １２　　　どういう手段\n １２　　　どういう現象\n １２　　　どういう経過\n １１　　　どういう物\n １１　　　どういう生き方\n １１　　　どういう経路\n １１　　　どういう扱い\n １１　　　どういう？\n １０　　　どういう道\n １０　　　どういう順番\n １０　　　どういう構造\n ９　　　　どういう部分\n ９　　　　どういう順序\n ９　　　　どういう手順\n ９　　　　どういう手順\n ９　　　　どういう字\n ９　　　　どういう姿勢\n ９　　　　どういう仕掛け\n ９　　　　どういう結論\n ９　　　　どういう議論\n ９　　　　どういう恰好\n ８　　　　どういう法律\n ８　　　　どういう分野\n ８　　　　どういう処理\n ８　　　　どういう質問\n ８　　　　どういう思いで|思い出\n ８　　　　どういう構成\n ８　　　　どういう気\n ８　　　　どういう環境\n ８　　　　どういう感覚\n ８　　　　どういう印象\n ８　　　　どういうニーズ\n ７　　　　どういう目\n ７　　　　どういう働き\n ７　　　　どういう説明\n ７　　　　どういう設定\n ７　　　　どういう世界\n ７　　　　どういう色\n ７　　　　どういう手続き\n ７　　　　どういう資格\n ７　　　　どういう思い\n ７　　　　どういう姿\n ７　　　　どういう使い方\n ７　　　　どういう御見解\n ７　　　　どういう感想\n ６　　　　どういう料理\n ６　　　　どういう理屈\n ６　　　　どういう日\n ６　　　　どういう地位\n ６　　　　どういう素性\n ６　　　　どういう選択\n ６　　　　どういう者\n ６　　　　どういう社会\n ６　　　　どういう結末\n ６　　　　どういう業種\n ６　　　　どういう活動\n ６　　　　どういうソフト\n ６　　　　どういうイメージ\n ５　　　　どういう目標\n ５　　　　どういう本\n ５　　　　どういう暮らし|暮し\n ５　　　　どういう返事\n ５　　　　どういう体制\n ５　　　　どういう数字\n ５　　　　どういう資料\n ５　　　　どういう子\n ５　　　　どういう原因\n ５　　　　どういう計算\n ５　　　　どういう技術\n ５　　　　どういう機能\n ５　　　　どういう管理\n ５　　　　どういう過程\n ５　　　　どういう運命\n ５　　　　どういう意義\n ５　　　　どういうスタンス\n ４　　　　どういう用件\n ４　　　　どういう発想\n ４　　　　どういう身分\n ４　　　　どういう親\n ４　　　　どういう職業\n ４　　　　どういう工夫\n ４　　　　どういう会話\n ４　　　　どういう歌詞\n ４　　　　どういうゲーム\n ３　　　　どういう理論\n ３　　　　どういう理想\n ３　　　　どういう利益\n ３　　　　どういう用事\n ３　　　　どういう日本語\n ３　　　　どういう日本\n ３　　　　どういう道具\n ３　　　　どういう動物\n ３　　　　どういう動作\n ３　　　　どういう趣味\n ３　　　　どういう手法\n ３　　　　どういう子供|子ども\n ３　　　　どういう攻撃\n ３　　　　どういう言い訳\n ３　　　　どういう言い方\n ３　　　　どういう検査\n ３　　　　どういう経験\n ３　　　　どういう規制\n ３　　　　どういう気持ち\n ３　　　　どういう関わり\n ３　　　　どういう価値\n ３　　　　どういう意識\n ３　　　　どういうニュアンス\n ３　　　　どういうアドバイス\n ３　　　　どういうもん\n ２　　　　どういう歴史\n ２　　　　どういう味覚\n ２　　　　どういう法則\n ２　　　　どういう文書\n ２　　　　どういう日々\n ２　　　　どういう読み方|よみかた\n ２　　　　どういう奴|やつ\n ２　　　　どういう審査\n ２　　　　どういう商売\n ２　　　　どういう修行\n ２　　　　どういう手当て\n ２　　　　どういう作業\n ２　　　　どういう靴\n ２　　　　どういう空間\n ２　　　　どういう歌\n ２　　　　どういう音楽\n ２　　　　どういう運用\n ２　　　　どういうグループ\n ２　　　　どういうせりふ|セリフ|台詞|科白\n ２　　　　どういうお考え方\n ２　　　　どういう。\n \n```\n\nBecause of some methodological problems, these results are unlikely to be\nperfect. In particular:\n\n 1. I was only able to cover about 80% of the results.\n 2. I wasn't able to confirm that the largest result sets had no false positives, and in some cases I may have made mistakes in the smaller result sets. \n 3. Smaller result counts are necessarily less accurate due to the smaller amount of data. \n 4. The way I combined multiple spellings for the same words may also be somewhat inconsistent.\n 5. In a few cases, どういう may be followed by a larger noun phrase, and the head noun I'm most interested in may appear later where my searches fail to find them.\n\nSo please treat these results as approximate only. Still, the larger numbers\nshould be relatively accurate, and I think I managed to cover the most common\ncollocations, so hopefully this list is helpful anyway :-)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-29T11:02:40.210", "id": "16188", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-29T11:02:40.210", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "16187", "post_type": "answer", "score": 16 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes, this \"など\" simply means \"and others.\"\n\nAccording to Wikipedia, トワイライトエクスプレス is operated not only by JR西日本, but also\nby 2 other companies (JR東日本 and JR北海道).\n\n<http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%88%E3%83%AF%E3%82%A4%E3%83%A9%E3%82%A4%E3%83%88%E3%82%A8%E3%82%AF%E3%82%B9%E3%83%97%E3%83%AC%E3%82%B9>", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-29T11:31:47.723", "id": "16191", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-29T11:31:47.723", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "16189", "post_type": "answer", "score": 13 }, { "body": "Although this is unlikely for NHK publications, note that some writers will\nthrow out a など in strange and inappropriate places, perhaps out of a sense\nthat it makes the statement \"softer\" somehow. Some of the technical texts I've\nworked on have had gems like,\n\n> この変数がブーリアンで、値がtrue、false、 **など** 。 \n> This variable is a Boolean, with values **such as** true or false.\n\nGiven that, in most implementations, a Boolean can only _ever_ be true or\nfalse, the など here is completely superfluous and arguably just wrong. So when\nyou encounter a など, analyze the text to see if it really belongs there.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-29T17:20:40.770", "id": "16199", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-29T17:20:40.770", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "16189", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "I think you need to describe the circumstances in more detail (eg Japanese\ncompany overseas with local staff?) but it sounds like these Japanese business\nmen are trying to create an environment in which all can work together\ncohesively and all feel comfortable. Possibly they recognise that the non-\nJapanese all address each other on first name basis. While they don't really\nfeel comfortable doing the same they have noticed that, at home, foreigners\nare quite comfortable being addressed \"first-name-san\", and are also quite\ncomfortable addressing their Japanese colleagues as \"family name-san\" and, as\na result, have decided to encourage the same practice where you are.\n\nI would say it is an improvement on a situation where (for example) all male-\nstaff from the Japanese HO are Mr but everybody else is first-name. However, I\nalso remember a story where the branch head overseas issued an edict that all\nJapanese staff were to be addressed \"family-name-san\" instead of Mr.....\nUnfortunately, the existing practice was already too ingrained and the edict\nwas retracted. What was probably done with the best of intentions had the\nreverse effect.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-29T14:38:47.493", "id": "16195", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-29T14:38:47.493", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "16193", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "\" **(family-name)さん** \" is the most basic way of addressing your colleagues\neven in the most domestic Japanese companies.\n\nFollowing is the general rule. More detailed explanation can be seen\n[here](http://japan.wikia.com/wiki/%E8%81%B7%E5%A0%B4%E3%81%A7%E3%81%AE%E4%BA%BA%E3%81%AE%E5%91%BC%E3%81%B3%E6%96%B9).\nOf course you can start calling people virtually in any way once you gain\ncloser relationships, so consider this as the safest way to avoid troubles\nwith anyone you're not familiar with.\n\n * If you want to address or mention someone inside your company, \n * \" **(family-name)(title)** \" for your seniors: 田中[社長]{しゃちょう}, 木村[部長]{ぶちょう}。 Only using \" **(title)** \" is appropriate if not ambiguous: 社長, 部長。\n * \" **(family-name)さん** \" for someone at the same position as you: 山田さん\n * \" **(family-name)さん** \" for your people: 佐藤さん。 \"(family-name)くん\" is sometimes used (even for females), although [disputed](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1036153045).\n * However if you want to mention someone inside your company to someone outside your company, \n * \" **(family-name)** \" without any titles or -さん, regardless of the position: 田中, 山田, 佐藤. Even when you're with your president, don't mention him as 田中社長. If you want to add their titles, use \" **(title)の(family-name)** \": 社長の田中, 部下の佐藤。\n * If you want to address or mention someone outside your company, \n * \" **(family-name)さん** \" in general, and \" **(family-name)(title)** \" possible: [御社]{おんしゃ}の鈴木さん, 鈴木社長\n\nIntroducing oneself as \"私は(family-name)さんです\" sounds very strange to me. Maybe\nyour speculation (social-hack to make foreigners use \"(family-name)さん\" form)\nis correct.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-30T01:24:28.600", "id": "16203", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-30T01:45:31.923", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-30T01:45:31.923", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "16193", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "The expression ～を兼ねて means \"combined with ～\", or simply \"with\".\n\n湯冷ましを兼ねて（何かをする・どこかへ行く）means \"to do something/to go somewhere in order to cool\ndown after a hot bath\". \nIt has been questioned in comments to an earlier version of this answer\nwhether the purposive interpretation of \"in order to\" is adequate. While I\ndon't think that it would be adequate to translate every instance of を兼ねて as\n\"in order to\", it appears to me that in this instance, i.e. 湯冷ましを兼ねて, the\naction of cooling down after a bath is what one wants to primarily achieve.\nThe action expressed by the matrix predicate is the one that one sees as\nsuitable of achieving this purpose. The relationship between the two actions\ncan then be expressed by purposive \"in order to\".", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-29T16:18:39.187", "id": "16198", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-01T18:20:52.737", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-01T18:20:52.737", "last_editor_user_id": "5362", "owner_user_id": "5362", "parent_id": "16197", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "[湯]{ゆ}[冷]{ざ}まし is one word. It means cooling down your body after taking a\nbath. In our culture, the bath tub is significantly important in daily life,\ncompared with other countries. I think it's because of the damp weather in our\narchipelago.\n\nWhen parents see their kids staying naked and watching TV after bath,\nespecially in winter, they may say \"湯冷めすると風邪をひくから、早く服を着なさい。\". It means 'Wear\nsomething now because you will get a cold if you cool down too much.\"\n\nThis \"冷まし\" is attributive form of \"冷ます\", \"冷め\" is a nominalization of verb\n\"冷める\".\n\nBoth verbs mean cool down, but \"冷ます\" is transitive, and \"冷める\" is intransitive.\n\nGood example is \"[目]{め}[覚]{ざ}まし時計\" = alarm clock (clock that _wakes_ you), and\n\"目覚め\" = awakening (you _wake_ up).", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-29T22:41:37.617", "id": "16201", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-01T08:15:21.913", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-01T08:15:21.913", "last_editor_user_id": "5069", "owner_user_id": "5069", "parent_id": "16197", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "**Edit.** (Thanks to naruto for pointing out the correct translation.)\n\n> 大丈夫！バンパー外すよりまし！笑 \n> No problem! Better than missing the bumper! lol\n\nよりまし is より (\"than\") + まし (\"better\"). I don't quite know why, but you seem to\nget the opposite meaning.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-30T01:57:59.220", "id": "16205", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-30T05:10:19.770", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-30T05:10:19.770", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "16204", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "```\n\n 外す 　より　 マシ\n take off rather than better\n \n```\n\nDepending on the context (i.e. previous comments), I'd guess the meaning is\n\n\"It still looks better than without the bumper\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-30T01:59:06.870", "id": "16206", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-30T01:59:06.870", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5432", "parent_id": "16204", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "* 得る = to (actively) get / acquire something (in general).\n * もらう = to (actively **or passively** ) receive / get something **from a person**.\n\nExamples where もらう is more appropriate:\n\n * 友達【ともだち】からプレゼントをもらう receive a present from a friend\n * 息子【むすこ】から手紙【てがみ】をもらう receive a letter from the son\n * 親【おや】からお金【かね】をもらう receive money from the parent\n * 学校【がっこう】で誰【だれ】かからインフルエンザをもらう catch someone's flu\n\nExamples where 得る is more appropriate:\n\n * インターネットで情報【じょうほう】を得る get information from the internet\n * 株取引【かぶとりひき】により利益【りえき】を得る make a profit from stock trading\n * 勉強【べんきょう】して知識【ちしき】を得る obtain knowledge by studying\n\nExamples where 得る/もらう is both acceptable (with slightly different nuance)\n\n * 働【はたら】いてお金【かね】をもらう/得る\n * 友人【ゆうじん】からアイディアをもらう/得る\n\nUsing もらう looks he's a little more thankful to his employer/friend.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-30T07:00:19.660", "id": "16214", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-30T07:56:43.557", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-30T07:56:43.557", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "16210", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "How about parsing it as this:\n\n> 「『その仕事ほどおもしろくない仕事はない』のではないか？」と、私は思った。\n\n... reading\n[～～のではないか？](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%AE%E3%81%A7%E3%81%AF%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84%E3%81%8B)\nas a rhetorical question.\n\n* * *\n\nYou can say\n「[～(の)ではないかと思う](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%A7%E3%81%AF%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84%E3%81%8B%E3%81%A8%E6%80%9D%E3%81%86)」(or\nmore colloquially\n[～～(ん)じゃないかと思う](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%98%E3%82%83%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84%E3%81%8B%E3%81%A8%E6%80%9D%E3%81%86))\nto mean \"I suspect that~~\" or \"I think it probably is~~\".", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-30T06:13:45.927", "id": "16212", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-30T06:25:48.713", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-30T06:25:48.713", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "16211", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "He thinks that \"that job\" is very uninteresting.\n\nI'm sorry I can't split this grammatically, but 「～のではないか」 corresponds to \"I\nwonder whether **～～** \", where **～～** is something (often bad) which can\nactually happen.\n\nYou can see many examples\n[here](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E3%81%AE%E3%81%A7%E3%81%AF%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84%E3%81%8B).\n\n```\n\n その仕事ほどおもしろくない仕事はないのではないかと、私は思った。\n \"I'm afraid that there is no job as uninteresting as this,\" I thought.\n \n```", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-30T06:32:45.077", "id": "16213", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-30T06:32:45.077", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "16211", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "> その[仕事]{しごと}ほどおもしろくない[仕事]{しごと}\n\nA job as boring as that one\n\n> はない\n\nDoes not exist. There is not such a job.\n\n> のではないかと、[私]{わたし}は[思]{おも}った。\n\nのではない or んじゃない + か being a rhetorical question marker, a supposition, a\n\"wondering if.\"\n\nSo basically you get something like \"I wondered if there's a job as boring as\nthat one.\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-30T07:09:49.600", "id": "16216", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-30T08:34:19.847", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-30T08:34:19.847", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "16211", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "### The Translation\n\n> （ ）、というようなことばや考え方を私たちに教えてくれたのは、やはり西欧舶来のことばであり、その翻訳語だったのである。\n\nBreaking this down a bit:\n\n 1. （ ）、というようなことばや考え方を \nThe object: _XXX kind of word or way of thinking_ \nSince this XXX could be more than just one word, maybe we'll say _wording_\ninstead of just _word_.\n\n 2. 私たちに教えてくれたのは、 \nThe topic: _[the thing / person / etc. that] taught [1 above] to us_\n\n 3. やはり西欧舶来のことばであり、 \nOne of the things that did 2 above: _I guess was the words brought over from\nthe West, and_ \nGiven the context of ...であり...だった and overall sentence structure, we can tell\nthat these two であり and だった clauses describe two things that both apply as\npredicates to the preceding は clause. So we translate であり here as _was ...\nand_.\n\n 4. その翻訳語だった \nSecond of the things that did 2 above: _[and] their translations_ \nFor the だった, we've already supplied the _was_ just above.\n\n 5. のである。 \nEnd of explanation. Could be clunkily rendered in a literal fashion as _it is\nthe case that [everything before the_ のである _]..._\n\nPutting it all together into normal English,\n\n> What taught us that XX kind of wording or way of thinking must have been the\n> words brought over from the West and their translations.\n\n### The Test Question\n\nIn terms of test-taking strategy, I see two clues for what goes in the\nbrackets. Both of these ultimately come from the phrase というようなことば in the\nsecond sentence. In this phrase, XXというようなことば explicitly mentions a ことば. A ことば\nisn't really a 観念, a ことば expresses a 観念; so 抽象観念 is not a good match to fill\nin the XX. Then, in the preceding sentence, we have another clue in the\nparallel construction:\n\n> 花の美しさというように\n\nSo those two both point towards 花の美しさ being a good match for the XX. In free-\nform writing, many other things could theoretically also replace the XX, but\npresumably this is a multiple-choice test, so if 花の美しさ were presented as one\nof the answer options, that's probably the best bet.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-30T19:11:20.763", "id": "16221", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-31T13:09:05.980", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-31T13:09:05.980", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "16215", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "It simply means, \"it was the [translated words] that ...taught us...\".\n\nA はBだったのである\n\nI guess we can all agree that A はBだった can be glossed for the time being as \"A\nwas B\". So what does the のである add here? It factualizes, or predicatizes, the\n\"A was B\" conjecture. You could translate this VERY roughly as \"It is the fact\nthat A was B\", or more fluently as \"We can conclude that A is/was B\", or \"It\nturns out that A is/was B\", or \"The fact is that A was B\", or restructuring\nthe sentence a bit, \"A was in fact B\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-30T19:33:46.050", "id": "16222", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-31T06:27:55.000", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-31T06:27:55.000", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "16215", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "It is a parallel rephrasing.\n\n> 花の美しさという(ように→ような) **言い方も乏しく、したがって** 抽象観念によって美しいものをとらえ ~~ようとす~~ る **\n> ~~言い方も乏しく、したがって~~** ~~そのような~~ 考え方もほとんどなかった。\n\nTo make the sentence clearer, we can move `言い方も乏しく、したがって` to front, delete\nredundant phrases, and change the `ように` to `ような` because the it modifies\n`美しいものを抽象観念によってとらえる`, which at last modifies `言い方`. The sentence becomes\n`花の美しさというような言い方も乏しく、したがって美しいものを抽象観念によってとらえる考え方もほとんどなかった` (Sorry if the\ntypesetting looks messy in your browser.)\n\n```\n\n 花　　　　　の　美しさ　　と　　　　いうような　言い方　も　乏しく\n ↑　　　　　　　　(ように)　　　　　　　↓　　　　↑　　　したがって　　　↓\n 美しいもの　を　抽象観念　によって　とらえる　　考え方　も　ほとんどなかった\n \n```\n\nNote the word to word correspondence, as well as the clause to clause\ncorrespondence, that is `花の美しさという←ように→美しいものを抽象観念によってとらえる` and\n`～言い方も乏しい←したがって→～考え方もほとんどなかった`.\n\nThen we can leave out the overlapping part and reduce this sentence to\n`花の美しさというような言い方も、そのような考え方もなかった`, which can further converted to\n`花の美しさというようなことばや考え方もなかった`, whose subject exactly matches the first noun phrase\nthe following sentence, which is the question.\n\n* * *\n\nRegarding the last part, we can again change the word order to make it\nsimpler.\n\n> そういう言い方や考え方もなかった。誰かそれを私たちに教えてくれたのである。教えてくれたのは翻訳語であった。やはりそうだったのである。\n\n教えてくれたのは翻訳語であった：It was 翻訳語 that taught us.\n\nのである ：That is / we can conclude that / I can see that", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-30T20:14:29.740", "id": "16224", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-31T07:11:33.777", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-31T07:11:33.777", "last_editor_user_id": "4833", "owner_user_id": "4833", "parent_id": "16215", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "(I'm going to only give you tips for finding the answer to the test question\nsince an accurate translation for the last sentence is already provided by the\nother answerers)\n\nIn the first sentence:\n\n> かつて私たちの国では、 **花の美しさというように** 、抽象観念によって美しいものをとらえようとする **言い方** も乏しく、したがって\n> **そのような考え方** もほとんどなかった。\n\nyou can see 「花の美しさというように～～する言い方」 and\n「そのような(=花の美しさというように、抽象観念によって美しいものをとらえようとする)考え方」, so here 花の美しさ is referred to\nas a 言い方 and 考え方:\n\n> 「花の美しさ」= (抽象観念によって美しいものをとらえようとする)言い方 \n> 「花の美しさ」= (抽象観念によって美しいものをとらえようとする)考え方\n\nNow in the second sentence:\n\n> **XX、というようなことば** や **考え方** を私たちに教えてくれたのは...\n\nyou can see 「XXというようなことば」 and 「(XXというような)考え方」, so 「XX」 should be a ことば and\n考え方, so you go back to the first sentence and find what has been given as a\nことば(=言い方) and 考え方:\n\n> 「XX」 = ことば (=言い方) \n> 「XX」 = 考え方\n\nMy advice is, \"try to find 言い換え/paraphrases\".\n\nAnd, as you may have noticed, you'd need to pay attention to / read carefully\nthe first sentence rather than the second one to find the answer to this\nquestion.\n\nGood luck ^^", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-31T00:51:00.383", "id": "16230", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-31T12:00:14.863", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-31T12:00:14.863", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "16215", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "I think ～そうで～ない is a pattern that means \"seems like ～ but not ～\". Often (but\nnot always) you find the same predicate repeated. So:\n\n> 行けそうで行けなかった場所 \n> places it seemed like you could go, but you couldn't\n>\n> 解けそうで解けなかった謎 \n> puzzles it seemed like you could solve, but you couldn't\n\nLess literally:\n\n> 行けそうで行けなかった場所 \n> places you were _almost_ able to get to / places that were _just out of\n> reach_\n>\n> 解けそうで解けなかった謎 \n> puzzles you were _almost_ able to solve / puzzles that you _couldn't quite_\n> solve\n\nIf you have the map and compass, you'll be able to get to many places you\ncouldn't quite get to and solve many puzzles that you couldn't quite solve.\n(This is a loose translation.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-30T09:50:45.150", "id": "16218", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-30T09:50:45.150", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "16217", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "\"The guy standing here in front of you\"\n\n\"This guy here\"\n\n\"The guy you're looking at\"\n\n\"This guy\"\n\n\"Me here\"\n\n## Update\n\nSome clarification as noted by the commenters. Yes, オレ and 僕 or course refer\nto the speaker. So the question is, what is the nuance introduced by the\ndemonstrative adjective この? It is \"this me\", as opposed to some other \"me\",\nsuch as a \"me\" at some other point in time, or a hypothetical \"me\" in some\nother situation. Since \"this me\" is ungrammatical in English, we need some\nother word to stand in for \"me\", for which I chose \"guy\", although I suppose\nthere are equally good alternatives. Another way of introducing this nuance\nwould be with a formulation such as \"right now I...\" or \"standing here I...\".", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-30T19:37:08.643", "id": "16223", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-31T04:38:25.093", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-31T04:38:25.093", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "16220", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I think この usually implies some quality of “me”. You can translate it as\n“someone like me”. You can insert some adjectives between この and <first person\npronoun>.\n\nUsually it sounds proud or arrogant, especially in このオレさま.\n\n> フン、この(偉大なる)ヤング様に勝負を挑むなど、百年早いわ！ \n> 天才美少女であるこのアタシが教えてあげるんだから、ありがたく思いなさい！\n\nBut as [Hyperworm](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/16220/what-\ndoes-it-mean-when-%e3%81%93%e3%81%ae-is-in-front-of-a-personal-\npronoun#comment36475_16220) pointed out, it can be used in exactly the\nopposite sense. e.g.\n\n> この(拙い)私でいいの？ \n> この平凡なあたしにも王子様が現れないかな。\n\nI think この私 tends to refer to some positive quality, and こんな私 some negative\nquality. But I'm not sure.\n\n* * *\n\n> 「よく聞け！私はお前達とは違うのじゃ！だからして… **この私** に気安く話しかけるでないぞ！分かったか？一般人ども！」 ｂｙ 久地院美華\n\n\n\nI think this is a pose of この私. (Does anyone know the name of this pose?)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-31T06:05:54.237", "id": "16231", "last_activity_date": "2015-07-08T12:44:18.460", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.207", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "4833", "parent_id": "16220", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 }, { "body": "**_ko-so-a-do_ -paradigm** \nThe words _kono_ , _sono_ , and _ano_ , (interrogative _dono_ ) are deictic\ndemonstratives. Their deictic meanings operate along a proximal-distal\ndimension.\n\n_kono_ = proximal to the speaker \n_sono_ = proximal to the addressee \n_ano_ = distal to both speaker and addressee.\n\nThis kind of deictic meaning is not restricted to _kono_ , _sono_ , and _ano_.\nThere are at least these additional forms:\n\nadnominals: kono, konna [emphatic] \nnominals: kore; koko \nadverbs: koo, konnani [emphatic]; kotira, kotti [emphatic]\n\nThis type of deixis is expressed by the entire paradigm, and not only by\n_kono_ , _sono_ , and _ano_.\n\nSpeakers are always proximal to themselves. Hence, one must use _kono_ with a\npronominal expression referring to the 1st person.\n\nHowever, _kono_ itself does not express meaning in the modesty-respect\ndimension. This dimension is referenced by the pronominal expression: 俺 is far\nless modest than 私, and that leads to the differing nuances of この俺 and この私.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-31T12:21:24.747", "id": "16238", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-31T12:21:24.747", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5362", "parent_id": "16220", "post_type": "answer", "score": -4 } ]

[ { "body": "### Adjective Endings い and き\n\nAll the modern い adjectives used to have the following endings (more at [the\nJA Wikipedia\narticle](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%BD%A2%E5%AE%B9%E8%A9%9E#.E3.82.AF.E6.B4.BB.E7.94.A8),\nfor those who can read Japanese):\n\n * 未然形{みぜんけい} (imperfective): く\n * 連用形{れんようけい} (adverbial): く\n * 終止形{しゅうしけい} (terminal): し\n * 連体形{れんようけい} (adnominal): き\n * 已然形{いぜんけい} (perfective): けれ\n * 命令形{めいれいけい} (imperative): -\n\nThe 未然形 and 連用形 are the same in modern Japanese, still ending in く. The 連体形\nending in classical Japanese was き instead of い, and folks still use that to\nsound old-fashioned and/or literary. So too for the 終止形 ending of し, still\nseen in literary use or in set phrases like よし (classical terminal form of\nmodern 良{よ}い).\n\nAs for where the き > い shift came from, there was a time around the Muromachi\nperiod when the interstitial _-k-_ fell out entirely for some speakers,\nproducing forms like はやい for the 連体形 and はやう for the 連用形. This う adverbial\nform produced modern terms like おはよう (from 早{はや}い: はやく > はやう > はよう) or おめでとう\n(from 愛{め}でる: めでたく > めでたう > めでとう).\n\nFor reasons left unclear, the general population ultimately accepted the き > い\nshift for the 連体形, but rejected the く > う shift for the 連用形. The 連体形 and the\n終止形 then merged, much as they did for verbs, leading to the disappearance of\nthe し ending.\n\n**TL;DR:** き is old-fashioned and fancified.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-30T22:22:06.163", "id": "16228", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-30T22:22:06.163", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "16225", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "The ん negative ending is a contraction of sorts of classical negative ending\nぬ, precursor to modern ない. It's still pretty common. As illustration of this,\nthe Microsoft IME gives 食べん as a valid conversion option after typing in\n_taben_ , or 飲まん for _noman_.\n\nNote that する with the negative ん is not しん, but instead せん, as again the\nnegative ん is from classical ぬ, and the classical negative form of する is せぬ.\n\n(蛇足: I think this せん was another layer of pun in the shortened name of the\ntitle character in _Spirited Away_.)\n\nIn addition, the ん in the polite negative ending ません is this same ぬ > ん\ncontraction. ます for the most part conjugates in a similar way as する, with the\nclassical negative ませぬ.\n\n~~Occasionally, modern ない itself will contract to just ん without coming from\nthe classical ぬ, as in the common informal contraction じゃん from ではない, or as in\nthe なかった > んかった shift mentioned in the question. As a verb ending, though,\nnegative ending ん is usually from classical negative ぬ.~~\n\n**Edit:**\n\nじゃん is sometimes explained as a contraction of ではない, where では becomes じゃ and\nない becomes ん. Phonologically, the first half is well-established and accepted\nwhere で + は shifts to じゃ, but the ない > ん shift remains unexplained. A more\nlikely sound shift would be based on the older phrases ではあらぬ or ではあらむ. あらぬ\n_aranu_ is the older verb-based version of modern negative ない _nai_ , meaning\n\"[there | it] isn't\", while あらむ _aramu_ with an _m_ sound is the older version\nof modern presumptive あろう _arō_ , meaning \"isn't [there | it]\", confirming\nwith the listener.\n\nSemantically, modern じゃん is used either in a negative sense, or in a\nconfirmation sense, matching these two older verb forms.\n\nPhonetically, both あらぬ and あらむ were known to contract to あらん _aran_. So ではあらぬ\n/ ではあらむ > じゃあらん. The corruption of -あらん to -あん can be observed in the slang of\nsome modern speakers, such as 分からん > 分かん. So じゃあらん > じゃん.\n\nSo ultimately, I don't think there is any diachronic (i.e. historical)\nfoundation for ない itself turning into ん directly. Instead, we see the\nprecursor to ない, classical ぬ, turning into ん via clearly observable\ncontraction processes.", "comment_count": 16, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-30T22:05:12.503", "id": "16227", "last_activity_date": "2014-07-17T18:00:31.080", "last_edit_date": "2014-07-17T18:00:31.080", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "16226", "post_type": "answer", "score": 16 }, { "body": "It _is_ 〜ない being shortened to 〜ん, but only under certain circumstances.\nSpecifically, it's in cases where Type I verbs ending in 〜る use the 〜ない form.\nFor example:\n\n * 分からない -> 分からん\n * 知らない -> 知らん\n * 蘇らない【よみがえらない】 -> 蘇らん\n\nAlso related to this is 〜aんない, which is more of a simple slurring wherein ら\ngets dropped. For example:\n\n * 分からない -> 分かんない\n * 知らない -> 知んない\n * 蘇らない -> 蘇んない", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-31T00:30:43.617", "id": "16229", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-31T00:30:43.617", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4914", "parent_id": "16226", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "There are two conjugation patterns for 形容詞, as shown in the Japanese Wikipedia\narticle here. The second カリ活用 pattern has more distinct forms. The 未然形 with\nnegative here would be ~からず, or with the presumptive, ~かろう. I'm less familiar\nwith these forms, but the 命令形 persists even in modern Japanese in phrases like\n遅かれ早かれ \"sooner or later\".\n\nPast there, whether to consider the く ending to be just the 連用形, or both the\n未然形 and the 連用形, might be a matter of scholarly argument.\n\n(Note again that this would be for classical Japanese, not modern.)", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-31T06:42:09.407", "id": "16233", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-31T06:42:09.407", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "16232", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "The use of the 未然形 is quite limited. As 形容詞 don't conjugate like verbs, it's\nhard to say they have the 未然形.\n\nBut as far as I know, there are several theories claiming 形容詞 do have 未然形:\n\n 1. く is the 未然形. ～くば resembles 動詞未然形＋ば, which is the conditional from.\n\n 2. く is the 未然形. ～くない resembles 動詞未然形＋ない, which is the negative form.\n\n 3. け is the 未然形. ～けく resembles 動詞未然形＋く, which is known as the ク語法.\n\n 4. から is the 未然形. ～からず resembles 動詞未然形＋ず.\n\n 5. け is the 未然形. ～けむ resembles 動詞未然形＋む, which is the future/volitional form.\n\n1 is just a coincidences. は, ずは, ずんば, etc. have the same function, too.\n\nSo is 2.\n\n3 doesn't etymologically make sense to me.\n\n* * *\n\nIf you look at the auxiliaries that accept the 未然形, you will find they are\nfull of irregularities. e.g.\n\nない：（サ変）しない；（カ変）こない；（一段）みない、\n\nまい：（サ変）しまい／すまい／するまい／せまい；（カ変）こまい／くまい／くるまい；（一段）みない、みるまい；（二段）うけまい／うけるまい\n\nべし, す and る are irregular too. ず, ぬ and む are relatively regular, though.\n\nExcept ず, ぬ and む, you can't derive the proper form for most regular verbs\nsolely by attaching the auxiliary to the 未然形 of the verb. The regularity of ず\nmight be simply because 未然形 was defined as the form required by ず, as its name\nimplies.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-31T07:34:45.007", "id": "16236", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-14T20:46:40.240", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-14T20:46:40.240", "last_editor_user_id": "4833", "owner_user_id": "4833", "parent_id": "16232", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "I am of the opinion that the **未然形 actually does not exist as a true form** ,\nin either Modern or Classical Japanese.\n\nUnlike, say, the 已然形 and 連用形, the 未然形 never appears on its own. In addition,\nit only has a distinct conjugation pattern for 四段 (and \"relatives\" ラ変, ナ変)\nverbs.\n\nWhat the 未然形 actually is in, say, 二段 verbs is extremely confusing. In this\ncase, it is identical to the stem of 二段 verbs, which ends in a vowel.\n\nThe only usage of the 未然形 is to attach stuff after it. This is in contrast\nwith the other 形s which all have uses by their own (已然形 is arguably the 連用形 of\nthe potential in Modern Japanese) no matter in inherent meaning or\nconstructions like 係り結び.\n\nSo in my opinion, 未然形 is a _device_ to attach random stuff directly onto the\nstem, since none of the semantic scopes of the other 形s fit. Since we cannot\ndirectly attach things onto consonant in Japanese, we must insert -a for 四段\ntype verbs.\n\n(Note that I do not prescribe to the view that all 形s are simply epenthetic\nvowels and the suffix たり ex. is actually -(i)tari. This requires awkward rules\nmandating deletion in 二段 verbs, ignores the semantic classes exhibited by,\nsay, suffixes using 已然形 and 連用形, and are often completely ignorant of\netymology (i.e. 連用形＋ぬ cannot possibly be -inu since ぬ is likely to be the\nproto-Japonic copula, and gerund+copula (することがある) fits the meaning very well))\n\n**Therefore, adjectives do not have a 未然形 since they are not 四段動詞.**", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-31T08:20:33.660", "id": "16237", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-01T08:09:21.030", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-01T08:09:21.030", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "2960", "parent_id": "16232", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "It can be used in front of adjectives to convey the sense of \"somewhat\" (e.g.\nなんか強い = \"somewhat strong\"). Is that close to what you're getting at?", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-01T03:52:46.607", "id": "16249", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-01T03:52:46.607", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4914", "parent_id": "16234", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "My answer will be based on the assumption that OP is talking about when 「なんか」\nis indeed followed, not preceded, by a noun as s/he so states in the comments\n(but not in the question).\n\nIn **informal** conversation, there actually exists such a structure.\n\n> \"なんか + Noun + みたいな（のような） + Noun\"\n\nFor instance, I have little appetite when I have a fever. Since I do not want\nto eat a regular meal, I would say to someone:\n\n> 「なんかゼリーかヨーグルトみたいなもの、いくつか[買]{か}ってきてくれる？」\n>\n> \"Could you go get some jello or yogurt type of things for me?\"\n\nIn this sentence, your TL \"along the lines of\" is spot-on. **Note that in this\ncase, 「なんか」 can be replaced by 「なにか」.**\n\n**EDIT:**\n\nJust in case, I will briefly talk about when 「なんか」 is preceded by a noun.\nThere are two main usages of this structure.\n\n1) Citing an instance.\n\n> A: どこか[暖]{あたた}かいところに行きたいなあ。\"I'd love to go someplace warm.\"\n>\n> B: 暖かいところ？サイパンなんかどう？ \"Someplace warm? How about Saipan?\"\n\n2) Making light of something.\n\n> 「[愛]{あい}なんかいらない！[金]{かね}が[欲]{ほ}しい！」 \"I don't want love! I want money!\"\n\n**Note that when 「なんか」 is preceded by a noun, it cannot be replaced by\n「なにか」.**", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-09-04T14:38:23.647", "id": "18562", "last_activity_date": "2014-09-05T12:17:17.100", "last_edit_date": "2014-09-05T12:17:17.100", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "16234", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "I think as you suggest, おちおち麻酔もかけていられない could be rewritten to\nおちおち麻酔にもかかっていられない to yield mostly the same meaning.\n\nかけていられない here seems confusing, but consider:\n\n> こんな暴風雨では、おちおち眼鏡もかけていられない\n\nThis seems probably less confusing because it's you who does 眼鏡をかける. However,\nif you think about it, it's you who went to the doctor and authorize to be\nanesthetized. So arguably it's still you who is anesthetizing you. Especially,\n僕 sounds like a all-knowing guy (he can tell how doctors behave from their\nattitude), so it makes sense he sees it that way.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-01T08:58:10.103", "id": "16253", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-01T08:58:10.103", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "16235", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "ガアアアア (\"gaaaaa\") implies more of an engine sound than the screeching tires I\nwould associate with drifting.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-31T13:01:50.283", "id": "16240", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-31T13:01:50.283", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4914", "parent_id": "16239", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "Near as I can tell, it's neither. It rather appears to be the totality of\nsound emitted by the car travelling at speed, as experienced by an external\nobserver; akin to the sound you would hear as a car travels past you while\nstanding near a road.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-02T11:54:18.897", "id": "16263", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-02T11:54:18.897", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "519", "parent_id": "16239", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "The following is a summary of [this Wikipedia\narticle](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%91%BD%E6%95%B0%E6%B3%95).\n\nA math book called 塵劫記【じんこうき】, published in 1627, was the first book that\ndescribed (and probably defined) how to count large numbers in Japanese.\n\nIn the [first edition of the\nbook](http://dbr.library.tohoku.ac.jp/infolib/user_contents/wasan/l/j001/06/j001060007l.png),\nthere was no \"4-digit grouping\" as we know today, at least for relatively\nsmall numbers (smaller than 1 極【ごく】). A different kanji was assigned to each\ndigit. 104 was 万, 105 was 億, 106 was 兆 ... and so on, until it reached 1 極,\nwhich was only(?) 1015.\n\nSoon after that, the 4-digit grouping was introduced in a revised edition of\n塵劫記 published in 1631, and 1 極 became 1048. In this edition, 8-digit grouping\nwas still used for numbers larger than 1 極 (100000000 極 = 1 恒河沙【こうがしゃ】,\n100000000 恒河沙 = 1 阿僧祇【あそうぎ】, and so on)\n\nIn the [year 1634 edition](http://mahoroba.lib.nara-\nwu.ac.jp/y05/html/380/l/p006.html), the 8-digit grouping was completely\nremoved, and the simple 4-digit grouping system after 万(=104) remained. This\nis exactly how the Japanese language count large numbers today.\n\nBefore 塵劫記, Japanese had a relatively [small\nvocabulary](http://www.sf.airnet.ne.jp/ts/language/number/ancient_japanesej.html)\nfor big numbers, and 万【よろづ】 (=104) seems to have been the largest unit.\n八百万【やおよろづ】 meant \"countless.\"\n\nThis 4-digit loop was borrowed from Chinese numeric system. Korea also uses a\nsimilar system. However I couldn't find why and when the Chinese language\nstarted to use the 4-digit scale instead of 3.\n\n(By the way, I was surprised to find that English-speaking people used [long\n(6-digit) scale](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_and_short_scales) until\nrelatively recently.)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-31T19:06:00.407", "id": "16243", "last_activity_date": "2022-04-12T01:19:47.260", "last_edit_date": "2022-04-12T01:19:47.260", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "16241", "post_type": "answer", "score": 27 }, { "body": "Numbers in English and most \"western\" languages are still influenced by [Roman\nnumerals](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_numerals), where 1000 = M =\n_mille_ was the largest number that had its own, non-compound name.\n\nJapanese took its numerals originally [from\nChinese](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_numerals#Large_numbers), where\nthere is a separate character for \"ten thousand\". It also has characters for\nlarger numbers, but groupings of 5 or more are probably less convenient as\nthey are harder to recognize quickly.\n\nHowever, neither system historically came into being fully complete and used\nconsistently. Both changed through the times and there were conflicting usages\nfor a long time until everyone converged on a standard.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-05-31T19:17:14.507", "id": "16244", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-31T19:17:14.507", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5433", "parent_id": "16241", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "> in Japan they would think of it as 8912,3889 (八千九百十二万三千八百八十九).\n\nJust FYI, no one in Japan writes numbers like that. Maybe you can find a\nmuseum or similar re-creation that does it when the tourists are watching, but\nretail, business, banking, government etc. use western formats.\n\nThe only place you will regularly see much smaller numbers written in kanji is\non restaurant menus and addresses on new years cards, when the writer is going\nfor an old-fashioned look, like Fraktur in Germany:\n\nとんかつ：一千二百円\n\n東京都品川区上町二丁目十七番9号\n\nbut the address is **much** easier to type as 東京都品川区上町2-17-9\n\nIf you are learning this archaic writing method for the end purpose of reading\npre-Meiji works in the original Klingon, keep studying. If you are learning\nmodern Japanese for the purpose of working in or with Japan, you already know\nmore than you will ever use. Move on to useful things.", "comment_count": 10, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-01T02:45:30.387", "id": "16247", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-01T10:58:46.117", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-01T10:58:46.117", "last_editor_user_id": "5473", "owner_user_id": "5473", "parent_id": "16241", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "To add to the previous answers, the rule is Arabic numbers for horizontal\nwriting:\n\n> 123456789\n\nand Chinese numbers for vertical writing.\n\n> 一 \n> 二 \n> 三 \n> 四 \n> 五", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-01T07:43:36.753", "id": "16252", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-02T00:10:10.887", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-02T00:10:10.887", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5479", "parent_id": "16241", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "More than likely it is borrowed from Chinese.\n\n十 百 万 亿[億] 兆 京\n\nrespectively:\n\n10^1, 10^2, 10^4, 10^8, 10^16, 10^32 etc. (goes on until 10^4096 !)\n\nI have seen 亿 and 兆 used in these definitions in modern Chinese and Korean,\nand certainly 億 in japanese for money e.g. 三億円 meaning 3 x 10^8 yen.\n\nThis system of creating a new word whenever the length doubles seems natural,\nas it is the minimal set of words you need to represent any arbitrarily large\nnumber without repeating yourself. It also provides a more unique way to say a\nnumber. For example, in english we could say one million billion == 10^15 ==\none thousand trillion).\n\nThis has changed in modern china... 亿，兆，京 now sometimes mean smaller powers in\ndifferent contexts for convenience. 兆 can mean a megabyte (10^6), e.g. 四十兆 =>\n40 Megabytes. Not sure if Japanese has this ambiguity, but 千 (10^3) certainly\nexists and doesn't fit the 'pure' traditional system.\n\nIn any case, I have never seen a split into blocks of 4 when writing a number\ndown. But that is the logic that should be used when reading a number out.\n\nThat is misleading though, since even larger numbers should be read by\nrecursively bisecting at the highest 10^2^n which fits, and this can get a lot\nmore abstract than simple powers of 10^4. To choose an unrealistic example:\n\n1,000,020,000,304,567 =>\n\n10000200 * 10^8 + 00304567 =>\n\n1000,0200 億 30,4567 =>\n\n(1000 * 10^4 + 0200) 億 + (30 * 10^4 + 4567) =>\n\n(1000 万 200) 億 (30 万 4567) =>\n\n(一千 万 二百）億（三十 万 四千五百六十七）\n\nPlease note it is different than just separating with length 4 blocks: 10^12\ndoes not have a unique name, but 10^16 does. So it really is unlike the\nwestern system. Blocks are only assigned a new name when they reach twice the\nlength of the last named block. Rather than just 3,6,9,12,15, we have\n4,8,16,32.\n\nFor negative powers of 10, the western style of 10^-3, 10^-6, 10^-9 is used...\n(equivalent to milli/micro/nano).", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-01T19:30:33.250", "id": "16259", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-01T19:30:33.250", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5484", "parent_id": "16241", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "For a partial answer to your question, truly native Japanese words are called\n[大和言葉]{やまとことば} or [和語]{わご}. Japanese words imported from China are called\n[漢語]{かんご}. Just for reference, imported words are [外来語]{がいらいご}. When English\nis tortured and used in ways we don't use it English, it is called\n[和製英語]{わせいえいご}. (Two examples, (1) メークする = \"to do make up\" -- leads to\nJapanese people using it as a verb when they try to speak English. (2) NG =\n\"no good\" -- but used in ways I've never heard a native speaker use it)\n\nThe generic question about displacement is far too broad to answer\nmeaningfully. There can be a lot of reasons -- perception that the English-\nderived word is cooler. Distate for a rare Japanese word or imported Chinese\nword due to obscurity of its kanji or negative aged associations.... but\n\nIn answer to your specific question about _class_ and _classmate_ , the modern\nJapanese education system only came into existence in the 19th century. So\nmost of the terms for classes, etc., were manufactured or readopted then from\nolder concepts. The education system was reformed again after WW2 as well.\nAlso, the Japanese university system shifted from imitating a German model to\nan American model. (e.g., doctorates used to be granted as honorary lifetime\nachievements around age 60 rather than being a basic pre-requisite for\nuniversity teaching). So at least at the college level, \"class\" better fits in\ntheir thinking what is happening than 授業. So to put it another way, they use\nclass because that's the concept they have of what they are doing.\n\nI hear classmate and [同級生]{どうきゅうせい} about as frequently but with different\nemphases in purpose.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-01T02:05:42.817", "id": "16246", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-01T02:26:12.180", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-01T02:26:12.180", "last_editor_user_id": "4091", "owner_user_id": "4091", "parent_id": "16245", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "Actually there are several English-origin words that effectively took the\nplace of traditional Japanese words in the last 100 years or so. (Hereafter,\n_traditional_ words mean both 漢語 and 和語—whatever that can safely be written in\nhiragana and/or kanji)\n\nFor example, traditional Japanese words such as 暦【こよみ】, 匙【さじ】 and 厠【かわや】 are\nvery rarely used in daily conversations today. Instead, we use カレンダー, スプーン,\nand トイレ, respectively, some of which are even longer and more difficult to\npronounce than the original words. Of course the concepts of those words are\nuniversal.\n\nOne cause for this is probably related to the Japanese education system. Those\nkanjis are a bit complicated and not listed in\n[教育漢字](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%AD%A6%E5%B9%B4%E5%88%A5%E6%BC%A2%E5%AD%97%E9%85%8D%E5%BD%93%E8%A1%A8),\nand not taught in elementary schools. Two of them are even not in 常用漢字表, so\nmany Japanese grow up without learning how to write them. Gradually over time,\nsuch situation can make people hesitant to use traditional words, and use\nEnglish-origin alternatives.\n\nThat said, I doubt クラス replaced any Japanese traditional words. The word クラス\nhas several meanings, but generally it can safely be translated into\ntraditional Japanese words which are still in use today , such as 学級【がっきゅう】,\n組【くみ】, 階級【かいきゅう】, or 授業【じゅぎょう】.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-01T17:07:46.327", "id": "16256", "last_activity_date": "2021-02-27T02:38:51.870", "last_edit_date": "2021-02-27T02:38:51.870", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "16245", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 } ]

[ { "body": "ででもある（か） is the tricky part of this sentence, although it could be deleted\nwith almost no change in meaning.\n\nIt is in fact である (=だ) with でも (\"or something\") placed in the middle. In the\nsame way you might see で **は** ある (\"is [with contrast]\") or で **も** ある (\"is\nalso\"), this is で **でも** ある (\"is or something\"). (It could probably also mean\n\"is even\" in other contexts?)\n\nSo 汚れた物ででもある means \"is a dirty object or something\", + かのように (as if it is a\n~).\n\n汚れたもののように, 汚れたものかのように, 汚れたものであるかのように... all of these are pretty much the same\nwith increasing levels of verbosity and very slight extra nuance as explained\nabove. Incidentally, some people might tend to avoid the second one because of\nか immediately following a noun, but I often see it used myself. There's some\ndiscussion on that [here](http://togetter.com/li/21496).", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-01T04:34:14.133", "id": "16250", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-01T05:09:49.590", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-01T05:09:49.590", "last_editor_user_id": "315", "owner_user_id": "315", "parent_id": "16248", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "Over on Linguistics.SE, there's a question about the difference between deixis\nand anaphora:\n\n * [**What is the difference between “anaphora” and “deixis”?**](https://linguistics.stackexchange.com/q/2305/)\n\nThe linguist John Lawler posted [a short\ncomment](https://linguistics.stackexchange.com/q/2305/#comment6226_2308) there\nwith a simple explanation. It's short, but in this case I think it tells you\njust about everything you need to know:\n\n> Very simple distinction: **First and Second Person are Deixis** , Third\n> Person is Anaphora.\n\nIt makes sense, right? When I say _him_ or _her_ , I'm usually referring back\nto someone I've already mentioned:\n\n> I'm looking for **Jane**. Have you seen **Her**?\n\nBut when I say _you_ or _me_ , I'm usually not referring back to anything that\nwas previously said. Instead, you figure out what these words mean from\ncontext, deictically:\n\n> Hey there, **my** name's Snailboat! Would **you** like to buy a vacuum\n> cleaner?\n\nThis applies to Japanese just as well. 私 and あなた and so forth typically have\ndeictic reference, not anaphoric.\n\nIt does seem slightly strange that Makino et al. didn't take the time to\nexplain this. But if you look, their top-level classification is into\n\"personal pronouns\" and \"demonstrative pronouns\". Then they explicitly define\nthe subclass of \"anaphoric personal pronouns\". I don't know why they didn't go\non to talk about deixis as well--I think it would have been clearer if they\nhad.\n\nOf course, the explanation above is slightly oversimplified. It's possible to\nuse a third-person pronoun deictically. I could specify who _she_ is by\npointing (\"Hey, what's _she_ doing here?\"). But generally speaking the\ndistinction in John Lawler's comment holds.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-11T12:16:58.633", "id": "17371", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-11T12:16:58.633", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:54:11.000", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "16251", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "I think you have hidden an answer in plain sight.\n\nThe example sentences you give translate 特別に as \"specially\" and 特に as\n\"especially\". As far as I can tell, this is exactly how you would use them in\nEnglish and Japanese.\n\n\"specially\" means something like \"in a distinguished manner, for a particular\npurpose\".\n\n\"especially\" means something like \"outstanding, noteworthy, exceptional\".", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-01T11:35:14.273", "id": "16255", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-01T11:35:14.273", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "16254", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "In the Balanced Corpus of Contemporary Written Japanese, we can see the\nfollowing trend\n\n> 平安 1644 results, with more particular results being\n>\n> * 平安時代 668\n> * 平安京 194\n> * 平安末 55\n> * 平安後期 40\n> * 平安朝 85\n> * 平安神宮 28\n> * 平安初期 36\n> * 平安貴族 35\n> * 平安宮 9\n> * 平安期 16\n> * 平安文化 6\n> * 平安中期 33\n>\n\nIn other words, 平安 seems to be primarily used as a reference to the Heian\nperiod.\n\nIt _can_ be used to mean \"calm\" (as opposed to \"peaceful\" 平和), but for this\npurpose 平穏 is more common:\n\n> 平穏 500 results (already more than for 平安, after subtracting the specific\n> list above)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-01T19:24:12.003", "id": "16258", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-01T19:24:12.003", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "16257", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "You can get the question right just by knowing how to use 今ごろ, which you did\nby following your gut feeling (which is also good technique). The other\ntechnique is to try spot a close alternative to what is given, in this case,\nwords similar to 今ごろ:\n\n 1. 今から: In that case, I am starting the exam from now.\n 2. 今ごろ*＝ about now or: Around this time (of year) the Sakura are in full bloom.\n 3. 近ごろ (ちかごろ）＝ nowadays, somewhat similar to 最近 (Thank you Chocolate)\n 4. 今にも＝at any moment: Weather that looks like it is about to start raining at any moment.\n\n*Correct answer\n\nThere may be other alternatives and sometimes it seems some words might work\nin more than one option but the examiners are looking for the best or most\nnatural answer.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-02T14:32:50.317", "id": "16265", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-03T00:32:51.663", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-03T00:32:51.663", "last_editor_user_id": "1556", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "16260", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[ { "body": "It's because Japanese language doesn't differentiate hu from fu. And フ is in\nreality neiter fu or hu.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-02T16:36:21.407", "id": "16268", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-02T16:36:21.407", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4092", "parent_id": "16266", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "## Phonemes and Allophones\n\nIn English, we have two different /p/ sounds. When you say _pin_ , you use an\naspirated [pʰ] sound, and when you say _spin_ you use an unaspirated [p˭]\nsound.\n\nThis may come as a surprise! English speakers generally think of them as being\nthe exact same sound. That's because English doesn't have any pair of words\nwhich are distinguished with [pʰ] and [p˭]. When we're small children learning\nthe sounds of English, we don't have any reason to train our ears to hear the\ndifference, so we never learn to tell them apart.\n\nTo a Thai speaker, however, the situation is very different! Their language\ndemands that they be able to tell the difference, and so to Thai ears, /pʰ/\nand /p˭/ are obviously different sounds. They learn to tell them apart as\nsmall children, so to them words like ปา /p˭ā/ and พา /pʰā/ are as different\nas night and day. **They can hear a difference English speakers cannot.**\n\nHere are a couple terms we can use to talk about this kind of language\ndifference:\n\n * The set of **phonemes** in a language is the set of sounds a native speaker needs to recognize to tell apart different words. Every language has a different set of phonemes.\n\n * Phonemes can be pronounced different ways in different contexts. Each individual pronunciation of a phoneme is called an **allophone** , and these too vary from language to language.\n\nSo in Thai, /pʰ/ and /p˭/ are **two different phonemes**. But in English,\nthere is only **phoneme** /p/ with two different **allophones** [pʰ] and\n[p˭]--two different ways of pronouncing /p/ in different contexts.\n\n* * *\n\n## The \"F\" sound in Japanese\n\nEnglish distinguishes /f/ and /h/ sounds. We can tell apart _hat_ and _fat_ ,\nfor example. For this reason, we say that English has both /f/ and /h/ as\nphonemes.\n\nJapanese, however, **doesn't have a true [f] sound**. What it does have is a\n[**voiceless bilabial fricative**](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C9%B8),\nrepresented in IPA with the symbol ⟨ɸ⟩, a sound Wikipedia describes this way:\n\n> For English-speakers, it is easiest to think of the sound as **an f-sound\n> made only with the lips, instead of the upper teeth and lower lip**.\n\nAnd because English speakers are used to telling the difference between /f/\nand /h/, a lot of us think of this [ɸ] as being a separate /f/ phoneme.\nUnfortunately, that's not how most native speakers think of it!\n\nThe problem is that Japanese doesn't distinguish any two words like _hat_ and\n_fat_ , so Japanese ears aren't trained to listen for the difference. And what\ndifference _is_ audible is small, and subject to variation; sometimes the [ɸ]\nsound is blended with an [h] sound, and sometimes [h] is used where [ɸ] is\nexpected. (See [_An acoustic study of the Japanese voiceless bilabial\nfricative_](http://www.askalinguist.org/uploads/2/3/8/5/23859882/an_acoustic_study_of_the_japanese_voiceless_bilabial_fricative-1.pdf)\nfor details.)\n\nInstead, what we find is that we have a single phoneme /h/, which can be\npronounced three different ways in different phonetic contexts:\n\n```\n\n は /ha/ [ha]\n ひ /hi/ [[ç](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voiceless_palatal_fricative)i]\n ふ /hu/ [[ɸ](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C9%B8)ɯ]　　　←　The \"F\" sound is an **allophone**!\n へ /he/ [he]\n ほ /ho/ [ho]\n```\n\nIn column one, we have kana; in column two, a phonemic representation (notice\nthat all five use the same phoneme /h/); and in column three, a phonetic\nrepresentation showing the allophonic differences between the /h/ sounds in\ndifferent contexts.\n\nSince Japanese speakers aren't trained to listen to the difference, all three\nallophones [h], [ç], and [ɸ] sound very similar. When most native speakers\nhear ふ, they hear the same /h/ sound as in は or ひ. And loanwords like フープ from\nEnglish _hoop_ naturally fall into the same bucket. Since there's no /f/\nphoneme and no contrast between [hɯ] and [ɸɯ], there's no reason for Japanese\nspeakers to transcribe the former with ⟨ホゥ⟩. And if they did write the\ndifference, few speakers would observe it in pronunciation.\n\nIt's true that English is influencing Japanese, and that these phonemic\ncategories may be changing over time, or may change in the future. For\nexample, younger speakers may be acquiring a ティ sound that didn't exist a\nhundred years ago, a contrast that exists only in loanwords.\n\nBut in many cases there's still no contrast. Even with your example of V,\nwhere the ヴ kana is in fairly widespread use, few speakers have a phonemic\n/v/, a contrast between [v] and [b] sounds. Instead, we find that バイオリン and\nヴァイオリン are both very common spellings, and there's no real contrast to be\nobserved.\n\nIn short, there's no need to distinguish フ from ホゥ in writing because the\ndistinction isn't relevant to speaking Japanese.", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-02T22:04:42.467", "id": "16272", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-02T22:21:48.193", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-02T22:21:48.193", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "16266", "post_type": "answer", "score": 46 }, { "body": "Snailboat's answer is based more on \"conservative\" Japanese where /ɸ/ is not a\nphoneme. However in _younger_ people's Japanese, /ɸ/ and /h/ are distinguished\nbefore all vowels other than /u/: ハ ≠ フア ≠ ファ. This is of course a loanword-\nonly distinction, and could probably be thought of half-phonemic and\nrestricted to the \"Anglo-Japanese\" sublanguage. (One similar situation might\nbe with -t in Middle Japanese: 日{にち} was pronounced by educated people as\n[nit] rather than [niti])\n\nWhy, then, is /h/ and /f/ not distinguished in front of /u/, even by young\npeople who know a bit of English? This is likely due to the _acoustic_ value\nof the Japanese /u/. Unlike the European /u/, the Japanese vowel is 1. a bit\nfronted 2. compressed, not rounded. The sound is narrowly transcribed [ɯᵝ].\nThis means that **/u/ has the same mouth shape as [ɸ]**. So when you try to\npronounce /hu/, [ɸɯᵝ] naturally comes out of your mouth. It is **acoustically\nmeaningless** to distinguish [hɯᵝ] and [ɸɯᵝ].\n\nIn fact, if you try hard to say [hɯᵝ] without making a [ɸ] sound you make a\n[xɯᵝ] ([x] as in Ba **ch** ) sound, which is incorrect.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-03T06:58:16.957", "id": "16277", "last_activity_date": "2021-08-09T19:55:55.607", "last_edit_date": "2021-08-09T19:55:55.607", "last_editor_user_id": "36423", "owner_user_id": "2960", "parent_id": "16266", "post_type": "answer", "score": 14 }, { "body": "There is, actually.\n\n# ホゥ\n\nThis follows a common pattern for these lenition-blocked foreign syllables:\n\n * Take a syllable with the same initial consonant but a different vowel. (hu-->ho)\n * Add the lowercase form of the syllable's intended vowel.\n\nThere is also トゥ (TO+u=tu), ディ (DE+i=di), デュ (DE+yu=dyu), etc.\n\nExamples:\n\n> ディオ・ブランド **DEiO-BURANDO** -> **dio-burando** (Dio Brando)\n>\n> カルトゥーシュ **KARUTOu=SHIyu** -> **karutūshu** (cartouche)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2019-04-16T17:20:05.170", "id": "66620", "last_activity_date": "2019-04-16T17:29:58.253", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "33710", "parent_id": "16266", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "Cross-linguistically, grammatical words like に and で are often unpredictable\nor idiosyncratic, and you can't always explain them logically.\n\nFor example, in English, we say _arrive at_ but not _*arrive to_. And we say\n_Welcome to X_ but not _*Welcome at X_. Why? [No reason. It's\narbitrary.](http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=7476) It seems like the\nalternatives should be just as logical, but for some reason we only say them a\ncertain way. And sometimes these requirements vary over time, or from place to\nplace. For example, American English speakers say _on the weekend_ , but\nBritish speakers say [_at the\nweekend_.](https://english.stackexchange.com/a/75488) Unfortunately, language\nlearners have to memorize these facts and move on.\n\n### So what about 前に and あとで?\n\nHere's what Samuel Martin writes in _A Reference Grammar of Japanese_ (1975),\np.219, as part of his multi-page explanation of に versus で:\n\n> Unexplained is the following anomaly: 前に 'before' refers to order (= 先に),\n> time, or static space, and 前で '(happening) in front' refers only to space;\n> あとに 'after' refers only to order and あとで 'after' only to time (with 後ろに／で\n> 'behind' designating space). Some sort of semantic cancellation may be\n> present; or perhaps the overlap with the copula infinitive and gerund has\n> confused the picture.\n\nSo the reason is unclear, at least to Martin. We can still try to guess,\nthough! Etymologically で is a contraction of にて (and you can still hear にて\noccasionally in very formal registers), so perhaps we might speculate that the\ndifference is related to て suggesting temporal order (\"after\").\n\nBut I personally think you're better off just memorizing 前に and あとで and not\ntrying to find the logic behind them—it's possible there's no logic to find!", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-02T20:40:27.273", "id": "16270", "last_activity_date": "2021-05-06T04:18:58.773", "last_edit_date": "2021-05-06T04:18:58.773", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "16269", "post_type": "answer", "score": 33 } ]

[ { "body": "I'm not good at explaining grammar but I think I can at least tell you which\nparticles I would use if I were to say your sentences:\n\n> １．春 **にはorは** たくさん雨が降る。\n\n... which is like \"In spring/As for spring, we have a lot of rain,\" since\nneither 春に~~ or 春で~~ sounds natural here, although you would use に when you\nsay:\n\n> 京都では、春 **に** たくさん雨が降る。In Kyoto, it rains a lot in spring. \n> 春 **に** たくさん雨が降るのは、~~~だからだ。It is because ~~~ that it rains a lot in spring. \n> 春 **に** たくさん雨が降ると、夏は~~~。When it rains a lot in spring, ~~~ in summer. \n> (The に is often left out in daily conversation.)\n\n* * *\n\n> ２．[春雨]{はるさめ}だ。\n\n... which means \"It's spring rain\", since none of 春に雨だ, 春で雨だ, or [春雨]{はるあめ}だ\nsounds right to me. \n\n* * *\n\n> ３．雨の日 **は** きれいだ。\n\n... which means \"Rainy days are beautiful.\" or \"(Something) is beautiful on\nrainy days.\" Neither 雨の日にきれいだ。 or 雨の日できれいだ。 sounds right. You could use 雨の日に\nin: \n\n> 事故は、雨の日 **に** 起こりやすい。Accidents are more likely to occur on rainy days. \n> 雨の日 **に** 学校に行くのは、いやだ。I don't want to go to school on a rainy day. \n>\n\n* * *\n\n> ４．今月の三十一日 **に** 日本に行く。\n\nBasically you can use に for a specific point in time, eg: in/on/at +\nyear/month/day/time etc. → ～年/月/日/時 **に**. (In daily conversation you'd often\nleave out the に, as in 今月の31日、日本に行く。) \n\n* * *\n\n> ５．休み **に** 日本に行く。\n\nin/during + break; on + holiday etc. → 休み **に** \n\n* * *\n\n> ６．一時間 **で** 食べた。\n\nin/within + period of time → ～～ **で.** eg:\n\n> ２週間 **で** ひらがなを[覚]{おぼ}えた。I learned hiragana in two weeks. \n> １年 **で** １００万円[貯]{た}めた。I saved ¥1,000,000 in one year.\n\n* * *\n\n> ７．日本語 **で** おねがいします。\n\n... which is like \"In Japanese, please.\" You'd use を when asking for /\nordering something, like コーヒー **を** ふたつ、おねがいします。/ Two coffee, please. (The を\ncan be left out in conversation, as in コーヒーふたつ、おねがいします。)", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-03T09:18:49.760", "id": "16278", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-05T08:48:16.247", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-05T08:48:16.247", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "16273", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "It's probably not \"late to erase the distortion of the unstoppable chest\" :-)\n\n 1. It's 止まらない, not 止まれない.\n 2. I think it's the 歪 which is 止まらない. In other words, 止まらない modifies the phrase 胸の歪.\n 3. 〜ておくれよ is probably 〜てくれよ with the honorific お- added to くれる.\n\nHere we have an imperative form of 〜てくれる, so it seems the speaker is asking\nthe listener to do something for them. So the listener is the (implicit)\nsubject of 消す, but with 〜てくれる there's no reason to put it explicitly into the\nsentence.\n\nI think that in both requests, the speaker is talking to Amethyst:\n\n> 1. 止まらない胸の歪を消しておくれよ **アメジスト**\n> 2. 救っておくれよ **アメジスト**\n>\n\nI can't come up with a literal translation that sounds right to me, so I'm\ngoing to try a relatively free translation, replacing 歪 with \"pain\" and 消す\nwith \"take away\":\n\n> Take away this endless pain in my heart, Amethyst\n\nAmethyst is the listener, referred to elsewhere in the song as 君.\n\nThis translation isn't perfect--maybe someone could comment if they can think\nof a way to improve it, particularly how to express 胸の歪. \"Pain\" isn't quite\nright for 歪, but I don't think the literal \"distortion\" is totally\nappropriate, either. Some dictionaries give \"stress\" or \"strain\" as possible\nchoices for the more psychological meaning, like in 心の歪.\n\nBut in any case, I think this should get you a little closer to the author's\nintended meaning :-)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-03T02:43:07.437", "id": "16275", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-03T04:41:09.757", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-03T04:41:09.757", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "16274", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "Use 「3つのグラフ」 or 「3枚【まい】のグラフ」. Whichever is OK, but maybe the latter will sound\njust a little bit more formal.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-03T11:13:14.250", "id": "16280", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-03T11:13:14.250", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "16279", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "If you use three graphs in one page, say 「３つのグラフ」. If you use three graphs in\neach separate page, say 「3まいのグラフ」", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-13T01:21:19.020", "id": "17411", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-13T01:21:19.020", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "6559", "parent_id": "16279", "post_type": "answer", "score": -1 } ]

[ { "body": "I think the most basic form is:\n\n> Ａが Ｂに Ｃを 紹介した。\n>\n> _A introduced C to B_.\n\nOf course, you don't have to include all three. In your example, the subject\nis implied:\n\n> ~~私が~~ ジョンに メリーを 紹介しました。\n>\n> (I) introduced Mary to John.\n\nThe word order is fairly flexible, as it usually is in Japanese, and some\nother variations are possible, but the basic answer to your question is that\n**yes** , に is the right particle, marking an indirect object.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-03T19:57:40.443", "id": "16286", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-03T19:57:40.443", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "16284", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "You usually can't have two をs in one clause, so when you see one, most\ncommonly one of the following is true:\n\n 1. It's part of a 〜を〜に（して） construction in which して is left out.\n\n> AをBに → AをBに（して）\n\nYou can recognize this one by the distinctive 〜を〜に pattern, often with a\ncomma.\n\n 2. A repeated verb has been left out (\"backward gapping\"):\n\n> XがAを、そしてYがBを買った → XがAを(買い)、そしてYがBを買った\n\nUnlike English, in Japanese the _last_ verb is retained rather than the first.\n\n 3. The を links to a verb in a subordinate clause.\n\n> Aを [ BをCして ] Dする\n\nIf you see two をs in a row like this and they don't seem to suggest the same\nverb is coming up, it's usually a signal that the speaker has started a\nsubordinate clause. Each を links to a different verb.\n\nIn this case, I suppose it's probably #1:\n\n> うしろで雄一が **ぞうきんを 手に(して）** 床をふいてくれていた。\n\nYuuichi was wiping the floor _with a cloth in his hand_.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-04T00:04:38.140", "id": "16289", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-04T00:04:38.140", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "16288", "post_type": "answer", "score": 36 } ]

[ { "body": "ならない is an expression that means that something is unbearably so, exceedingly\nso, felt strongly in such a way. It should be parsed as something separate\nfrom the normal ～になる \"become\" meaning. If it were to be \"become\" then it would\nuse に instead of で. In this sense で is the continuative form of the copula,\nand as such it is describing a situation and the ならない afterward is describing\nsomething that follows as a result. 残念でならない can therefore only be parsed in\nthe \"can't help but be\" meaning. If it were 残念にならない you'd have something like\nwhat you want to say, although I don't think that particular wording would be\nused.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-04T03:41:18.660", "id": "16291", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-04T03:41:18.660", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "16290", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "This expression is typically characterised as \"I/you can't help but....\" and\nadds emphasis to the statement which is about feelings, usually negative. You\ncan look this up in grammar books as 〜てならない. It combines with adjectives and\nverbs. 残念 is a な-adjective so instead of 〜て it is 〜で.\n\nThe examples I have are:\n\n> 親友の結婚式に出席できないのが 残念 でならない \n> I [can't help but be/am] so disapointed that I won't be able to attend my\n> friend's wedding.\n>\n> 検査の結果が 気になってならない \n> I [can't help but be/am] concerned about the results of my physical exam.\n\nBecause it applies to the feelings it is used with first/second person. To\napply to a third party you would finish the sentence with ようだ／らしい.\n\nAccording to the comment above it is in the Dictionary of Advanced Japanese\nGrammar but **if it is not in your N1 text book then it is probably covered at\nN2**. There are other related expressions such as 〜てたまらない and 〜てしょうがない worth\nknowing.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-04T23:49:48.123", "id": "16296", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-05T01:10:03.023", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-05T01:10:03.023", "last_editor_user_id": "1556", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "16290", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "The て part is a conditional particle, similar to ～してはならない, ～してしかたない, ～してすみません,\netc. In 残念でならない, 残念 is the cause of ならない.\n\nならない is the negative form of なる, which is the intransitive verb of なす (to do).\nThe relation between ならない and なす is analogous to できない and する. In modern\nJapanese, なす/ならない is only used in some fixed expressions, such as `なせばなる`,\n`どうにも(こうにも)ならない/however (you do it) you will accomplish (nothing)`,\n`なんとかなる/somehow manage`, `我慢ならない` and `してはならない`.\n\nなんとかなる and 我慢ならない are clearly related to なんとかできる and 我慢できない.\n\n* * *\n\n残念でならない is better understood as “it is so disappointing that/and I cannot\n(...)”. This ならない means しかたがない or 我慢できない that is what you said “unable to\nsuppress”.\n\nNevertheless, ならない is idiomatic. You cannot really replace it with できない. And\nthere is a clear difference among ～してならない, ～してしようがない(idiomatic),\n～してたまらない(idiomatic) and ～して我慢できない(unidiomatic).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-07T20:25:39.910", "id": "16325", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-08T01:26:12.403", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-08T01:26:12.403", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4833", "parent_id": "16290", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "生活【せいかつ】 is English _life_ , _livelihood_ , or _living_ ; day-to-day\nactivities of people.\n\n命【いのち】 is _life_ ; it's something we lose when we die. Synonyms:\n生【せい】、生命【せいめい】\n\n生気【せいき】 is more like _liveliness_ , _spirit_ , or _energy_. Synonyms:\n元気【げんき】、活力【かつりょく】\n\n一生【いっしょう】 is a _whole life_ of someone. Synonym: 生涯【しょうがい】\n\n人生【じんせい】 is _human's (whole) life_ ; use this only for humans, of course.\n\nライフ is rarely used unless you're a video gamer. When used, it's the same as 生活\nor 命.\n\nExamples:\n\n * 生活が苦しい difficult to live on (due to financial problems)\n * 生活保護 public assistance\n * 快適な生活 comfortable life\n * 交通事故で命を失う lose one's life in a traffic accident\n * 残り少ない命 little time left to live\n * 命が惜しければ... if you value your life...\n * 生気のない顔 colorless face\n * 声から生気が消える speak in an inanimate voice\n * 生気が戻る become energetic again\n * 一生で一度だけ／人生で一度だけ once in a lifetime\n * 一生の仕事 one's lifework\n * ライフが少ない health is low (in games)", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-04T23:46:52.580", "id": "16295", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-05T00:39:29.287", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-05T00:39:29.287", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "16293", "post_type": "answer", "score": 15 } ]

[ { "body": "The Balanced Corpus of Contemporary Japanese (BCCWJ,\n<http://www.kotonoha.gr.jp/shonagon>) draws on published sources such as\nliterature, newspapers, etc., as recent as 2005. The numbers for the words in\nquestion are\n\n> 移民者{いみんしゃ} iminsha 8 results \n> 移住者{いじゅうしゃ} ijūsha 181 results \n> 労働者{ろうどうしゃ} rōdōsha 6982 results \n> 定住者{ていじゅうしゃ} teijūsha 19 results \n> 在留者{ざいりゅうしゃ} zairyūsha 25 results \n> 永住者{えいじゅうしゃ} eijūsha 91 results \n> 帰化者{きかしゃ} kikasha 1 result\n\nThe only result for 移民者 in online J-J dictionaries (accessible via\n<http://www.kotobank.jp>) is the [title for the Swedish film \"The\nemigrants\"](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E7%A7%BB%E6%B0%91%E8%80%85%E3%81%9F%E3%81%A1?dic=daijisenplus&oid=00592660)\n移民者たち.\n\nThat said, 移住者, 定住者, 在留者 and 帰化者 are not in any of the dictionaries either.\n\nI'm not sure what conclusions to draw from this. 移民者 is certainly very, very\nuncommon, but not unthinkable. That said, 帰化者 seems to be even less frequently\nused.\n\nI see several problems with the argument here.\n\n * One problem might be that 移民 literally means the moving/migrating of a person, which makes 移民者 look like a little pleonasm, so that 移民者 might not exist because it sounds silly, not because the Japanese don't accept the concept of immigration.\n\n * Another problem is that all the other nouns (without 者) can used to form a verb with する, e.g. 移住する, 永住する, etc., which lends itself very well to form, say, 永住者 meaning \"somebody who does 永住\". Only 移民 doesn't have the corresponding 移民する.\n\n * Another thing I have to take issue with is describing the word/suffix 者 as \"honorific\". I don't think anything justifies this description, especially since \"honorific\" means something very specific when talking about Japanese, and that is suffices like さん, 様, 殿, etc., usually used for _addressing_ someone (maybe the equivalent being Mr., Ms., etc.), not for _describing_ someone.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-05T00:47:45.017", "id": "16297", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-05T00:47:45.017", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "16294", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "I must be missing something obvious, but the article doesn't make sense to me\n\nAs far as I know, an immigrant as an individual person **is** _ijūsha_. The\nToronto Japanese Community Association refers to itself as 新移住者協会, for\ninstance (<http://torontonjca.com/>). The term _imin_ , to my understanding,\ngenerally refers to migration or immigration itself, rather than the people.\nAdding _-sha_ would be understood by most people though, I'd think, in the\nsame way that _immigrationer_ could probably be understood by English\nspeakers.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-06T14:32:07.477", "id": "16311", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-06T14:32:07.477", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5522", "parent_id": "16294", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "ホームシック is understood as describing the state of being homesick. You can\nparallel it with 病気 (as in ホームシックになる vs. 病気になる, ホームシックの時 vs. 病気の時), but being\nperceived as a noun doesn't imply that it is describing a disease.\n\nメタボ (derived from メタボリックシンドローム{metabolic syndrome}) appears to be used both as\nnoun and as _na_ -adjective, e.g. メタボの人 vs. メタボな人.\n\nMoreover, I think that _na_ -adjectives characterize something as having\npermanently a certain property, whereas characterizing with の implies a more\ntemporary property.\n\n> メタボの人 sounds more like someone who _at the moment_ suffers from metabolic\n> disorder.\n>\n> メタボな人 sounds more like someone who \"has\" metabolic syndrome.\n\nSince ホームシック is definitely temporary, ホームシックの sounds more natural. ホームシックな人\nsounds a little like an oxymoron.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-05T11:50:19.253", "id": "16300", "last_activity_date": "2018-08-03T20:38:57.053", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "16299", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "First of all, it's worth noting that Japanese has no 形容詞 or 形容動詞(な-adjective)\nwhich directly corresponds to the English adjective _sick_. (although you can\nsay 「彼の具合【ぐあい】が悪【わる】い 」, if you don't mind replacing the subject)\n\nWe can say 「彼 は [病名] だ」、「[病名] の 人」、「 [病名] に なる」、where [病名] can be 癌 (cancer),\n肺炎 (pneumonia), 糖尿病 (diabetes), 骨粗鬆症 (osteoporosis), or 病気 (disease) in\ngeneral. And they are all nouns. We usually cannot say 「 [病名] な 人」, so 「癌な人」\nor 「糖尿病な人」 is wrong.\n\nI think that's why we often treat the loanword ホームシック also as a noun. Words\nsuch as _lovesick_ or _airsick_ have no corresponding adjectives either in\nJapanese; instead we have nouns 恋煩【こいわずら】い (love sickness) or 飛行機酔【ひこうきよ】い\n(air sickness).\n\nThat said, I think this rule is somewhat loosened if certain 外来語 diseases are\nconcerned. In fact, **both 「ホームシックな時」 and 「メタボな人」 sound as natural as\n「ホームシックの時」 and 「メタボの人」 to me**. Japanese tend to create many な-adjectives from\nEnglish adjectives, as in スマートな, リスキーな, etc. They can even create な-adjectives\nfrom English nouns, such as\n[ワンパターンな](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E3%83%AF%E3%83%B3%E3%83%91%E3%82%BF%E3%83%BC%E3%83%B3),\nハイリスクな. I see no reason why _homesick_ cannot act as a な-adjective as well as\na noun.\n\nLastly, some people may argue that Japanese young people use \"病気な人\", or more\ncommonly, \"ビョーキな人\". Such use of 病気 is a slang and [has a special\nmeaning](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E7%97%85%E6%B0%97) (abnormal, crazy,\nmad). Use \"病気の人\" for someone with a real medical disorder.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-05T17:17:32.587", "id": "16303", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-05T17:49:04.470", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-05T17:49:04.470", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "16299", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

[ { "body": "Born in Japan and raised in Japan for more than 30 years, I have never seen\n\"赤ひげ\" used as a derogatory term of \"westerner\".\n\nBefore I write this, I did find an entry 赤髭 in a Japanese derogatory terms\nglossary, and it does say it's \"Westerner (derogatory).\" However, more than\n90% of the words in that list were totally unfamiliar to me. So I believe it's\nsafe to say there's no derogatory nuance in \"赤ひげ\" in modern Japanese. Maybe it\nwas a derogatory term in the Edo period.\n\nToday, \"赤ひげ\" reminds Japanese (not younger than 30) of what you've just\nwatched in the movie; a humane doctor who sacrifices himself and willingly\nhelps weak people. It is a stereotype of \"ideal doctor\" in Japan, just like\n\"黒ひげ\" or _Blackbeard_ is the [symbol of\npirates](http://www.takaratomy.co.jp/products/kurohige/). There is [Akahige\nPrize](http://www.med.or.jp/people/akahige/) for doctors.\n\n(However, its original novel,\n[赤ひげ診療譚](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%B5%A4%E3%81%B2%E3%81%92%E8%A8%BA%E7%99%82%E8%AD%9A),\npublished in 1958, is full of discriminatory terms and acts by today's\nstandards...)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-05T19:04:53.037", "id": "16304", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-06T04:19:35.907", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-06T04:19:35.907", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "16302", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 }, { "body": "Another modern sense for 赤髭 or 赤鬚 is that of the アカヒゲ, _Erithacus komadori_ ,\nthe Ryukyu robin (JA wikipedia page\n[here](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%A2%E3%82%AB%E3%83%92%E3%82%B2), EN\nwikipedia page [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryukyu_Robin)).\n\n\n\nOddly, the コマドリ or Japanese robin has the species name _Erithacus akahige_.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-05T20:20:22.873", "id": "16305", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-05T20:20:22.873", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "16302", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "赤髭 refers to a fictional, ideal doctor who lived in a downtown of Edo, though\nthere could be perhaps some real models. He took a good care of poor people\nliving in the slums. He didn’t receive doctor’s fee from the needy.\n\nHe didn’t mind to visit and treat sick persons anytime whenever at any place\nwherever in their need. Not only being a good-hearted, lighthearted and\nmerciful man with sense of justice, he was also a master of martial art. He\nfought resolutely against power and injustice, and busted on rascals and\npunished those who bully the weak.\n\nThere are various versions of 赤髭譚 – Akahige stories in novels, films, and TV\ndrama series. 赤髭 is an ideal character of a man, and there’s no derogatory\nsense in the word, 赤髭 sui generis.\n\nI suspect the O.P.'s been confusing 赤髭 with 赤毛, which certainly means\n“westerner(s)” and has a derogatory tone.\n\nWe also have the similar expression, 紅毛人, of which literal translation is a\nman with red hair. Both words, 赤毛 and 紅毛人 were invented in the late Edo era\nwhen Japanese first encountered the so-called 黒船 ‐ the Black ship and their\ncrew led by the Captain Mathew Perry in 1853. The words were current until\nearly 19 century. But both words are completely obsolete today, together with\n毛唐、a derogatory description of westerners.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2016-03-18T21:49:41.270", "id": "32971", "last_activity_date": "2016-03-20T10:38:20.603", "last_edit_date": "2016-03-20T10:38:20.603", "last_editor_user_id": "12056", "owner_user_id": "12056", "parent_id": "16302", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "<http://www.geocities.jp/holmyow/mukade.html> This document seems saying the\nuse of `百足` is at least as old as in the 10th century. So if this research is\ncorrect, it shouldn't be considered as a calque from the western languages.\n(But I'm not sure about the reliability of this document.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-06T08:18:50.523", "id": "16307", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-06T08:18:50.523", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5264", "parent_id": "16306", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "百足 is an ancient Chinese colloquial name for a sort of arthropod. It can be\ntraced to the 6th century document Book of Wei, which includes the passage\n百足之蟲，至死不僵，以扶之者眾也 -> \"A worm with a hundred feet does not go stiff upon death,\nsince it has many support\". The phrase has since found its way into common\nChinese idiom in a slightly altered form.\n\nThe term 百足 was explained in some ancient texts as an alternate name for\nmillipedes (馬陸/馬蚿), although it probably referred to any arthropods in the\nMyriapoda subphylum. That meaning passed into Japanese knowledge when Chinese\nmedicinal texts were adopted (for some reason centipedes and millipedes were\ningredients for Chinese medicine).\n\nSo the term definitely predates Japanese contact with the word centipede.\n\nAs for the reading, apart from the ももがて explanation, another theory is that\nムカデ was originally 六十手 (c.f. the pronunciation of 10 as \"ga\" in the surname\n五十嵐), and that this reading was applied to 百足 later.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-06T14:18:00.803", "id": "16309", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-06T14:18:00.803", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5522", "parent_id": "16306", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[ { "body": "In the first sentence, it's passive causative, because the subject/topic of\nthe sentence is \"we (students)\".\n\nA very literal translation would be\n\n> 先生、どうして私たちはこんなにたくさん漢字を勉強させられるんですか。 \n> Teacher, why are we made to study _this_ many kanji?\n>\n> だれも勉強させていませんよ。だれのために勉強しているんですか。 \n> Nobody is _making_ you study. For whose sake are you studying?\n>\n> 自分です。 \n> For our own sake...\n\nXのため is a very common way of saying something like \"for X's own good\".", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-06T14:18:34.773", "id": "16310", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-06T14:18:34.773", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "16308", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "デイビット is actually David.\n\n * そうです indicates a similarity based on direct (probably visual) evidence i.e., David _appears/behaves like_ a good chef based on what you see. In this usage, そう is attached to the i-form of verbs and stem of adjectives.\n\n * (だ)そうです is a report on what you've heard before. In this usage, そう is attached to the dictionary form of verbs, directly to i-adjectives, and with a だ behind na-adjectives.\n\n * ようです like the first そう, indicates an appearance you are directly observing, but more certain - a higher likelihood - than そうです. That is, David _looks_ like he is good at cooking based on how you're seeing him cook. よう is attached to nouns and na-adjectives with a の in between.\n\n * らしいです indicates its something inferred from indirect evidence. In other words, David seems to be good at cooking ( _based on what you're heard_ ).\n\nNote that ようです can also be a somewhat non-committal observation. And らしいです (or\nmore accurately, just らしい) can be used to describe an attribute, similar to\nusing -like in English. e.g, 名探偵らしい -> detective-like, like a good detective,\nin a good-detectively sort of way. I hope that makes sense :p", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-06T15:41:11.177", "id": "16313", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-06T17:18:46.743", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-06T17:18:46.743", "last_editor_user_id": "5522", "owner_user_id": "5522", "parent_id": "16312", "post_type": "answer", "score": 29 }, { "body": "This is not based on any reliable sources or textbooks, but is my personal\nimpression.\n\n 1. デイビットは料理が上手そうです。\n\nDirect and active estimation, impression, or judgement by the speaker, based\non his (David's) appearance, his way of speaking, rumors of him, etc. \"I\nsuppose David is good at cooking.\" \"Seemingly David must be good at cooking.\"\n\n 2. デイビットは料理が上手なようです。\n\nThis is used to avoid assertive tones, or express ~~weaker~~ guessing ~~than\nthe first~~ , not necessarily supported by ~~good reasons~~ active judgement\nof the speaker. It can also be used to repeat information by someone else,\njust like the third one. \"Sounds like David is good at cooking.\" \"I guess\nDavid is good at cooking.\" \"They say David is good at cooking.\" (under certain\ncontext)\n\n(The degree of confidence is not really different between 1. and 2.)\n\n> デイビッドは、見た目には料理が上手そうですが、実際のところは下手なようです。 \n> = David _looks_ good at cooking, but the reality seems to be that he's not\n> good at it.\n>\n> この本は（絶対に／もしかすると／多少は）面白そうだ。 \n> = (judging from its cover, etc.) This book looks interesting.\n>\n> この本は（絶対に／もしかすると／多少は）面白いようだ。 \n> = They say this book is interesting (in a review article, etc.)\n\n 3. デイビットは料理が上手らしいです。\n\nThere is no guessing of the speaker at all. \"I heard David is good at\ncooking.\" \"They say David is good at cooking.\"\n\nNote that `デイビットは料理が上手だそうです` is not the same as the first one, but it's pretty\nmuch like the third one (They say ～).\n\n`この敵は強そうだ` = this enemy must be strong; `この敵は強いそうだ` = they say this enemy is\nstrong.", "comment_count": 9, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-06T16:33:12.600", "id": "16314", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-06T18:57:15.120", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-06T18:57:15.120", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "16312", "post_type": "answer", "score": 15 }, { "body": "This question has already been answered. But anyway I'll still post the answer\nI found from a site by Magamo that I personally find the most helpful. I hope\nit may provide additional information for those who are still confused despite\nreading the answers... like me.\n\n> \"But I don't think this kind of explanation would help understand the\n> difference between そうだ and ようだ. So I'll post a wacky explanation from the\n> view point of what's going on in native speakers' minds.\n>\n> Your textbooks may explain the difference by showing the difference in\n> reasoning etc., but that can never be accurate. The actual difference\n> between non-hearsay そうだ and そうだ-like ようだ lies in the psychological distance\n> between you and the event, appearance, or other kinds of thing you're\n> mentioning. When you use そうだ, you're psychologically/emotionally tied to the\n> thing/event/situation/whatever and often you're picturing an imaginary world\n> where X in Xそうだ is true and you're standing there in your mind. You might be\n> in an on-going/about-to-happen event, and in that case, the imaginary world\n> can be the very close future world you're picturing in your mind.\n>\n> In other words, you use そうだ when you're both an observer and a person who is\n> currently involved in some way while ようだ is used when you feel you're an\n> observer and kind of an outsider. When you use そうだ, the situation you're\n> taking about is psychologically in front of you.\n>\n> For this reason, it's impossible to use そうだ when you're talking about an\n> event that already happened or finished; the current yourself living in the\n> \"now\" time-frame is always an outsider to the world in the past, and you\n> always feel a certain distance between you and a past event. Of course you\n> can say 雨が降りそうだった when you mean you felt that the \"about-to-rain\" was\n> psychologically related to you and that it was an on-going event you were\n> experiencing in the past. But it just means \"雨が降りそうだ\" happened in the past,\n> i.e., you were observing the situation in the past and felt it was related\n> to you.\n>\n> If you say 雨が降ったそうだ, it only means you heard it had rained, i.e., the other\n> kind of そうだ I mentioned earlier in this post. If you want to say \"It seems\n> that it rained,\" you say 雨が降ったみたいだ/ようだ.\n>\n> 雨が降るみたいだった (it seemed that it was going to rain) is used when you were just\n> an observer and psychologically distant from the rain.\n>\n> It doesn't matter if it's visual information or your conjecture when it\n> comes to the difference in usage. It's just in certain situations you often\n> feel that things are in front of you in an emotional sense, and some types\n> of reasoning appears more often when you observe a situation as an outsider.\n> For example, when you talk to a cheerful girl, you say:\n>\n> 元気そうだね (more likely used when her cheerful appearance cheers you up) 元気みたいだね\n> (you could sound like you're indifferent)\n>\n> Another example is:\n>\n> 死にそうだ (\"I'm dead tired\") 死ぬようだ (You sound like a spiritually enlightened\n> monk who is observing his own death without any worldly emotion)\n>\n> A real girl would say イキそう when she's coming, but a creepy guy who's\n> fingering a female android would be depressed when he hears her say イクみたい\n> because it clearly shows that the robot has no emotion and is just observing\n> the programmed behavior during sexual intercourse.\n>\n> I guess it's quite difficult to grasp this psychological thing because it\n> doesn't seem English distinguishes \"seem\" \"appear\" \"think\" etc. this way.\n> Sometimes そうだ and ようだ are pretty much interchangeable too. But I think the\n> general rule is that you use そうだ when you feel it's very \"close\" to you and\n> in front of you in an emotional sense.\n>\n> Note that ようだ/みたいだ has a lot more meanings such as \"like\" as in \"I hate a\n> guy like him,\" and you can't always use そうだ just because it's\n> psychologically in front of you.\n\nI hope a native can clarify this...", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2017-07-05T15:47:27.977", "id": "49067", "last_activity_date": "2017-07-05T15:47:27.977", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "15891", "parent_id": "16312", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "Not a native speaker, so please correct me if I am mistaken about something\n\n* * *\n\nUsing the example of rain, here is what I would gloss these various sentences\nas:\n\n * > 雨が降りそうです \n> = [Looking at the cloudy sky] It looks like it might rain [and this affects\n> me]\n\n * > 雨が降るそうです \n> = [Someone told me/I read that/I overheard that] It is going to rain\n\n * > 雨のようです \n> =[Looking at the cloudy sky] It seems like it might rain today [but it might\n> just feel like a rainy day]\n\n * > 雨が降るようです \n> =[I have some reason to believe that] It might rain today\n\n * > 雨が降るみたいです \n> = [Looking at the cloudy sky] Huh. Looks like it might rain [though it\n> doesn't really affect me]\n\n * > 雨が降るらしいです \n> = [I heard that/read that] It is going to rain [and I believe this to be the\n> case]\n\nIn other words, 〜だそうです and 〜らしいです indicate hearsay or indirect information\n(someone made an observation/prediction/guess, that you are passing along),\nthough 〜らしいです has a bit of a 〜はずです vibe (i.e. you believe this information, or\ntrust its source), whereas 〜だそうです might just mean someone said it would, not\nthat you believe or disbelieve that.\n\n〜そうです and 〜みたいです both indicate your own personal observation, which suggests\nit is a visual observation but doesn't have to be. 〜そう slightly suggests that\nyou are not merely making an observation like \"that car is green,\" but that\nthe information has some significance to you, or that whether it is true or\nnot affects you in some way.\n\n〜のよう and 〜Xするよう both imply an impression, as in 〜のような/に, but 雨が降るようです implies\nthat you have decided, based on that impression, that it is possibly going to\nrain; 雨のような日 might just be a very cloudy day that feels like a rainy day,\nwhereas 雨が降るような日 is a day that feels at any minute like it might start\nraining.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2017-07-05T17:46:09.367", "id": "49071", "last_activity_date": "2017-07-05T17:46:09.367", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "21802", "parent_id": "16312", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "Like ようだ、らしい is used to express suppositions based on facts, and these two can\nhave the same meaning in a lot of contexts.\n\nBut they are not 100% equivalent\n\n> どうも酔ったようだな。（a)\n>\n> どうも酔ったらしいよ。（b)\n\nExample (a) will be used when the speaker feels drunk, even if there are no\napparent symptoms\n\nExemple (b) will be used when the speaker does not feel his drunkness, but he\nguesses he is drunk because of several symptoms: he cannot walk straight, he\ncannot speak clearly, ...\n\nWith らしい, the supposition is base on more objective facts than ようだ。 らしい is\nused in sciences related litterature.\n\nBut if the speaker wants to insist it is their personal opinion, they will\nchoose ようだ\n\ntranslated from: Reiko Shiamamori, Grammaire Japonaise Systématique, Volume II", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-01-05T09:43:14.713", "id": "83469", "last_activity_date": "2021-01-05T09:43:14.713", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "37097", "parent_id": "16312", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "You are discussing two meanings of 「`いいように`」 here:\n\n 1. At X's will; In whatever way that's convenient to X; As X likes\n\n 2. (quite literally) In a good manner; In a positive way; Rightly; Nicely\n\nThe first `いいように` is an idiom, usually used with certain verbs such as\n「`扱う`」「`利用する`」「`あしらう`」. It's not interchangeable with 「`よい方に`」 or 「`よく`」. Very\noften this `いいように` implies this person X is evil. That's why it's in\ndictionaries. (If it's _you_ who asks to treat yourself freely, then there is\nno evil sense: 「私のことはいいように使ってください。 」 = \"Please use me as you like.\")\n\nThe second meaning is quite literal, and that's why you couldn't find it in\ndictionaries. 「`いいように捉【とら】える`」 is literally translated as \"catch (it) in a\ngood way\", and you really have いいように translated this 「いいように」.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-08T06:36:29.440", "id": "16326", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-08T06:36:29.440", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "16315", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "There's a bit of a nuanced difference there.\n\n * `勝手に` is acting without _caring_ about (the effect on) others.\n * `むやみに` however is acting without _thinking_ about the consequences.\n\nSo, the answer `よく考えないで` matches `むやみに`'s meaning of doing something _without\nconsidering_ if it might (e.g.) inconvenience others. In contrast, using `勝手に`\nwould mean doing it _without caring_ if it inconveniences others.\n\nEDIT: would be nice if you explain what I\"m getting wrong when you downvote.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-07T12:45:44.113", "id": "16318", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-07T14:28:07.907", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-07T14:28:07.907", "last_editor_user_id": "5522", "owner_user_id": "5522", "parent_id": "16317", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "The verbs する and なる are a transitive-intransitive pair. When they follow the\n〜く form of adjectives, they're kind of like \"make\" and \"become\":\n\n```\n\n Ａ **が**　 　　赤く **なる**　\"A becomes red\" 　　(A turns red, blushes, etc.)\n Ａ **が**　B **を**　赤く **する**　\"A makes B red\"\n```\n\nThe main difference here is that with なる the _subject_ turns red, while with\nする the subject turns the _object_ red. And なる doesn't take an object at all!\n\nKeep in mind that in a real sentence, が might be replaced with は, or the\nsubject might be left out entirely, etc. This is just a simplified example to\nshow how this grammar pattern works.\n\n* * *\n\nNow let's look at the guitar example:\n\n> ギターのボリューム **を** 小さく **して** ください。 \n> _Please turn the volume down on the guitar._\n\nSince this is imperative in form, the implied _subject_ is the listener. The\n_object_ is explicit. The speaker is asking the listener to please turn the\nvolume down on the guitar.\n\n> *ギターのボリューム **を** 小さく **なって** ください。 \n> _*Please become smaller the volume on the guitar. (??)_\n\nHere, we have an object marked with を, but our main verb なる doesn't take an\nobject, so this sentence is ungrammatical. Of course, the listener can\nprobably figure out what you meant to say, but it doesn't really make sense\nthe way it's written. The phrase 小さくなってください seems to say \"please become\nsmaller\", and it doesn't take an object marked with を.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-07T16:40:08.727", "id": "16322", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-08T01:33:12.703", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-08T01:33:12.703", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "16319", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

[ { "body": "I took a look at the [book OP\nmentioned](http://www.amazon.co.jp/dp/4106103494) and following is a super-\nsimplified summary of how \"ン\" was invented, as described in the book. I'm no\nhistorian nor linguist, so I can't guarantee this is true.\n\n * There was no kanji for \"ん／ン\" at all in [Man’yōgana](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man%27y%C5%8Dgana) (万葉仮名). This is partly because, in those days, the Chinese writing system also had no simple character for the [n/m/ŋ] sound. Actually no one in East Asia knew how to write this sound using only one letter.\n\n * In the early 9th century, Buddhist monks in Nara developed katakana, but there was no \"ン\" at first. This was natural because there was no kanji for \"ン\" in 万葉仮名 from which they extracted katakana.\n\n * Instead, they developed several ways to express [n/m/ŋ] sounds in Buddhist scriptures. They mainly borrowed other existing katakanas. For example, \"イ or ニ\" for [n] (恨 = コニ), \"ム\" for [m] ([厭]{iεm} = エム), \"イ\" for [ŋ] ([痛]{t'nŋ} = ツイ).\n\n * One way of writing [n] sound was \"レ\", which is seen in 地蔵十輪経【じぞうじゅうりんきょう】 written in 883. 鮮 = セレ, and so on. Other boomerang-shaped characters, like \"く\" or \"ゝ\" or \"へ\" were also used to express [n/m/ŋ] in various books at that time.\n\n * The oldest book that has katakana \"ン\" as we know today is 法華経【ほっけきょう】 in 1058. Some books still used \"レ, ゝ, く, へ\" after this, but at around 1100, \"ン\" became popular.\n\n * So the author believes this \"ン\" is not from a part of any (万葉) kanjis. He believes \"ン\" derived from this \"レ\" or V-like character, used to represent [n/m/ŋ] sound.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-09T05:52:18.177", "id": "17329", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-09T11:08:23.777", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-09T11:08:23.777", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "16321", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

[ { "body": "As far as I know, まだ～していない is the norm and まだ～しない is also possible for many\nnon-durative intransitive verbs, such as まだ来ない, 届かない, 終わらない, etc.\n\nThere may be some subtle differences, e.g. していない may suggest the existence of\nsome kind of evidence and therefore be more objective, and しない may be more\nsubjective. Apart form them, I think the two expressions are generally\ninterchangeable.\n\nIf the verb is durative, like `買う`, `まだ～しない` is rarely used and often means\n`not going to ... yet` (するつもりはない) rather than `have not ... yet`.\n\nいまだ～せず was used in classical Japanese, and still can be seen in news titles or\nsomething.\n\n* * *\n\nWill it make more sense to you if `ている` means `have (いる/ある) + done (て/た)`?\nSimilarly, `もう来ています` and `もう買っています` can mean `have already come/bought`, too.\n`ている` is an ambiguous and relatively recent invention. So you may still find\nsomething like `まだ食べません/買いません` in old books.\n\nHowever, “why” is never an easy question to answer. Although ている can mean\n“have done” in both positive (すでにしている) and negative (まだしていない) sentences, した is\njust more common than している.\n\nAs a side note, the した/している/しない/していない (but not しなかった or していなかった) contrast\nseems extremely complicated to me when it comes to _the present tense_ or\n_untensed expressions_.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-07T19:37:01.020", "id": "16324", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-16T07:39:09.127", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-16T07:39:09.127", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "4833", "parent_id": "16323", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "According to [this\npaper](https://web.archive.org/web/20150920025304/http://ir.library.osaka-u.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/11094/6499/1/JLC_38_129.pdf)\n(thank you @snailboat) and my own intuitions, the core difference between the\ntwo is _precondition fulfilment_ : -ていない is used simply for the lack of an\naction (or its completion), while -ない is used for the lack of of a\nprecondition being fulfilled for that action to occur.\n\n(The paper talks about it in terms of intentions, but it seems to me that\nもう/まだしない verbs can take impersonal subjects as well. Correct me if I'm wrong.)\n\nWith まだ, this works out like this:\n\n * まだしていない is 'the action _isn't completed_ yet' (i.e. it can happen/finish whenever and we're just waiting)\n\n * まだしない is 'the _conditions for the action beginning aren't fulfilled_ yet' (i.e. there's something still lacking before it can begin, and just waiting isn't going to get us anything if we don't complete the prerequisites)\n\nWith もう, it works out like this:\n\n * もうしていない is 'the action is _no longer occurring_ ' (for whatever reason)\n\n * もうしない is 'the action _will no longer occur_ ' because a precondition is no longer fulfilled - especially if that precondition is someone's intention (e.g. '[I've decided that] I won't do it anymore').\n\nWith もう at least, the difference is perhaps better stated in terms of\n_current_ versus _future_ situations. もうしないと決めた is quite fine, since your\ndecision affects what'll happen in the future, but *もうしてないと決めた is very strange\n- since もうしてない is a statement about what's already the case, your decision\nshould have no bearing on the situation. Similarly, you can say もうしない for 'I\nwon't do it anymore' even if you're still doing it at the moment, but if you\nwere still doing it and said もうしていない, you'd be lying.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-08T22:48:35.977", "id": "17328", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-16T07:46:38.203", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-16T07:46:38.203", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "3639", "parent_id": "16323", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "_(This was written before @Choko posted her comment but the two seem to\nagree.)_\n\nThe easiest answer to your question is no, it is not that simple. It depends\non the nature of the verb and what you want to say.\n\nYour reference to \"present continuous\" suggests that your are not familiar\nwith concepts such as \"stative\", \"durative\", \"punctual\", \"subject change\" and\n\"continuous change\" verb groups or the resultative state in Japanese.\n\nThis is quite a big subject to explain (there are probably several theories)\nbut it is the key to the solution you are looking for: I found [this\npaper](https://web.archive.org/web/20161003230916/http://homepage3.nifty.com:80/park/aspect.htm),\nfrom @snailboat, quite useful.\n\n**BRIEF EXPLANATION OF UNDERLYING GRAMMAR & USE OF ADVERBS**\n\nThere are not really any short cuts to studying something like this but, in\nrelation to your question, I would summarise this as follows:\n\nVerbs like 来る can be classified as \"subject change\". In its plain form 来る\ndescribes an unexecuted and (probably) future action. In its ている form, 来ている,\nit usually describes an action that has been executed and the result is still\nbeing felt (eg the subject has come and is still here). This is also referred\nto as in the resultative state. These verbs are different from verbs such as\n騒ぐ which in its ている form describes the continuous action (or state) state of\nmaking noise rather than a \"resultative state\".\n\nAs you know, adverbs such as まだ and もう are used to describe or refine the\naction. This can be can be quite important. For example, in the case of\n\n> まだ来ていない\n\n来ていない, as the negative form of 来ている, describes the (opposite) state that has\nnot happened. The subject has not come (and is therefore not here). The adverb\nまだ reinforces this meaning and might be used to imply that somebody was\nwaiting for it to happen or it was over due.\n\nHowever, getting back to your question, the adverbs もう and まだ can also be used\nwith such plain form verbs in the negative form but their appropriateness also\ndepends what you want to say. For example:\n\n> 彼はもう行かない。= He is not going again. (ie in the future)\n\nFurther, although the ている form of subject change verbs are usually used to\ndescribe a resultant state this is not always the case. One way to describe a\ncontinuous state using a subject change verb is by choosing an appropriate\nadverb. A good example is the verb 死ぬ, to die. The following sentences should\nillustrate this:\n\n> 僕の猫は死ぬ = My cat is going to die. \n> 僕の猫は死んだ = My cat died.(see note 1) \n> 僕の猫は死んでいる = My cat is dead. \n> **僕の猫はだんだん死んでいる = My cat is slowly dying.**\n\nBy adding the adverb だんだん the predicate 死んでいる has changed from resultant state\nto continuous state.\n\nSo perhaps the answer to your question is:\n\nNo. It depends on the nature of the verb and what you want to say. If the\ncombination of an adverb and a verb does not feel right the best course of\naction is to consider what you want to say and whether the sentence you have\nmade really means what you want it to mean. This is illustrated by the other\nexample you give:\n\n> いいえ、まだ買っていません。 (A) \n> いいえ、まだ買いません。 (B)\n\n(A) is correct if you want to say: No I have not bought it yet. (B) might be\ncorrect if for some reason you wanted to say \"No, I am still not going to buy\nit.\" (note 2)\n\n* * *\n\n**Note** :\n\n 1. I am not sure if this really flies as an explanation of the difference between 死んだ and 死んでいる so I have made it a note:\n\nIf we accept the saying a cat has nine lives then perhaps we can say it has to\ndie nine times before we can say it is \"permanently dead\", as in it leaves\nthis world for the next. If we can say this then perhaps before it loses its\nninth life we can also say:\n\n> 僕の猫は死んだことが8度ある：My has cat died eight times.\n\n...and it would not be correct to use 死んでいる because the cat is still enjoying\nits final life.\n\n 2. This is consistent with @Choko's comment which suggested that you might not be buying because you were expecting a discount to be announced.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-10T15:19:22.410", "id": "17347", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-16T07:47:52.627", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-16T07:47:52.627", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "1556", "parent_id": "16323", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "I think they have the same meaning. The basic difference is that 〜ようになる is\ncommonly used after positive verbs, while 〜くなる is commonly used for negative\nverbs.\n\nWhy? Well, negative verbs are morphologically shaped like adjectives, so they\nhave the shorter 〜くなる form available, and that's what people use 99% of the\ntime. That's not possible with positive verbs, so for those people use 〜ようになる\ninstead--for example, 「見えるようになる」.\n\nTo get some numbers to back this up, I searched the [_Balanced Corpus of\nContemporary Written Japanese (BCCWJ)_](http://www.kotonoha.gr.jp/shonagon/)\nusing the freely available 少納言 tool. Here's what I found:\n\n```\n\n なくなる　　　　 6527 results　　\n ないようになる　 49 results \n```\n\nIn other words, the short form 〜なくなる is over a hundred times more common!\n\nIn contrast, there are 6513 results for ようになる alone. If you search for this\nphrase, you'll see that the vast majority of the time, it's used after\npositive verbs.\n\n(Note: To reduce false positives, I typed `[^がもは少危]$` into the 前文脈 (\"preceding\ncontext\") field. This filtered out results like 少なくなる or 〜がなくなる and focused\nthe results on verbs. If you'd like to get the same numbers I did, you'll need\nto do the same.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-08T15:44:14.990", "id": "16329", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-08T23:28:49.010", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-08T23:28:49.010", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "16328", "post_type": "answer", "score": 15 } ]

[ { "body": "The same thing any te form does. It's \"continuative\" and the part that comes\nafter elaborates on that condition. So if you say あんな事聞かれて・・・ then whatever\ncomes after will be in the context of having been asked such a question. So\n聞かれて平常心でいられるか means that, having been asked such a thing, the speaker wonders\nif he/she/whoever is being asked will be able to stay calm.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-09T06:27:33.720", "id": "17331", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-09T06:41:53.213", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-09T06:41:53.213", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "17330", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "dainichi's comment in the OP is right.\n\nThese are left-overs of western dialect that are actually still used today:\n\n**Wants** たい ー＞ とう (usually in the negative)\n\n * 行きたくないな・行きとうないな or 行きとうなかね\n\n**て／た forms of 「う」verbs**\n\n * 何買ったの？・なんこうたと？\n\n**General Phonetic Shift** ら行 sounds to い\n\n * それ何？・そいなん？\n * その人誰？・そん人だいね？\n * 二人は？・ふたいは？\n\n**Scolding**\n\n * 早く行きなさいよ！・はよう行きんしゃい！\n\nWith these it's easy to see how ありがとう and いらっしゃい came about.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-12-28T04:06:11.573", "id": "21044", "last_activity_date": "2014-12-28T04:06:11.573", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "8021", "parent_id": "17332", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

[ { "body": "My dictionary 漢字源 lists as meanings\n\n> 1. {名} はな。はなぶさ。中央がくぼみ、芯を含んだような形をしたはな。→ 華\n> 2. {形・名} うるわしい。すぐれている。ひいでた者。「英雄」「英明」。\n> 3. & 4. [omitted]\n>\n\nThe literal meaning being related to a flower, the extended meaning being\n\"lovely\" or \"outstanding\" or \"someone skillful\". The words 英雄 \"hero\" and 英明\n\"intelligent\" are listed under this extended meaning.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-09T14:05:46.920", "id": "17335", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-09T14:11:20.347", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-09T14:11:20.347", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "17334", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "Henshall writes on p.130 of _A Guide to Remembering Japanese Characters_ :\n\n> 艹 is _plant_ 9. 央 is _center_ 429 q.v., here acting phonetically to express\n> _bloom_ and possibly lending an idea of _blocked off at the head_ from its\n> assumed original meaning of person yoked at the neck. 426 originally meant a\n> _flower that blossomed but lacked seed_ , such a flower being _exceptionally\n> beautiful_. It can still mean beautiful flower in Chinese. Exceptionally\n> beautiful came to mean _superior_ , with extended meanings such as\n> _talented_ or _brave_. **It is also used for the first syllable of _England_\n> , largely under the influence of Chinese in which [it] is pronounced YING\n> and is a closer approximation to ENG.**\n\nIt's not true that 英 \"now really has the exclusive meaning of English\", but\nit's acquired that meaning as well. It's still used in its usual senses of\n\"superior, talented, brave\" in compounds like 英雄, 英明, or 英知.\n\nIn reference to England, it seems that 英 is an abbreviation for the ateji 英吉利.\n\nThe dictionary 精選版 日本国語大辞典 says:\n\n> （「英」は「イギリス」のあて字「⇒英吉利」の略）\n\nAnd the character dictionary 新漢語林 says:\n\n> 国名。英吉利（イギリス）の略。\n\n[Wikipedia](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%A4%E3%82%AE%E3%83%AA%E3%82%B9)\nbacks this up:\n\n> 「イギリス」の語源については、ポルトガル語の Inglez に由来すると言われる[3]。江戸時代には「エゲレス」とも呼ばれていた（前掲ポルトガル語\n> Inglez、またはオランダ語 Engelsch が訛ったもの[4]）。\n> **当て字である「英吉利」という表記は、もともと先行する中国語に由来する[5]。**\n\nSo I think that, in reference to England, it was used for its sound in Chinese\nrather than for its meaning, and that's why we find two unrelated sets of\nmeaning (\"English\" and \"superior\").\n\nI think the literal meaning of \"flower\" is uncommon in Japanese, although\nyou'll find it used to write certain flower names such as 蒲公英(たんぽぽ).", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-09T20:22:54.390", "id": "17336", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-09T21:43:47.347", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-09T21:43:47.347", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "17334", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

[ { "body": "Although there's no such baseball metaphor in Japanese, closest Japanese words\nthat came up to my mind are `[A]{エー}`, `[B]{ビー}`, `[C]{シー}`; A for kissing, B\nfor touching, and C for intercourse. (Some sources say `D` means \"pregnancy\",\nbut I don't think this was used in real life)\n\n> 「どこまで行ったの？」 \n> 「彼とはまだAまで。」\n\n( _\"How far have you reached?\"_ and _\"I've only reached the first-base with\nhim\"_ may be the translation, but I'm not sure. Edits are welcome.)\n\nHowever these were frequently used maybe 20 years ago or so, and they are\nbeing obsolete. Younger people simply put just `キスまで`, I think.\n\nキスとかの段階を示すABCってあるじゃないですか？ あれって何が何なんですか？ \n<http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1246485907>\n\nA similar expression of \"all the way\" is `最後まで(行く or やる)`, which I think is\nstill common. (Did she let you go all the way? = 最後までやらせてくれた?/最後までいかせてくれた?）", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-10T02:08:47.207", "id": "17338", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-10T02:14:21.720", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-10T02:14:21.720", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "17337", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "According to\n[Wikipedia](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%B6%9A%E6%9F%84#.E5.BE.93.E4.BC.AF.E5.8F.94.E7.88.B6.E6.AF.8D.EF.BC.88.E3.81.84.E3.81.A8.E3.81.93.E3.81.8A.E3.81.98.E3.83.BB.E3.81.84.E3.81.A8.E3.81.93.E3.81.8A.E3.81.B0.EF.BC.89.E7.AD.89)\nand [this article](http://blue.zero.jp/mr36/cshintou.html), 従伯叔父【いとこおじ】 (male)\nor 従伯叔母【いとこおば】 (female) may be the specific words you're looking for. However,\nanything further than いとこ (cousin), おじ/おば (uncle/aunt) is rarely used in\nordinary Japanese except for はとこ (second cousin).\n\nSo you should just say \"母のいとこ\", \"母のいとこの母\", etc. as long as you want to make\nyourself understood without dictionaries.\n\n\"父方【ちちかた】の\" or \"母方【ははかた】の\" are common words to say father's/mother's side.\n\n> 母方【ははかた】の祖父【そふ】 \n> = grandfather on the mother's side = mother's father\n\nSo if you want to express \"My mother's cousin's mother was the older sister of\nmy mother's father\" simply yet specifically, I think \"その人は、私の母の父方のいとこです。\" is\nappropriate.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-10T07:42:39.783", "id": "17340", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-10T07:56:56.043", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-10T07:56:56.043", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "17339", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "I think it's the opposite? が simply states the fact, while は would imply \"at\nleast\". I'm a native speaker myself.\n\nFor example,\n\n```\n\n 銀メダルが取れた\n -> I got the silver medal\n 銀メダルは取れた\n -> I got at least the silver medal (but not the gold medal)\n \n 銀メダルが取れないと帰れない\n -> If I don't get the silver medal, I can't return\n 銀メダルは取れないと帰れない\n -> If I don't even get the silver medal, I can't return\n \n```", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-10T15:32:32.077", "id": "17348", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-10T15:32:32.077", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "17343", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "住む is to live somewhere in the sense of residency. It's where your house is,\nwhere you're staying. It's the same kanji as in 住所{じゅうしょ}, or address.\nBasically the place where you live.\n\nYou're right about 棲む. It refers to where an animal lives, like where a bird\nwould make its nest. Googling it I find a lot of literary uses, especially\nwith relation to demons, like \"悪魔の棲む家.\"\n\n泊まる refers to where one stays away from home, like at a hotel on vacation.\n\n暮らす refers to your daily life. Your everyday, your daily situation. It has\nmore of a sense of what you're doing and your condition in that situation\nrather than the plain idea of place of residency that you would find in 住む. It\nrefers to your existence within society. You find the kanji in compounds like\nひとり[暮]{ぐ}らし, which is _living alone_. Note that with 住む you use the particle\n「に」, as in 田舎に住んでいます, but with 暮らす, you use the location of action marker 「で」,\nas in 田舎で暮らしています.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-10T14:41:16.100", "id": "17345", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-10T14:59:14.770", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-10T14:59:14.770", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "1797", "parent_id": "17344", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 }, { "body": "ssb's answer seems perfect, so let me give some examples so you can see the\ndifferences between 住む and 暮らす better.\n\nLive in Tokyo:\n\n * 東京に住む OK\n * 東京で暮らす OK\n\nLive a happy life:\n\n * 幸せに住む WEIRD\n * 幸せに暮らす OK\n\nSpend his life as a fisherman:\n\n * 漁師として住む WEIRD\n * 漁師として暮らす OK\n\nSurvive using only ￥1000 a day:\n\n * 1日1000円で住む WEIRD\n * 1日1000円で暮らす OK\n\nYou can also think \"住む\" is a subset of \"暮らす\". In Japanese, there is a word\n「[衣食住【いしょくじゅう】](http://kotobank.jp/word/%E8%A1%A3%E9%A3%9F%E4%BD%8F)」. This\nmeans \"clothing, food and housing\", which are the three basic elements of\n「暮らし」.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-10T14:54:01.273", "id": "17346", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-10T14:54:01.273", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "17344", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "The other answers provide good information. Here is some additional\ninformation for help in understanding the differences between the words.\n\n * すむ \nThis is ultimately the same word as 清む・澄む \"to be clear\", 済む \"to be finished\",\n住む・棲む \"to reside in a place\". The underlying idea isn't too far from English\n\"to settle\". When water _settles_ , any cloudiness settles down to the bottom,\nleaving the liquid clear. When a matter such as a business affair _settles_ ,\nit is concluded. When a person (or, by extension, an animal) _settles_ , they\nreside in a place for an extended period.\n\n * とまる \nThis is ultimately the same word as 止まる・停まる \"to stop\", 泊まる \"to spend the\nnight\", 留まる \"to be fixed, to remain, to leave an impression\". The underlying\nidea is basically \"to stop\". When something ceases moving, it just _stops_.\nWhen a person _stops_ for a day or a few while traveling, they spend the\nnight. When an image _stops_ in one's mind, it lasts or remains. \nHere, the key difference with すむ is that とまる implies a shorter time period.\n\n * くらす \nThis is the transitive counterpart to くれる, with both verbs ultimately cognate\nwith 暗い \"dark\", from the underlying idea of making something dark (くらす) or\nsomething becoming dark (くれる). This darkness often idiomatically refers to the\npassing of a day: 日が暮れる \"the sun sets\". From this perspective, くらす could be\nglossed as \"to spend one's days\", and hence the underlying sense of _living a\nlife_ > _lifestyle_ , as opposed to _residing_.\n\nIn speech, which すむ, which とまる, or which くらす is intended is something you have\nto find out from the context. In writing, you can discern some of this detail\nfrom the spelling (kanji).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-10T17:44:54.113", "id": "17350", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-10T17:44:54.113", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "17344", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "While you can always use 本部【ほんぶ】 for headquarters, another way to say 本部 (of a\nmartial art or a religion) is 総本山【そうほんざん】.\n\nThis refers to a name of a place (town), a name of a building (temple, shrine,\netc), or a name of a group (institute), depending on the context.\n\n> 天台宗の総本山は延暦寺です。 Sohonzan of [Tendai-shu](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tendai)\n> is Enryaku-ji temple.\n>\n> 柔道の総本山は講道館です。 （BTW, 講道館 is [the name of a\n> institute](http://www.kodokan.org/index_j.html) as well as the name of a\n> building）\n\n**Edit:** It was pointed out that 総本山 is too grandiose for rather small and\nnon-Buddhist groups like Geido-Kenpo-Ninpo-Ryu. Although 総本山 _is_ a grandiose\nword and has roots in Buddhism, I think it can safely be used metaphorically\nfor non-Buddhist groups, especially those related to Asian traditions.\n(Perlの総本山は perl.org です, etc.) Removing \"総\" and just saying \"本山\" sounds less\ngrandiose (General HQ vs. HQ, I think). But if your group is a really small\none, don't use (総)本山 (or maybe 本部, either)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-11T02:33:06.923", "id": "17358", "last_activity_date": "2015-06-21T07:11:50.650", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "17351", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

[]

[ { "body": "リア充 is different from \"playboy\".\n\n**リア充** : an internet meme constructed from `リアル` (real) + `充実【じゅうじつ】`\n(fulfill). a person who is _successful or fulfilled in real life_ (vs. an\n_otaku_ who is living in the world of anime or video games).\n\nIn most cases this refers to someone who has a lover, used with some sense of\njealousy. Sometimes this is used to refer to any \"non-otaku\" enjoyment outside\nanime/game worlds, such as skiing, parties, or going to an amusement park.\n\nDepending on context, リア充 even includes people who are happily and busily\nspending their days on business (vs.\n[hikikomori](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hikikomori)).\n\n**プレイボーイ** : a playboy, a woman chaser, a ladykiller (vs. ordinary person),\njust as you know in English.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-11T00:51:40.803", "id": "17356", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-11T01:40:15.310", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-11T01:40:15.310", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "17354", "post_type": "answer", "score": 17 }, { "body": "Considering they are both internet memes, \"normalfag\" does match リア充 pretty\nwell.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2015-06-17T11:05:36.690", "id": "25100", "last_activity_date": "2015-06-17T11:05:36.690", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "10381", "parent_id": "17354", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

[ { "body": "さて is a \"decorative\" word and is used like \"Now,..\" or \"So, ..\". It doesn't\nreally matter even if you omit it.\n\n> **さて** 、始めましょうか。: **So** , let's get started.\n\nそして is a coordinating conjunction and can be translated into \"Then,\" or \"After\nthat\".\n\n> 空が暗くなって、 **そして** 雨がふりだした。: The sky got dark, **then** it started raining.\n\nAlso, it could simply mean \"and\". For example,\n\n> 私は新聞と傘、 **そして** チョコレートを買った。: I got newspaper, an umbrella, **and** a\n> chocolate.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-11T03:47:38.437", "id": "17362", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-11T03:47:38.437", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "6541", "parent_id": "17357", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

[ { "body": "Both mean reply, but 返信 can only be used if the reply is transmitted via code\n(be it letter, e-mail, flag semaphore, Morse code etc. as opposed to speech\n(including telephone), gesture etc.). Note that 返信 does not refer to the\nobject that contains the reply; it refers to the reply.\n\n```\n\n Eメールで返事しといた　->　OK\n Eメールで返信しといた　->　OK\n 大声で返事した　->　OK\n 大声で返信した　->　Weird, speech isn't via code\n \n```\n\n**EDIT** : \nRe: `transmitted via code`, I think the best practical way of defining it\nwould be \"not via speech or gesture\". To your example, spy talking in code\nwould be 返事 because the transport layer (haha you can tell I'm an Engineer) is\nstill speech, but I think it's border line. If they'd do the same on the\nphone, that will be still 返事. However, if they transmit encrypted message via\nphone (like by reading out bunch of numbers etc.) or even in person, that\nwould be now 返信 because it's no longer via speech.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-11T17:56:37.463", "id": "17384", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-12T08:14:20.590", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-12T08:14:20.590", "last_editor_user_id": "499", "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "17359", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 }, { "body": "Every Kanji character has its own meaning.\n\n * \"返\" means \"return\" and is also used as \"返す（かえす）\".\n * \"事\" means \"thing\" in general and is also pronounced as \"こと\".\n * \"信\" means \"letter\" or \"signal\" as in \"信号\" (signal).\n\nThus, \"返事\" is a reply in general, while \"返信\" is something sent as a reply.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-12T13:13:15.177", "id": "17399", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-12T13:13:15.177", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "6554", "parent_id": "17359", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "According to\n[非回答者](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/users/4032/%E9%9D%9E%E5%9B%9E%E7%AD%94%E8%80%85)\n\n> Cram all three into the bottommost block -- \"す。」\". The better schools,\n> teachers and publishers will not accept any other method.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-11T17:58:15.113", "id": "17385", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-11T17:58:15.113", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.740", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "17360", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

[ { "body": "Yes, it's grammatically correct. です is just a polite expression. I would\nprefer to add です when I am in a formal situation or with senior people.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-11T03:55:46.913", "id": "17363", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-11T03:55:46.913", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "6541", "parent_id": "17361", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "As Tomiyoshi notes, です is a polite marker, much like the -ます ending on verbs.\nThe plain form is だ, corresponding to the dictionary or plain form of verbs.\nIn technical terms, this です・だ word is often called a \"copula\" (after _-i_\nadjectives, です is instead regarded as a politeness marker). Whether either\nform is required at the end of a sentence depends on two things: 1) the\ngrammatical structure, and 2) the social register (i.e. the context, who\nyou're talking to).\n\n### Grammar\n\nGenerally speaking, if a sentence ends in a noun or a _-na_ adjective, you\nneed to use the copula (either だ or です, depending on social register).\n\nIf a sentence ends in an _-i_ adjective, as in your sample sentence, adding だ\nin informal contexts is actually considered incorrect grammar, since the _-i_\nadjective is already grammatically complete on its own. In technical terms, an\n_-i_ adjective forms a complete predicate (i.e. it works as a verb), so the\ncopula is not needed. However, _‑ i_ adjectives do not conjugate for\npoliteness (there is no -ます form), so in polite contexts, です is used as a\npoliteness marker, as a kind of replacement for -ます.\n\n### Social register\n\nIf you're among friends, だ after nouns or _-na_ adjectives might be\nappropriate as the less-formal plain form. If you're among strangers,\ncolleagues, or in a professional setting, you should use です, also after _‑ i_\nadjectives.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-11T05:54:59.587", "id": "17370", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-12T19:04:48.170", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-12T19:04:48.170", "last_editor_user_id": "5229", "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "17361", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "> Do you need です before から at the end of sentence?\n\nNot necessarily. It depends on how polite you want to be.\n\n> バスに乗りましょう。タクシーは高いですから。 \n> or can you simply say タクシーは高いから without the です?\n\nYes, both are correct. You can say:\n\n> バスに乗りましょう。タクシーは高いですから。(polite form) \n> バスに乗ろう。タクシーは高いから。(casual form)\n\nbecause these are inverted sentences of:\n\n> タクシーは高いですから、バスに乗りましょう。(polite form) \n> タクシーは高いから、バスに乗ろう。(casual form) \n> (タクシーは高いから、バスに乗りましょう。is also fine.)\n\n* * *\n\n(You don't say *バスに乗りましょう。タクシーは高いからです。/*バスに乗ろう。タクシーは高いからだ。 because you don't\nsay *タクシーは高いからです、バスに乗りましょう。/*タクシーは高いからだ、バスに乗ろう。You'd use\nタクシーは高いからだ。/タクシーは高いからです。 when you say \"It is because taxi is expensive\", as a\nresponse to \"Why do you take a bus?\" etc.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-18T09:55:33.827", "id": "17491", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-18T10:21:49.927", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-18T10:21:49.927", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "17361", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "Searching the Balanced Corpus of Contemporary Written Japanese (BCCWJ,\naccessible at <http://www.kotonoha.gr.jp/shonagon/>) for 様に by removing\nresults that correspond to 同様に, 神様に, etc., only four results are found.\n\n> 様{よう}に 4 results (without false positives) \n> ように 185442 results (possibly with false positives)\n\nSimilarly,\n\n> 様だ 0 results (without false positives) \n> ようだ 12378 results (possibly with false positives)\n>\n> 様で 2 results (without false positives) \n> ようで 82 results (without false positives)\n\nSo, for all of ように, ようだ, ようです, kana is definitely preferred.\n\nThe general rule is to use kana for words with grammatical function.\n\nOne other use of よう you didn't mention is the construction [ます-stem]+よう, where\n様 is also written in kana, except for the verb する, which is usually written as\n仕様{しよう}.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-11T16:28:47.220", "id": "17375", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-11T16:28:47.220", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "17372", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "This depends on personal taste and situations, but in general Japanese people\nare generally taught to use hiragana for auxiliary verbs and particles.\n\n * ～あての(手紙) ～宛ての(手紙) (a letter) to ～\n * ～ごとに ～毎に per ～\n * ～ために ～為に in order to ～\n * ～できる ～出来る be able to ～\n * ～ように ～様に like ～\n * ～において ～に於いて at ～ (place)\n\nI suppose many Japanese style guidelines (for newspapers, official documents,\nand such) have explicit rules to avoid kanji in those cases.\n\nThose were frequently written in kanji before WWII, and people can still read\nand understand the kanji versions without difficulty. A few occasions of the\nkanji versions should not be frowned upon too much. However, excessive use of\nkanji for those cases can make you look like simulating old documents, or\nsimply less trained to write modern formal Japanese.\n\nI'm not quite sure, but according to my J->E dictionary, \"stilted\", \"pompous\"\nand \"bombastic\" may be the words I can use to describe my impression of the\nkanji versions.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-12T02:09:15.917", "id": "17388", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-12T02:33:30.800", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-12T02:33:30.800", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "17372", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "都合 means more like circumstances or condition. 都合がいい would literally translate\nto the circumstances are favorable (on a particular day), which makes the\nmeaning of \"that day is convenient (favorable) for me\".\n\n便利 (as suggested by its kanjis, 便 - convenience; and 利 - profit, benefit)\nmeans advantageous/profitable convenience, i.e. useful or handy. A situation\nwill be favorable and an object would be convenient.\n\nSo looking at your examples, they seem correct.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-11T14:35:42.540", "id": "17374", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-11T14:41:33.910", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-11T14:41:33.910", "last_editor_user_id": "4507", "owner_user_id": "4507", "parent_id": "17373", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "The issue you are facing is that if you say:\n\n> ◯◯ と ◯◯ が好きです\n\nThe list formed with と is usually assumed to be an exhaustive list of items,\nso if you were using it to say you liked **ONLY** Japanese culture and\nJapanese history, then it would be appropriate.\n\n* * *\n\nThe form you showed in your first sentence:\n\n> ◯◯といろいろ が好きです\n\nIs awkward to the listener.\n\nWhile it gets the point across, it is not something you will hear anyone say\nbecause you are trying to make the listing of \"various other stuff\" part of a\nclosed list of stuff.\n\n* * *\n\nOn the contrary the format:\n\n> ◯◯ や ◯◯ が好きです\n\nAllows the listener to infer that, while you only mention Japanese culture and\nhistory, you are not implying that is the only thing you may be liking. When\nlisting multiple things you like, や is a superior choice.\n\nIn the Japanese language, you do not need to add something to the effect of \"\n_and stuff_ \" because by using the correct particles, you identify that your\nlist is non exhaustive.\n\n* * *\n\n> 私は日本文化や日本史などが好きです\n\nThis sentence is a way of saying \"I like things like Japanese culture and\nJapanese History\"\n\nThe reason this is accurate is because it is clear from your question in\nEnglish, that you do not intend to limit yourself to only liking the two\nthings you specifically mentioned.\n\nBy using や and など together, you say that your list is non exhaustive, and the\nなど on the end sort of sticks on the list and says \"and things like this\" about\nthe other things you listed.\n\nHope that helps.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-11T17:48:54.923", "id": "17383", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-11T17:48:54.923", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5459", "parent_id": "17376", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 }, { "body": "In the sentence you gave, you tried to directly translate the phrase into\nJapanese. However, the sentence you made does not sound natural. Instead, the\nway to express \"Japanese culture, history, and other stuff\" is using や, which\nis used to express \"among other things\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2015-09-05T06:06:09.890", "id": "27824", "last_activity_date": "2015-09-05T06:06:09.890", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "11098", "parent_id": "17376", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

[ { "body": "1. This kind of (rather poor) pun is generally considered to be [おやじギャグ](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%AA%E3%83%A4%E3%82%B8%E3%82%AE%E3%83%A3%E3%82%B0). As far as I know, there is no word specifically referring to \"AだけにB\" jokes.\n\n 2. I think the third meaning of that dictionary (であるから、それにふさわしく) can be applied. 「バスケット, therefore I say, スケット」.\n\n 3. Sorry, I'm not the right person to answer this part of your question. However, \"no pun intended\" seems to be very loose translation, because a pun is certainly intended when you use \"だけに\" in this way.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-12T16:35:42.340", "id": "17404", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-12T16:56:01.043", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-12T16:56:01.043", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "17389", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

[ { "body": "The rule you mentioned does not apply to 原稿用紙 for novels and articles. Never.\n\nHowever, you may be instructed to place 濁点（゛） and 半濁点（゜）into a separate box,\nwhen you have to fill some legacy paper forms at banks or government offices.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZccLb.png)\n\nThis is because 濁点 and 半濁点 consume an extra byte if you encode [hankaku\nkatakana](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half-width_kana) strings into old\nencodings such as JIS, Shift-JIS, EUC-JP, and they have to count the number of\nbytes.\n\nIn my opinion, this is a very bad tradition of the fixed-length-string era,\nand should disappear at once.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-12T09:14:39.653", "id": "17393", "last_activity_date": "2015-12-15T15:06:47.893", "last_edit_date": "2015-12-15T15:06:47.893", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "17390", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 } ]

[ { "body": "All in all it takes 15 minutes to get there \n**全部で** 15分かかる。 \n([more examples of this\nstructure](https://www.google.co.jp/webhp?sourceid=chrome-\ninstant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=%E2%80%9D%E5%85%A8%E9%83%A8%E3%81%A7%2a%E6%99%82%E9%96%93%E3%81%8B%E3%81%8B%E3%82%8B%E2%80%9D&safe=off&start=90))\n\nAll in all this movie was quite fun \nこの映画は **全体的に** おもしろかった。 \n([more examples](https://www.google.co.jp/webhp?sourceid=chrome-\ninstant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=%E2%80%9D%E3%81%93%E3%81%AE%E6%98%A0%E7%94%BB%E3%81%AF%E5%85%A8%E4%BD%93%E7%9A%84%E3%81%AB%E2%80%9D&safe=off),\n[more examples](https://www.google.co.jp/webhp?sourceid=chrome-\ninstant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=%E2%80%9D%E5%85%A8%E4%BD%93%E7%9A%84%E3%81%AB%E3%81%AF%E9%9D%A2%E7%99%BD%E3%81%8B%E3%81%A3%E3%81%9F%E3%81%91%E3%81%A9%E3%81%A1%E3%82%87%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A8%E2%80%9D&safe=off),\n[more](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=%E5%85%A8%E4%BD%93%E7%9A%84%E3%81%AB))\n\n[This dictionary](http://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=all%20in%20all) might help as\nwell. It includes some useful phrases like 全体として見れば.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-12T11:55:03.690", "id": "17394", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-12T12:03:02.740", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-12T12:03:02.740", "last_editor_user_id": "3010", "owner_user_id": "3010", "parent_id": "17392", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "I think that's using all-in-all in two different senses. The first example is\nin the sense of \"in total\" whereas the second case is in the sense of \"in a\nword\". For the latter, I'd suggest you can use something like `[概]{がい}して` or\n`一言で`, e.g.: `概して言えば面白い映画だった。`", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-12T13:05:38.303", "id": "17397", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-12T14:45:20.987", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-12T14:45:20.987", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "5522", "parent_id": "17392", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "Another option I haven't seen yet is つまり, which is to the effect of \"In\nshort...\", and is used as a lead-in for a brief summary.\n\nHere are some examples taken from the Tanaka Corpus:\n\n> 祖母【そぼ】は耳【みみ】が遠【とお】い、つまり、耳【みみ】が少【すこ】し不自由【ふじゆう】なのだ。 \n> My grandmother is hard of hearing. In other words she is slightly deaf.\n>\n> 彼【かれ】はとても太【ふと】っている、つまり、３００ポンドも体重【たいじゅう】があるのだ。 \n> He is very fat, that is, he weighs 300 pounds.\n>\n> つまり、英語【えいご】はもはや、イギリスの人々【ひとびと】だけの言語【げんご】ではないということです。 \n> It shows that English is no longer the language only of the people of\n> England.\n\nThe last example, in particular, I think captures that nuance that you're\nlooking for.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-16T01:42:04.693", "id": "17459", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-16T05:13:28.720", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "4914", "parent_id": "17392", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

[]