INSTRUCTION
stringlengths 11
999
| RESPONSE
stringlengths 0
999
| SOURCE
stringlengths 16
38
| METADATA
dict |
|---|---|---|---|
What's the meaning of 間時肆拾貳 at a car parking sign
I'm trying to translate this car parking sign/garage and I'm stuck on the part for ****
![enter image description here](
Google just returns the translation "In between", so I still don't know what they mean. Maybe it's like parking in between the lines?
|
This is a tricky one because this sign is 1) written right-to-left, 2) using kanji for numbers, and 3) using **old** / **traditional** kanji for the numbers.
So rearranging it left-to-right and using simplified kanji would give us
> (top) []{} → Hourly Rental / Pay by-the-hour
> (right, red) [M]{} []{} → Entrance (is) 50 meters ahead
> (example in question) []{} → (Open) 24 Hrs.
> (lower left, green) []{} → Vacancy / Empty spaces availabe
* Here is a reference to kanji used for numbers.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 13,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
Special meaning of 手が挙がる
In an email about someone I introduced for a position at a company, one particular sentence was as follows:
While I am familiar with the fact that has multiple meanings, I do not see how any of them fits in this context. Can someone enlighten me?
Thank you in advance for your answers!
|
I hate to disappoint you, but
>
means " ** _no one agreed to hire [this individual]_** "
Whether or not those involved were asked to physically raise their hands if they agreed to hire him/her is beside the point because already has an idiomatic meaning of " **to say yes** ".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "expressions"
}
|
Difference among evening words 夕方, 夕べ, 晩, 夕?
I've found several words in the book, which means `evening`. What's the difference among them?
_I've found only this information:_
- 5pm to 7pm
- 7pm to 10pm
- 10pm onwards (night, late evening)
But not sure, is it true and what's the difference among `` and `` and the others?
|
From a Japanese Dictionary:
#
> <
means the time when the sun sets. But, is not used in modern Japanese. It is only seen in classical texts.
#
> <
also means sun setting time, but is used in modern Japanese.
Note that has antonym: . means sun rising time.
#
This word has many meanings:
> 1.
> 2.
> 3. <
>
1. says ` is `, but 2. says ` is night`.
And so, (3. means is dinner) is used to express a wider span of time.
#
> 1.
> 2.
> 3. <
>
1. says ` is `. 2. says `A night with some event`. 3. says `Last night`.
I think 2. is the most common usage and 3. is not used very often because the other word ``'s pronunciation is the same. However, because also means , is preferred.
Note that has two ways of reading it: `yube` (same as ) and `sakuban`.
# Conclusion
and are almost the same, but is used only in a literary style. means a later time.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "word choice, word usage"
}
|
How do I translate this one?
I am currently working on a certain game's translation. The dialogue goes like this:
> Sōsuke:
> Riho:
> Sōsuke:
> Riho: ……
> Sōsuke: ……
> Riho: ……
Which I then translated as:
> Sōsuke: Then, let's call each other by pet names!
> Riho: Pet names? That's wonderful. Well then, what should I call you?
> Sōsuke: Uh...call me 'Darling'.
> Riho: ....Isn't that too shameful?
> Sōsuke: P-Please...? I'd really like Riho to call me that...no,
> Riho: Is that my pet name? Well then...darling.
I left the word to be translated as is. Should it be translated as "Rihoni"? Is that how nicknames work? Please feel free to correct my translation attempt. Thanks in advance.
|
No, should be translated has Riho. Since Sousuke is repeating himself, replacing her proper name by her pet name, and her name being inflected, in would be the particle. The change in orthography indicate a change in meaning.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, translation, words, particle に"
}
|
'いつ空いていますか' vs 'いつ空きますか'
What's the difference between the two?
According to some machine translation, it is:
When are you free
When will you be free
Is that as accurate?
|
> Is that as accurate?
It actually is, roughly speaking.
Here is the real difference in meaning and usage.
>
asks about when (what days of the week, what time, etc.) the other person tends to be (relatively) free. Thus, this question would generally be replied to with:
, etc.
>
is quite different in that it can be asked **only when the other person is occupied** and you want to find out about around what time the other person will have some free time for you. Therefore, this question would often be replied to with:
, etc.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "て form"
}
|
また usage in a dictionary
When I look up the Japanese definition (at dictionary.goo.ne.jp) of the word , this is the definition that gets shown:
I can't figure out if is a separate definition than or if they make up the definition together?
I see the usage of like this in a lot of Japanese definitions and I suspect that it makes up the definition with the sentence that came before it. However I can't figure out what would mean in that case.
Thus my questions are:
Are those two sentences two seperate definitions or are they one definition?
And what does mean if it is used in this way?
|
It means or/also. It's commonly seen in Japanese dictionaries in the form of when talking about suru-verbs (among other things) to describe both the action (verb) and the state (noun).
You see similar things in English dictionaries too. The following definition for evil is an example.
> the condition of being immoral, cruel, or bad, **or** an act of this type
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "words, dictionary"
}
|
What does できなさすぎる mean?
So I know that **** means too much, like **** , etc.
but when it comes to something like:
> ****
Does it mean:
1 - I can't do "this" at all.
or
2 - I can't do "this" too much.
So if I say:
> **/**
Do I mean I can't eat natto at all, or do I mean I can eat it just a little, but can't eat it too much?
And if "1" is the right answer, how different is it from things like **/?**
|
/ means "I can't eat natto at all" or "I am so terribly bad at natto", but it's a humorous slangy expression rather than a standard sentence. It's fine as the catchy title of a blog post or a light novel, but we should be using / most of the time.
In general, is occasionally used as a humorous intensifier these days. It can be _positive_.
> *
> * 10
> * Amazon
> * (Kanna Hashimoto's catchphrase; maybe this is the cause of the recent popularity of ?)
>
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "grammar, slang, internet slang"
}
|
What's the difference among 夜中, 真夜中 and 夜?
I've found 3 words with the definition of the night/midnight.
But some difficulties appeared. This is the answer have found:
, what's the difference between and then?
|
Broadly speaking:
* = "evening (generally after dark), night"
* = "nighttime"
* = "middle of the night"
If you want to be super specific about "midnight" as in "12:00 AM", you may well say 12.
For good measure, there are also these terms related to "night":
* = "late at night"
* = "late at night"
* = "late at night" (less commonly used)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "word choice, word usage"
}
|
Importance of からだ in this sentence
I found this sentence in _Nihongo Sō-Matome_ :
> A:
> B:
Based on my understanding:
> A: (you're) fat again...
> B: I only eat nothing but sweets.
I do not know why is there.
Should the translation be: _body eats nothing but sweets_? Is it ok to remove ?
|
First off, I think you got the actors the wrong way round.
> A
> **I** ended up getting fat again.
> B
> **That's because you** eat nothing but sweets.
Can you remove ? Grammatically you can, but it wouldn't sound natural in the same way that this English exchange would sound slightly awkward:
> A) I ended up getting fat again.
> B) You eat nothing but sweets.
B's reply doesn't feel like part of the conversation does it? It just sounds like a random statement of fact.
Edit: I've just realised your problem. You thought was meaning body. But it isn't. It is meaning 'because' plus the copula .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "syntax, nouns"
}
|
Sentence order: Where to put もう
This is the sentential question I found in Sou Matome :
>
>
> _ _ * _
>
> A. B. C. D.
I answered:
> ****
but the answer is :
> ****
Why is placed before and not ? I thought since is an adverb then the safest place is before a verb? Is there a rule where should be placed?
|
First the typo: **** -> **** .
Next you should really consider the meaning of the sentence you are trying to construct as well as the grammar. What do you think would mean if the sentence was ...? Until the game finishes more?/now?/soon?/already? None of these make much sense to me.
There is another verb in the sentence, and there is another adverb, and it's important to remember that adverbs can modify other adverbs as well as nouns. We have meaning 'wait'. This is modified by the adverb to give "Wait a bit". We can then modify all of this with the adverb to give "wait a bit more/longer".
Altogether we have:
>
> Wait a bit longer until this game finishes.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "syntax, word usage, jlpt"
}
|
Different ways of saying "single"?
I am trying to translate basic combat to Japanese, but find myself struggling as to which form of "x of this" to use. I am currently trying to figure out how to say "single," as in "single punch," with the following ones:
> (-OR- (-OR- (
What is the rule of choosing between the (kunyomi number) + and other forms?
|
Well, if you specifically mean a single punch you can say 1 or 1 or alternatively . There's a manga series called , which plays on this idea to have a one punch KO. If you want to talk about say 2 punches you could say 2 or 2.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "nuances, numbers"
}
|
What does って at the start of a sentence mean?
…
From <
The site says it means (is what Kimura from the class 3 [said]!!)
I feel it's not really correct in this case, but I want to confirm first.
Is it actually something more like in this case?
Does it translate to something like, So that means kimura from 3rd class is...!! (flat chested or something)
I tried finding info in various j-j dictionaries, but I failed to find any concrete examples of being used like this.
Thank you!
|
Judging from the picture (he is recalling something), I think the description in the linked article is correct. This (at the beginning of the second sentence) is a quotative particle, and it's referring to what was said in the previous balloon.
> …
> ...which is what Kimura in the class 3 said!
> ...that's what I heard from Kimura!
FYI, Kimura is a male student :D
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "particle って"
}
|
Ore hitori de wa kesshite miru koto no deki nai keshiki; It's a view I could never see on my own
I do not understand the meaning of de wa, I thought it meant something like at the / in the (location) - But in this sentence, I don't know. hmmm
|
> ****
In addition to marking the place where an action happens, (de) has another meaning. It marks the means by which something is done e.g. = (go) **by** bus, = (eat) **with/by means of** chop sticks.
In this case it is marking how the _seeing_ is done. (hitori de) = by means of one person, i.e. by oneself.
The (wa) is separate from . This is the usual topic marking particle. In this case it is acting in its contrastive role. The contrast here is that by himself he could never see the view, but with the implication that he could see the view with the help of others.
By the way this is not a full sentence. It does not say " **It is** a view that ...". It is simply "A view that ...".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
What is the role of と after a noun when it doesn't appear to count or list anything?
The sentence I'm trying to understand is this one:
> ****
I don't understand the meaning of the second (in bold).
To me all the sentence is like
> Issunboushi invited grandpa and grandma **and by** marrying the princess (they) lived happy
So, there is one pre-masu form with (as time sequence) and -link form with (as mean).
If this is right, I don't understand what the second is doing. would be "and" and the -linkage will be "by" in bold in my sentence above?
Thanks.
|
This means "with".
In the case of the verb it is used to mark the person you are marrying.
X = "I will marry **with** X" = "I will marry X.
You'll see meaning "with" in quite a few places. Some other examples would be:
X = meet with X.
AB = compare B with A.
Your understanding of the rest of the sentence looks good.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "particle と"
}
|
Is "ゲーム中に使用する" a descriptor in "ゲーム中に使用する最大HPを書き写す"?
Full text is:
HPMP
I can't figure out if this is saying to copy everything during the game, or if "" is describing everything that needs copying?
|
Unless the context clearly says otherwise, modifies , not . That is, happens before the game. I'm saying this simply because an adverbial phrase usually modifies the closest verb.
> HPMP
> In addition, copy "max HP", "max MP" and "blessing" you use during the game.
(But what's the context? A game master's guide of a tabletop RPG?)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, particle に"
}
|
Meaning of ですかね in a response
I feel like this is a basic question, one whose meaning I don't think I fully understand. I'm watching a on YouTube where is asked
"How many women have you been out with before?"
To which he pauses to think for a few seconds before replying with
> 3
My question is what is the nuance of over here? Am I right to take it that by using , there is just a touch of uncertainty in his response? I.e he isn't 100% that it was just 3 people?
The original conversation:
> :
>
> :
>
> :
>
> : 3
YouTube video for reference:
|
You have pretty much answered your own question here.
is a half-declarative and half-interrogative expression for making a statement that the speaker does not feel would need to be clear-cut.
It actually is used to mean what its components would literally suggest -- the interrogative and the casual declarative .
> "Uh.. About three, I guess?"
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "word choice, nuances"
}
|
Meaning of 境 in その日を境に
Why does this mean 'On that day', does mean something other then 'boundary'/'area' in this sentence?
|
> {}
in this phrase means a " **turning point** " where something changed.
What it is that changed must be explained (or at least implied) in the context before this phrase appears.
> "Ever since that day..."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
Is honorific speech ever used in the first person?
I'm just starting out learning Japanese, and I've read that when using honorific and humble forms and conjugations, you use humble forms to refer to yourself, and honorific forms to refer to others, such as the person you're talking to.
Is there any context in which a person might refer to themselves using honorific speech? A CEO, the Queen of England or Emperor Akihito, some fictional villain who thinks they're a God, someone trying to be insulting?
|
In ancient Japanese, honorific verbs was used by very noble people to refer to their own actions (, "self-honorifics"). But you won't see this unless you learn archaic Japanese seriously. In modern Japanese, even Prime Minister and Emperor use humble verbs properly to refer to their own actions.
You may see a high person use humble verbs to refer to someone else's actions. A typical example is ("Come!") said by a governor in historical samurai dramas. Beginners can forget this for now, but this is something an advanced learner may encounter. See: Humble language for other people as an insult
In addition, you may see someone use honorific name suffix to refer to themselves. is a typical "arrogant" first-person pronoun. In fiction, you may even see a stereotyped arrogant girl called call herself ("Miss Erika"), for example. This is a stereotyped arrogant speech, and real noble people never speak like this.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "politeness, honorifics, formality"
}
|
などの followed by a Noun
Question about this sentence :
> t ****
Why do we need ? What is its use in the sentence given? Isn't a particle so it is ok to be followed by a noun?
I checked the Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar for and I still do not understand the use in this sentence. Pleasw help. Thank you.
|
In this sentence, " _no_ " is used to be more specific as to what kind of "thing" is being said.
For instance, if we were to remove , the sentence would be
> **t**
>
> Please do not enter the pool with **things like T-shirts, etc.**
To avoid ambiguity, " _no fuku_ " is added to specifically say that only clothing is not allowed, and "t _t shatsu nado_ " is added to give the reader an idea about the kind of clothing that is not allowed, hence
> **t**
>
> Please do not enter the pool with **clothing such as T-shirts, etc.**
You can find a similar sentence here.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation, particle の, nominalization, particle など"
}
|
Meaning of ちゃっかり in ちゃっかり口には入れてた
I found a definition for : however I'm still not quite sure of the nuance of this word example below.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> …………
>
> ……
>
> ……
>
> ……………………
>
> **** ……
|
Try looking at more than one dictionary.
For instance, the entry here lists the following definition, which seems to fit your context better:
>
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning, adverbs"
}
|
What is the difference between 閉める (shimeru) and くれる (kureru)?
What is the difference between (shimeru) and (kureru)? Both mean close, but when would you use one over the other.
Please explain making reference to these examples:
Example 1:
()
(watashi ga) samui no de, mado o shimete kudasai
Please close the window because I am cold
Example 2:
mō sukoshi mado o shimete kuremasen ka
Please close the window more
Why does one use (shimeru) and the other uses (kureru)?
|
In **both** your examples the verb to close is .
The you are seeing in example 2 has nothing to do with closing. literally means "won't you give me (the favour of) closing the window". means "to give" and it is one of the famous giving and receiving verbs that are explained in many books and online tutorials.
apparently does have a meaning of "to close" as in to come to an end, but I'm not familiar with its usage, and it is certainly not the meaning in your example.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": -1,
"tags": "words"
}
|
What does のかもな mean at the end of a sentence?
I played a game (visual novel for PS2) in Japanese. And I came across this sentence:
>
And I was wondering what the part after (means. I guess, that may change it into a noun, but I am not sure at all.
|
Would you understand what meant? This is a shortened version of the same thing, the here being part of the construction.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, particles"
}
|
How to break 信じようとしていただけかも知れない into separate parts?
I tried, but I came up with either:
1. (~(vol.)) + (~(prog. past)) + +
2. + + (stem) +
I highly doubt that second one is true, because "takes" dictionary or past forms, but I am nit sure what would mean in this sentence.
|
>
### Pulling it apart
Let's break this down.
>
In turn, this phrase is:
*
The volitional of .
*
The particle.
*
in the conjunctive form.
*
in the past tense / completed aspect.
The main meaning here is "had been trying to believe". The construction `[VERB: volitional]` parses out to "try to `[VERB]`".
>
"Only" or "just".
>
In turn, this is:
*
Question particle, also used in certain kinds of coordinating clauses.
*
Inclusive particle: "even, also"
*
in the potential negative form.
The main meaning of the construction is "I can't know [for sure] if ", used idiomatically to mean "it might be ".
### Putting it back together
Literally then, we have:
>
> believe `[VOL]` was doing only might be
> → was trying to believe only might be
Putting that into sensible English:
> It might only be that [someone] was trying to believe
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "meaning, words, parsing"
}
|
Meaning of this sentence, confused by まで
So, Google translate shows this as meaning After 7pm on the day... But doesn't mean "until" so why would it be after 7.. And not up until 7?
819:00
|
The only thing the sentence:
> {}8{}{}19:00{}
can mean is:
" **We (take your order) until 19:00 on the (same) day at the front desk (Dial #8)**."
Note that I used "take your order" as we have no idea what kind of service this is talking about.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
Are these furigana wrong?
_
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "furigana, creative furigana"
}
|
Till what age can an infant be called akachan
Till what age can an infant be called akachan. When can we use musuko-chan till any particular age or till he is able to walk. Please clarify
|
”Akachan” is ”baby.” The meaning of it has not far from born and depending mother. If he walk stable or talk, or you talk with one who thinks he is not a baby, you cannot use it.
On the other hand, you can use ”musuko” even if he is a baby. But, ”-chan” is not suited. If you talk about other’s son or daughter, you can use ”musuko-san” or ”musume-san, ” or simply ”oko-san.”
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning, word choice, nouns"
}
|
What ならねー means?
I am playing a game. I sit in an empty train and character says:
>
I don't know what naranēyona should mean.
I am just speculating, that it might mean "Really, It can be abandoned that's okay".
Google translate says it is: "Really, It is often abolished line" Which checks out with what I was thinking, but still don't know, what means.
!Imgur
|
is a very informal, kind of slang-y shift in pronunciation of .
You'll often see diphthong (two-vowel) portions of words flattened into monophthong (single-vowel) variants in informal speech. Additional examples you might encounter:
* →
* →
* → →
The ending seems to be the most common spelling, but depending on the writer, you might also see (in rough order of frequency) , , or .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning, words"
}
|
What does こした mean?
In the sentence:
> () ****
What does mean? Is this or or something other?
And does mean "well" or "whatever"?
|
For the first part, is the past tense / completed aspect of the verb . In your sample text, this is part of a set construction: [].
Some dictionary entries:
* Weblio monolingual Japanese
* Weblio E↔J
* Eijiro
For the second part, yes, basically means "well,..." and parses out as basically "I guess it's good". As a whole, "well, yeah, okay then..."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "meaning, words, verbs"
}
|
Sentence ending at に what means?
In the sentence
> ****
Why is the at the end? What can it mean?
|
It is ~ construction. Learn about it here
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning, particle に"
}
|
What does むわりと mean?
I was reading something and saw the following:
> ****
I can't find or in any dictionaries. I'm guessing might be and maybe it means undiluted, but how would that apply to steam/humidity?
|
When you encounter a word that is written in kana and is in the form of , the chances are that it is an onomatopoeia or a variant of one.
is an example of that. The more common forms are and , both of which should be found in any monolingual dictionary as they are both used quite often.
Weblio defines as:
> "thick with smokemoisture or odor; hard to breathe (air)"
means the same.
Finally, the variant, of course, means the same and therefore, it should fit the context.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "meaning, words, adverbs, onomatopoeia"
}
|
How to say "the day after the day after tomorrow"
In my language you can just keep adding a particle before "the day after tomorrow" and with every particle it becomes the day after that. I was just wondering whether there is a way to say this in Japanese.
I can think of something like but is there some suffix or prefix you can add to something as many times as you need it?
Also, is there a way to say "the day before the day before yesterday" in a similar way?
|
We say (in my region, at least)...
> () -- the day after tomorrow (can also be read )
> **** () -- two days after tomorrow (can also be read )
> **** () -- three days after tomorrow (can also be read )
>
> / () -- the day before yesterday (can also be read )
> **** / **** () -- two days before yesterday (can also be read )
> (but not **** / **** ...)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
Conveying total time spent over years
I'm trying to say "I played a game for a TOTAL of 1880 hours or 78 days, over a 5 year period."
I'm a 102 student and we aren't even through the first Genki book yet so this is very hard for me to express with my current knowledge.
I found this and i think i can adapt it to work for me. When is it appropriate to choose or in regard to time?
>
>
> 'I studied throughout the year without taking a holiday break (possibly for a few years) for the exam.'
Is this translation/adaption correct?
>
>
> 'Over a 5 year period, I played a game for a TOTAL of around 1880 hours or 78 days.'
|
There is a word that native speakers frequently use but Japanese-learners rarely, if ever, do to express the idea of " **cumulative total** " without using a big Sino-loanword. That word is **{}** .
You can say:
{} **** 1,880{}78{} ,
**** 1,880{}78, etc.
If you want to sound a little more formal or technical by using a Sino-loanword, you can replace the part by {}.
Note I did not use because it is not too natural-sounding.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
What does ゆーか mean?
> ****
What does mean? I searched on Jisho, Weblio and Googled it, but found nothing. What does it mean? Is this some kind of abbreviation, or onomatopoeia?
|
is a colloquial way of writing . It is mentioned as a colloquial form in the entry for in Weblio:
>
As well as in the EN-JP version of Weblio and in Jisho.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
Meaning of XほどYほどでもない
Sentence taken from this question:
>
I'm failing miserably to understand this sentence. Writing it less colloquially we presumably get:
>
I understand to mean "to the extent that/of" e.g. = "to the extent of yesterday, it's not hot" = "It's not as hot as yesterday".
My guess at a translation would be roughly:
> "I'm so meddlesome that I save strange children, or rather, I don't do it out of kindness".
but I feel that would be two separate sentences: " i.e. = "To the extent that I save strange children, I am meddlesome", and "" = "Or rather, to the extent that it is kindness, it is not".
Something tells me I'm barking up the wrong tree.
|
> **** {}{} ****
Conclusion first. The only reason that is used twice is that this sentence is fairly informal/colloquial. In more formal speech, it would rarely be used twice in such a short sentence. The second is the one that would be dropped in more formal speech.
So, how does one know it is informal/colloquial? One knows by the use of and as you yourself seem to have noticed. is indeed _very_ informal.
The last half of the sentence could have been formed instead as:
--- **** or
--- ****
> "I am not so meddlesome or rather "kind" as to go out of my way to help children I do not (even) know."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "grammar, particle ほど"
}
|
Question about かな and だろう
Among these phrases which is the correct one?
>
or
>
|
Both are grammatically correct. They can mean...
>
> "I wonder if it will rain today." / "Will it rain today?"
>
>
> "It will (probably) rain today." / "I think it will (probably) rain today." / "It will rain today, won't it?"
... depending on intonation and context.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "particles"
}
|
Why are some names pronounced differently from their on-yomi and kun-yomi?
I'm learning how Japanese names work for a story I'm writing and creating names is one of the most fun things I've done in some time. However, it comes with a share of frustrations. One for me is that I don't understand why some kanji are pronounced in a way that is different from both kun-yomi and on-yomi readings.
For example, let's take the name ( _Kazuma_ ). I can't seem to find any kanji dictionary (with English definitions) that state that the character can be pronounced as _ka._ Most times I've seen the character, it's been romanized as _ichi_ and I don't understand where _ka_ comes from.
Another example is the birth name of kabuki actor Ichikawa Raizo VIII, ( _Kamezaki Akio_ ). Neither nor seem to form the pronunciation _Akio,_ yet that is how the name is read and spoken. Why is this?
Thank you in advance for answering my question! Have a nice day!
|
There is a third type of reading for Kanji called _nanori_ as was pointed out in a comment on your answer dictionaries frequently have many of these special readings though not necessarily all of them.
Here is a resource on nanori and Japanese naming that may help: < as well as some more examples on how complex it can be <
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "kanji, pronunciation, names, onyomi"
}
|
A word to express a feeling of sudden release from intense pressure that had been building up over time
I'm failing to express an emotion in Japanese that one feels after something emotionally unnerving that had been intensifying was then suddenly released, primarily due to being resolved by the subject. I was thinking of but it feels like a direct translation from English and might not be understood by native speakers. Is there a better word or expression for that?
I also found a question about that might be one showing the right expression but I'm not sure.
|
To me, who is a Japanese-speaker, {} is **not** a word describing a human emotion. It is only a technical term meaning "pressure release". I would not use it myself, but you are not me.
Here are some phrases that could be used naturally with Japanese-speakers.
**_Nouns & Noun Phrases:_**
{}
{}{}{}
/[]{}{}
**_Verbs & Verb Phrases:_**
{}
{}
{}{}
{}{}
{}
There should be more, but I should not be working too hard during the Golden Week.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation, expressions"
}
|
Question about how to read 如何
Taking this sentence as an example:
> /
I always have a hard time knowing how to read ; , , even or sometimes..
I've checked if the question was answered previously, I hope I didn't missed it!
|
In the sentence you gave it is functioning as a noun, so its reading is []{}.
> ――
Source:
Recognizing from context the part of speech is functioning as (noun, adverb, adjectival verb) is helpful as a first step. Also, recognizing if it is part of a set phrase e.g. []{}, []{}, []{}, []{}, []{} should get you there in most cases.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "readings"
}
|
What is the difference between 「結局【けっきょく】」and 「とうとう」?
According to the dictionary I use to study, both are adverbs and their definitions are so similar that I can't tell the difference:
> : after all; in the end; ultimately; eventually
>
> : finally; at last; ultimately; in the end
What is the difference between both words (e.g. meaning, nuance, level of formality, style of speech, _none at all_ …) ?
|
implies a continual process that led to the outcome, whereas doesn't.
For example, one can say but notbecause is not a state achieved via a continuous process. On the other hand, one can both sayandwhich has roughly the same meaning, but the former draws a lot more attention to the continued struggle that led to the outcome.
Other examples:
> Natural:
> Unnatural:
> 1st:
> 2nd:
Both have very similar meanings, but the 1st describes how the gradual process eventually led to the outcome. The 2nd describes what the ultimate outcome was.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "words, adverbs, synonyms"
}
|
How is 今一度 a noun in Japanese/English?
I came across the bolded segment in the following sentence and translated it as "once more".
> ****
Both Jishio.org, and tanoshiijapanese.com say that is a noun, while I think that the phrase "once more" is not a noun in English.
How is a noun in Japanese? Is the English translation also a noun, according to the dictionaries cited above?
|
According to the entry for in the Japanese dictionary Weblio:
>
>
> . . A phrase that can be used specially when emphasising or expressing in a more formal way.
it is a synonym of and , which are both listed as "Expression" rather than "Noun" at jisho.org. Therefore, I think that the Noun tag for is plain wrong there.
IMHO, the three expressions can be considered adverbs or adverbial phrases.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation, english to japanese, nouns, japanese to english"
}
|
In terms of comma placement, does the following rough translation match the Japanese?
In terms of comma placement, does the following rough English translation match the Japanese?
>
>
> How bothersome, that country's mass media.
I know that in terms of proper English, a better translation would be:
> The mass media of that country is certain to be a bother.
However I want to know if there is another way to translate the Japanese so that the comma is also used in the English translation.
|
> However I want to know if there is another way to translate the Japanese so that the comma is also used in the English translation.
Sure, if you don't mind an unnatural English, you could translate it literally. However I really don't see the point, English and Japanese are very different languages in which the ways you start, structure, and end a sentence are different. The way those languages are constructed is different, and so on.
You can't just apply the same punctuation rules from one language onto another without taking the linguistic differences into account.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, translation, punctuation"
}
|
An uncommon variant of 写
I ran into the sentence below. The meaning is clear and when copying and pasting the _kanji_ I get: . I wonder how common such a form of the _kanji_ is. Is it just a different font?
![enter image description here](
|
You're seeing a Mainland Chinese font.
![enter image description here](
The Mainland Chinese shape is out of place with the others, and was influenced by the common shape of, for which the Japanese shape is out of place with the others.
![enter image description here](
> is different too.
>
> ![enter image description here](
Note,andare completely unrelated characters.
* * *
_Source: zdic_
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "kanji"
}
|
How to say "In the morning/afternoon/evening"?
I am wondering what the various ways of saying in the morning/afternoon/evening are... I would expect to be able to say // ... but in the course I'm doing I never see this, they "ni" is usually omitted, or change for a "ha".
|
In general, is attached to temporal markers that do have a numeric value, whereas it is not attached to those temporal markers that do not have a number. The exception are the weekdays, for which both options are acceptable.
**With **
> 1032005…
**Without **
> and many, many more…
**Either with or without **
> … …
* * *
Source: ⅠLesson 4, Grammar Explanation
!enter image description here
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Why is 燃える + ゴミ = burnable? But the verb is not in ta-form
I saw this in the book. ![enter image description here](
> {}: {} {}{}{} {} {}
I remember that If we want to use a verb as an adjective, we need to change a verb into the Ta-form, but this one is the verb in a dictionary form. Why is that?
|
I think you shouldn't think about the past tense of the verb here, because it has a completely different meaning.
>
Literally means "garbage that burned" (= burned garbage). So it cannot be used as a potential form to mean "burnable".
>
Is the correct form to use. It literally means "garbage that burns" so it could be translated by "burnable".
Also, you should forget the idea that a past-tense verb is an adjective, its translation might look like it's an adjective, but it's still a verb and it should be seen as such, even though we translate it by an adjective to make the translation sound more natural.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "verbs, て form, tense"
}
|
Is a sentence ending with "か……。" a question or a questionative statement?
I came across the following line inside a Japanese book I'm reading.
> ……
My understanding of the line is different depending on whether it would be a question (because of the ),.
> For example, "However, why Ein and Zwei...?"
Or would it be a ellipsis statement, (idk what the proper terminology is for this kind of statement) where the question is implied through the contemplative format of the sentence, but not stated outright:
> Example: "However, Ein and Zwei..."
TDLR: is a sentence ending with "……" a question or a questionative statement?
|
The correct term is rhetorical question, and yes, in this case it is a rhetorical question. Also there is no "why" in the Japanese sentence.
Japanese people often use like that, especially to confirm what has already been said, for example:
> A: = It's me!
>
> B: ... = So it's you (huh)...
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, usage, punctuation, ellipsis"
}
|
Where does っぱい derive from?
As it says in the title, I'm hoping to find out where the adjective ending - comes from (like in 'sour'). Is it related to - (X-like, X-ish) at all? I can't seem to find an etymology for it if there is one known, but I really only have access to free resources like wiktionary and anything I can find on a google search and isn't behind a paywall, and that hasn't brought up anything.
|
From what I can find, the ending is peculiar to two words: and .
Shogakukan's and Daijirin both suggest that the ending for is a shift from ("blindingly bright"; as an auxiliary element, "to appear XX; to be conspicuously XX"). Digging around, I also found Shogakukan, Daijirin, and Daijisen entries for , which appear to corroborate this derivation.
Separately, I suspect that the more-common suffix may also derive from this same , although I cannot currently find any Japanese source that says anything more than simply that is from , and that is a suffix essentially meaning _-ish_ , _-like_.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "etymology, adjectives, i adjectives"
}
|
Asahi Dry Black beer can
What does on Asahi Dry Black means? Specifically (sewing?) and (via hole?). I tried searching it on japanese web, but it's kinda assumed as common knowledge and never mentioned besides sites about beers.
![hi ](
|
> [Noun] + {}
means:
> "made in the [Noun] style"
is an establishment where people gather for the main purpose of drinking draft beer in huge beer mugs.
When I first saw your question, I was going to say that was a {} (= "an English word created by the Japanese"), but I have found this place in the U.S., so I am not so sure:
<
In any case, comes from "hall" and certainly not "hole". Another word you will eventually need to know is .
> {}
in this context, means:
> "dark beer"
So, the whole phrase means:
> "Dark Beer Brewed in the Beer Hall Style"
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 19,
"question_score": 16,
"tags": "translation, meaning, expressions"
}
|
Is the following のが a nominalizing のが?
I have the following Japanese sentence:
> ****
and I was wondering if the bolded nominalizes the before it, as Darius says that
> "...Basically, all the does is make a verb act like a noun, and then syntactically-speaking, that noun-like thing can fit into any spot a noun would normally go, and that spot will already be marked with , , or some other case particle" (Darius).
But I'm unable to wrap my head around what the nominalization of is, which in turn makes me doubt the 's ability to nominalize in the above sentence.
![page 17 of book that contains above sentence, added for providing additional context](
|
In this case, you can forget nominalization. One way to interpret this sentence is to think of this as a vague noun meaning "thing" or "one". Then on its own can mean "the thing which I'm wearing" rather than "(the act of) wearing".
>
> What I'm wearing is a hospital gown.
But this construction has a broader use and has a specific name called cleft sentence.
>
> I'm wearing a hospital gown.
>
>
> It's a hospital gown that I'm wearing.
Technically speaking, this is still a kind of noun and is a kind of relative clause. Note that can be used instead of since it's in a subordinate clause ().
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "syntax, particle の, particle が, nominalization"
}
|
What does 「再々起」mean?
> ****
Source: < (last line of first paragraph)
I think it means most frequently sung songs but I am not sure. I understand as 'often' and as 'occur/beginning' but I am confused about what the combination means.
|
You are reading way too much into it.
{} means "a return to popularity" and
{} means "a **second** return to popularity". In other words, it means "a re-comeback".
The popularity of , the singer who was once very successful in Japan, declined greatly for the "problems" in her personal life. When she returned to her home country of South Korea, however, she became quite popular again there, which was her . Now, she is aiming for her back in Japan by giving a concert this coming June.
The reason that the word is quoted in the article would be that it is not a word usually found in dictionaries.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning, words"
}
|
Saying 'In my opinion, the internet has more good points than bad points'. [Comparative]
To say 'In my opinion, the internet has more good points than bad points', would the following phrase be correct;
Would this phrase be correct? Or would it make more sense to omit from the phrase. Or is the phrase entirely incorrect?
Thank you.
|
>
This sentence, while it would be understood by at least half of all native speakers, is not grammatical. Here is why.
can only be correctly used when making a comparison between "good things" and "even better things". That is vs. . That, however, is not what you want to talk about this time. You want your sentence to make a comparison between the number of "good things" and that of "bad things".
Thus, the phrase you would like to use is:
> by using , which means "to exist in larger numbers".
The whole sentence should look like:
> ****
To make it a little more natural, you can say:
> {} by using .
Finally, to avoid sounding immature for using words like and , you can say:
> {}{}
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "particles, syntax, comparative constructions"
}
|
〜ている + そうだ（様態） =?
How do you add meaning "looks like" to the form? ?
E.g. + = ?
|
For {} ("conjecture"), the correct forms are:
{}{} **** "Looks like everyone has come."
{}{} **** "Looks like they/we have all the ingredients ready."
No before . "It looks interesting."
For {} ("hearsay"), the correct forms are:
**** "They say/I hear that everyone has come."
**** "They say/I hear that all the ingredients are ready."
**** Needs . "They say/I hear that it is interesting."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, usage, て form"
}
|
How to combine 受身, 使役, 可能, etc?
I'm a bit confused how different forms should be combined together.
Take (without tense, without ) for example, correct me if I'm wrong,
(I) beat him up =
(I am) beaten up by him =
(I can) beat him up =
(I) make him beat (someone) up =
Then if I try to mix them up, these are what I'm really unclear about:
(I can/may) be beaten up by him =
(I) don't allow him to beat (someone) up = (?)
(I) want him to be beaten up (by someone) = ?? ? sounds a bit weird to me?
|
I would say...
(I can/may) be beaten up by him → / []{} /
(I) don't allow him to beat (someone) up → ()
(I) want him to be beaten up (by someone) → ()
(or _lit._ I want someone to beat him up)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Ambiguity of Xのようだ
Consider:
>
Without additional context can this statement mean both:
1. He looks like a student. i.e. he has the stereotypical appearance of a student; he's wearing glasses, has a studious look, and appears not to have washed for a week. It could be that I know he is **not** a student. I'm just saying that he looks like one.
2. He seems to be a student. i.e. judging by the evidence I believe that he is in fact a student. He doesn't necessarily have the appearance of a student, but the evidence points to him being one.
Can we rule out either of these possibilities grammatically, or is it purely down to context?
|
It purely depends on the context.
could mean "it appears like...", "it looks like...", "it seems like...", or even "it sounds like...".
But nobody uses without any context, so you usually know what the things that make "it" seem like XX are.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
I need some assistance with understanding これといった in the following sentence
> ****
This article says that means the following.
> "Since is always used in conjunction with a negative expression containing , the basic idea of a phrase/sentence containing would automatically be something like "there is nothing one could point one's finger and say 'This is it!'
But in my sentence I can't find the , other than , which is the continuative form of . Because its in the continuative form, I doubt that it counts as the required to make the above explanation for applicable to my sentence.
And because there is no negative verb, as far as I can tell at least, I can't use the definition I found here on Jisho.org.
|
Your interpretation of is wrong. , even in the or any other form, is still , so it is perfectly acceptable to use it with . Also the acts as an emphasizer here.
> __ **** = I checked if my limbs will move **without** _any special_ problem by standing up.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, translation, conjugations"
}
|
Difficulty understanding the sentence: 私たちは生命の危険を失うおそれがあった。
>
>
These two sentences are translated the same way over various databases.
I can properly understand the first sentence as: "We were in danger of losing our lives".
But I don't understand how the sentence below can be translated with the same meaning. I can't see the correlation between "danger of life"(?) and "fear of losing"(?)
|
First of all, the second sentence doesn't look quite right:
> = We risked to lose the danger of our lives.
I feel like you tried to put two sentences in one:
>
>
>
Also, the way you translate a sentence is not necessarily the way you should understand the said sentence. To fully understand them, you should translate them literally by breaking them down into pieces, in this case, you should understand them as below
> = As for us, there was a danger of losing (our) lives.
>
> = As for us, there was a fear of losing (our) lives.
The difference is clear when you look at the Japanese, even though the meanings are pretty close, but you shouldn't rely on the translations to understand something.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, translation, meaning"
}
|
What implication does 臨まれた mean in this context?
> ****
Source: <
I understand this as, on the same day, there's going to be an announcement of abdication and some other ceremony and
I do not understand the part between . What does it mean ?
|
> I understand this as, on the same day, there's going to be an announcement of abdication and some other ceremony and
I'm not sure whether you're parsing the sentence correctly...
is a relative clause that modifies .
**** here is the honorific form of . ( is the honorific auxiliary/.)
> []{}[]{}
In the morning of the 30th, at in , the Imperial Palace, where the imperial ancestor is enshrined, the Emperor attended , where he announced the (holding?) of in the afternoon of the same day.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "meaning, words"
}
|
Is my translation of "こちらから訊くより先に、低く呟くような声が返ってきた" correct?
While working on a translation for the following Japanese sentence, my brain inexplicably spits out a translation without giving me a reason for each translated segment.
>
When I reflected on my/its reasoning, it gives me the following as its reasons for translating to produce the English sentence below.
> (My brain's reasoning after the fact): 'the Japanese comma and the English comma are mostly the same in terms of placement. This word goes here, here, that one over there, here, and...'
>
>
>
> Translation:
>
> From me asking her directly, she brings down her voice back to a similar mummer.
Question is, is my brain's random, possibly correct translation accurate, given the context of the 1st person POV character talking to a girl with the following dialogue?
> POV: ……
>
> Girl: []
>
>
|
* means "before" in this context. See: What is the difference between and when expressing order of events?
* is an intransitive verb, whose subject is .
* modifies (i.e., "a low and murmur-like voice"). This refers to what she said, "". You should review the basic grammar of ...
>
> Before I asked (her name), a low murmur returned (from her).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation, meaning"
}
|
Is the following Japanese sentence negative or positive in English?
Context: Character A has just told the character who is the narrator that he has the talent to be an assassin. Being a normal person, and thus taken off guard, the narrator responds with the following:
> …… **** ……
From what I can tell, the narrator says something along the lines of:
> "Haha……, it’s nearly impossible for me to understand _the thing you’re not saying that I have_. In the first place, on what basis do you say that……"
I **think** that the italicized part of the English sentence corresponds to the bold bit in the Japanese which emphasizes the narrator's disbelief, but I'm unsure if my understanding of the Japanese is correct in terms of the sentence being an emphasized negative sentence, a double negative, or a positive created from two negatives.
What is the correct way of understanding the above Japanese sentence, given the context?
|
* (or , , etc) is an _extremely_ common set phrase meaning "nonsensical", "puzzling", "garbled", etc. or as a whole means "gibberish", "rubbish", etc. ( is another way of writing in novels and such.)
* is "(please) don't say ". I believe you know `te-form + ` is a way of making a request. Naturally, is a negative version of it.
* is the object of . has been omitted because this is informal speech.
Therefore, the translation of is very simple: "Don't talk nonsense."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation, meaning, usage, word order, emphasis"
}
|
Congratulating someone on the new Era/Emperor
As Japan moves into the Reiwa () era, I was wondering if any traditional greetings exist to congratulate someone on the new Era, Emperor or Year of the Japanese calendar?
|
No, there's no such greeting. In the last 150 years or so, a new era has been associated with the previous Emperor's demise, so it's not a happy event in the first place. This time is an exception, and people may be allowed to say something including , but there is no fixed, traditional way of saying congratulations.
(Disclaimer: I'm writing this from the standpoint of an ordinary native speaker. Experts may know some rare phrase that was used long ago.)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "greetings"
}
|
Meaning of 挙げてきた in this sentence
>
The part is confusing me, I can't seem to find a definition of this word. In general struggling to translate this sentence and understanding some of the meaning.
|
is a simple transitive verb meaning "to nominate", "to mention" or "to list".
() is one of the Japanese subsidiary verbs. It adds the nuance of "over time" and/or "toward/for us" (if this survey was conducted by the author), but it may be left untranslated in this case. See: Difference between - and -
In case you've missed it, this sentence is a cleft sentence. The object of is , which was pulled out for emphasis.
>
>
> As a matter of fact, it is this communication ability, or _comyu-ryoku_ , that many companies have recently mentioned as an ability they demand of job-seeking students.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, translation, meaning"
}
|
How does work それが and ため in the context of ･･･それが熊のために騙されて･･･?
How does **** **** work here? Especially, and ? I feel like is introducing the reason of why the tail of the monkey was supposedly very long; however, I cannot really explain and I think that the meaning would not change even if not present. I think this is this definition of (goo ` ` and that it could simply be replaced by .
* * *
The full story for reference:
> “ **** ”
> \--
|
> **** ****
First, .
As you have said (or at least implied), this is **_not_** the usual "demonstrative pronoun + subject marker". in this context is used for its idiomatic meaning of " **Here's the thing.** " This usage of is reserved for the start of an explanation of a negative event or experience. We also use for this purpose.
Next, .
In this context, indicates the reason or cause of an event. means the same thing as **** , etc. This is quite different from the that means "for" as in "doing something for someone".
Hope this helps.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
Can the 歳 counter be used for architecture, furniture etc to tell its age?
While I understand that the counter is used to indicate ages of people and animals, I was wondering if it could be used to also talk about ages of inanimate things like architecture or furniture.
For example,
sentence: That castle is more than 500 years old.
According to me, it should translate to:
>
> (which is: Ano shirou wa 500-sai yori oi desu)
However, the answer I get from google translate is:
> 500
> (which is: Ano shiro wa 500-nen ijō maedesu.)
I am completely new to the Japanese language and this has completely confused me. I'd appreciate it if you could help me out please.
|
As you said, N {} is reserved for humans and other animals. For other objects, it is not used except for when one personifies them humorously (or for other literary effects).
For buildings, by far the most common phrase would be:
> {} N {}
We would normally say:
> {}{}
It is _**not**_ correct/grammatical or natural-sounding to say:
> 500
DO NOT trust Google Translate. To use N {} correctly, you need to use a real verb as in:
> **{}** 500
>
> "It was over 500 years ago when that castle was built."
Moving on to furniture..
For furniture, a very common way to indicate the age is to use:
> N {}
as in:
> , etc.
Or you could use "explanatory" phrases such as:
> {},
>
> , etc.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 19,
"question_score": 11,
"tags": "counters"
}
|
What is the difference between 考え、アイデア、発想 and 着想
These are all translated as "idea" in English.
But I don't understand which context I should use each one in.
If I had to guess:
means an imagining of a solution or an understanding of something,
is the same as
means an idea that quickly came to mind
not sure about this one, but i imagine it's similar to
Can someone please explain the nuances?
|
* **/** : Idea in the sense of _solution_. Unlike English _idea_ which has various meanings, in Japanese primarily refers to a concrete idea that can solve a certain problem.
* **** : It's often interchangeable with , but it has a broader meaning. can also refer to someone's _thoughts_ or _opinions_ in general.
* **** : Rather than an idea itself, this tends to focus on the process of coming up with an new idea. Thus, you can say but not . For example, brainstorming is a method of . It can also refers to an overall tendency of thinking or seeing things. refers to a childlike, flexible way of thinking things.
* **** : This is used only when you start a new project (business, research work, artistic work, etc). It's close to _inspiration_. For example, if you created a song after seeing a beautiful moon, you can say or .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "word choice, words, nuances"
}
|
Ｂさんといるところを評価されれば meaning
Confused of the meaning of as it just doesn't seem to make sense translating it. For context the whole sentence is:
>
I know the text is discussing communication skills and I'm guessing it is trying to say even if the communication seems high..... the communication seems low?
|
>
in that context means "if I were to be judged [on my communication skills] based on [when I am with] B"
means "a moment/scene when [I] am with B", and that moment is what's being (hypothetically) judged.
To explain the context, let's say we have three people:
* the speaker, S
* some person A who S finds easy to talk to, i.e. in your given sentence
* another person B with whom S finds it difficult to keep a conversation going
Then S is saying that she might be perceived as having good communication skills when speaking with A, but on the other hand when she is with B she might be judged as having poor communication skills.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, meaning, grammar"
}
|
Should I use sonkeigo if I meet a celebrity?
Yesterday I met a very famous Japanese person. I panicked and asked him,
Was this correct? Or was this too polite and kind of strange?
|
Assuming you met him privately, yes that was correct. is usually acceptable (especially if you are young), but is never overly polite nor strange.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "politeness"
}
|
Finding a Notion for もう
I tried to find a notion for that combines all of its different meanings into one concept. This is what I came up with:
_ shapes the entire feeling of a sentence by emphasizing change._
Examples:
"" (it was okay for the addressee to come before)
"" (the speaker only has to disturb now)
"" (the situation with that person is now hopeless, but has not always been)
I really like this approach, but I have trouble applying this understanding of to its usage in phrases such as "" and "". Does anyone have an idea how to combine the meaning of in these last two examples with the concept of emphasizing change? (Provided that this way of looking at the word is deemed viable at all.)
|
I like your analysis of the concept at work here. I think the notion of "change" is still appropriate for and . While the in this context is commonly glossed as "more", I believe it is still possible to apply your analysis:
* For , the speaker now intends to do something once more, or perhaps to ask someone else to do something once more.
* For , the speaker now intends to have one more glass.
The emphasis is still on a change of state in the now, with the change being one of intent.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, adverbs"
}
|
Can't find out what symbol this is
![enter image description here](
Any help? I've tried finding out what this is but I've hit a wall. :/
|
It's the other form of the hiragana "ki" .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": -1,
"tags": "words, questions, learning"
}
|
What does this sentence with いつ mean?
I can't understand the last sentence in this video: . I think this is what he's saying, starting at 17:41:
>
Maybe I misheard, but if this is correct, what does the last sentence mean? The is really throwing me off, since it's not or and the sentence isn't a question. If wasn't there, I think it would (basically) mean "this kind of thing could happen to you, too."
|
I think this is a _strange_ mixture of the / construction and the interrogative + + construction. Although perfectly understandable, I feel this sentence is not well-formed. It should have been either of:
* ****
*
Here are some examples of `interrogative + + /` from BCCWJ:
> *
> *
> *
> *
> * 3
>
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "questions, interrogatives"
}
|
Pronuncation of r in Japanese name
I'm not sure if this is the right place to post this but I was wondering how one would pronounce the Japanese name Reita when speaking English. Should it be [leːtə], [reːtə], or something else?
For reference, I live in an English-speaking country and Reita is my new roommate's name. He's told me a couple times how to say it but I couldn't quite catch it and I don't want to seem impolite by asking him again.
Thanks in advance!
|
Matt, it's very kind of you to go to so much trouble to try learn how to pronounce your new roommate's name correctly.
Unlike the English "r" sound, producing the Japanese "r" sound involves lightly touching the tongue against the top of the mouth, just behind the front teeth. For this reason, to non-Japanese speakers it can sound a bit like an "l" sound, or even a "d."
Since Reita is now living in a country where English is the dominant language, he's going to have to get used to hearing his name (mis)pronounced with an English-style "r" sound – just as you, if you ever spend time in Japan, will have to get used to being called "Maht-to." But far from finding your asking him impolite, I think he'll really appreciate that his roommate wants to learn to say his name correctly, and will be glad to help you practice.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "pronunciation, names"
}
|
Etymological connection between 戻る and 元
It just crossed my mind that both and sound really similar. The Japanese Wiktionary page on even lists its first definition as "". Consonants becoming voiced also seems to be common in Japanese, such as through the process of , so becoming doesn't seem too far-fetched either. Since I don't have access to (or know of) a good etymology dictionary, I figured I could ask here if derives from .
(In before the connection between the two words is really obvious to every good speaker...)
|
My source here is the _Nihon Kokugo Dai Jiten_ entry here at Kotobank, where the verb is the fifth section down, starting with the line ().
According to this, the verb is first cited to a text from roughly 1001 with an unvoiced middle consonant as . I think this bolsters the idea that this is a verb derived from the noun (spelled variously in kanji as etc.). The voiced appears later, apparently in the 1200s or 1300s. My suspicion is that the bilabial nasal //m-// at the start of the word may have gradually caused voicing of the following //-t-// to result in voiced //-d-//. There may also have been a need to differentiate from homophonous verb with the same []{LHL} pitch pattern, but a different meaning ("to bend something, to warp something").
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "etymology"
}
|
Difference between「のびる／のばす」and「のべる」
With the use of a dictionary, along with reading some web pages, I understood the meaning as well as the proper usage of and . But I noticed an overlapping in meaning regardingand. Do the former two groups of verbs have differences in meaning and usage withand.
|
# Difference and
has meaning as `make flat something thick or fold`.
> 1.
> * ―
> * ――
> * ()―()―
>
>
> () -
On the other hand, has wider meanings. But, 's meaning of `make flat` is used for thinner thing.
> 1.
> * ―
>
>
> () -
For better comprehension, I'll explain about other differences.
# Difference of and , in meaning of extension
##
>
>
> () -
has meaning as `extending schedule`.
##
> () -
has meaning as `extend straightly`.
I think is used with a thing which has form, but I couldn't find source about it.
# Difference of and
Same.
See again () - . These are used as a same word.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning, word choice, verbs"
}
|
Meaning of 感じの in this sentence
if already gives the meaning of “seeming, characteristic of, ish,” etc then what is the purpose of adding
|
It emphasizes the subjective nature of the statement. If one simply said , that would be something like "a vaguely unmasculine person," "a person somehow lacking in masculinity," etc. is more like "a person who seems vaguely unmasculine," "a person who seems somehow lacking in masculinity."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, meaning, usage, adjectives, reading comprehension"
}
|
おはよう written as おはよ?
Playing through the intro of Let's Go Pikachu, I came across what looks to me like the greeting , but written instead as .
![enter image description here](
Is this a known alternate spelling, or perhaps a simplification aimed at younger audiences?
|
is just an informal, variant pronunciation/spelling of . The age of the speaker or audience does not have so much to do with it.
Other common variants include:
For the informal versions of , you will hear/see:
With the evening greeting, we seem not to "play around" much for some reason and we may only have:
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "nuances, spelling"
}
|
What does にとり mean？
Could somebody please help me to understand what **** means in the following sentence (taken from a letter explaining the change to Reiwa era) :
> {} **** {}{}{}{}{}{}{}
My current translation attempt (having still basic japanese skills and not being either an english native speaker) is the following : "I (humbly) provide information about a recent and important subject close to us, japanese people." but I am struggling with () (obviously this doesn't mean 'bird' here, could it be a form of ?)
Many thanks in advance for your help.
NOTE : Question edited in accordance to Ringil/Setris answers (initial question was about only)
|
means the same thing as . and both come from + and are two different ways to convert + to . It's very common in Japanese to use the to connect clauses. The only real difference between and is that is more formal. There's also , which is politer.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning, renyōkei"
}
|
Connecting sentences with dictionary form verbs?
This is from the "intro" of the novel talking in general about sayayins . It seems that is like a sort of poetic/archaic style as the grammar doesn't make sense to me.
>
I think it means
> [][[]] []
>
> Their liking is the battle, to invade other stars [they] were the hooligans of the universe.
It's that is correct, what is the grammatical explanation for the connection between this [] and this [] as there is no , , commas, pre-masu or -form linkage.
Thanks.
|
It modifies the noun .
Here's a simpler example:
> - (I) read books
>
> - A child who reads books
>
> **** - A **male** child who reads books
In your example, being fairly literal, we have
> [[]][] - They were hooligans who invaded other stars
>
> [[]] [ **** ] - They were hooligans **of the universe** who invaded other stars
Edit per @Chocolate's suggestion: [] also directly modifies . The is the of and it is used to connect the clauses. It doesn't say that they **like** to invade other stars. It only says they like to fight/engage on battle, the invading is a separate action. You can think of it like this:
> [ **** ] [] - They were hooligans **who liked fighting**
>
> [][ **[]** ] [] - They were hooligans who liked fighting and **invaded other stars**. Note that the action of liking is separate from the action of invading.
>
> [][[]] [ **** ] - They were hooligans **of the universe** who liked fighting and invaded other stars
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "relative clauses"
}
|
Is the book Genki wrong about volitional + と思っています?
I've been looking for this on the web but can't find my specific doubt.
I just read the Genki 2 chapter about volitional + to say you are planning on doing something. The book is pretty clear that this grammar can be used ONLY to express our own opinions or intentions and not other's.
!enter image description here
But right after the lesson, the first exercise says: "Describe what each person is planning to do" and the example follows:
> ****
The book just said is used for our own intentions but then the example is trying to tell us that another person is intending to do as if we know other person intention.
So, can this grammar be used to express other people's intention? Thank you beforehand.
|
A Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar (Seiichi Makinko and Michio Tsutsui) has this to say on the subject:
> When the subject is not the first person, the nonpast form of cannot be used. ... The reason why this is unacceptable is that represents an internal feeling of the speaker alone. Therefore, when the subject is the third person, has to be replaced by the stative which means ' he (= the third person subject) has indicated that he feels ~, in such a way that the speaker can see and/or hear what he feels'
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "volitional form"
}
|
What does nushi means in japanese?
Nushi can be written using katakana or kanji in Japanese. I wanted to understand the exact meaning of this. And can it be used as someone's name?
I named my daughter nushi (It means sweet in Hindi) but when I called her name in the crowd I fetched the attention of some people from Japan. Hence, I was curious to know if it has some meaning in Japanese. I searched for dictionary and I found 2 meanings of it. Hence, I asked here.
|
Nushi ( in kanji, in hiragana) means only one thing in Japanese: "boss/master (especially of animals/fish)". See this question. It's almost never used as a Japanese person name.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning, names"
}
|
What does のそ mean in this picture?
What does mean in this picture?
!enter image description here
A friend of mine said that it was "a moment later...", but I'm not really sure if that's the real meaning. What does this annotation mean?
|
is an onomatopoeic word describing a slow and/or sluggish kind of walk or body movement.
We also use and as its variants.
You can forget "a moment later" for good as it has no such meaning.
For the onomatopoeia-curious out there, , which means "chop-chop", "speedily", etc. would be like the 'antonym' of .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 17,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "translation, meaning, word usage, onomatopoeia"
}
|
How do you formulate the 連用中止 with 形容動詞 (な adjectives) and 名詞 (nouns)?
According to my textbook, verb and i-adjective sentences can be chained with the form like this:
!enter image description here
Later on, I came across this exercise where I'm required to replace the adjectives' endings by the corresponding . But I do not know how to turn into in the following sentence:
!enter image description here
> 7 **** **** **___**
Is this feasible? What about sentences that end with a noun?
Thank you very much
|
No, you cannot omit after . As your textbook clearly says, this grammar is about verbs and **_i_** -adjectives.
> 7 ****
See: Adjective. difference between and
**EDIT:** You can also use copula-like and say " **** ", too.
* * *
You may see two na-adjectives connected without a particle ("" instead of ""), but this is another story.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar, renyōkei"
}
|
What is the use of ごと in this clause?
This is the whole phrase and the sentence I don't understand is in bold:
>
>
>
>
> ****
>
So "" being passive and "" is the direct object, then "" it's a clause that explain what the Sayajins are/were. could be a nominalizing suffix like:
> As to Furiza (...) the sayajins, they who living in the Vejita planet, were sadly extinguished from the universe (by Furiza?).
I don't undestand what they are using the dictionary form for and if it's referring to "", the sayayins or modifying "", and i dont understand the use of here.
Thanks form your help.
|
modifies , so means "the planet they lived on." The suffix means "as well as," "together with," "along with," or "and all" (as – "eat an apple, peel and all"). Here, is used to stress that this character "Freezer" didn't just destroy the Saiyan people, but their whole planet.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "subordinate clauses"
}
|
Differentiation between subjects in relative clauses?
how do you distinguish between saying for example “A person he likes” and “A person who likes him” if they would both be is there a way around that? different wording? a different particle? i must be missing something here hahaha. any help would be appreciate!
|
Both meanings are possible with . It'd have to be decided on context, but if someone were to hear that out of the blue, they'd be far more likely to think that it means `A person he likes`.
If you really wanted to unambiguously say `A person who likes him`, the best way is probably by saying . There are other ways such as for example saying (An interesting use of where it typically isn't allowed).
Here's a great other answer on this:
* What is the in sentences such as ?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, particles, relative clauses"
}
|
What is the meaning of 「隣のおじいさんは言いました」
I am reading and there is a phrase used a lot like...
>
I have not seen this before and it doesn’t make sense to me from my understanding of meaning “next to”.
What does it mean here? Is it like a temporal “next”. Like... “Then the old man said...”?
|
No, doesn't mean "then" or "next" in a temporal sense. Depending on the context, the phrase you have quoted means either "the elderly man next to [someone]" or "the elderly man who lives [or lived] in the house next door."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, meaning"
}
|
The meaning of いた in this sentence related to be left surviving
The whole sentence is:
>
Could it be:
> However, fortuitously surviving sayajins remained.
In this case, this is the past of ? If this right, could have the reading "to remain" or "the be left" in this case?
Thanks.
|
just means "there was " here. is the past tense of ("to be", "to exist"). And is a typo for **** ?
>
> Saiyans who survived
>
>
> Saiyans who happened to survive
>
> ****
> However, **there were** Saiyans who happened to survive.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "verbs"
}
|
Reason for using じゃないですか in this sentence?
>
The translation in the subtitle was “Because, sometimes people do sit next to me but there’s a sort of wall in front of you.”
I don’t understand where the fits into the translation of where “because” is in the sentence either.
|
As the post mentioned in comments says, to understand the sentence better, simply substitute with . Here , roughly speaking, plays a role of "isn't it?" or "right?" (it would be a negation if there wasn't in the end of the sentence, which, in fact, is a question marker), so the second part of the sentence is a statement that asks (but rather rhetorically) your interlocutor if they agree with your or understand you.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, word choice, word usage"
}
|
What does ぐいつ mean?
!enter image description here Can somebody help me, please?.
|
That doesn't actually say , it says . It conveys the idea of a sudden, sharp movement that is vigorous or strenuous.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": -1,
"tags": "grammar, translation, meaning, word usage"
}
|
Meaning of「悪いとは思うけれど」in this context
This is an excerpt from by . The main character and his wife are robbing a McDonald's. A girl who works there asks them a question.
>
>
> ****
My question is what does mean? Who's thinking, and what do they think is bad?
|
here means "I do feel sorry [for what we're doing to you], but"
The wife, who says this line, is expressing her apologetic feelings to the McDonald's girl. To paraphrase a little, she's essentially saying "Sorry you ended up being the one that we robbed, but the bakery wasn't open. So we chose this place instead."
here is a word that expresses that one feels apologetic, like or . From :
>
>
> ―
> ―
> ――
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "meaning, phrases"
}
|
What is meant by 実感が欠けていく here?
To add some additional context, the character appears to have family problems (particularly father problems). Her birthday is on Christmas, however her father never celebrates it with her.
I don't quite understand what is referring to in the below.
> ……
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ****
|
is "sense of reality", and in this context, it refers to the sense of realization that he is her father. is "to lack/miss/disappear", and is "over time" and/or "away from me". So the sentence is saying that, because she is seeing the situation sarcastically, she is becoming more and more unsure if she can accept him as her father. The more she is seeing his blatant effort, the more she is seeing him as a remote being.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning, definitions"
}
|
Usage of こいつ, あいつ, etc
When can I use , , etc?
I’ve seen that they can mean he/she/this/that in various contexts but when is it appropriate to use them versus or
|
Roughly speaking, , , and mean "this/that guy", except they're gender neutral. Essentially, they're colloquial, and slightly rude, variants of , , and , which mean "this/that person". and are equivalent to the English "he" and "she" respectively, but they're relatively distancing words; they generally carry the connotation of "that man/woman over there" or "this man/woman neither of us know well". In most conversations, if it's clear from context who you're talking about, you can just drop the pronouns completely, but if it's not clear but both of you know the person by name, just use their name + // and you're good to go.
Hope that clears it up :>
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, word choice, word usage, pronouns"
}
|
Why does "Rendaku" not apply in 少々 お待ちください?
I'm thrilled to finally read about Rendaku () in my learning journey of Japanese, and to realise that is a simple example of this phenomenon!!
However, "" in still remains as "" instead of "" (with tenten on the second "")
a) Is there any specific reason why Rendaku is not applied in this case?
b) I read that the exceptions to Rendaku are sometimes due to unpredictability and also due to sound-words.
|
{{pad}}There are many exceptions, but the general rule is that the second component of an on-yomi compound is not voiced. This includes on-yomi reduplicative words like , , , , , , and . There are exceptions like and . Ultimately, you have to learn them one by one.
See: Rules or criteria for : Voiced or unvoiced syllables in compound words
> Most Sino-Japanese words tends to resist rendaku. (; safety-keeping) + (; inspection) = (; safety inspection), not . (But some words accept rendaku. (; stock) + (; company) = (; roughly corresponds to “business corporation”).)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "rendaku"
}
|
What is the implied-verb represented by the sentence-ending を in the following context？
I am trying to understand the dialogue being spoken by the narrative character on the page below, specifically the fourth line of dialogue from the right in the picture.
> ……
What is the implied-verb represented by the sentence-ending in the above sentence, or is there a trick to figuring out what that verb might be, as mentioned here and here
? What is her response to this question?
The omitted verb is / ("to do").
> ()?
> Why did you do such a thing?
Judging from what's written in this page, ("such a thing") refers to her (mock) attempt to kill the speaker with a knife.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "verbs, particle を, reading comprehension, sentence final particles"
}
|
Difference between using ていない/ている and just ない/る when used with potential (られる) form
I was surfing online for Japanese articles and chanced upon this sentence: **** which translates to: my child who sat on a plane for the first time, couldn't sit quietly.
A question that popped in my mind immediately was, if I were to say: **** wouldn't this mean exactly the same thing? If so, under what circumstances would one be preferable over the other
|
This is essentially about the difference between and .
refers to a _motion_ : "to sit down (from a standing position)" or "to have a seat". Thus means to sit down slowly without making a noise, as opposed to throwing yourself into a seat. is its negative-potential-past form, but this is not what you want to say.
refers to a state (the result of the motion): "to be in a sitting position" or "to stay seated". means to stay seated quietly. is its negative-potential-past form.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "て form, potential form"
}
|
How to say "Developer" In Japanese?
I want to know how to say Developer in Japanese. By Developer, Specifically a web Developer, Programmer or Coder.
When I googled it initially, I got:
>
And then I found a Kanji:
>
I know context is also very important in Japanese so I was wondering if the above are correct for developer and which would be better to use for this occasion.
|
Both are perfectly correct, and the difference is small. But, as you said, context is very important, and we need much more context to say which is better. In what kind of context do you want to say "(web) developer"? In general, is a relatively stiffer and more traditional word, and it may be preferred in news articles and official government documents. On the other hand, may sound a little more "catchy", and it may be preferred in event names, product names and such. ( is another word which is gaining more and more popularity, and you may want to consider this if you are thinking of recruiting a good frontend engineer, for example.)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "word choice, kanji, nuances, katakana, business japanese"
}
|
Understanding 自分は in this sentence (and other potential gross misunderstandings)
>
> He put the receiver down and, while stroking his moustache, Mr Dursely thought.
> ------ ****
> _I'm being stupid_
I'm really stuck on the line in bold.
So I guess I can translate as "really". I think it intensifies the rest of the sentence. Is this right?
I think in this case is "how..." so would be "Really! How stupid I am!"
So, if what I've got so far isn't gibberish, I don't know how to fit in the part. Literally I suppose it would be "Really! As for myself, how stupid I am!".
But, is really necessary? Why? How should I think about it?
|
Translating this as "Really!" is not wrong, but may be a bit too weak. I feel it's closer to "That can't be!", "Unbelievable!", "I never dreamed of it!", etc. It's not an intensifier but an interjection-like expression on its own. That is, it's not directly connected to the remaining part of the sentence.
is necessary in this case. This is because works as a comment about the surprising news he just heard. Without that explicitly switches the topic, the last half of the sentence would mean "How stupid it/he/she is!", referring to the news. Compare:
> !
> Unbelievable! How stupid! (←this refers to the news itself)
>
> !
> Unbelievable! How stupid I am! (←he is disappointed at himself because he could not think of the possibility of what he heard)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, reading comprehension"
}
|
The meaning of a て-form verb at the end of this sentence
There are many explanations of t-form at the end of the sentence on internet like:
1) Connecting to other clauses, or if there is no continuation, expressing that you want to continue. form at end of phrase but not being used for requests
2) Expressing "while" "when" or "although" What is the use of -form at the end of this sentence?
3) Short way to say ... Using form at the end of sentences
4) Giving a reason Why is there form at the end of the sentence?
However, I can't understand this dialogue:
> Bulma: ?
Haven't you ever seen a women?
> Goku:
It's the first time I see a human too.
>
My dead grandfather said/needed
> ****
If you, meeting a women, unite/live, while been able to treat her kindly /be able to treat her kindly!...
What is the meaning of the t-form on this one?
Thanks.
|
The te-form of the verb is . is not a te-form but (the imperative form of , which can conclude a sentence on its own) followed by .
This is a colloquial version of quotative-, and it's used in relation to in the previous sentence.
>
>
> ≒
>
> My dead grandfather was saying this: "If you should meet a woman, be kind to her."
See:
* Quoting Particle Usage
* What is in ?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "て form, particle って"
}
|
What does らん in 「強からん事を祈る」 mean?
I came across this sentence while reading Osamu Dazai's Ningen Shikkaku. The sentence is pretty long, so I have only included the relevant part.
> **** ...
When I searched it online, I came across this article on Chiebukuro which says:
>
in becomes some kind of guess or conjecture here. But what I do not understand is, what kind of form is .
is a -adjective but I am confused as to what the that bold part in the sentence means and how it fits in the overall context of the larger sentence.
Complete sentence for reference:
>
|
> {} - base adjective
>
> -
>
> = + auxiliary
>
> = + auxiliary with sound change
As the thing in Chiebukuro says, is usually used to express volitional/speculation. I think in this case, it doesn't add too much to the meaning and that means `to pray for stronger/more dangerous storms.`
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "grammar, conjugations, adjectives, word usage, classical japanese"
}
|
How does これ以上する work in this particular context?
I've already learned how to use when it means "beyond this" or further than this". But I'm confused as what it means in this particular context I came across.
I've been reading a sports manga. For context a girl cooks lunch for her friend once to motivate him to attend practice. The friend then adds another request on top of that, being for her buy him tea. The girl then says this.
...
What confuses me here is whether suggests that she'll do this more in the future (cooking lunch and buying tea) OR she's only saying she'll do it this time without promising to do it more in the future (the original promise was only cooking lunch once).
|
While you might be able to construct a context where the former meaning (that she'll do this more in the future) made sense, the latter (that she'll do this now) is much more natural given the context you provided.
Translating very literally, the line comes out to:
> If I'm going to do any more than this I won't forgive you unless you* make it to nationals
In more natural English, this might look something like:
> If I'm gonna do all this you'd* better make it to nationals
Ultimately though the point she's trying to make is just that if she's going to go through all this trouble, she wants him to make it to nationals.
Note that if they're both on the same team/in the same sports club, the implied subject that I wrote as `you` could very easily be a `we`. Also, if you're wondering where "nationals" came from: `` here is an abbreviation for the `` in whatever sport they're playing, in the same way we say `nationals` for `national championships` in English.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation, meaning, word choice"
}
|
About the word 地図
= +
(^-^)
( _´∀_ )
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "word requests"
}
|
|
Function of と when used with 続く
I don't understand the function of when used with
From this sentence in my textbook:
> 1. 451.7137.051.043.239.133.4 ****
>
I also found another similar sentence online:
> 2. ****
>
When referring to these resources, I'm not sure under which meaning takes:
How is used in these sentences?
If I had to guess, maybe it's used as a defining/quoting particle?
―
If so, I'm not sure how it fits in to the definition above.
What function does take in these sentences?
|
This before is a "friend" of quotative-. If I have to choose one, it corresponds to this definition of .
> 2.
>
It says can broadly mark "the content of an action/effect/state". The well-known quotative- is actually a subset of this type of . I don't know how this is usually taught to Japanese learners, but in my own words, this type of is a "content descriptor" or "concrete-description- _to_ ".
Here are some examples of such atypical, "quotative-like" :
* ****
* BA ****
* 19,800 **** (see this question, too)
* ****
* 12 ****
* ****
* **** iPhone
* 359 ****
As you can see, appears when you describe a verb/adjective using either a concrete number or a concrete sequence/list of items. It's somewhat akin to English "like" or "namely". You may find this more or less similar to used to form adverbs from onomatopoeias and some descriptive nouns (e.g, , , ...).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 10,
"tags": "grammar, usage, nuances, particle と"
}
|
Saying “I don’t have to...”
would this be
I don’t have to study -
|
That is correct.(lit. "There is no need to (...)") or(lit. "I'll be fine even if I don't (...)") are some alternatives. They have different connotations, so which one you would want to use depends on the actual detailed context where you would use the phrase.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, word choice, word usage"
}
|
What does オト mean here?
I ran along this sentence while reading a novel online. To put it into context, 3 guys were drinking beer at home to celebrate something. Guy 1 had his arm around Guy 2's neck in a friendly way. Guy 2 then said this.
I'm slightly beyond a beginner in terms of a japanese but the only part I understand here is the . As far as I know, has mupltiple meanings and the biggest problem is I don't know what here is supposed to be.
If this info helps at all, Guy 2 was in his 20s while Guy 1 was in his 30s
|
A verb is often written in katakana when a slangy/tricky meaning is intended (e.g., = "to kill, to f**k", = "to torture", = "to trip (with drug)"). This is part of the verb . See the seventh definition of on jisho.org:
> 7. to make someone swoon (judo) Martial arts term
>
is , and here means "to release/unlock".
>
> =
> If [I/you] don't get rid soon, [I/you] will be made unconscious.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation, slang"
}
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.