INSTRUCTION
stringlengths 11
999
| RESPONSE
stringlengths 0
999
| SOURCE
stringlengths 16
38
| METADATA
dict |
|---|---|---|---|
What is the expression/word for "going against traffic (flow)"?
Suppose you're driving in a one way street and see someone coming in the opposite direction.
What's the most natural way to say something like "Hey, you're going against traffic!"
I know how to say basically the same thing just re-wording a little:
> _This is a one way street!_
But I was wondering what's the word/expression to actually say "against traffic" (to go against traffic, or to go/drive in the wrong way, etc).
|
>
is the most common expression for that. Often heard on the news. Because of the aging society, incidents of elderly people accidentally getting on highways in the wrong direction, going backwards on one way streets, and so on are increasing.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "word choice, words"
}
|
Is there a difference between 「目を覚ます」 and 「目覚める」
I just recently learned these phrases were a thing and I can't find the difference anywhere online.
Is there a difference between and ?
Any help would be appreciated!
|
There is no semantic difference when they mean "to wake up (e.g., in the morning)", but sounds more bookish and literary. In the most casual settings, people usually say or .
In addition, each has derivative meanings:
* also means "to regain one's sense", "to recover from illusion", "to notice one believed in something wrong".
* also means "to become conscious (of the joy of something)", "to be enlightened", "to awaken (e.g., to beauty, perception, sex, ability)".
See also:
* Difference between and
* Usage of and
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 18,
"question_score": 10,
"tags": "meaning, words, nuances"
}
|
Is there a term for being able to understand a Kanji meaning, but unable to pronounce it?
Is there a term for being able to understand a Kanji meaning, but unable to pronounce it in Japanese?
|
I believe there is no single-word term for this. There is a word that means "hard-to-read word", but it doesn't mean "being able to understand its meaning". You can say something like . (Even native speakers encounter such examples often!)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "meaning, word requests"
}
|
N + NO/NA/DA + わけ and generic rule?
I found in dictionary is a Noun, However, I see in the book that Noun will go with when using with , as N + /.
Besides , is there any Japanese word that has that exception?
Why has it become like that? And there is any general rule for us to remember? Thanks a lot.
|
If N is a pure noun such as or , N **** is the norm in formal settings. N **** is usually acceptable, but tends to sound colloquial. is sometimes used also before , , , etc. If N is a na-adjective (aka descriptive noun) such as , simply should be used. N is always ungrammatical.
See also: in this sentence?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Are 0, 1, 2, 3, 4....... also considered Romaji?
Are 0, 1, 2, 3, 4....... also considered Romaji? If they are not written using kanji?
|
No. (Roman script) is actually an alternative name for (Latin script), which only refers to A, B, ..., Z. In Japanese, also means transcribing Japanese words using Latin alphabet, but that's an extension of the original meaning.
* A, B, C, ...: Latin/Roman script ()
* 0, 1, 2, ...: Arabic numeral
* I, II, III, ...: Roman numeral
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "numbers, rōmaji"
}
|
How would I indicate yelling when writing Japanese?
In English typing in capital letters is considered yelling. How would I indicate yelling when writing in Japanese?
|
****
****
 or wavy dash ()
* small vowels ()
* small tsu
They can be stacked (e.g., ``, `!!!!!`).
Related:
* What does the little (tsu) signify when at the end of a word?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "typesetting"
}
|
Japanese equivalent of a brain fart
Is there a Japanese equivalent term(s) to describe a brain fart/absentmindedness? I noticed the term karahenji in Jisho.
|
**{}** is a word that, like "brain fart," means roughly that you are unable to recall something in the moment, but you would normally be able to recall it easily.
It comes from **{}** (to forget) and **** , a prefix that can be used for emphasis or to add a derogatory tone to something.
As noted by kimi Tanaka in a comment, it's possible that there is a difference in register between the two terms across languages, since "fart" is not a polite word, but in meaning they are very close to each other.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning, words"
}
|
Can a supermarket be considered a yaoya if it sells vegetables in addition to other things?
Can a supermarket be considered a yaoya if it sells vegetables in addition to other things?
|
No. only refers to relatively small shops that sell vegetable and fruit. See this image search result:
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": -1,
"tags": "meaning, words"
}
|
What does 帰れん mean?
from the youtube channel is it won't go back or can't go back if translated or neither?
|
{} **** **** = "not / will not return (home)"
**** **** = "cannot / will not be able to return (home)"
The latter is in the **negative potential** form.
This has been discussed many times before; hence, just a short answer.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning, auxiliary ず"
}
|
Do Kanji characters ever have different pronunciations in Kansaiben?
Do Kanji characters ever have different pronunciations when Kansaiben is used?
|
If you mean, does Kansaiben use different intonation (pitch) for words that are often represented by kanji characters, the answer is yes.
Well known ones with differences (with and without kanji) are: (-flat pitch), {LH}) and ({hl}), ({LH}), ({HLL}), ({LLH}), {LHLLH}, {LLLHL}, etc.
To summarize, kanji is not relevant to the intonation (pitch accent). A rough equivalent would be an American southerner pronouncing 'wash' differently from a northerner. The spelling does not dictate the pronunciation (except in cases where the spelling is intentionally changed to reflect accent).
As it appears that you are talking about words like , which are pronounced differently in Kansai (and involve kanji), here's a link with a few similar examples.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "words, names"
}
|
Is there a difference between tomo and tomodachi?
I was able to translate the terms as friend. Is there any difference in meaning between the 2 terms?
|
'tomo' is basically not used in everyday modern Japanese. You may sometimes encounter it in literary writing, or in fiction to make a character sound archaic. 'tomodachi' is the ordinary casual word for 'friend'. You can use it in most situations, though formally you can also say { 'yuujin'.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "meaning, word choice"
}
|
Does the size of a 町 determine if it is pronounced machi or chou?
and The first one is pronounced Chatanchou and the second is Shitamachi. The second term is within an area of the the first one. Is a machi smaller than a chou? In the past was the term used in between the kanji to indicate a machi, for example shita no machi?
|
In the east of Japan, Machi is used more often.
In the west, Cho is used more often.
Google “ ” and you will find a good picture.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "meaning, words"
}
|
What does "また朝までコース" mean?
It's a small hashtag on twitter.
Does the here always refer to a meal? A plan of action? Are they saying they're gonna party till morning?
|
Yeah. They are saying they're gonna party till morning.
We might say
> {}{}{}()
>
> So, we missed the last train home. Let's party till morning(Karaoke?).
I do not think it always relates to a meal, say drinking beer at Izakaya, but it could be. I might be wrong tough, I think it is a set phrase with the party. I do not say "{}" or something.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
Can the term kaiwa no heya be used to mean an actual location/room to chat in?
I know that the term chattorumu is used for online chats. What term would be used to denote an actual room for this activity? A room to chat in.
|
Though I'm not sure whether a real chat room has ever existed in English-speaking world (after a bit of Googling), and I'm not sure it's the perfect match for the hypothetical concept, I know that some facilities actually have for close or private small-group conversation. A number of diners (mostly cafés) seem to have it as a part of the trade name too.
Last but not least, this word is also not uncommon for the name of online chatrooms or forums.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": -4,
"tags": "meaning, word choice"
}
|
Why is しない used instead of じゃない?
So I have the following two sentences from the Yotsuba manage chapter 15.
> ****
I have seen some typos with the manga on the site I'm reading it at, but I don't think this is one. I'm confused as to why is used instead of means doesn't do. The literal translation would be "Does it not do weird flavor instead" instead of "Is it not a weird flavor." Could this be a mistake in the whoever wrote the javascript/markup for this site or does translate as "Doesn't taste" here? I think I've come across instances like this before where is used somewhat loosely.
|
_**Sensory Expressions**_
> {}{}
is perfectly natural-sounding.
It makes little sense to you because you think means " **does not do** " when the truth is that has so many meanings.
> Adjective + + + = "Something tastes [adjective]."
In the phrase in question, the particle is omitted because it is colloquial speech. Thus, the line means:
> "Is it good/yummy? Doesn't it taste weird?"
Likewise, we also often say:
> Adjective + {} + + = "It smells [adjective]."
>
> Adjective + {} + + = "It sounds [adjective]."
>
> Adjective + {} + + = "It feels [adjective] to the skin."
Finally, you can use instead of . It would still be grammatical, but less natural-sounding.
If the were not omitted, however, you could NOT use as it is ungrammatical to say .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
What are these two characters marked red? い＿める and いじめ＿いよォ?
What are these two characters marked red? I'm trying to learn reading some kid books, some Bonobono font chars meaning though is a mystery for me.
 and (pronounced ji, but di in certain romanisations).
To address the meaning of what's being said, I understand that there is a slight difference in the meaning of and , both meaning to bully/tease.
has some sense of cuteness/playfulness about it: perhaps you're teasing someone, but you don't really mean for your words to hurt them -- you might use the kanji .
on the other hand has the true meaning of bullying about it: more hurtful and unpleasant -- you might use the kanji .
Note, however, that the (strictly) correct 'spelling' of both of the above verbs in modern Japanese is .
The use of in is a historical spelling of the verb, before was (largely) rationalised to in the 1946 script reforms. Both and are pronounced the same, except for I think in certain dialects in Kyushu and Shikoku.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "hiragana, learning"
}
|
Is 「っしょ」possibly a colloquial sentence ending particle?
In this chapter of Chainsawman I saw this and am confused by what it means.
.
Keep in mind, this is not a particle and not necessarily always sentence-ending either.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "usage, particles, slang"
}
|
What does "目的化して久しい" mean in this dialogue?
I found this in a fantasy manga. I separated them by text bubbles.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
It's the first line I'm confused with here. Is he saying "the purpose for this changed a long time ago?"
If so, how does that connect to the next lines? Are those the original "purpose" he was talking about?
Is he saying he needs to supply magical power to do quests?
|
means "It has been long since..." "It's been quite a while since..."
means "It's been quite a while since our method turned into our purpose" (≂
And the , refer to . Initially was their method to accomplish their original purpose (unmentioned here), but it turned into their purpose at some point in time (while they were doing quests, or fighting?)
So they say , "Just for the purpose of supplying/filling up/replenishing our magical power (rather than to accomplish our initial purpose), every day we devote ourselves to our quests."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
What does "私としてた" mean here?
Found this in a book where a student was being scolded for playing a prank on the teacher with his car. The teacher was panting so the dialogue was broken up. Not sure if that's why I'm confused.
> ... ...
>
> ...
The "" confuses me the most here. I've learned of when it means "in the role of". Is that what it means here?
Is it different from this definition here? <
If any more context helps, the student used his teacher's car and used up all the gas.
|
This usage is not related to the X.
is alternative/colloquial way of saying , a past form of (from ). And here is simple “and/with”. So is “[you] were doing with me”.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
Use of ni or wa for " I always eat with my older brother on monday"
In my textbooks solution it says
> getsuyoubi ha itsumo ani to isshoni tabemasu
I thought it would be
> getsuyoubi ni
Thank you in advance
|
So, first of all, the sentence is grammatically totally fine and would be comprehended in the context you give. This would probably best structurally translate as
> "I usually/always eat with my brother on Mondays"
However, partly because Japanese is a pronoun-drop language, and partly because of the situation -- where the speaker has been asked about going for pizza (presumably on a Monday) -- **** might well be preferable here.
The reason for that is that he's focusing on the concept of Monday, so it makes sense to make it the topic/discourse of the conversation. In comparison to the above sentence, you'll thus get a structural translation of something closer to
> "On Mondays, I usually/always eat with my brother".
Using thus makes it a bit clearer that it's the pizza invitation **being on a Monday** that is the issue as to why he can't go, which is appropriate for this context.
Hope that helps.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "particles, particle は, topic"
}
|
Extremely casual way to make requests to very close friends
How does one make a very casual "request" to a good friend. I know that the form is used to make a request that is fairly casual, but it doesn't sound "casual enough". For example, , would probably sound like 'please' eat it (a very soft please) and ptobably isnt said in very casual situations. To give a more concrete example, lets say I am with a close friend, and what I really want to say is "come on, dont be a wimp and just eat it bruh" or something along that line. In such cirxumstances, I would probably say...blah blah blah...... and finallyI should also ask if its ok for both genders to use it. But that (at least to me) doesnt really sound casual does it, so I am wondering what is the most appropriate way to say this
|
In no particular order, we do say these:
*
*
* **** ← gaining popularity in recent years.
* {} mostly masculine
* mostly masculine
*
* {} mostly masculine
*
* {} mostly masculine
The ones that use {} instead of {} would naturally be uttered mostly by male speakers.
Thus, to a friend that is hesitating to try a food item, you might say:
* {} or {}
↑ Change the to and it will sound even more casual.
* {}{}{}
I have probably gone too casual. Point is that if your Japanese is basically textbook-ish (which is often the case with Japanese-learners), uttering just one extremely casual sentence learned from a native speaker will only make you look weird.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "slang, casual"
}
|
Te-form and かつ and も？
I'm reading a light novel and am stuck on a sentence. One big problem is this phrase:
>
I know that is used to connect things, and my understanding of is that it's a strong connector, but I don't understand it exactly.
The full, long sentence is:
>
I was hoping someone could help me understand what parts of this sentence mean so I may continue reading my book lol, specifically:
What is the first phrase of the sentence supposed to mean? Does the only connect to ? I would think the phrase would mean "kindness like Yoshida-san's" but the makes it seem like that's not how to translate it.
What exactly does connect in this sentence? Does it connect everything before it and everything after it until the
And finally, if someone could explain what this triple connector combination of And means in then that'd help me a lot.
Thank you~
|
means "(someone) is a mature person".
So you should parse it like:
> [][]
> A man [who is kind and at the same time mature], [like Yoshida-san]
connects to .
modifies the noun . is the form, ie the continuous form of , "is kind, and...". means "besides" "furthermore" or "at the same time". here is "too" "also", as in "He's kind. And he's mature, _too_."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "て form, adjectives, i adjectives, particle も, conjunctions"
}
|
Translation struggles - Kuroshio Current being mentioned in a patriotic song
I'm trying to make sense of an old Japanese patriotic song , and there's a line that contains a reference to the Kuroshio Current. The event this song was written about (the so-called May 15th Incident) has zero connections to the Kuroshio Current, and I think there must be some cultural reference that I'm not aware of. It's in the last 2 lines of the second verse:
> {}{} {}{} (Wake up from a nightmare, open your eyes)
> **{}{} {}{}** (I have no idea what to make of this)
Is it indeed a cultural reference, or does the last line speak about the Kuroshio Current as a physical object (and if so, how it is relevant to the May 15th Incident)?
|
Probably due to Kuroshio's strong current, they improve transportation of heat and things. The lyricist wanted to encourage troops mentioning . My interpretation is the following :
> The Kuroshio is forthcoming, how do you feel about that?(Why don't you get stoked!?)
It sounds like a typical phrase of rock concert like Metallica.
Possibly {} : Ground Force also did long-distance-swimming for their training a lot. So, I guess the cultural reference and its physics are related.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, history, culture, song lyrics, poetry"
}
|
Are there different ways to say nice to meet you in Japanese?
Yoroshiku onegaishimasu is a commonly used phrase when meeting someone for the first time. Is there a more suitable phrase that would more accurately convey nice to meet you? Could I say oaide kite ureshii desu?
|
It depends on what you mean by "nice to meet you"
a) as the phrase, where it carries no / very little meaning of actually being happy to have met the person (instead of never ending up meeting)
If a), "" is probably the most natural one.
OR
b) To express actual delight of getting to meet the person, e.g when you have been really looking forward for it.
If b), I can't come up with anything very good, but maybe "" or "" (The latter one is stressing more the fact that you have been waiting, i.e. would be like "I am glad I finally got to meet you"
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "words, phrases"
}
|
Is 悪いところを見つかった proper Japanese?
The weblio page for uses this phrase as an example meaning "I've been caught." But as I understand it, implies that the subject and not the object is the thing that is found. And so I would expect it to be
or otherwise
This example seems to be the only one on the weblio page to use with .
|
**_Different Meanings of _**
> {} ****
is at least colloquially a valid phrase meaning:
> "(Someone) was caught at an awkward moment."
In this expression, means a "scene" or "moment" where an action takes place.
**** is not a structure you would use in formal speech, but that can be said about a million other words and phrases.
The sentence:
> ****
however, means a **_completely_** different thing. It means:
> "A bad / malfunctioning part was found."
means a "part" in this sentence. It may refer to a part of one's body or an object such as a car, TV, PC, etc.. This sentence implies that an **_examination has been conducted_** that lead to the finding of the malfunctioning part.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar, expressions"
}
|
What is the correct reading of 水気?
From researching about the word in Jisho, I found that it has two different readings: and . Unfortunately, the information on the site did not really help me in differentiating on what the proper reading was. The only noticeable difference that I could observe was that has a greater variety of possible meanings than .
With this in mind, I would just like to know what exactly are the other differences between the two? Also, what is the more common reading, and what are the scenarios wherein one reading is preferred over the other?
|
In modern casual exchanges, is almost always read , and I would say you can practically forget . is a fairly common word, but people probably don't understand you if you said in conversations.
That being said, was not rare at least in old novels. According to (a corpus based on furigana in public-domain old novels), both and were actively used. They seem mostly interchangeable to me, but sometimes also meant "humid/fog-like air" rather than "humidity", in which case is not interchangeable with . There should be some modern novelists who actively use , but I would say there is no good reason to use unless you're writing some stiff literary works.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 10,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "meaning, readings"
}
|
How do you say “only to find out” in Japanese
I’m trying to connect two sentences with the phrase “only to find out” / “only to discover”
|
This is an uncommon usage of English infinitive (`to + <verb>`) known as infinitive of result (as opposed to infinitive of purpose, which is much more common). To translate "only to " into Japanese, you usually have to split the clause into two and join them using , , etc.
* I did it again, only to fail.
****
* I searched everywhere, only to find nothing.
****
****
* I went to the bookstore only to discover it was closed.
****
**** (more literal but may sound redundant)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "phrases, phrase requests"
}
|
What does "知るべき" mean in the end of this sentence?
Read this on an fb page.
" ..."
Does it mean "Like I need to know more in how great your voice is."? Or "Like you need to know more in how great your voice is.""
Am I right in assuming "" describes how great her/his voice is?
|
is "should". See: How to use ( = beki)
Therefore is "You should know more". is a sentence-end particle. And the object of , marked with , is , "the greatness of the voice of yours".
>
> You should know the greatness of you voice more.
> You should be more aware of how great your voice is.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
What is the たんだ in と思ってたんだ for the sentence in question?
Here is a sentence that I came across in Yotsuba, . I believe the English translation would be something like, "When Ena () gets married and leaves, I think I'll use this. I know that means that something has been thought of for some duration but what does the stand for? I believe is the connective copula for explanatory purposes. So the translation would be something like "It is that, I think I will use this when Ena goes off and gets married." But why is used? Is this acting as something for past tense or is it needed to connect somehow? Could it mean, "I had thought"?
Any help would be appreciated. I'm starting to notice these types of past tense uses more but still can't 100% wrap my head around them.
|
is a progressive-past form followed by explanatory-. So it translates to "(It is that) I was thinking ". Here's the breakdown:
* **** : to think
* **** : to be thinking (progressive)
* **** : was thinking (past progressive)
* **** : was thinking ( → , → ; see this chart)
* **** : + explanatory-no \+ copula
>
> I was thinking I would use this.
In non-casual settings, should be **** **** or **** **** .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 20,
"question_score": 10,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
日本人のかたですか vs 日本のかたですか
I originally received a post from an online chat which stated I assumed this post was correct and questioned the meaning of the word in this instance. Would be considered redundant? Would be the correct rewrite of the sentence with meaning person?
|
> “Nihon no kata desuka”
> “Nihonjin no kata desuka”
> “Nihon no hito desuka”
> “Nihonjin desuka”
All of them are used.
There’s no difference in meaning, but “kata” sounds polite, “Nihonjin desuka” can be rude. “Nihonjin no kata” has two words that means “person”, but it’s grammatically correct.
Because there’s “desuka”(), we wouldn’t say “Nihonjin desuka”. It doesn’t suit “desuka”.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "meaning, words"
}
|
Why is the plain negative in this sentence translated as "haven't"?
>
I encountered this sentence in an Anki deck (core 10k) and I can't seem to wrap my head around it, specifically its translation. According to the deck, the English sentence is "The room hasn't warmed up yet". Now in this case, wouldn't the plain negative mean "will not warm up yet" or "will still not warm up". If I remember correctly textbooks teach you that + is the one that expresses the English "haven't...yet". Is this a mistranslation or am I missing something?
(I also thought about translating it as "The room will not warm up, as we HAVEN'T done anything to warm it up", so it is impossible for the room to get any warmer, hence the plain negative. It is most likely just me brainstorming, but who knows...)
|
You can say instead of () for some verbs:
*
=
My order has not arrived yet.
*
=
The letter has not come yet.
*
=
I haven't understood her feelings yet.
But this is not true for many other verbs:
*
I'm still not going to buy this book.
I have not bought this book yet.
*
He is not going to eat lunch yet.
He has not eaten lunch yet.
*
I will not die yet.
I am not dead yet.
So, what's the difference between these two verb groups? According to (2), the verbs in the former group have a certain goal and involves a temporal or spatial change over time.
>
I somehow feel there are more complex rules, but this at least explains your example sentence ; there is a clear goal (i.e., the desired temperature) and the room temperature changes gradually over time, so is interchangeable with . Nevertheless, the latter is more common.
Related:
* When using and does a negative verb always have to be in the () present continuous form?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar, aspect"
}
|
what does mean in these following phrases the grammar rule 「という」
on my book there are these sentences that I didn't understand
> * ****
>
> * ****
>
> * ****
>
> * ****
>
>
|
It expresses apposition.
> In japan, there is an old tradition that rabbits are making mochi on the moon.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Why is １年 written after 去年１年 in this sentence?
I was reading an article on NHK easy news about whooping cough and I came across this sentence, I've seen this usage of "time duration" before but I never understood why just saying wouldn't be sufficient/proper (or perhaps it is. I'm not sure).
My question is what purpose is this for? If is already there, wouldn't the reader know that the writer was referring to the people who got sick last year?
Somewhat of a side question too, but is 's usage here used for comparing and contrasting? This year vs last year. I don't believe its usage is for a conditional and it isn't for connecting two nouns.
As always, thanks for any help that comes my way. I'm truly grateful.
|
> ****
The only reason that is used instead of just is that the comparison here is being made between a 12-month period (all of year 2018) and a 7-month period (Jan. thru July, 2019).
Had the comparison been made between **two** 12-month periods, the author would have just used (or "year XXXX").
The point of the sentence, as I am sure that you know by now, is to inform the readers that the whooping cough is more widely-spread this year than last.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Is there some functional difference between デマ and ガセ?
According to gogen-allguide.com comes from the German demagogie, so it would make sense for it to be similar to demagogy in English. But demagogy is used for political things like false claims and promises, where is much broader nowadays to mean any groundless statement or rumor , even if it was political in nature at first.
For gogen-allguide.com simply defines it as and describes it's origin as probably being the of .
These are both very general definitions, so are they completely interchangeable anymore or are there situations where one would be preferred over the other?
|
Both and refer to false information (thus it's intangible), but the biggest difference is that must be prevailing; it is always intended to be widely spread through rumors or SNS, and thousands (or millions) of people are affected. Fake news on Facebook is usually called . See how the words like , , are included only in the definition of .
On the other hand, fake information obtained through a person-to-person deal is called (or , , ) but not . At least in modern Japanese, whether the information is political is not important in both cases. (By the way, as far as I know, knock-off brand goods are called or but not .)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "usage, definitions"
}
|
Confused by passive verb in 無理矢理されたこと
This is a sentence from the fifth story in , which is . For context, the narrator is talking about a time when she was a kid and she said something about the "surgery" that offended her parents. Everyone in the country has a surgery to become an adult when they turn 12.
>
I find this whole section pretty difficult, and it's hard for me to say exactly which part I'm confused about. I'm assuming refers to the surgery (and not, for example, what she said to her parents). If that seems wrong please correct me.
How should I parse the second sentence? Are and part of the clause that ends with ? Are they the subject of ? Does mean "what was done to them against their will"? And why does the sentence end with the dictionary form rather than something like ?
Sorry for asking so many questions! Feel free to just answer whichever questions seem most important.
|
I don't know what refers to without reading the previous context.
> **** ****
The basic structure of this sentence is A **** B **** , which means "to (wrongly) assume A as B", "to make a false assumption that A is B", "to convince oneself that A is B", etc. See this answer for the `A + + B + () + verb` pattern. A is the **object** of because it's clearly marked with . The implied subject is adults in the country, who already underwent the surgery.
You have correctly parsed the A part. means "the thing forcibly done to everyone, more importantly, themselves (=adults)".
is in the dictionary form because it makes the sentence sound more vivid and dramatic than the teiru-form or the past tense (i.e., historical present).
* * *
My translation attempt:
>
> (Adults in this country) convinced themselves that what had been forcibly done to everyone, including themselves, was a wonderful thing -- exactly because they could not resist it.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "passive voice, narration"
}
|
Can one say [ゲームを遊ぶ ]?
So I know that commonly people say or NOUN yet on the Japanese playstation website, I see written, even though the verb is intransitive. Are they both correct or is it sorta like an Incorrect usage but commonly understood, like some english phrases?
|
I think and are both perfectly correct. Although some dictionaries say is only intransitive, you can find some transitive usages of on BCCWJ, including:
*
*
*
*
*
* (although this may be taken as a location marker)
The difference is usually subtle and unimportant, but sounds like is the main purpose, whereas sounds like is just a method to have fun. The following article intentionally distinguishes and :
* ””””2
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, word choice"
}
|
Why is て used here?
I got this message after asking for recommendations for Japanese media:
>
My question is, why is there a after I was thinking it was apart of the title but doesn’t need a . Does it just connect the title with the fact that it’s a movie?
Like “I recommend the movie ‘Sea Monkey’”. Some sort of abbreviation of
|
Just as you think, it means “I recommend the movie ‘Sea Monkey.” In this sentence, means or . I think this abbreviation is often used in Kansai.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation, meaning, word choice"
}
|
What is the difference between なにかな and なんだろう?
I want to see if or , would be used in a similar way. I asked about what would be a good chat topic and the response was . I have also seen and jisho gives similar definitions. Don't both terms indicate a type of wondering? I am thinking that may be more of a surprise.
|
is a word to tell someone.
is a word to tell yourself.
When you are talked to by someone, you should say to him or her and you should say to yourself.
and means “What do you want to say?” “What is that?” “What?” “ I wonder what.”
In some Japanese TV programs, a comedian has to answer what is in a box (It may be a snake or other animals.)
He says . He is just saying “I wonder what’s in the box.” not particularly paying attention to people. He also says . He is telling people there “I’m wondering what’s in the box.”
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": -1,
"tags": "meaning, phrases"
}
|
Because my friend asked me to
Hey guys, so, I'm familiar with the verb '' when translating the verb 'to ask', as in for information. But, what about when asking/requesting someone to do something? (Similar to 'preguntar/pedir' in Spanish)
I've seen the verb '' before, but I'm not sure how to use it nor if it's even the correct verb to use.
Let's look at the following sentences:
> 1. I played football on Wednesday because my friend asked me to.
> 2. My brother asked me to play football
>
My attempts:
> 1.
> 2. ....?
>
Thanks in advance guys!
|
When you want to ask/tell someone **to do** something else, you use the pattern <thing to do verb><ask/tell verb>. So your second example would be
> **** ****
Notice that it's **** for the thing you are being asked to do, and **** to indicate who he asked. Since both of them are , you can safely omit the **** because it's just redundant at that point.
Also, your first sentence contains some redundancies and a mistake. It should be
> **** **** )
The and are again redundant. But the topic of the sentence is _you_ and what you did, so this is where the should go, and what your friend did should be marked with ****. However, it's implied that you're the one playing soccer, so you can omit the .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, syntax"
}
|
誰かの胸の夜の空に伝えたい気持ちが生まれたら meaning
This line is from of Bump of Chicken:
>
Which meaning is suitable?
1. When you have a feeling that you want to tell someone’s night sky in his heart.
2. When you have a feeling that you want to tell something to someone’s night sky in his heart.
3. When someone has a feeling that he wants to tell (in his night sky in his heart).
4. When someone has a feeling that he wants to tell something (in his night sky in his heart).
|
I would read it as AB ("when B is born/produced in/at A") where A is ("night sky within someone's heart") and B is ("passion/feeling to tell something (to someone)"). is a static location marker (i.e., where something exists) rather than a destination marker here. So 4 is the closest among the four options.
This interpretation aligns with what's written in the next line:
>
> It (=) will head to the sky of someone he wants to tell (the message) to
So in the first line is clearly a starting point rather than a destination. This is why option 2 is wrong even though it may seem grammatically possible. Imagine something like telepathy is happening, and is the invisible message itself (or its "carrier").
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning, song lyrics, reading comprehension"
}
|
Is there a difference between とろっとろ and とろとろ?
Please help me understand what mean in this sentense. May I translate like "looking sleepy" or it's meaning only "soft / runny"?
Person A:
Person B: ?
The way I understand it like "You are villain who is bringing people to tears with in such a sleepy sweetest voice". But I am not sure.
|
in this context would mean " _ **melting**_ ", "very soft", etc.
is an emphatic form of . That small for emphasis appears at different places in onomatopoeias, but that is another topic. (We say, for instance, ("sticky"), but not .)
> Person A: "Such a villain, he is. How many women has he made cry? With that sweet, melting purring voice!"
>
> Person B: "Melting?"
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "meaning, word choice, onomatopoeia"
}
|
Meaning of だけはわからない
> ****
I'm translating the above sentence from Japanese to English, and I'm having issues with understanding what **** means.
Why does come before ? says that means 'at least'; and supports this with a definition of 'at least not (when followed by a negative)'. I know that means 'to not understand' as its in the negative form. When I tried to translate the above, the resulting sentence made barely any sense (Example 1) or it failed to convey the 'abstracting focusing' aspect of (Example 2).
Example:
> 1) Even so, he understands anything but not what is only about himself.
>
> 2) Still, he at least doesn’t understand himself.
What do I need to know in order to properly understand what **** means in the above sentence?
|
> + + Verb +
is the pattern you will need to learn as it is commonly used. **It is an expression that describes the single or very few exceptions to a phenomenon**. It means:
> "Someone [Verb] everything but/except ~~."
Thus,
>
means:
> "He, however, knows/understands everything but about himself."
or
> "Things about himself are the only thing he does not understand."
To give you an actual example of the most commonly-used phrases in the real Japanese-speaking world, you will hear something like:
* {}{}{}
That means "I love vegetables. I eat all kinds except for the bell pepper."
* {} said jokingly most of the time
This means "I understand a lot of people but you!" This is said when the other person has been acting strange.
It **_does not_** mean "Only you don't understand (something)." or "You are the only person who doesn't understand (something)."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 19,
"question_score": 11,
"tags": "translation, usage, nuances"
}
|
What does 「飛びついては止める傾向」
Context:
> 20 ****
goo.ne dictionary defines two meanings for
> ――
>
> ――
I think second meaning suits better here. So my translation for the phrase in bold is:
>
>
> Since he was a kid, he did not have the tenacity you need, to throw yourself at the things you are interested in. This eventually led him to stop going to school as well.
Am I understanding this correctly ? This might be an obtuse question but if I had to pull out and translate it, what would it mean ?
|
As Chocolate pointed out, you seem to have missed the `V1 + + V2` construction:
* "Te-form" versus "masu-stem + " ( versus )
* What does mean in this sentence?
* is this a grammar pattern?
So refers to the son's tendency to do and as a paired action for many times. (read ) in this context means "to quit", and is the opposite, i.e., the second definition of goo.ne.
>
> Since childhood, (my son) has lacked tenacity, and had the tendency to (always) jump at something new and quit it soon.
in this figurative sense usually needs a target (e.g., , ), but since it's clearly contrasted with , it can be inferred in this case.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation, phrases"
}
|
Is there a slang word/phrase for "Floor it"?
gives as one of the translations of "floor it" but while this has the same meaning, it can't really be used in the imperative. I mean,sounds rather...uncool, doesn't it?
How would this kind of thing be said in or maybe lingo?
※It doesn't have to be the exact meaning of pressing the gas pedal to the floor, I am more interested in what phrases are actually used.
|
> ****
or
> **** !
or
> ****
**Let's go at full throttle!/Full Blast!**
should work.
I guess __ is probably used when you need to accelerate very hard like slope. So, you might be told like that by the teacher at driving school.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "slang, word requests"
}
|
Asking a question with a negative verb (見なかった?)
In Yotsubato Ch. 1, Fuuka asks Ena:
>
I understand this to mean "Have you seen a strange kid?" But I'm a bit hung up on the negative form of the verb here. Why not ask:
> ?
Is there a difference in meaning or nuance?
I know that negative verbs in questions can be used invitationally or rhetorically as in:
>
or
>
But somehow this case seems different to me. Is it the same or related grammar pattern? Or is it a different pattern that someone can point me to?
|
When you say , you hope that he saw the kid or you think he probably saw the kid.
>
> Did an elementary school girl come here?
When you say this, the situation will be like you are looking for your daughter.
>
> Did teacher come here?
When you say this, the situation will be like you saw the teacher walking toward the classroom, and just asks if he came here.
> Did you see a strange kid?
When you say this, the situation will be like you saw a strange kid in a restaurant, after you got out of there you ask your friend who you had lunch with.
> Did you see a strange kid?
When you say this, the situation will be like you want to tell him why the kid is strange and how funny it is. And you may say “” more loudly for emphasis.
But this is just tendency, nuance. You can say whichever you want.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, questions, negation, learning"
}
|
てもいいですか vs. causative verb + もらってもいいですか
> ****
I know that _causative verb form + _ means to let somebody do something. And is for asking for permission. But I don't quite understand the use of these 2 constructions together.
If I wanted to ask someone to let me use their phone, I would possibly say:
>
How are the meanings of the two sentences different? Is "" just more polite?
|
- May I do(To Grant Permission)
causative form + - Would you Please let me do(To seek permission)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
The use of 申し上げる and 申す
According to Jisho.com, and are both kenjougo. From what I can tell, the meanings are also very similar, if not identical.
However, the words are not interchangeable. We can use (not ) in sentences like . And we can't use instead of in .
Though it's easy to memorize the phrases, I'd like to understand the two verbs better. How exactly are they similar and different? When can and can't we use each of them?
Thank you!
|
According to ,
> {}{}{}{}{}{}
{}is courtesy form of {}, and the expression is to express what you are doing in a reserved way to the listener to looking up to the listener.
They follow
>
So,{} has to change into the {} with the polite suffix
Thus,
> {}
this is saying the name "" to the listener in a reserved way to look up to the listener.
They move onto {}{}.
> {}{}{}{}{}{}{}
So, {}{}is humble form of {}, and the expression is to saying what you are doing in a reserved way for the partner to show the respect to the partner.
> .
So this is greeting itself is expressed in a reserved way to show the respect to the partner.
They also explains the etymology of on the phone call is {}. Telephone operator used to say in order not to be rude to the listner, however it was hard to pick up the sound, it has become contracted into .
> ****
>
>
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "keigo"
}
|
What is the difference between 「警察」and 「警官」?
I understand that is a broader term to refer to the police in general, but it can be used to refer to a police officer. In such case, is it equivalent to or there is still a difference between both words?
|
The difference is actually huge.
{} can refer to:
1) The **intangible** "police" as an institution. The whole system of policing a nation, region, etc.
2) The **tangible** "police station" or "police department". Also called {}
3) The informal form of {} or {} = "a cop".
{} only has one meaning.
1) "a policeman", "a cop". Synonymous to {}
Extra:
For the native speakers, the first word we learn to use for referring to a cop is definitely **** . You are **_not_** going to hear a toddler say:
or
The kind of toddler who would say those would be considered .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "words, synonyms"
}
|
What does 〇〇〇〇 mean when combined with おじさん？
I saw the term written in a chat profile. What does the mean?
|
implies that various words are applied to . For example, he might say and so on. But he doesn't say it concretely because he would just tell that he is a middle aged man or the word is one that he doesn't want people to know such as , .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "meaning, symbols"
}
|
Use of 全て（すべて）in a sentence
Would it be accurate to say: **** to mean "I did not buy anything because everything was expensive." Is the phrasing correct? And is the use of the particle ”” accurate or should I use ”” instead? ( ****
|
You should say
If you say
We’ll think “Something besides (everything) isn’t expensive? What do you mean?”
But we usually say and
You don’t have to use .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, english to japanese, japanese to english"
}
|
文の組み立て JLPT N1 Question about word order
I am currently practicing for the N1 JLPT, where the questions require us to assemble the sentences in the correct order. Although the book provides the correct answer, it doesn't provide the correct order of the phrases. Hence, I would like to check whether the following sentences are in the correct order as I have trouble figuring out the correct sequence.
> 1.
> ( is the correct answer provided, and not sure about the other 3 positions)
>
> 2.
> ( is the correct phrase, but I'm not sure of the reasoning as to why the is in the 4th space.
>
>
Thank you for the help! :D
|
>
> We need water that is both sufficient in quantity and clean.
is ungrammatical for obvious reasons. I believe you already know how to join two na-adjectives using , so please learn how to use to emphasize the meaning of "and". You can rephrase this as **** **** . See how and have been swapped. In case you have trouble parsing , this discussion may help.
>
This one is already correct.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, jlpt, word order"
}
|
What is a female worker who receives a salary called?
I have seen the term for men. What is a female who works for a salary, regardless of occupation, called? Is appropriate?
|
We don't use . **OL (pronounced )** is a catch-all, wasei-eigo term for female office workers. Don't try to "spell it out" as , which is usually **not** understood.
However, some people believe it mainly refers to low-ranking workers who does clerical work, and even English Wikipedia article for this is written with such a prejudiced view:
> OL is a female office worker in Japan who performs generally pink collar tasks such as serving tea and secretarial or clerical work.
The Japanese version says it's essentially a neutral term. If you want to avoid misunderstanding, it's safest to just use **** regardless of sex. is becoming a dated word, anyway.
**EDIT** : Note that both and OL mainly refer to **office** workers. Blue-collar workers are usually not called even if their income is salary-based.
Related
* What is the difference between , OL, and ?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "words, katakana"
}
|
Given the context, what is the correct way to parse this sentence segment 次に訊くべき言葉が出てこない。?
>
>
> ……
>
> []
>
>
>
>
>
> ****
My western brain doesn't know how to understand the bolded segment. It parsed the segment as 'particle-()' 'verb-()' 'particle-()' 'noun-()' 'particle-()' 'verb-()'. I don't know if my parsing is correct or wrong, but I know that the following is true for parsing basic sentences.
> Japanese: Subject/topic + object + verb
>
> English: Subject + Verb + Object
Seeing as how there are two verbs in the Japanese segment, how do I understand what the verbs and particles are doing to form a coherent sentence?
|
Um, you know about Japanese relative clauses, right? If not, I have to say this novel is too difficult for you yet. When you see a verb before a noun, it usually means there is a relative clause involved, although there are a few exceptions.
The _main clause_ of this sentence is:
>
> Words will not come out. (i.e., I'm at a loss for words.)
This cannot be simpler.
So is a _relative clause_ that modifies . is not a particle but an adverb meaning "next". Note that particles cannot be at the beginning of a sentence. is "to ask". is an auxiliary verb that means "should" (see this).
> ****
> (literally) Words **with which I should ask next** will not come out.
> I was at a loss for next words to ask a question.
(I used the past tense because this is an example of historical present.)
If is what threw you off, this can be dropped without largely changing the meaning in this case:
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "particles, parsing, auxiliaries"
}
|
左に曲がる/右に曲がる v/s 左折/右折
That's it, essentially. What differentiates these two ways to indicate a turn? So far, I had only heard /, but recently I heard / in the GPS of a car. At first I thought that the latter was just a noun version, more than an action, but I've seen examples where the latter seems to also be used as a verb (i.e. ). Is it more car-related? A Google image search for the latter only shows car-driving related pictures.
Thanks in advance !!
|
refer only to cars, bicycles, busses, and other vehicles on road (I think airplanes can while on road, not flying) is used in various ways.
>
>
>
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "word choice, nuances, wago and kango"
}
|
Equivalent to "How to" in guides and the like
What is an equivalent expression to "How to" that is used when searching/referring to guides, especially online?
|
There is no equivalent. One way would be to change the verb where appropriate and make something like , etc.
Or as the other answer said, use a generic word like .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "expressions, english to japanese, phrase requests"
}
|
Is the function of this ある a pre-noun adjectival, or is it a verb that forms a relative clause?
I'm going over my previously done translations to see if any need further editing, and the following comes up.
> {}{}{} **** {}{}{}
I relearned yesterday that a relative clause/qualifying phrase is made by placing a verb or adjective in front of a noun in Japanese. In the above, the relative clause would be ****. The noun being modified that makes up the main clause is .
The issue is that says that is both a verb and a pre-noun adjectival, both of which, to my meager understanding, would work in the above sentence to form a relative clause. How do you know if is a verb or a adjective in the above sentence?
|
as a pre-noun adjectival is used to mean "one" or "a certain," in common constructions such as .
In this case, is clearly bringing some "baggage" with it in the form of:
>
(Where the is converted from ). So you can be certain that is acting as the verb in a phrase modifying the noun .
Having said that, I don't think there's any strict difference between these two uses of . While may sound like, e.g., , it's simply "a day that exists," using the verb
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": -1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "verbs, adjectives, relative clauses"
}
|
Does こと mean 'thing' in the following context?
The characters are having the following conversation (provided for context), and I'm unsure as to what in the last line means. According to a previously asked question, it has a large number of uses. From the context, I'm tentatively guessing that means "thing", seeing as how the topic is about a talent that the first character was previously unaware of. I'm unsure though, as has many other uses.
> ……
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> …… **** ……
Is my understanding of the use of in the above sentence correct?
|
As you say, the means “thing” in this sentence.
is the (nonsense thing).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation, syntax, formal nouns"
}
|
Romanizing doubled-up kango
I am reading some old prewar books that smush two kango together to create a complex noun, for example for "legends and traditions".
An academic citation, by an author who I am finding a bit dubious, gives Romanizations for such doubled-up kango with a _ya_ in the middle, for example, _densetsu ya dentō_.
Is this a legitimate way to transcribe the literary reading of doubled-up kango, or is _densetsu dentō_ the correct pronunciation?
edit in reply to naruto: The exact document in question is a Meiji period current events magazine from 1899, but I'm wondering about this general pattern of writing which I've seen over the period 1890-1945
|
I'm a naitive Japanese speaker. Just let you know my answer is based on my experience, not based on linguistic evidences.
> Romanizations for such doubled-up kango with a ya in the middle, for example, densetsu ya dentō.
From my perspective, this statement is questionable. It is true that you can itemize with "ya"() (both in written and spoken Japanese), but in such cases we would always spell it out explicitly, that is .
However, the "doubled-up kango" itself is not wrong. Sometimes (but not often) we itemize things without using "" or "" and its pronunciation is simply, "densetsu dentō." In normal sentences, spelling with ”” or "" between (i.e. ) would be preferable for readability. (Also, it might be my personal articulation style, but I put a short pause between densetsu and dentō.)
I hope this helps.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "readings, wago and kango"
}
|
What is the meaning of キルフェボン?
I dont understand the meaning of this word. The context is the heading of the chatroom. Thank you.
|
Qu'il fait bon is a Japanese cake shop’s name.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": -3,
"tags": "meaning, words"
}
|
So that + adjective?
How would you translate something like “so that you are/can be X”?
I bought this so that he’ll be safe.
I want to do this for you so that you’re happy!
|
Like mentioned in the comments you would use /. As for the question of how to combine this with adjectives and the copula you would normally use the adverbial form of the word in question. For example:
>
>
>
>
For the copula you can use (which is another form of the copula) but I think in most cases and does the job better
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, translation, word choice, usage"
}
|
What's the difference between 立ち上がる and 立つ?
They both appear to mean "to stand up".
|
has much more range. It's used to mean "stand," as in a prolonged action; standing in one place. is just the action of standing up. If you google image, it's easy to see the difference. has another meaning of, basically, "rising from the ashes", like here: .
on the other hand has a huge range of meanings, just hop over to your favorite dictionary. If it's any good, it should make things clear.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "word choice"
}
|
「ようとしない」と「ことがある」の違い
I’m right now learning the pattern but I can’t tell the difference on a negative statement using .
>
>
|
1.
2.
His _unwillingness_ is explicitly expressed in the first sentence. () is a _volitional_ form, after all. Maybe he has some shady background he wants to hide. The second sentence is simply saying such a thing does not happen. It may be that he has nothing interesting to tell, or no one is interested in him.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, word choice"
}
|
お父さんの無念を引き継ぎ糧にすることが出来る。 What's the meaning?
>
I tried to understand what this sentence means, but I am totally confused. It was related to an assets that left behind, but there was character which means food or provision, it's really confusing. Please kindly help. Thanks.
|
> {}{}{}{}{}
> with referring to .
{}, in this context, roughly means " **food for thought** ", " **intellectual nourishment** ", etc. This is a very common usage of the word, too, besides its basic meaning of "burgers and fries" (j/k), the food with real calories.
> "I shall remember my father's regrets so that I will be able to turn them into my food for thought (to live on)."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation, japanese to english"
}
|
Romanizations of Japanese using consonant diacritics?
The Hepburn romanization, to express the different realizations of some consonants before /i/ or /u/, uses different spellings from the other syllables in their groups:
* /si/ > "shi"
* /zi/ > "ji"
* /ti/ > "chi", /tu/ > "tsu"
* /hu/ > "fu"
Other romanizations, like the Nihon-shiki or Kunrei-shiki, avoid this altogether sticking to one consonant symbol for each group.
Have there ever been any romanization standards which instead used diacritics to express this difference in pronunciation? E.g. something like:
sa ši su se so
za ži zu ze zo
ta ťi ţu te to
ha he ḩu he ho
|
No romanization systems currently in use today use diacritics on consonants. I think it's non-intuitive to both Japanese and English speakers.
Portuguese-style romaji was used in the 16th century, and it included some diacritics. Historically, there were also French-, Dutch-, and German-style systems (see a table in the middle of this page). I don't know about them, but I believe they are not actively used today, anyway. For example, _tsunami_ is spelled as _tsunami_ in all these languages.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "rōmaji, symbols"
}
|
Asking if you are there いますか or いるの？
I want to ask if someone is there. Can both terms be used to ask if a person is there/are you there? or
|
I assume what you are asking is " + " construction.
> + ****
means you want to **get the reply** from someone if they are staying there.
So, if someone is replying, it might **relieve** you.
> + ****
means you **are wondering** if someone is there since it is **unlikely/no sign** someone is staying there. So, if someone is replying, it might **surprise** you.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "meaning, words"
}
|
What does "信じて行動する" mean?
Please explain more in detail and clearly that phrase "".
Context:
>
Am I to understand that definition like "man of word + man of action", a person who is completely self-controlled and achieves the goals set for herself, a successful man?
|
The in , means 'and then' because it is the continuous form. It means (literal): Me and haru believed a guy and then acted(moved).
Kind of like you can say I went to the supermarket and then returned to school. The fact that you combined into one thought shows that you are missing the fact that the splits it into two separate although related thoughts.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
Difference between 呼ぶ声がします and 呼びます
The full context of the first original phrase is:
> {}{}
I was just wondering, why is in the sentence when there is already ? Or rather, what would be wrong with replacing with ?
|
> ****
> ****
Both are _grammatically_ correct.
In the former, expresses/implies that someone's voice came toward the main character ( here) and he hears it.
So the latter is just:
> Someone called, "Urashima-san, Urashima-san..."
while the original sounds more like:
> Taro heard someone's voice calling him, "Urashima-san, Urashima-san..."
* * *
The here means "to sense/perceive".
> []{} etc. +
is used to mean "to sense/perceive [voice, sound, smell, taste, feeling, etc.]"
eg
> _hear a voice_
> _hear the sound of ~_
> _smell ~_
For more on this usage of , you can refer to these threads:
* the extended use of (to do)
* How do I use ? (ex: )
* What does mean when it does not mean "do"?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "verbs"
}
|
赤らめる 大それた rule for reading
> []{}
On’yomi before hiragana in a word looks special.
Are there any other examples?
If any, how can I know whether it is kun’yomi or on’yomi?
Like:
> []{}
|
On’yomi before hiragana are exceptional cases in Japanese. Most of those words occur when a conjugation of the verb is followed after On’yomi, such as:
> []{}, []{}, []{}, []{}, []{}, []{}, []{}
However, []{} is not included even in this type. I know several other examples:
> []{}, []{}, []{}, []{}
But probably they are quite special. I don't know this is related, but at least examples above, these are categorized into a special word class called pre-noun adjectival ([]{}). It is said that there are few words belonging to this word class.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "readings"
}
|
もう + た-form AND た-form + こと が ある
What is the difference between these two sentences?
Both sentences mean "I've already eaten sushi", right? But what situation would I use in? And when would I use ?
|
> 1) {}{}
>
> 2)
The first sentence can only mean one thing and **the second can mean two very different things**.
1) can only mean " **I have eaten sushi before**." This person has already experienced eating sushi. The speaker, therefore, would almost always be a non-Japanese person.
2) can mean the exact same as 1) and an additional thing, which is:
"I have already eaten **_the_** sushi."
**The meal happened to be sushi that time**. Thus, for this meaning, the speaker can well be a Japanese person.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
When to omit だ when answering questions?
Maybe this is a stupid question, but in _Minna no Nihongo_ it says to omit when giving a **positive answer** to a question.
> Question:
> Answer: ****
But it is not explained if one can omit when answering this way:
**Example 1**
> Question:
> Answer: (?)
**Example 2**
> Question:
> Answer: (?)
Do I have to put at the end of these two answers or should I omit it?
|
Grammatically in your cases using or omitting does not make any difference.
But Japanese speakers use specific forms in specific situations, and it changes when the relationship between speakers changes.
In both example, the question sentence and is quite casual, and sounds like the speakers are female. Using a single for the end of a sentence is strong and mostly used by male speakers, so I will omit it here. If you want to use , adding another sentence ending particle after it will be more natural. Ex.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, copula"
}
|
What is the function of たろ in this sentence?
I found this sentence while I was practicing in Wanikani platform.
Translation according to Wanikani: "Do you want me to crack your skull open and suck out your brains with a straw?" the ghost said angrily.
There is a in there and I have not yet been able to decipher its meaning. Would you be so kind as to give me a clue? I'd really appreciate it if you did so.
|
The whole quoted line is in Kansai colloquial speech (and the translation provided is good).
{} is in Standard "dictionary" Japanese, meaning " ** _should I suck ~~?_** ". It is the volitional form of with a question marker .
is the tough guy's slang for {}.
{} is an emphatic version of or .
is the onomatopoeia for the sucking sound. It is a regular onomatopoeia that is used everywhere.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
Why is the る left off すぎる in this sentence?
Here is my sentence.
>
First, I'm not sure what means, perhaps somewhat could inform me since Jisho and google translate are both giving results that I don't think are correct. I'm thinking it's some sort of slang.
Now for the main question. I believe the to be the explanatory and this sentence means, "(The thing is) You ask for too much." What's the reasoning for taking the off here? would be the stem of . Every example I've ever come across of explanatory with a verb has not used the stem. What's the difference here?
|
Masu-stem of a verb often works as a noun. Here is a _noun_ meaning something like "over-asking".
Also note that is followed by , which comes only after a noun or a na-adjective. is plain ungrammatical. Please check this list for the usage patterns of explanatory-.
Compare:
> * He is eating too much. (Literally "As for him, it's over-eating")
> * He (always) eats too much.
> * It is that he (always) eats too much.
> * He is eating too much.
>
As for , I also guess you've misread . Or it may be someone's name.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Renyoukei at the end of a sentence
<
I'm curious about the renyoukei at the end of the last sentence of the description:
>
What does it do at the end of a sentence? Google Translate makes a consequence of and I would think has a conjoining function, but I can't anything confirming that.
Thanks in advance.
|
I am not sure about what you are asking, but … means the story goes on, but the sentence omits the rest part after the two characters meet. In this case the conjunction form is used since the following part is just omitted.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "renyōkei"
}
|
Meaning of 棒立ちの様子
I got this sentence from Boku no Hero S01E13 (06m25s)
> .
> Besides, the children appear to be frozen in fear. (translation from the site)
I understand everything except the expresion in the title.
According to Rikaikun, those words mean: = standing upright; standing bolt upright; rearing = state; state of affairs; situation; circumstances;
So how can mean "frozen in fear"?
|
literally means "standing (like a) stick", and its implication is "uselessly standing still without doing anything else". "In fear" is a translator's addition, but I think it's not spot-on because the children don't seem to be afraid in particular.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation, meaning"
}
|
Couple of slangs I've heard when watching anime
In one of the animes I've watched recently (can't recall the title), I heard words like "" (not sure if this is how it's spelt in katakana since I only heard the word, but as for how it's pronounced in English, it would most probably sound like cheeeeesee) and "" (English pronunciation : wotto).
Judging from context, the former means "hello" and the latter, "whoops". And there is also "" (uwaa) which probably means "yikes" (I'm guessing, in a bad way, something like "") in English.
So the questions that arises are, since I am only translating based on context, I am not sure if they mean what I think they meant. Can anyone correct/ advice on this?
Secondly, are these words even used in real life (I have only heard them on anime) ?
|
>
If it sounded like and it was said in a scene where one would say "Hello!", it would almost have to be:
**** **** , etc.
It is an informal and slangy "Hi!" that comes from **** **** **** **** , etc.
Naturally, this has nothing to do with cheese.
>
If this was uttered where you would expect to hear "Whoops!", then it would be:
(emphatic version of above)
It is an interjection uttered when you are surprised by something happening all of a sudden or when something catches your attention.
Finally,
>
You heard this one right. It is an exclamation used in all kinds of situations.
You mentioned "Yikes!" and that would be one meaning of it. We use it upon seeing/hearing something we like as well. It is an all-purpose exclamation.
> are these words even used in real life?
Yes, of course. All three are actively used among us native speakers in real life. You would, however, need to understand that is only used by certain (young) speakers in casual situations.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 12,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "slang, casual"
}
|
About the differences between 貯金 and 節約
As the title says, I would like to know differences between {} and {}. Both mean "saving money" and have the irregular verb ending:
> {} : To save money
>
> {} : To save money
From what I understand by reading example sentences, {} has a more general meaning and can be used with anything to save like water, food, money...
Is only usable with a _money_ context? Are there any differences between the two of them when they are used in a _money_ context?
|
= to put money in the bank or a piggy bank or envelope.
= to avoid spending money (i.e., to make food rather than eat out)
Both of these are []{} (Chinese words in Japanese).
follows a verb-object pattern. Thus,
(v) store (object) - money
follows a duplication pattern:
(v) -save - save
So you can do lots of things to , but if you are talking about water, people say []{} or about electricity []{}. In those cases, it means "reduce use of X"
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "word choice, words, word usage"
}
|
What does はなはなはな mean in the Okinawan dialect?
What does mean? People were clapping and the expression was used after the karaoke song was completed. This term was used as more of a chant after the person finished singing. This expression was heard while chatting with people from Okinawa.
|
or are like “cheers!” They’re used before starting to drink.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "expressions, dialects"
}
|
Why is で used in this sentence 両方セットで差し上げます?
So I'm reading a manga and this girl is giving a guy two pieces of paper. She says "” I would think that a particle would be used here since the set of papers is an object. "I give the set of papers (to you)." What do I give? The set of papers. I'm looking here, < , at the 4 main uses of and none of them seem to explain the particle's usage here. Can anyone explain what is doing here.
|
Because she omitted the part of the sentence. For example if she was giving apple()...
* **** ****
... is the correct way. " **** **** " sounds weird. The example you have shown omitted the part "". That's the reason she says "". In the web site you have shown, I believe (2) is the closest usage.
By the way, you can also say ...
* **** ****
So just saying "" is correct too.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
What are the nuanced usages of まず?
The following lines of dialogue is spoken by a girl to the narrative character in a book I'm translating.
> {} ****
>
> {}
I know generally means 'first', but I am unable to parse out what 'first' is denoting in the above line.
Does denote a aspect of time, as in 'first (time) in that situation...'. Does it denote a action done by such as 'first they would have panicked...'/'they certainly first would have panicked', etc? Does it denote something else? Or does not mean 'first' in the above sentence, and instead mean something along the lines of 'about', 'almost' or 'anyway', as defined on Jisho?
Roughly Translated Context
|
> {} {} **** {}
, in this context, does not mean "first" as you stated.
In Japanese, it is synonymous to {}. In English, it would be " ** _for the most part_** ", " ** _likely_** ", etc.
> Does denote a aspect of time, as in 'first (time)' in that situation?
No, not in that context, as I briefly explained above.
> Does it denote a action done by such as 'first they would have panicked...'/'they certainly first would have panicked', etc?
Sorry but no. It denotes a (rather high) probability or likelihood in the sentence in question. It does **not** denote an order of actions taking place. "First" is only one of the meanings of .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation, usage, definitions"
}
|
Most natural way to use the negative with つもり
Which is more natural to say in Japanese? Do they have slightly different connotations?
* (I intend not to eat.)
* (I do not intend to eat.)
Also, are those translations fairly accurate?
|
They have different structures as you've translated, and both forms are used as often as the other unlike English. If I reword them to be clearer:
* = _I have an intention that: "I'm not going to eat (it)"_
* = _I have no such intention that: "I'm going to eat (it)"_
...and don't forget:
* = _I don't have an intention that: "I'm going to eat (it)"_
which is the negative of in the usual sense i.e. negation of the verb.
As you can see, is used when you have a definite will not to do it. On the other hand, the interpretation of is open to what you want to contrast/emphasize using in each context:
* > A:
> _Hey, there's a nice cake in the fridge._
> B:
> _It's for the party so don't eat it._
> A:
> _Oh, I didn't mean it._ (= It's not that I intend to eat it.)
* > A:
> _Don't you want to eatfugu?_
> B:
> _I'm never going to eat it because I don't want to be poisoned._
Further reading:
*
*
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "grammar, nuances, negation"
}
|
What is the difference between「家族【かぞく】」and「家庭【かてい】」?
Aside from "home" or "household", I understand that can mean "family" as well. In such case, is there any difference in terms of usage or nuance between and ? when is it more suitable to use instead of ?
|
Regardless of how they may be rendered in the natural English, always points to **people** , while always **place**. In other words, is a group united by kinship or whatever that often lives together, or its member; is an environment that enables those people to gather and spend a private life (as opposed to "workplace" etc.)
Many words can be only used along with either of them, or change drastically on which they are used with.
> _family visit_ (as visa applicants do)
> _home visit_ (as doctors do)
>
> (a category of cars, movies, video games, tour packages...)
> (a category of prepared foods, video game consoles, vacuum cleaners...)
>
> _family portrait_
> × (a photo records someone's lifestyle?)
>
> × (a family's symbolic meal?)
> _homemade food_
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "word choice, words, synonyms"
}
|
What is the difference between 「いろいろ」and 「さまざま」?
According to the dictionary, they both mean "various". What is the difference between both words?
|
is used with different items of the same type (like different types of coffee at coffee shop) while would be for different types of items (tea, coffee, soda,...).
is also more casual and used in speech while is usual written.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "word choice, synonyms, na adjectives"
}
|
Is there a difference in usage between 賃銀 and 賃金?
I was looking into a novel and I found the word . According to my dictionary, this word has the same meaning as , which is _wages_ , the money a person receive for a work/task.
They have the same pronunciation and is another form of (according to jisho.org). But what I still don't know is in which case is used over .
|
According to this site, {}{}{}
{}
> {}
The salary white collar worker received called {}.
{}{}
> {}
The salary blue collar worker received called {}.
The sample expression from old novel,
> _ **** []{}{}_
`Third Old-Rickshaw driver we had negotiated finally approved to go to Koume with salary Otoyo afforded.`
`Sumida-River, Sumidagawa by Kafū Nagai.`
So, the salary written as {} was payed for physical work before.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning, word choice, kanji choice"
}
|
What term would be used for commemorative coins and notes collectively?
Would commemorative coins and notes collectively be known as to indicate a type of memorial? The special money printed and coined in honor of special occasions such as the Olympics and other national events.
|
would cover both coinage and paper money used for memorializing purposes. As shown on the linked Wikipedia page, can be used to specify paper currency.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": -2,
"tags": "meaning, words"
}
|
Why is a fountain pen called 万年筆?
I am curious about the etymological history of {}, whose actual meaning is a fountain pen in Japanese.
If we separate the kanjis we have :
> {}: ten thousand
>
> {}: years
>
> {}: brush
So, literally it means _a ten thousand years brush_ , isn't it ?
Why is it called that way ? Is it because this item made its appearance at some point in History ten thousand years after another event ?
|
, , and () all have 'many' as part of their definitions. Going in order of lower number to higher number signifies a higher quantity. These numbers are often used figuratively, such as {}signifying 'long life', while literally meaning 10,000 years (of age). is often used in the figurative sense to convey something similar to permanence or eternity, though not quite in the literal sense.
very many; lots. Advanced age.
many; numerous; very.
myriad; many; all; a large number; everything
In the case of the naming of , one would assume that it was mostly a marketing device, giving the impression to the buyer that it would last indefinitely.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "words, etymology"
}
|
What does the term ほおほお mean?
I mentioned to a Japanese chat friend that I liked music after he asked me what I liked. He then typed . Does it mean something similar to "I see."? Thanks.
|
is an interjection used when one is impressed or surprised. It roughly means " _ **Oh, is that right?**_ ", " _ **Oh, I see.**_ ", etc. depending on the context it is used in.
The dictionary spelling is or just .
<
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "meaning, words"
}
|
Which is more appropriate? 大学院に入る／入学する／進学する?
Please explain which of the following (or any other) is more appropriate to say "enter postgraduate school/studies":
1.
2.
3.
|
andmean entering school. Therefore, you can use them regardless of what kind of school. In addition,is more informal than and you should use the latter in writing.
On the other hand, if you use, you will lay stress on entering "more advanced" school. For example, if you go on to graduate school directly after graduating college, No.3 is the most proper expression.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "verbs, compound verbs"
}
|
Expressing the act of drawing
Can the kanji for writing be used to express that one is drawing something, like a picture. As in read as .
|
For drawing, we use {} as in {}.
{} is reserved for writing letters and characters. So, we say {}, {}, etc.
Note that the two are originally the same verb. They are only written using different kanji for disambiguation.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 10,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "kanji"
}
|
Is it possible to make a relative clause & main clause using a formal noun, such as はず?
I know that a relative clause and main clause are formed when you have a construct of [sentence/verb] + noun in Japanese. While attempting to translate the following sentence, I found three of the above construct as denoted by (1) (2) and (3), where the relative clause and main clause meet.
> ( **1** ){}( **2** )( **3** )
Number 3 seemed suspicious to me and not quite right to be a instance of the relative-main clause construct, so I did some research. This answer says that (in most cases) is a ("formal noun"), which made me wonder if it is possible to make relative-main clause constructs using formal nouns as opposed to normal nouns.
And if the answer is 'yes', is the above instance of making a relative-main clause construct? If not, why (in the case it is a formal noun in the above instance, but still fails to make a clause)?
|
The short answer is yes. You can even say is always preceded by a modifier, which is usually a relative clause (and sometimes an attributive like , ). Some like work without a modifier, in which case they are not called .
> * when he watches a cat
> (↑ This is a formal noun)
> * The time has come.
> (↑ This is an ordinary noun)
>
It is important to understand that are very often **translated to English without using a noun**. Still, syntactically speaking, they are Japanese nouns, and thus accept relative clauses. Your sentence indeed has three relative clauses marked by (1), (2), and (3).
Other examples of `relative-clause + `:
> * ****
> I will study to pass the exam.
> * ****
> He did not know the fact that the earth is round
> * ****
> I paid as I was told to.
> * ****
> I like watching TV.
>
The last example is also known as a nominalizer, but is a perfect , syntactically speaking.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "relative clauses"
}
|
What is this character? 始める_!
Probably a silly question. I assume that it is just a stylistic way of writing some katakana or hiragana that I know. The image is from but I’ve seen it in a few places. The full sentence is basically “let the global conference begin.”!enter image description here
> _!
|
This is essentially a duplicate of Is this character a ?
I don't like answering in comments, so I'll post it here.
The character is a two-stroke with a dakuten: .
Related:
* In what situations can you use as a sentence ender
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "katakana, hiragana"
}
|
Is the negative potential of 書く used in this sentence and what is its meaning?
I am reading a manga and a girl is showing her tutor that she "started her test." All she has is her name written down. Here is the sentence. . I believe the tutor has said this. The preceding sentence was said by the girl and was
I can't quite pick up on what is being said here. It seems like is the negative potential form of . So my obviously wrong translation is, "Not being able to only write your name is good." This makes no sense. I'm just taking every word at face value so to speak. If anyone could provide a proper meaning for this sentence, I would greatly appreciate it.
|
I think it's:
> ****
... means "no(thing)...but" → "only". (not "not...only")
is a contracted pronunciation of . can mean "have not done (yet)". (See: Why is a verb in the past () contradicted with ? ) here literally means "have not been able to write anything but~~" "(have) managed to write only~~".
The means "but". (It's a conjunctive particle, not the subject case particle.)
So the whole sentence means:
> "You've only written your name, but it's good."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "conjugations"
}
|
How is したら acting in this sentence: こいつからしたら当然の反応だが
Can anyone help me find out what is doing in this sentence:
>
I assume to be "from these guys", to be "natural response" and to be "but/however".
Now for the confusing part. The seems to be the conditional of . Could this be "expressing surprise at the condition" like Tae Kim says here? Even so, how does fit here? Could the speaker be saying something along the lines of "whatever these guys do, I'm not surprised (It's my natural reaction at this point)"?
Any help would be much appreciated. I've been coming across more uses of that don't necessarily translate to "if" or "when", so that can partly contribute to my uncertainty with this problem.
|
It means ”Shit. For him, it’s a natural response.”
But I can’t expect why there is “”. You may understand the meaning by context.
means “for, in one’s opinion”
>
> For him, chess is more difficult than shogi.
> 50
> In my opinion, it’s great to get 50 points in maths.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning, conditionals"
}
|
At what age is a person considered to be シルバー?
I read this term in an online article and it was referring to people. I assume it means elderly people. Is there an age that one must be to use this term?
|
It appears to depend upon which organization or company is assigning the designation. Usually using 65 to 70 years of age as a lower threshold. This is similar to varying ages for 'senior discounts' (in the US anyways).
Here is a page from NTT Facilities Research, which lists a few terms regarding the elderly relative to age.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "words, katakana, word usage, loanwords"
}
|
Difference between 行きます and 来ます in this context
I was messaging my friend telling her I'll meet her at the library and I said
>
> (I'll come to the library soon.)
She corrected me saying not ''.
Why
I'll 'go' to the library?
Since I'll be meeting her there, I thought I'll 'come' to the library.
Why is it not ?
|
It's not how we typically use "come" in American English. You only use if you are already at that place. Since you are not there yet, you have to "go" there, so you must use .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
助けてくれて有難う meaning and usage
I want to thank the people who are helping me on this website. Would be the appropriate thing to say to everyone?
|
> I want to thank the people who are helping me on this website.
In that case, how about...
> ()
>
> or just
If you want to sound more formal, how about...
>
> ()
* * *
> Would be the appropriate thing to say to everyone?
It would be understood, but it sounds to me like "Thank you for saving me / saving my life".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": -1,
"tags": "meaning, words"
}
|
Is there a difference between 辞典 and 辞書 ？
Is there a difference between and ? I know that both terms refer to a dictionary. I am thinking that a has pictures and possibly more volumes (encyclopedia) and a does not.
|
* **** : dictionary
* **** : dictionary
* **** : encyclopedia (with pictures and long descriptions)
Note that and are different words with the same reading. and are basically synonyms, but tends to be used as part of a compound or a dictionary name, whereas is more widely used as a common noun for a dictionary.
Related:
* The difference between and
* What is the difference between jibiki and jisho?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "meaning, words"
}
|
What's the function of the particle も in this sentence?
I don't think a lot of context is needed, basically a girl having an intimate moment and talk with her boyfriend...
Rough translation: (You/we) don't have to hold back, because (the expression) "To be in love with someone means to be greedy for them" is understood by me now _as well?_.
It seems to me that the sentence makes perfect sentence without , so is it there for emphasis of some sort? If it means "as well", would the [as well] refer to how there are many people (boyfriend included) who understand that "To be in love with someone means to be greedy for them" and she is saying that now she is one of them too? Or does have another meaning/function here?
|
This is _also_ or _as well_. Since it attaches (), the basic meaning is "I also understand", "not only you but also I" or "I as well as others", implying she was slow to realize that "fact".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning, particle も"
}
|
Is the pattern V + に行く used with -する verbs?
Is it natural to say, for example **** ? Or would you rather say ? If both are acceptable, is there any difference in meaning or usage?
|
is used quite a bit more frequently. Looking around, most people don't really see a difference between the two and consider both correct.
It's like saying in English, 'I'm going for a walk.' versus 'I'm gonna go for a walk.'.
Many if not most other cases of V + would likely be more appropriate with the .
For example, if you were talking about tennis and you just said , one wouldn't understand if you were going to watch tennis or going to play tennis (/) .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, verbs"
}
|
わける vs 振り分ける -- What is the ふり doing here?
Consider the following example:
> divide the main folder into sub folders (in case of mail)
>
>
>
What I want to know is why do we add ""? Why can't we just use ""?
|
just means dividing one thing (or several things) into two or more pieces (or groups). means sorting or distributing _many_ things into subgroups, and it is used especially when items arrive over time, as in e-mail filters or HTTP load balancers. In your case, there is only one main folder but there are many mails in it, so you can say **** () **** or **** 2 **** . **** doesn't look correct to me because it sounds like there are dozens of random folders to sort.
Regarding this , it means something like "to assign" here. See the third definition here.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "verbs, compound verbs"
}
|
Why does と思います point to "you"?
There is a sentence on IMABI:
>
Which translates to:
> Why do you think it is you got fat?
Why is it `you think`? If I were to translate it, it would be `I really wonder why you got fat?` (`really` comes from ``, which as I think has emphasis purposes after ``)
Where have I got it wrong? Or can this sentence be translated either way?
|
Here's a very simplified explanation: because the makes it a question.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.