INSTRUCTION
stringlengths 11
999
| RESPONSE
stringlengths 0
999
| SOURCE
stringlengths 16
38
| METADATA
dict |
|---|---|---|---|
Trouble with "不安と、病名がちゃんとあったことに少し安心して涙が止まらない"
> **** (source)
I don't know how to link "" to ""(which function of is it?)
And I don't understand why is used if it makes her cry, it doesn't seem logic since if it is a weak emotion it shouldn't make her cry...? "I can't stop crying because I' m a **little bit** relieved"
|
connects and . It is a little off grammatically, but that's not too much of a surprise given that this is a tweet. Perhaps more proper way of saying this would be
As for your question about , if you read it like "a little bit of relief" resulted in tears streaming, that might come off as odd, but if you think of it as "finally I found that somebody understood this illness", which is what the name signifies, then hopefully you can understand why it made her cry. That sense of finding an answer gave her comfort.
She's describing this comfort as "a little" because knowing what the problem is still just the beginning, not the ending.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, particle と"
}
|
Meaning of もらってもらう?
I found the combination "" in a text in N1, page 142:
> …… ****
My questions are as follows:
* What does this expression mean as a whole?
* How can you break down the expression to explain its meaning?
|
/ are usually translated as "receive".
/ can also be used as an auxiliary verb when someone does something for you.
The subject of the sentence is usually the speaker () and can be omitted.
Example:
He writes for me.
Literally: I receive from him the act of writing.
So in the following sentence, the first means "receive".
But the second is an auxiliary verb.
To have people accept my clothes.
Literally: to receive from people the act of receiving my clothes.
More details can be found in "A Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar", page 263.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, giving and receiving"
}
|
In Japanese, what's the difference between 全て (subete) and 有らゆる (arayuru)
(subete) is defined as everything; all; the whole
(arayuru) is defined as all; every
# Example phrases:
**One:**
kurikaeshimasu ga, komugi-ko, arayuru niku, sakana o fukumanai mono desu.
(Repeating, NO wheat flour, all the meat and fish, not containing these things.)
**Two:**
.
Sono subete no uta o utau koto ga dekimasu.
(I can sing the name of all 40 Sentai teams.)
* * *
Why does one use (subete) and the other (arayuru)? Are they interchangeable?
* * *
_Please note: I am more concerned with the meaning and I am still learning Kana, so the Kana I have used might not be 100% correct._
|
is a simple word meaning "all " or "every ". has the nuance of "all kinds of ", "every sort of " or "every you can imagine". Etymologically, this in means "possible".
For example means "all the people (in the room, country, etc)", while is closer to "all kinds of people (age, sex, nationality, ...)".
> * all the meat (e.g., in the fridge, in the store)
> * all kinds of meat (chicken, beef, pork, ...)
> *
> I can sing all the songs (e.g., in this list).
> *
> I can sing all sorts of songs. (e.g., hip-hop, opera, ...)
> *
> I went to all the countries in the world. (literally all the 197 countries)
> *
> I went to all kinds of countries in the world. (someone who has visited 50 different countries can safely say this)
>
always modifies indefinite things. You can say referring to "all _the_ five people" you have already mentioned in a conversation, but you cannot say in this situation. Also note that is almost always written only in hiragana.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "meaning, word choice"
}
|
The role of か when 行こうか is not a question
In the sentence:
>
When the intonation of implies an invitation and not a question, what is the grammatical role of particle ?
|
"" is adding a sense of invitation to the phrase, on top of other words that are also inviting, such as of .
alone would suggest the speaker is a little more determined, and you have a little less choice in the matter.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
I don't understand this passage
> **50**
>
> **** (source)
1°)50=> "To check if the patient understands sounds(50 different sounds possible) said randomly" It doesn't make sense since if they are said randomly they shouldn't be intelligible...?(and I don't think it's just recognizing the sounds since it's a test done if there are no problems with the hearing()).
2°) I don't understand why giving correct answers is bad and shows that we have ?
|
For me, 50 refers to etc., which are played randomly, and the patient is asked to identify what they hear, so it’s a step further after the hearing check. If they give correct answers, it means although they can identify the basic elements / sounds of the language, but cannot follow the dialogue (makes the correct sense of it), that’s why they have .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "reading comprehension"
}
|
Use of 予定 at the end of sentence
I'm currently reading this article
Which has the following sentence:
>
>
> My translation: There is a plan to export small rice cookers, which have become popular in India.
The sentence ends with **** but I don't understand why. I would expect it to end with instead. Since for me would translate to "there is a plan", where just would be "it's a plan"
|
**** is like "is planned"
eg:
>
>
> I plan to eat out.
>
> lit: "eating out is planned"
**** is like "there are plans"
eg:
>
>
> I have plans on that day.
>
> lit: "on the topic of that day, there are plans"
So, applying this logic to your example sentence:
> It is planned to export small rice cookers popular in India.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "grammar, syntax"
}
|
Subject ambiguity in 大阪府の警察は、樋田容疑者を警察署から逃げた容疑で調べていますが、何も話していません。
From this article:
> ****
> Osaka police are investigating Hida on suspicion of escaping from the police station, but are saying nothing.
That was my translation until I read an English version of the story. I assumed the police were investigating but that suggested that they weren't prepared to talk about it at the moment. However, the English article implied that it was the suspect who was . Is this sentence ambiguous or am I missing an obvious clue which tells me that the suspect is the subject of and not the police?
I was also unsure about my translation of ... as "investigating on suspicion of ...". The reason I worry is that they surely already know it was him who escaped.
|
Yes the subject of is , but there is no obvious grammatical clue, so you have to determine the correct subject from the context. If you read several similar news articles regarding police investigation, you'll soon notice that is used very often to report the suspect's attitude after the arrest. (But I admit this sentence may be trickier than the one in the original article. is a relatively difficult word, but you at least don't have to worry about who is doing it.)
At least in Japan, is always used like this even when the police is 100% confident. Legally speaking, police investigators cannot judge the fact. All they can do instead is to investigate the case, "suspect," and send the suspected person to court, where the official judgement will be made. Until then, the person will be called , and what they did is called .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "ambiguity"
}
|
Question about the phrase 心配いりません
I came across the phrase and from what I understand it means "Dont worry". It is formed by using the -verb (worry) and (to be needed). What I don't understand is why there is no particle or something between and .
Does this mean that -verbs don't necessarily require the verb or one of its related forms? Or am I just overthinking it and a particle just being omitted?
|
is the same as **** (literally "worry is not needed"), but is omitted. Here is a simple noun meaning "worry" or "anxiety". Suru-verbs are essentially nouns followed by ("to do"), so you can treat words like , ("driving"), ("studying") also as simple nouns.
Since is something people say very often, you can safely omit even in formal settings. Another similar set phrase is ("No problem"), which is a short version of **** . Just like English speakers don't usually bother to say " _There is_ no problem", this is usually omitted for brevity, too.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar, syntax, particle は, particle が, ellipsis"
}
|
Meaning of 呑む in causative form
I was searching for the definition of this phrase
>
and from what I could research this phrase comes from the novel Romance of The Three Kingdoms ().
From my understanding a leopard is being chased by a tiger, and in doing so the tiger is leaving his hideout exposed, so somebody is making the wolf attack the tiger's place.
The problem is this paragraph i found were there's a direct translation that I can't understand:
>
I'm trying to interpret this as: Make a wolf infiltrate (a tiger's hideout) by impelling a tiger.
I'm using the 3th definition of from here: <
> ③
I'm having troubles understanding this because most of the examples I found using in causative form mean "to make someone cry/feel bad" which wouldn't make sense according to what the phrase wants to express. Also is it normal to use two in one sentence? I think there's a rule against it.
|
means "to drive the tiger to swallow the wolf".
doesn't mean "to make the wolf swallow", which is , but "to make someone to swallow the wolf".
There's nothing wrong about . The first leads to and the second one does to .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning, causation, interpretation"
}
|
What does どうなちきつたんだよオ mean?
I am trying to learn a lot by reading, but I am having a lot of trouble with this phrase/sentence:
>
Now, this is from a manga (Akira, specifically) so I'm guessing it's some kind of cheesy/loud exclamation. But I've tried to figure out what it means and I'm just really not getting it.
This is the the original image.
_
|
It's not but **** **** , which in this context roughly means "What happened to you!" or "What has become of you!" I don't know how much you know about Japanese, but assuming you can read most of what's written in AKIRA, here's the breakdown. (If you still have trouble reading hiragana, you should start with something easier.)
* : "how"
* : contracted form of (see this chart)
* : te-form of ("to become", "to turn out")
* : ta-form of ("to end up"; see as an auxiliary verb)
* : explanatory-no; see What is the meaning of //etc?
* : copula
* : the same as , a masculine sentence-end particle
( is a set phrase meaning "what happens", "how it's going")
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 10,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, meaning, particles, readings, manga"
}
|
What is the meaning of 近いほうが here?
I came across this phrase in a passage and I am not quite sure what it means. It seems unlikely that it is used for comparison, but I could be wrong. The Chinese translation following it seems to translate it to "not only". There is no grammatical explanations in the book, and searching online hasn't been helpful either. So someone please illustrate the appropriate grammar here.
 nutrients.
As for why the Chinese translates that as `not only`, I imagine it's because the Japanese clause ends with ~, which is a grammar that can be used to list things/reasons.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, meaning, interpretation"
}
|
Pitch accent variations within giongo words like ふわふわ
According to the NHK Accent dictionary, the pitch accent for can be:
( **a** ) {HLLL} or ( **b** ) {LHHH}
It is ( **a** ) when is attached and it is ( **b** ) when used as a simple adjective.
First, are the following examples correct?
{HLLL}
{LHHH}
Secondly, do other giongo words also follow this pattern? Or is it a case by case basis?
|
Yes, this is a generic characteristic of giongo. According to this article from NHK, the pitch accent of an onomatopoeia is mainly determined by whether it modifies the following word adjectivally or adverbially.
> ****
Words like is pronounced like []HLLL when it's used as a giongo adverb, but like []LHHH when it's used as a non-giongo adverb.
> * []LHHH(non-giongo)
> * []HLLL()(giongo)
>
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "onomatopoeia, pitch accent"
}
|
Trouble with this passage
>
>
> ****
>
>
>
>
>
> **** **** (source)
1. I don't understand the construction and the meaning of . Is it:
* with a relative clause (as in ), or
* the pattern (it seems to fit the pattern of the latter but the meaning doesn't seem to fit the context)?
2. What is the object of ?
3. What does refer to?
Does the journalist ask himself a question or rather say the question that everyone is thinking about ()?
4. What does mean? I think it means "because there were confused people" but it seems weird according to the context?
|
1-2) Yes, the is like in . Here it means `There is something everyone feels/notices`. This feeling is explained in next sentence as .
3) is referring to `among the `.
4) You're right in the interpretation, it's talking about how there are some people who say their doubts out loud. What kind of doubts? . What kind of people are they?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "reading comprehension"
}
|
Label on the substance bag in the tv show maniac
In S01E03 of maniac we can see this bag:
![enter image description here](
What is the symbol between and ? Is it supposed to be 1, like for version 1? If so shouldn't it go after the ?
|
It is not a number 1, as you might think. It is a valid katakana which is a small : .
The word in question is then:
>
These kind of small kana are used in conjunction with the previous kana in order to modify the sound. In this case, where the kana is and gives a 'te' sound, adding the small kana in front to make gives the 'ti' sound that normally can't be expressed in the standard kana range. Recall that the normal sound for the 'i' range in the row gives us or 'chi'.
So, now that you know this, what word is this?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning, katakana"
}
|
ambiguity of どうこう
Perhaps one of the more interesting/infuriating things i've found is how is seemingly always written without kanji...
the obvious ones with default to I assume
> -just cuz i said that doesn't mean i saying i want to go out with her
> …… - I feel like you can’t say all (girls ) have the same tastes (when it comes to guy's heights)
""
> …… ……- how come even though i'm finally with a guy i like, other people keep disturbing us and saying all this crap, what we're doing has nothing to do with them.
and the stuff I'm not so sure of
or
> - your ("tendency" to assault me/this and that sort of beating me up) is already irrelevant ?
?
> (context is "… " ) \- I , who "doesn't have the same "tendencies" as you, has already made up my mind. - really not sure about the last one.
Appreciate any clarifications and further insight
|
In all your five example sentences, is this meaning "this and that", "something", "blah-blah", etc. It's used to contract the unimportant part of the sentence. It's interchangeable with .
can work as an adverb, "(like) this or that":
>
> That does not mean I'll do something (about the problem) right away.
>
>
> I feel we cannot say something sweepingly. / It's not a black-and-white situation.
also can colloquially form a noun clause (i.e., can be followed by particles like , , ):
> []
> I'll be beaten, or this, or that...they're no longer relevant.
>
> []
> This is not a you-think-this-or-that kind of problem; _I_ decided it.
>
>
> Before thinking about doing something with him, you must make yourself a better person.
>
> (Forgive me if my English translations are unnatural; I'm bad at this type of colloquial sentences)
Unsurprisingly, , and are normally written in kanji. These words are simply not used in your examples.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "homonyms"
}
|
Possible meaning of キズ(kizu)
Panel from manga by
, and since it’s katakana I suspect it’s some kind of slang but I did not find anything on zokugo-dict...
|
In this case, is part of a set phrase which is or (lit. A scratch on the jewel) which is analogous to the English version _A fly in the ointment._
The phrase then means that it's a small annoying something that sours the mood of enjoyment or success (similar to how a scratched jewel isn't as beautiful as an undamaged one, and is as such a minor annoyance or flaw).
This might be describing the characteristic of the character with the rest of the phrase at the beginning:
>
> (Her being) domineering is the "scratch on the jewel (lit.)"
A very loose translation that is probably truer to an English tone is:
> She thinks she's on top and that's her (only) flaw.
Special thanks to Chocolate and By137 for the point-outs.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "translation, meaning, manga"
}
|
use of と in 無用の長物と化した
>
>
> My sure has been delayed but it's here! Though, right now, this must mean i've changed from my former useless self
* speaker has gotten informed that a bunch of girls have gotten interested in him
what does serve in this sentence, why not It seems to be a bit of a stretch of be quotative.
thanks
|
[]{} means "change~~" "turn into~~". The has almost the same function as in or . (For the difference of and , see this thread: What is the difference between **** and **** ?
>
literally means "for the current me" "for what I am now" (≂ ). is a relative clause modifying , and refers to . This line uses (See: what exactly is "{}"?). So it's literally saying "But it (= my , which arrived late) has turned into for the current me."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "particle と"
}
|
What is the difference between 美人 and 佳人?
Both words mean "beautiful woman", but I guess the reason two words exist is because of some nuance. Am I right ?
|
I see no semantic difference, but is an uncommon outdated word. On BCCWJ, there are over 2000 instances of and only 28 instances of , most of which are part of certain old book titles (incl. ) or idioms (incl. ). If you said in casual speech, the listener probably wouldn't even understand it. On the other hand, on , there are many instances of from novelists of the 19th century. So unless you want to write something stiff mimicking the writing style of old novelists, you should not use . (BTW there is also , which is equally rare)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 15,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "word choice, words"
}
|
Want to say something like "I will work here in the replacement of XYZ-さん"
I'm in a situation where one person left the company so I will work as his replacement. I am new to the place so I want to tell the client through mail and orally that "I will work instead of / in replacement of XYZ Person". I have found something like "". But how do I use this word? Please guide me.
|
("successor") refers to _a person_ (i.e., a noun). So the simplest usage of this word is , although this may look a little too blunt. Instead, you can say something like XYZ.
is a very handy set phrase meaning "in place of " or "instead of ", and you can say XYZ. But this may imply your predecessor was somehow problematic. If he suddenly left the company and everyone else was annoyed, saying XYZ is natural. Otherwise, probably is the safer choice.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "phrase requests, business japanese"
}
|
Meaning of ほうなんで?
It is a "simple" sentence, but I can't find any information how I should parse and interpret this part.
> ****
|
Do you already know how to make a comparison using and in Japanese? If not, please learn it first.
* Japanese Grammar – Making Comparisons
* Japanese Comparison: , …, and …
The sentence in question is an extension of this. While there is no explicit comparison target marked with , this still means "comparatively" or "relatively".
>
> Despite my appearance, (if one has to categorize me either as a cautious or as a careless person,) I'm comparatively a cautious person, you know.
> I'm a more cautious person than I may look, you know.
(literally "even with this") is a set phrase, "although you may think otherwise" or "although I may not look like it".
Similar examples:
> * This cake is relatively sweet.
> * I'm relatively a good sleeper.
> * I'm not a kind of person who watches TV often.
>
Related:
* What does the word mean?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "translation, meaning, parsing"
}
|
What is the difference between "Doko de benkyou shiteiru no desu ka?" and "Doko de benkyou benkyo shiteimasu ka?"
In Japanese, what is the difference between "Doko de benkyou shiteiru no desu ka?" ( ?) and "Doko de benkyou benkyo shiteimasu ka?" ( ?)
How does the different structure change the meaning? Please explain with reference to the two sentences.
Please note, I am still learning kana so please accept my apologies if there are errors in it. I am more interested in the meaning.
|
According to "A Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar", page 325:
: a sentence ending which indicates that the speaker is explaining or asking for an explanation about some information shared with the hearer, or is talking about something emotively.
The information is often what the speaker and the hearer have observed or heard.
Where are you studying?
(The speaker already knows the hearer is studying and wants an explanation)
Where are you studying?
(The speaker assumes the hearer is studying)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, particle の"
}
|
need help to understand がる/ がっている
I learned about from two different native teachers and both explained it differently. The first one said that is seemed/looks like someone wants something
>
> The cat seems to want it
>
>
> We act like we wanted anything (and everything)
The other one said it is not "seems" it more like, "tendency to do X" and that we don't have a similar concept in English.
>
> My father had the tendency to smoke a lot.
So I want to ask, which explain is the right one? Are they both right?
Thanks. Or
|
Reading OP's comment, I've got an impression that translating into "seems to" is misleading after all. The point is not how s/he looks but what s/he does.
To be honest, it's not easy for me to grasp comprehensively. So, let me explain with some examples.
When you say , what it essentially indicates is not how s/he looks but the fact that s/he shivers with cold or so. You may be able to conclude that s/he seems feeling a chill, but that's a secondary thing.
When it comes to , it means, in short, to try to get something. essentially expresses how s/he is asking for something in somewhat way, which is also a minor yet significant difference between , which is exactly to want.
When you use it for one's habit, you could translate it into "tendency" or something.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "grammar, meaning"
}
|
Why is the て-form being used before ん？
In the following sentence:
>
What is the grammatical reason for to be used in -form **before **?
|
**** is a contracted form of **** , which in turn is a contracted form of () **** ("Who are you looking for?", notice the progressive form). More generally:
* contracts to . (See this chart)
* **`/r/ + vowel` before a /n/ consonant can turn into ** in casual speech. (Do not confuse this as explanatory-.)
Examples:
* **** → ****
waka **ra** nai → waka **n'** nai
* **** → ****
mite **ru** no → mite **n'** no
* **** → ****
ne **ru** nayo → ne **n'** nayo
* **** → ****
shabe **ri** nasai → shabe **n'** nasai
* **** → ****
tabera **re** naiyo → tabera **n'** naiyo
Related:
* What are the rules for substituting with ?
* vs in My Boss My Hero
* Readings of and
* What is
**EDIT:** By extension, / can contract to / (informal and slangy).
* **** → × → ****
* **** → × → ****
* **** → × → ****
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 26,
"question_score": 17,
"tags": "colloquial language, contractions"
}
|
ながらも followed up by のに
>
Though she is bewildered in shame, (and though??) her waves of pleasure escape in her voice, she seems flustered.
i'm not sure if this is only because using though b2b is strange in English, but there is a certain logical disconnect here.
Thank you for any clarification.
|
In this case, the is about the . The role that plays here is the same as .
> Example: =
So, to translate your example:
>
>
> Even though she is hesitant from embarrassment, she seems busy letting escape vocalizations of the waves of pleasure
*Naruto pointed out that the in this example is transitive and therefore my initial translation was incorrect. I have corrected the translation to reflect the correction.
*It should be noted that my translation is still not 100% accurate, grammar-wise. What is being let escape is not , but . is simply the method by which the escape is being let happen. I worded it this way because it sounds more natural, but the exact translation would be as worded by naruto in the comment below.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "parsing"
}
|
Difference between である and だ in the written form
My grammar book states that is used as copula in the written form to express ideas in a neutral fashion and that is also used in the written form to, quote, "sound more objective". But doesn't "sound more objective" = neutral point of view?
So, what are the different usages of and in the written form?
|
According to "A Dictionary of Intermediate Japanese Grammar", page 32:
> The plain forms are used in formal writing, for example, in professional articles and editorials. Although style is more formal than style, the two styles are ofter used together.
So, is more formal than .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar, copula"
}
|
How can one determine the appropriate meaning of 伺う in formal speech?
Is it based on the particle connecting the object of the verb?
For example,
> **/**
>
> to go
vs
> ****
>
> to ask
Is it **purely** based on the **context** of the sentence for distinguishing between `to go`, `to come`, and `to visit` (source)?
|
According to the dictionary, the word has 5 possible meanings, many of them using .
So you have to look at the context to find the right meaning.
Looking only at the particle may not be enough. Some sentences may not even have a particle.
<
But if you have:
someplace
it will most certainly be "to visit".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "nuances, verbs, keigo"
}
|
use 味の感想も聞けるしな and 作りがいがある in this sentence
>
>
> mc that does all the cooking, talks about cooking while cooking
>
> Maybe it's because everyday i get feedback about my cooking from all of you. particularly Alice, no matter what it is, because she eat it with a smile, I ...
= +++(cause)+(?) ?
= i'm not sure
Thanks in advance
|
Actually I think there the is the standard 'also'. This is because that clause ends with , which is + + , where the ~ describe a list of reasons for something and the is just a masculine sentence ending particle. Here's a related question: at the end of a sentence
= +{}. The second part just means `something worth doing`. So here, it means making the food is something worth doing.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "parsing, particle も"
}
|
Are there any words that are longer in kanji than in hiragana?
The number of hiragana to write the pronunciation of kanji always seems to be longer than or equal to the number of kanji. I.e. each kanji corresponds to one or more hiragana.
Are there any words that take up more characters (or maybe more syllables) when written as kanji rather than hiragana/katakana? Where multiple kanji correspond to fewer hiragana or syllables?
|
Yes, words have no direct connection between its kanji spelling and its reading, and a few of them are actually longer in kanji than in kana, but these kanji are rare and not actively used in modern Japanese exchanges.
* (second cousin; usually written in kana)
* (bull-headed shrike; usually written in kana)
* (a type of old-time street performer; obsolete word)
Here are some more examples. I haven’t checked all of them, but most of them are very rare.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 19,
"question_score": 14,
"tags": "kanji"
}
|
びりびりに破いた - why they come together
So I found this sentence
Looking at jisho, got translate as torn (adj) and to tear (v). Its the first time I'm seeing both of these words but I don't understand why it is written like that. Do I need with to say that I have torn something if I can just use the verb .
Is it simply a way of speech?
Thanks, Or
|
As you can probably guess by its appearance, is an onomatopoeia that describes how a sheet of paper is torn to pieces. In other words, it's the sound of paper being torn apart. This before is optional, but with it, the sentence sounds more emphatic or vivid. In English, something like "into pieces" would be the closest translation of .
By the way, is basically an adverb, and it almost never works as a na-adjective. I often see jisho.org making mistakes regarding word class...
See also: Why are there so many sound symbolic words?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning, onomatopoeia"
}
|
What is the meaning of どうの?
Context: a former swordsman takes his daughter to attend kendo lessons. She doesn't seem happy, so he reminds her that she decided herself to go, at which che replies:
> ****
What is the meaning of ? I found an example on Kenkyusha dictionary suggesting it can be used in lists:
> **** **** .
>
> She's forever complaining; if it isn't the color, it's the design or something else.
Is this the way it was used in my sentence? Thank you for your help!
|
It's the same as or explained in this question. It replaces a (subjectively) unimportant part of the sentence like "blah blah". In this case, the father has told her a long story about , but she is thinking what he said was unimportant to her.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning, words, usage, word usage"
}
|
Sentence Structure JLPT question 「日本語がかんたんな本」
Please help. I found this question on the N5 practice exam:
>
> ( _ _ _)
>
> A.
> B.
> C.
> D.
Please explain why is the structure... why not ? What is the rule followed? Why is there two ?
Thank you.
|
is a noun phrase where is a relative clause modifying . Its non-relative version would be:
> ()
> _lit._ As for the book, Japanese is simple.
> → The book is written in simple Japanese.
("a little more") is an adverb that modifies the na-adjective ("simple").
You can parse your example this way:
>
> _lit._ "I'd like / prefer a book [whose Japanese is (a little) simple(r)]"
> → I'd like / prefer a book with a little simpler Japanese / a book written in a little simpler Japanese
You can rephrase it as **** . (For more on this, you could refer to this thread.)
Some example phrases using this pattern:
> []{} "a person with beautiful hair"
> []{}[]{}[]{} "an animal with a long trunk"
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "syntax, particle が, jlpt, relative clauses"
}
|
What's the difference between 豪華 and 贅沢?
While reading a scene about some people checking out the luxurious hot tub that is in their building, one of the character remarks:
>
which I understand as meaning like: It's not at the level of being too , but it's extremely .
Am I right in understanding that is more extravagant that ?
|
in isolation is a positive word meaning _luxurious_. But if we say **** , it of course turns into a directly negative remark (" _overly_ luxurious" or " _too_ luxurious").
On the other hand, is an ambivalent word that has both positive and negative connotations. When it's negative, it's closer to _extravagant_ or _lavish_. People often say , , etc. When it's positive, it's almost interchangeable with .
So the speaker rephrased a clearly negative remark ( **** ) to an ambiguous phrase () to make the sentence sound more euphemistic and milder. But if we remove , is the word that is closer to _extravagant_.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "word choice, nuances"
}
|
adjective pronominalization with の
>
>
>
I found those phrases here. From my understanding these mean:
= the ones that are big
= the one that is pretty | the ones that are pretty
Am I right? I didn't manage to find any explanation online and on my grammar book. Is it correct to use the same construction with other tenses, like (= the one that is not big) or (= the one that was pretty)?
|
Your interpretation is correct.
In these 2 sentences, the objects that the adjectives refer to were omitted. They are probably mentioned before these phrases. If an adjectival phrase refers to something that is already known, the object can be referred to by .
And yes, it can be used with other tenses too. The usage is exactly the same.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, particle の"
}
|
What is the meaning of ほうで here?
> **** (source)
|
It's two sentences of … and … combined together, with conjugated into the conjunctive form .
is a noun that's used as a grammatical component for comparison. In concrete, means "if you can have school lunch once a week, that's better (than average)".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "reading comprehension"
}
|
救えたはずのもの... (lots of unaccounted もの)
I have a real patchy understanding of this sentence in Danganronpav3.
The speaker is (Hoshi) and is incredibly cynical in contrast to the main character's optimism. He sometimes explains things in a difficult to understand way:
> {
Attempted translation: "Some things can't be saved just through ideals. Sometimes even what you thought was saved can end up lost."
My assumptions are:
* The is a colloquial
* That is and not .
* That the use of implies some cases were in the positive.
* That the is being used as an "even in the case of
Any help would be appreciated, thanks.
|
Regarding the first sentence, yes, this is a colloquial , and this is basically (thing) in general, although it may include people as well. in means "even". The literal translation is "Only with ideals, you cannot save even what you can save." But your translation attempt seems fine to me.
Regarding the second sentence, is a noun phrase meaning "something you could have saved", which is the object of . , meaning "even", _replaces_ and .
>
> You may end up abandoning even what you could have saved.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "particle も, particle まで"
}
|
What is the meaning of 起こし in this sentence?
I"m trying to translate the following sentence into English for a assignment in my translation workshop class.
**** , .
The bolded part has me confused due to the strange shi ending; which I first read as the shi clause with the term , but realized this was incorrect due to the predicate () not being in the plain/short form. Jisho.org says that is a suffix, which I believe to be incorrect in this instance as there is a particle behind the .
Thus, what does mean in the above sentence, and how do you know this?
|
It's a conjugation formed by taking a verb in form, then removing the .
Example conjugation:
* ~~~~
* ~~~~
Combining sentences with that conjugation basically means "and". It's similar to combining sentences with , though there are differences in usage.
Example sentence:
> ****
>
> John was **born** in Japan **and** studied at a Japanese school until he was ten.
I recommend page 556 of "A Dictionary of Intermediate Japanese Grammar" as a reference for the details of this grammar form.
...
To answer your question directly:
> Thus, what does mean in the above sentence, and how do you know this?
It's just a continuative conjugation of the verb , which means "to raise", and that verb is being applied to . I know this because that's the dictionary definition. The fact that it ends in just means "and..." before talking about the rest of the sentence.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, dictionary"
}
|
What is the function of もし？
I know that translates to "if", but I dont know exactly when or how it should be used. I was reading Yoko Hasegawa's Japanese: a linguistic introduction. In the chapter on conditional clauses, some sentences begins with , others dont. Example: versus (the original text is in romaji, I transcribed to hiragana for better understanding)
Since , , or already express the idea of conditional, what is doing here? Does it have any additional function beyond those in the 4 conditional particles? If it does, what is this function, and if it doesnt, why is it included?
|
As the above, itself is a word like "excuse me". However, it ideomatically functions as an indicator that tells that a conditional clause follows next, which helps you comprehend what otherwise wouldn't be revealed until the last conjugation.
The same thing can be said about (adverb) for partial negation, for permanent negation or or for reasoning clauses, the last one of which is also the same in the point that it doesn't have extra semantic value besides what's combined with.
This type of words are called (Guiding Adverb).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "conditionals"
}
|
How do you talk about a boring, repetitive sound?
There are a lot of repetitive songs where I work. How do I mention how repetitive the music is, and convey that I dislike it to an all Japanese staff. Can I use ?
|
A good word for this concept is (), which is a wasei-eigo term that exactly means "boring and repetitive" or (). Saying only does not necessarily mean the song is bad.
is a fairly stiff word that is usually used in business settings, and it means a similar troublesome/unfortunate event happening again and again. , , , etc. means nothing to me.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": -1,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
「〜てすむ」の意味は何ですか。
> ****
|
[]{}
[]{}[]{}[]{}[]{}
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Confusing use of ずつ
> ****
> According to the company that runs these buses, they plan to run the Tokyo bus three times a week, _twice each in the afternoon and evening_. A reservation will be needed.
I'm unsure of how to understand . Does this mean twice in the afternoon and twice in the evening, or does it mean once in the afternoon and once in the evening (making two times in total)?
I'm not even sure whether modifies 2 or 3.
Whichever is the correct interpretation how would you adjust it to give the other one?
|
**** 2 is ambiguous, but usually means "twice in the afternoon and twice in the evening", i.e., four times a day.
**** 2 is not ambiguous and it only means "twice a day, one in the afternoon and one in the evening." Here is an apposition marker, and 2 and are referring to the same thing. is used in relation to before (it's "per day" rather than "per ").
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "grammar, counters"
}
|
Interpreting this Bus Schedule
I am seeking some help to interpret the following bus schedule. Specifically, I am interested in determining which section of this table deals with the travel times to (Joudogahama Visitor Center) from Miyako Station).
If I'm interpreting this table correctly, the top row (C01,A01,C02,A02) are the bus routes? Going down each column, taking the 9:00 column, the bus leaves at 9:00 am and arrives at at 9:13?
In the second table below, is it correct that the bus leaves the at 08:33 and arrives at at 08:50?
Thanks for the help.
Bus Timetable to Jodogahama Visitor Center
|
> If I'm interpreting this table correctly, the top row (C01,A01,C02,A02) are the bus routes?
Yes. It appears so. The names directly below them seem to be the final destinations (shortened).
> Going down each column, taking the 9:00 column, the bus leaves at 9:00 am and arrives at at 9:13?
Yes, and that's Route C03 with final destination at .
> In the second table below, is it correct that the bus leaves the at 08:33 and arrives at at 08:50?
Yes.
Take note of the schedules marked , which means that buses don't travel at those times during weekends and holidays.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
i don't understand 一人分
I can't understand a sentence. Could you help me please ?
>
i don't understand "" I understand that as "I paid your expenses with my income"
The previous sentence is "" and she just told her nephew that his father gave money to pay for his studies. Does "" have any other meaning than "one person's portion"??
|
1 here does mean "one person's portion", and in this context it refers to one person's worth of living expenses, i.e., the living cost of , which the speaker thinks is small enough.
And do you understand what means here, which is critical to catch the meaning of 1? This is the potential form of , which has a slangy meaning "to manage", "to moderate (party, etc)", "to run (shop, etc)", "to keep going", etc. (Surprisingly, this meaning is not in jisho.org.) In this context means financially making ends meet and keeping the family together.
>
> It's just one person's worth (of living expenses), I can make ends meet (only) with my wage!
> I can at least afford one person's worth (of living expenses) with my income!
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "manga"
}
|
Correct Japanese grammar for "video recording" when in context to length of time
The exact phrase I would like to translate is
**Duration for video recording is required**
This would show up as a warning of a user on software to remind them to select an amount of time to record video.
The problem that I am running into is how the grammar will translate best into Japanese.
The translation that I was able to compile was
``
But if I paste that into something like Google translate, it shows that it comes back as "I need video recording time". Which makes me question if the Japanese grammar was bad, also why the Japanese word seems possessive as it says "I need".
|
is probably inappropriate because it refers to a period spanning more than a few days (e.g. ). Unless this is for controlling a fixed camera that records something for many days, you should use instead. How about:
* (or )
* (or )
is appropriate for a select box, is for a text box.
Words like and can be safely omitted, and omitting them makes the sentence more "professional".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, phrases, english to japanese"
}
|
How does it translate noun + ni + shiteitanda?
I was trying to understand this sentence
kimi no senaka o boku wa tayori ni shiteitanda
kimi no senaka = your back boku = I
And I can't figure out what tayori ni shiteitanda means
jisho.org says tayori is a noun, dependence
and that shiteitanda is somehow related to suru jisho.org , if it's a verbal tense of suru I can't find it in the japanese verb conjugator japanese verb conjugator
Also, this webpage says noun + ni suru (in the case shiteitanda is related to suru) can be used to "decide on" a noun, ie "I'll go with.." . So may be this could be something of the form "noun + ni shiteitanda" assuming shiteitanda is related to suru, and since there is a "noun + ni suru" form but that's as far as I can guess. How does it translate noun + ni + shiteitanda?
|
"tayori ni suru" = to rely on
"shiteita" is the past progressive plain form of "suru"
"nda" is a contraction of "no da", which is used to present an explanation or point out something to the listener.
so in this case, we could interpret it as: "tayori ni shiteitanda" means the speaker ("boku") is pointing out that they relied on the listener's back ("kimi no senaka").
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
When 大 is read as たい versus だい？
There is a general rule that for a kanji compound of the form , you tend to read using () if is and with () if is . See e.g. this question on goo (in Japanese). (Of course there are many exceptions, and this rule is not special to ---see General guidelines for choosing vs. in kanji reading)
Are there any rules of thumb or broad etymological reasons for which to use for at the beginning of a kanji compound?
For instance, you typically read the following examples as :
>
and in these as
>
One subjective impression I have is that if you have some , at least in the case of , and modify it with at the beginning that it is typically read as , e.g., or . (Compare this with , say, where the root word seems to be .)
|
The used for specific words varies based on when the word was borrowed from Chinese. is the and is the . There's no hard rule for how to tell which pronunciation to use.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "etymology, readings"
}
|
Use of ともちょうだい and speaker consistency
>
>
> it's cuz there's a guy that said he had 2 extra tickets, "if they aren't needed, i'll accept them" is all I said.
The latter half is the speaker talking about her own remarks right? Is there a more exact way to pinpoint that other than deducing from context? (ie, only girls use )
is there distinction between and
thank you
|
> 22
> There was a guy who said to me something like "I have two extra tickets", so I just said "If you don't need them, give me both."
>
> (brackets added by me)
is used regardless of sex, and there is no personal pronoun, so you have to determine the subject of at the end only form the context.
following a te-form is "please (for me)", but in this case means "give me." ( works very similarly. See this question.)
is a suffix that mainly follows an adverb made of a number and a counter. It means "all/both of the ". See this.
Examples:
* Take a look at this ticket.
* () Give me a ticket. / Give me some tickets.
* 2 (You have many tickets) Give me two.
* 2 (You have two tickets) Give me both of the two.
* 3 (You have three tickets) Give me all of the three.
* 2 I succeeded twice (in several trials).
* 2 I succeeded in both of the two trials.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "giving and receiving"
}
|
Two words from Shinya Shokudou
I have two questions about the TV series Shinya Shokudo. The show focuses on a midnight diner, its chef, known as "The Master", and his involvement with his customers. When the master is taking an order from a customer, he always says something like(1). When he is serving a meal, he says something like (2).
I cannot find both these words in the dictionaries. I would like to know the origin of those two words and the correct writing.
You can listen to it here:
(1) <
(2) <
**EDIT** Since I got asked to include what I think the translation/meaning could be, I would say obviously (1) is something along the lines "allright, sure" and (2) is something along the lines "here you go". (2) could also be some short form of but I'm not sure. That's why I was asking in the first place :)
|
* (1) This is not but .
* (2) is indeed short for .
Both of these are used mainly by a friendly server or a chef in a private informal restaurant. Chefs of sushi restaurants may say these, too. You will never hear these in chain restaurants and classy Western-style restaurants where proper keigo is expected.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "words, etymology"
}
|
Confusing sentence using ~わけではなく and other forms
Note: I already reviewed many topics here regarding the use of , but I still struggle to properly translate the sentence below. It's from the introduction to the book (a book for teachers of beginning Japanese grammar).
>
Translating literally produces something like
> There's no need to explain it, but for real [actual-use] Japanese, it's not the case that distinctions between early and middle/advanced Japanese grammar exist, in other words early Japanese grammar is setting an expedient foundation [for teaching someone to learn].
Which sounds like utter gibberish to me. The stumbling block is the phrase "". I would think "" makes more sense ("it's not the case that distinctions between different levels of grammar don't [already] exist"), but that's not what's used here.
What is a correct translation of the sentence above, especially in regards to the ~ phrase?
|
Read it again -- the author is saying that there are no distinctions between "beginner / intermediate / advanced" in the real world of actually-spoken Japanese. Same for any language. Such distinctions are convenient fictions created for the purpose of taking a vastly complicated system -- a language -- and divvying it up into manageable pieces for purposes of learning and instruction.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "meaning, word choice, usage"
}
|
Meaning of 世界観に入り込む in the following sentence
The following sentence is taken from the afterword of the final volume of a manga:
> ****
I understand the general meaning of the sentence and its grammatical structure, but what is the meaning of ? In particular I don't know how to interpret the verb . My attempt:
> I was able to draw understanding[?] the vision of the world [whose vision?].
Here you can see the original page for more context. Thank you for your help!
|
This refers to the world of _Samurai Drive_ itself. The "textbook" meaning of is something philosophical like "how to understand this world", such as "this world is supported by a giant turtle" or "this world is merely a large machine". However, is very commonly used to refer to a fictional world itself or the exotic atmosphere of a fictional world. For example, you can say , , SF, etc., and the difference between and is very small in such cases.
So means "diving into the world (I created)", which figuratively means something like "as if I were in the world of _Samurai Drive_ and saw the characters with my eyes".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "meaning, words, verbs, expressions"
}
|
Parsing in this sentence, subject incongruity
> (us angels) ****
>
> amatsu-sama's teachings are usurped by selfishness, hatred, deceit, (??) isn't sufficient, the fighting repeats endlessly.
angels have been teaching the humans stuff, and will soon leave the humans to be independant
What is "" in this situation? is it ? ? or something else?
is [] under ? ie. []?
|
This is the same as or ("(while) never being satisfied"). This sense of is relatively rare in modern Japanese, but it's a traditional meaning of , and it should be listed in any monolingual dictionary. is a well-known set phrase.
> ###
>
>
> ――
> **** ―
Note that is merely a temporary subject of the first half of the sentence including . The implicit main topic of this sentence is (humans), which is indicated in the previous sentence. can work as a noun ("hatred"), but in this context it's just 's continual form in its literal sense.
> () (Human's) selfishness surpasses the teaching of Amatsu; humans hate, deceit and repeat fighting, never being satisfied.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "parsing"
}
|
The meaning of となった in this context
the meaning of in this context is not entirely clear for me. Help, onegai.
> **** 11700
|
First, note the translation of the word in question:
* X = "to become X"
Furthermore, note that putting a verb before a noun is a way to describe the noun. For example:
* {/} = "A person who (will) talks/talked"
* "" = "The steak that Mr. Tanaka ate."
So basically, the whole first part of the phrase (up to and including ) are used to describe the noun after it: ""
> **** ...
>
> The New York stock market **which became the origin of a worldwide simultaneous period of low stock prices** ...
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, translation, meaning"
}
|
Understanding the translation of ～てほしいと頼まれました
> ****
I interpreted the first part of that sentence is that the speaker is going to write a series called "World Universities" for their friend at Waseda University, but the second part confuses me a bit.
I know it's supposed to say something like "I was asked to have you write the article", but I'm confused about how it is phrased with . I feel like it should have another verb in there to show that the person speaking is asking a question, but I don't see it.
|
This is an example of a long direct speech with brackets omitted.
>
The main structure of the sentence is:
> ()...
> "I was asked by a Japanese friend, (who said "...")
... and everything in the brackets is what this Japanese friend said to the speaker. It's the Japanese friend who is going to publish articles about universities in the world, and in the sentence refers to the speaker, who is presumably American.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "grammar, て form"
}
|
Why is 私 a sixth grade kanji?
Can anybody explain why is a sixth grade kanji?
I find it funny that such a common word appears on the list so late.
|
This is because you don't have to write it in kanji even after you have become an adult. On BCCWJ, there are 65,182 examples of , while the number of the examples of is 11,372. This means many adults choose to write in hiragana even after learning its kanji. (I think formal documents tend to contain the kanji more often.) By contrast, an educated adult almost never writes or in hiragana, so, in a sense, these kanji are more fundamental. is not really an essential kanji for making sentences on a daily basis, and learning it in sixth grade is not too late. The same is true for ; even though it has kanji (), not many people use it in day-to-day writings.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 24,
"question_score": 25,
"tags": "kanji"
}
|
Question about 突き挿す
Is misspelling of or alternative writing of it (it is not listed in EDICT or on dictionary.goo.ne.jp) or is it completely different word?
|
is "to prick/push", is "to pierce/stab" and is "to insert". While is a common combination, is at least not common, and my IME does not convert to .
But that does not mean you can call it a misspelling without even seeing the context. There is no such thing as the comprehensive list of compound verbs, and native speakers may combine verbs if they feel it's natural. To me, sounds quick, sharp and violent, while sounds slower and duller, like pressing your finger on clay. I don't remember if I have seen somewhere before, but I feel it makes perfect sense in some situations.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "compound verbs"
}
|
"nounをnoun(verb stem)" expressions: ie 基準を流れ, 戸惑いを表れ etc
> **** (part of explanation for )
>
> ****
I've treated the in these sentences as . How is used here, and what is the best way to interpret it? I assume it has something to do with the -perception verb following it, but it doesn't line up for me.
|
I think you need to look at parsing the sentences in a different way, since you are cutting off the scope of your analysis too soon. I think the real pattern here is "N N V", where V is a verb of perception. Both of these sentences use that pattern to express perceiving one thing as another thing.
...
For the first sentence, I would split it up as follows:
>
>
>
>
>
The verb means something like "to perceive". What is being perceived is "", and what it is being perceived as is "".
...
For the second sentence, I would split it up as follows:
>
>
>
>
>
The verb means "to think". What is being thought about is "", and what it is being thought as is "".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "particle を, parsing"
}
|
Ending sentences with "、と。"
I've seen sentences ending with "" many times in some particular texts. Here are some examples:
> **Example 1** (source: by )
>
> ****
>
> **Example 2** (source: niwasaburoo supplementary notes on tense)
>
>
I assume it's a shorthand for something like "" or "". Is that right?
The comma before the also seems to be applied pretty consistently. Is that an important part of the grammar form?
Does this usage correspond to a particular speaking/writing style? Does it have some particular nuance? Any other important things to note?
|
It's quotative-, but used _after_ the corresponding verb because the quoted part was added as an afterthought. You can rephrase them like:
>
>
>
The comma before is technically optional. But an author often does this intentionally to make the text look more dramatic by splitting a sentence into two. In such cases, a comma is a good way to add slight emotion to the second sentence.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "particles, particle と"
}
|
What does chome chome mean?
In this anime they have a song that's called, _Omae no Tou-chan Chome-Chome_
So I looked what chome chome is, and they say \- It's an euphemism for sex \- It's an onomatopeia (related to sex) \- It's a whatever unprintable word
and nobody gives a clear answer that makes sense with the title of the song. What does chome chome mean?
|
is one of the ways of reading the symbol(s) `××` out loud, which is used to mask a word or a part of a word. I wonder if there is an English equivalent for this... If you know how to read the `**` part in "f**k" in isolation, that's it. If I understand correctly, it was originally a generic placeholder like or , but later gained a sexual connotation. was a popular word in the 1980's, but it's almost outdated now. Teenagers may not even know this.
By the way, the lyrics of the song explain the usage of this word very well :)
Related:
* How do you pronounce "" as a placeholder?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 12,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
Is there an ambiguity with 初めて in this sentence?
>
I think this means:
> This movie was first released in Japan.
However, I was wondering if it could be both understood as "The first release of this movie happened in Japan" (it wasn't released anywhere else before) and "In Japan, this was the first time this movie was released" (it may have been released before in other countries).
|
>
This Japanese sentence is ambiguous. Still, if there is no context at all, I would probably take it as the former, "The first release of this movie happened in Japan". If it means the latter, it tends to be **** with the contrast marker . This is similar to bringing "in Japan" to the beginning of the sentence. It turns "this movie was first released in Japan", which I think is equally ambiguous, to "In Japan, this move was first released".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Problem with 大きくなって
I'm translating a letter and came across this sentence:
> {}[]{}...
I'm having problems understanding the grammar used here. I know this means "When I get bigger" or "When I grow up" after reading English translations.
Why is being used? When I look for on the dictionary it translates to "on a grand scale" and I'm not sure this is correct.
|
is a comparative term. So + = compared to now/~than now, inferring "further along in time", or in this case "when I/you get older/bigger" as modified by ""
As for "", this is the -adj. (meaning "big, large") that when used to modify a verb, the final is changed to (becoming the adverbial form) and added to the verb.
The confusion may lie in that we're taught that is a -adjective, so you would never see . But the reality is that also exists and is used that way. The only thing that keeps me sane is the ”” song that has a repeating phrase of "...” It was very popular in Japan when I was a beginning student in Tokyo. It was hard to escape as it flooded the airwaves for nearly a year. So I suppose that I was just beaten into submission... Once you hear the song you'll never be able to unhear it. Try it. It will fix your dilemma.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, て form, particle より"
}
|
Where does アフレコ come from?
I looked for the meaning of in Jisho.org and after the meaning (dubbing) it says "Abbreviation, Wasei, word made in Japan". So since the word apparently it doesnt come from a foreign language, and since the dubbing process is a little over 100 years old, where does the word come from?
|
is an abbreviation of "after recording" (source: ).
"wasei" literally means "Japanese-made". It's a term used to describe words that were made in Japan, despite being made out of foreign words. For example, "wasei eigo" means "Japanese-made English". ~~Another famous example of wasei eigo is "salaryman", which despite seeming like an English word, is only used in Japan.~~ (Apparently not quite! See Eiríkr's comment.)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "etymology, katakana"
}
|
How do you translate 作ってみたら in 妹がチーズドックを作ってみたら兄がwwww?
It would seem to me the sentence says "little sister makes cheese dokku (whatever that food is) and .. big brother ... ?
I can't understand . Is the tara conditional form of ? Is it another thing? By intuition I would guess he's trying to say that she makes the cheese dokku and he uploads it to internet (youtube) to be seen? perhaps? but I can't make literally sense of the phrase. If is a verb in conditional form, which verb it is and how does it fit in the sentence?
|
`te-form + ` is "to try ing" or "to (and see what happens)". This is a subsidiary verb.
* What is the difference between "verb" and "verb()+"?
is the "past conditional" form of , but this form often just means "when" or "and".
* Differences among ---, etc
> Use like to show a sequential, cause-and-effect relationship between the two clauses
* How to know if is hypothetical or temporal
> In these examples, the verb happened and caused the main verb
* Other uses of the conditional
> While it is a 'conditional' it has a broader meaning than just 'if'.
Therefore:
My sister makes a cheese dog.
My sister **tries** mak **ing** a cheese dog.
My sister tri **ed** making a cheese dog.
…
**When** my sister tried making a cheese dog, ...
My sister made a cheese dog (as a test/practice), **and** ...
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "verbs, て form, conditionals"
}
|
Why で in 今日で最後にしたいです?
Referring to the clock that counts the time since the last nuclear test:
> ****
> I want to make today the last day where I change the figure on the clock.
I'm confused by the particle in this sentence. Maybe I've mistranslated, but I would have expected it to be . I'm thinking of the pattern AB/ meaning "make A as/into B".
Depending on the explanation there's also a possibility I'll be confused as to why it's and not , but at the moment I don't see how either one works.
|
Both **** and **** are perfectly fine. In the latter case, is a particle used to mark a time limit, deadline, finish time, etc. says:
> ⑤ **** **** ****
So you can think is used with verbs related to finishing, ending, exiting, quitting, etc.
* ****
****
(× **** is wrong)
* ****
(× **** is wrong)
* ****
(× is wrong)
* ****
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar, particle で, time"
}
|
Why would a Japanese adult be embarrassed to use the word "friends"?
I am watching a current anime, _That Time I Got Reincarnated as a Slime_ ( ). The protagonist, now a reincarnated slime in the isekai story, is making friends with a dragon. The specific conversation begins at time code 20:30 of chapter 1*. After they have agreed to be friends, he thinks to himself (sub, time code 21:17):
> …
> It's a little embarrassing talking about "friends" at my age...
He was 37 when murdered. **Why would he be embarrassed to use the word "friends"?** Is there a better word to be used between adults?
* * *
* Link is to Crunchyroll, an American streaming service. I don't know what other countries will be able to view it.
This question is a follow-up to What is Japanese version of the pun word, “slife”? … and term for adult friend?. On Anime & Manga SE. @кяαzєя answered it, and he suggested I post a follow-up question here.
|
>
The word _tomodachi_ ("friend") itself is not really embarrassing, although there is a more formal word for this concept. In this case, this _tomodachi_ also represents the whole exchange he has just made with the tsundere dragon. Indeed, innocently and directly saying ("Let's be friends!") is not something a typical middle-aged man would do, at least in Japan. It sounds to me like what a kindergartner might say. Usually such a relationship between adults starts without mentioning the word _tomodachi_. (By the way, the situation is different when it comes to romantic relationship.)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 16,
"question_score": 12,
"tags": "word choice, anime"
}
|
sentence structure and extent of quotion in this statement
> speaker
>
> girl ……
>
> speaker
>
> girl
>
> speaker ****
-
> that why, after thinking about the fact that you really understand me, i'm kinda glad
>
> it's not like i see you in _that_ way, that's just how you look.
>
> that means, before you realized it yourself, you you've really come to understand me
>
> are you dumb? How the hell did you come to that conclusion?
>
> **For me personally,if possible, thinking " if you looking at me with that sort of feeling" ...., that makes me happy**
how much does the the quote emcompass?
[...]? []? []?
When would you use over for the //means/agent purpose like with
is there a better way to interpret the ... in this quote?
Thank you.
|
Here's the quoted part:
>
> For me personally, I think "if possible, if you are seeing me like that, (that's good)".
Sentence-end can be used to express suggestion and hope. In the latter case, you can think something like , or is omitted after .
and are interchangeable in this context. It means "like that" or "in such a way."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "particle に, particle で, quotes"
}
|
Why is あすぶ an "out-dated or obsolete" kana usage for 遊ぶ?
I saw this note on the jisho.org page for :
> Other forms
>
> Notes : Out-dated or obsolete kana usage.
And I'm curious what this means - did it used to be read this way? Or do some people still read it this way? What happened?
|
According to many dictionaries, is just a phonetic shift () of . (source) From this description, it seems like is the original spelling, and is the derivative... so it doesn't seem like is an old form of the word.
is also listed in some dictionaries as part of regional dialects. For example, it's listed as ibaraki-ben (in ), the agatsuma dialect (in ), and koushuu-ben (in ). (source)
In this hinative thread, a native speaker says that they never heard of . All things considered, it seems like this pronunciation should be avoided for general-purpose conversation.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "readings, history"
}
|
Kanji for みない in 調べてみない
> ****
In the sentence above, what is the kanji for ?
|
In the case of , the is classified as an auxiliary verb ([]{}). Auxiliary verbs are "always" written in hiragana. I suppose if you _had_ to use kanji, then is the most generic of all the possibilities.
See also Use of kanji when writing .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "kanji"
}
|
Is this と quotative or conditional?
> **** **** ...
> The investigating company says "If they get rid of the rules then the time to find a company who is hiring will get longer and there will be students who worry _that_ they can no longer study hard".
1) Is the in bold quotative or conditional? I feel as though this could be translated in two ways:
a) There are students who will worry if/when they can't study hard.
b) There are students who will worry that they can't study hard.
2) Does add anything important here, or can I omit it without changing the meaning/nuance?
3) Not sure about in . I translated this as "companies who are hiring", but means "to find a job" not "to find an employee" so I think I might have got it wrong.
|
1. The is quotative. You can parse the sentence in brackets as:
>
The in is conditional.
Literally: There are students who worry / Some students worry (saying) "If the rules are abolished, the time to find a company to get a job in will get longer, and I won't be able to study hard."
2. Yes, are both okay. I think the meaning will be clearer with .
3. means "company (for me) to find a job in", ()). The subject of is "I (i.e. )".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, particle と, conditionals, quotes"
}
|
Another こと usage question
I'm trying to translate the sentence "Food is an easy topic for me to write about" to Japanese, but I'm struggling. Some thoughts / questions:
(1) I know could say "Writing about food is easy":. However, I feel like some of the nuance is lost, i.e. the implication that there are other topics that are difficult to write about.
Separately, canreplacein this sentence, since it is not immediately followed by I know onlycan be used if immediately follows it, but am unclear if that applies when the nominalized verb is the topic of asentence.
(2) Am I correct thatis preferred (but not mandatory) overin this context, since there is no immediacy?
(3) My attempts so far:
- I suspect this comes out as "Food is writing about an easy topic".
- Is this "Food is a topic that is easy to write (about)"? Do I need to addsomewhere?
(4) I'm not sure how to fit the "for me" part of the sentence into any of the proposed sentences above.
|
(1)(2) and are both okay, but yes, I feel is better, especially in polite and formal sentences.
(3)(4) Among your several attempts, is the best. is more like _title_ rather than _topic_ , so let's use instead. (You can safely use even when you are not talking vocally.) To translate "for me", you can use .
>
> (literally) Food is an easy-to-write topic for me.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, translation, nominalization"
}
|
What does オシャレ mean?
>
It seems the definition of is something like "stylish", but it doesn't seem right in this case. What does that mean?
|
is also spelled . This breaks down to honorific prefix _o-_ \+ _share_ , the stem of the verb _shareru_ , "to dress up, to get fancy, to be stylish, to be refined", or even "to be witty" in terms of how one speaks. This could be used as a noun, or indeed as a _-na_ adjective, like in your sample text.
You may have heard the term _dajare_ for "stupid joke": this comes from prefix _da-_ for "stupid, worthless" + this same _share_ for "witticism".
So in the context of your quote, "dressed up" certainly doesn't fit, and as you note, "stylish" also sounds funny. But "refined" or "fancy" would seem to work.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 12,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "meaning, words"
}
|
How to use と with three or more nouns?
I just started learning Japanese and I recently learned something like:
>
> (Please give me this camera and that radio.)
Note that I have not learned Katakana yet so sorry for the Hiragana up there.
So, what if I want three or more objects at the same distance. For example, I want the camera, TV and the radio that is right in front of me.
Can I say something like:
>
To omit some "and ()"?
Thanks in advance!
|
> []{} **** []{} **** []{}
would sound okay when talking to a store clerk while shopping.
* * *
ABC sounds a tiny bit more casual/conversational than ABCABC. You can say/write...
> []{}[]{}[]{}[]{}
> My hobbies are playing piano, reading, and watching movies.
> []{}[]{}[]{}[]{}[]{}[]{}
> Prime Minister is visiting Spain, France, and Belgium.
(You can also use ABCAB[]{}C etc. which sound more formal.)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, usage, particle と"
}
|
How to say "weeaboo" in Japanese?
What's the best translation of "weeaboo" in Japanese?
I would define a weeaboo as a (generally derogatory term for a) non-Japanese person who is highly interested in manga, anime, Japanese video games, and/or Japanese culture in general.
_Otaku_ (/) is somewhat a synonym of weeaboo in English, but apparently not so in Japanese, where it means nerd/geek more broadly, not necessarily in manga/anime/video games.
I wasn't able to find an entry on Jisho.org or relevant links besides two Reddit posts (link 1, link 2), which suggested the following:
* /
*
* for a more neutral term
Which of these terms is most commonly used? What are the connotations of each of these terms, and where might they differ from the English term "weeaboo"? Are they established in any dictionaries? Are there any other terms that might be used?
|
There is no one-size-fits-all solution. It depends on how you want to use this word.
* or is not something an average Japanese speaker would understand, and that's why it's not on jisho.org. It's a transliteration rather than a translation. Still, if you want to write an article about the concept of weeaboo in Japanese, you'll probably want to present the word as first and explain its meaning. (Actually, I first recognized the word weeaboo via one of such articles written in Japanese.)
* and are good if weeaboo is not the main topic of your article. is a derogatory suffix similar to "-mania" or "wannabe". These phrases may not fully cover the nuance of weeaboo as you have defined, but you can convey the gist of it. Note that these phrases have no direct connection to anime/manga, so you may still have to explain that part if it's not clear in the context.
* is "Japan fan", a very neutral phrase.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation, word requests, definitions"
}
|
だろう in question context?
This is sentence:
> “”“”
I'm not sure if this is really a question, but words like and suggest that it probably is. So if this is really a question, then how should I inerpret at the end, because usually as far as I know it represents information about which speaker thinks its almost certainly is true.
But here, it looks like question is in form of something like "In which way did you see world?", and I don't understand how fits here.
|
after an interrogative (, , , ...) is something that may be called a "I-wonder marker". While forms a question addressed to someone else, forms a question addressed to yourself.
> “”
> I wonder what kind of world you are "seeing".
> I wonder what the world you are "seeing" is like.
**** is "in what way" or "how", but **** is "what kind of" or "like what".
More simpler examples:
* ?
(I wonder,) Where am I?
* ?
(Please tell me,) Where am I?
* ?
(I wonder,) Who is it?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, translation, meaning"
}
|
What does "本人と似て" mean?
In this sentence I don't understand the beginning " ---" For me it's : Anyway, they look alike, brilliant and frivolous But I'm not sure. Could someone please help me ?
And if someone could explain to me the meaning of in the end of sentence, does it have the same meaning as "" or does it mean something else.
![the page concerned ](
|
* : "the person themself", "that person" (if the whole sentence is about the teacher, this perhaps refers to the student.)
* : a particle that marks a comparison target. See this and this.
* : the te-form of ("to resemble", "to become similar")
The verb takes both and . and are interchangeable, but maybe the latter is slightly more colloquial. So is "being like that person" or "similarly to him/her".
* : "frivolous (and)"
* : Literally "merely shining" or "only flashy". In this case it describes how someone looks fabulous but has no substance (cf. ).
* : the noun linking particle
This type of does not usually come at the end of the sentence. It's an incomplete sentence ("frivolous and superficial..."), and it probably modifies a person mentioned in a adjacent balloon. Maybe ? I need more context.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "manga"
}
|
Question about "ほう" in this context
Heres the sentence :
>
So I understand the sentence, I think, by context, as : "He reached up with his free arm and touched his scalp, trying to determine the origin of his headache."
But i can't find a good definition or explanation for this "", which kanji is this related ? what's the meaning here ?
Thanks in advance.
|
The kanji that's it's representing is the standard . It is used in the standard way of making a comparison between two objects. Here the comparison is between the two hands of the person. As for what comparison it's making, the answer is that it's comparing the -ness of the two hands. So here means the hand that is more .
Edit: As Chocolate points out, when used here isn't actually making a comparison between the **level** of , but the **existence** of or not.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
Who is doing the action in the second sentence?
I'm translating the following two sentences from a book written in first person.
>
>
> []{} []{≪≫}
Is the person turning their body in the second sentence the girl mentioned in the previous sentence, or is it the first person narrator?
|
**** at the end of the sentence is a subsidiary verb which describes a motion coming toward a "main person". Since this story is written from the first-person view (, , ...), this probably means is coming toward the first person narrator. That is, although "she is motionless", she is at least slowly moving her legs.
Nevertheless, as @NicolasLouisGuillemot points out, the biggest hint should be in the story itself. Who is holding the knife in this context, after all? How many people are there in this scene? It's difficult to say something with confidence from only those two sentences.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, translation, topic"
}
|
What is the difference between 何もありません and 何もあります?
and both have the same meaning according to google translate. I have no trouble in understanding why has the meaning of "nothing/everything" as one of my native languages has a similar structure but is what I have problems with.
How can a word when in the negative and positive form both give out the same meaning? Both according to google translate means "There is nothing". Is even spoken much in day-to-day talks?
|
is a mistake. Google translate is not able to tell you whether a sentence is grammatically correct or not, so maybe it's just giving you its closest guess.
Note however that you _can_ use it in a positive sense if you use instead of .
* {} = there is nothing
* {} = there is anything/everything
Also note the difference in the reading of the kanji "" in these two cases.
Reference: (section 16.2.1/16.2.2)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "meaning, word choice"
}
|
Question about 単独
Does word has some figurative meaning close to something like "not ready"? I'm asking because it used in this sentence
> “”
But protagonist definitely isn't "solo", since he has companion, but he is worried what can happen if he "disarm" himself and something bad happens. So it should be something close to "not ready" from context.
|
I think
> “”
means something along the line of: "But that would only be the case if I was (still) alone."
So he is worried about what might have happened with him in this situation while he was still travelling/fighting (?) solo. I guess he recently banded together with his companion?
In that sense the normal sole/single/solo translation would be correct.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "meaning, words"
}
|
Expected sentence in article to use を but が is used instead
I'm reading this article and I have come across this sentence and I'm wondering why **** is used instead of . What's the reason am I missing here?
> ****
>
> My translation:
>
> On the 11th, Toyosu Market has opened and started auctions.
|
In addition to Kaizokugari's answer, I'd like to point out that is an intransitive verb -- it cannot take an object marked with . This verb means that _"something starts on its own"_. The "something" here would be the subject of the verb, and thus it takes the subject-marking particle .
To break it down, your sample sentence in Japanese is a compound sentence.
>
We could split this up into its component sentences:
>
> The Toyosu market opened on the 11th.
>
>
> Auctioning began.
Dividing it up into separate sentences like this doesn't sound very natural, but it can help when trying to parse longer texts.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, syntax, particle が, particle を, transitivity"
}
|
Sentence structure of 戦争で敵兵になぶりものにされて殺されたんだ
> ……
>
> ****
>
> ...
In this hypothetical, the parents are killed in war but the bolded section is unintuitive to read.
can't take directly as a transitive verb, but is the only thing that can do the to his parents.
would appreciate clarification, than you
|
First, note the following:
* The highlighted sentence is a passive sentence. In passive sentences, the agent is often marked by .
* "" as a whole is a noun-equivalent, so the verb of the highlighted sentence is not . Instead, you could say that "" is like a verb on its own.
Breaking down the sentence piece-by-piece:
>
the "location" of the action
>
the agent of the action in the passive sentence
>
the two verbs of the sentence, combined with to indicate that the two events happened sequentially.
The verbs are conjugated in the passive voice. The is the agent who is doing the action, and we understand from context that it is the speaker's who received the actions of the agent.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "parsing"
}
|
How to create a personal name with kanji
For personal names, is it right to use kanji to describe its meaning?
For example: one of the meanings of the name Vincent is "defeat the evil".
Instead of using Katakana for Vincent, is it the right way to consider the two words "defeat" and "bad" and consider respectively their kanji, like this? :
So we obtain a equivalent Japanese name (and not a foreign name) for Vincent.
Can you tell me anything about it? Thanks!
|
Rendering foreign names into Japanese kana or kanji is usually done with the express purpose of reproducing the SOUND of the foreign name as accurately as is possible given the limits of Japanese phonetic components.
Using kanji to show Japanese people one of the underlying "meanings" of a foreign name isn't really helpful in one's personal life or for legal requirements, so it isn't really done. That said, I have met foreigners who chose to give themselves Japanese kanji nicknames based on the overt meanings of their names or the symbolic meanings of their names. But those nicknames were usually "chat handles" or just jokes.
If you simply want to convey to a Japanese friend one of the symbolic meanings of your name, it's far more common and much less confusing just to actually tell them which English words or concepts are associated with your name.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": -1,
"tags": "names"
}
|
What is the difference between 清潔 and 清浄
According to one Japanese guy I know:
>
>
He also says that the correct adjective in the sentence below is and is incorrect.
> /
However, according to the dictionary, is correct.
<
Can someone explain this to me?
|
basically only refers to physical cleanliness. Being is being free from dirt, dust, blot, bacteria, etc. It's antonym is , which refers to something physically dirty.
is a relatively uncommon word. It can refer to physical cleanliness of water and air in technical contexts (e.g. ), but in non-technical contxts, it tends to refer to more abstract or "spiritual" cleanliness/pureness. The antonym of in the spiritual sense is , which describes something morally dirty, inpure, corrupted, etc.
Therefore, if you're thinking of the tranquility, sacredness, or any other mental effect of mountain air, would be the natural choice. If you're only concerned about air pollution or infectious disease, is also fine.
is a suru-verb meaning "to wash", "to clean", "to cleanse", etc. It is basically a kango version of , and mainly used in technical contexts.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "words"
}
|
Use of かて as "even"
>
I get the meaning of the sentence, but I'm wondering, is there a nuance behind ? For instance, between and and ?
|
is Kansai dialect. It is difficult to translate into English, but the usual meaning is similar to "even if...". It is used in place of the standard Japanese particles ~~ or ~and the verb conjugation ~.
Example (like ~):
> No matter what you say, what's impossible is impossible.
>
> Even if you start now, it's already hopeless, isn't it?
Example (like ~):
> Even elementary school kids know that.
>
> I don't want to do that, either
Source: Colloquial Kansai Japanese by DC Palter, Kaoru Slotsve
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, kansai ben"
}
|
Looking for the correct spelling of “tsundoku” in Japanese
I am not learning nor will I be learning Japanese any time soon so I’ll be glad if you could help me out here. I am a designer and I wanted to play with the correct Japanese spelling of this word “tsundoku”. As I understand it means buying and piling unread books instead of reading after buying them. I am attaching a few photos showing some spellings but I have no way to be sure if they’re right.  that combine Kanji (Chinese characters) and hiragana, and in your second example, you can see those alongside the same word spelled out in just hiragana . Both are correct, as ajsmart said. My autocorrect actually gives it as (without the hiragana between the characters) - a third option, just to add to the confusion. Welcome to the world of Japanese...
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": -1,
"tags": "translation, meaning"
}
|
clause ending ようで clarification
> **** ……
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> ****
I can't really come up with a concise interpretation of this usage. I read as both a situation summarization and a cause indicator all in one, but it feels clumsy.
The 4th sentence, for example, has much more of a "because feeling" in it than the first one. The 2nd and 3rd sentence feels like it's more in the middle in terms of cause.
(since) i'm not good with just looking at the board and taking notes, naturally i have more physically active practical classes.
vs
But applying a hierarchy among the students, that sort of custom...(stuck between a rock and hard place)
|
just the continuative form of , which expresses similarity to something else. You can understand all your examples in this way.
> **** ……
But the students have made something which **appears to be** a ranking...
>
Although my(?) hand was completely unable to reach them, my(?) wish **appeared to** have reached them...
> ****
It **appears** has no choice but to acknowledge that 's opinion was correct...
> ****
I also **appear to be** bad with classes where you always look at your notes...
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, auxiliaries"
}
|
Differences between 妊娠 and 受胎
Can you tell me what are the differences between:
~~1) **** and ****?~~
**** and ****?
|
It is true that some English-Japanese dictionaries list as meaning "conception", but I do not agree with this. means pregnant (i.e. the state of carrying a fertilized egg / embryo in one's womb), where as means conception (i.e. the process of becoming pregnant).
If we check the Japanese explanations on kotobank.jp we have the following:
{}
The formation of a pregnancy. Sperm meets eggs such that fertilization occurs, whereafter
the fertilized egg moves through the oviduct until it reaches the uterine cavity and gets
implanted in the endometrium. This process leading to pregnancy is referred to as .
{
“”
The state of a body, where a fertilized egg is implanted in the uterus of a female and
develops into an infant (fetus), until the infant and the placenta goes out of the body,
is referred to as .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": -1,
"tags": "words"
}
|
Use of て form in a relative clause
>
From what I understand, this can approximately be translated as:
> She was wearing clothes so thin that you could say: She will definitely catch a cold.
The thing I'm having trouble with is this part in the relative clause:
>
First, why is at the end here? Since I don't think it is modified by what comes before, is this order used to avoid which may create a confusion with "She was of course wearing blabla..."? And secondly, why this form? Is it just an unfinished sentence implying something else, or is it to avoid were would act as a relative clause for ?
|
I think what you might be missing is that ~ is a grammatical construct on its own.
The main point of the sentence is this:
> The girl was wearing thin clothes.
The construct "" further describes the clothes she is wearing: Clothes so thin as if to indicate it would be natural to catch a cold. (Translation is a bit rough around the edges, but it is hard to express adequately in English)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
What does ともあれ解析-待ちかな～ mean?
Context: A dangerous crisis is happening, and the boss man has just received partial report on the entire incident, but enough to be informed what's going on. The full report is waiting on some labatory analysis of leftovers from previous incident in the crisis.
After the subordinate who reported leaves, his aide says:
>
I'm assuming this is /// and the aide is wondering if they should wait for the full (complete) report. Am I right here? The big boss answers:
>
>
>
I'm guessing that Aaa, is less him saying they should wait but more exasperation because he thinks they need to start making countermeasures now or the same thing will happen again.
Of course it could be a confirmation and mean "Yes, we need to prepare properly or else things will take the same course."
|
after a suru-verb/noun works as a suffix that forms a no-adjective. It means "waiting for ".
> *
> *
> (informal) What are we waiting for?
>
So means "Anyway, I guess we have to wait for the (full) analysis." (and ) means "I wonder if" or "I guess" depending on the intonation, but when is written like this, you have to guess from the context. here simply means "Yeah (we have to wait)".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
how to make sense of 御用の方は屋上にまで?
At the beginning of Love Live! Sunshine!! Ep.13, there is a notice written by the character Hanamaru, that writes: .
The screenshot
The English substitle says "If you need us, we'll be on the roof". I get the meaning, but I still can't wrap my head around two things:
1. means customer or guest. Shouldn't "we" be subject in this sentence?
2. , what does here mean? Doesn't mean "until, up to"? I have gone through some old questions in this site but I still can't translate this word here convincingly.
|
> ****
> "If you need us, we'll be on the roof".
It should be a typo of []{}[]{}[]{}.
is a common phrase to say "If you need us, please come to ~~" → "If you need us, we'll be in ~~". or ("Please come to ~~.") is left out at the end.
**Update:** In the screenshot it's spelled as , so maybe they wrote it that way on purpose. I guess they are making the character speak (or write) in a bit strange/awkward way, to make them look more distinctive/unique. (This might be related to .)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "particle まで"
}
|
Can someone explain the grammar in this sentence "もうこれで終わってもいい"
I'm having problems with the particle and its main function here. I can't figure out the real meaning of this sentence.
> {}
I found that [Verb + Te-form + ] is used to ask permission to do the action of the verb, which conflicts with the context of the scene (a firm, decisive affirmation) from this page of a manga:
![](
|
A bit tricky without more context but, the whole passage seems like:
**"And now with this (something), (it doesn't matter if/I don't care if) it all ends now. So I'm gonna give it everything I've got..."**
The first bit **** is pretty ambiguous.
Literally translated:
- So with this...
- It's fine if this is the end.
- So...
- Everything I've got...
It would be helpful if we could see the surrounding pages as well.
_Edit: Fixed a misreading with updated meaning._
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation, て form, particle で, particle も"
}
|
what's the purpose of '気でいたんだ' in this sentence
The full sentence is:
> {}{}{}
For now I think comes from 'to obtain just about everything / almost everything' but I can't understand the purpose of the rest and how it changes the meaning of the phrase.
|
means "to (keep/stay) think/imagine/feel(ing) that one did~~". (≂ ) (cf. "to think/feel/imagine one did~~", "to fancy oneself as~~")
means "to gain/obtain (anything and) everything".
So literally means "I thought/imagined that I had obtained everything."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
How to say "even" for the last item in an enumeration?
The context I want to say is as follows.
> People who always **complain about their jobs, working partners, and even the company** while still taking the salary look like ones who spit into their own well from which they drink everyday.
Here the word `even` is only attached to the last item of the enumeration
jobs, working partners, company
I am afraid my translation below does not convey the original meaning. Please kindly correct me!
>
Note: Any constructive advice or suggestion is always welcome!
|
How about translating it like:
> **** ****
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, particles, particle も"
}
|
Different pronunciations of 主
I just stumbled across this - rather simple - sentence from the novel :
>
>
> ****
>
> It wasn't even the demon lord's will. His goal was only to use its powers, he didn't even have an interest in the results.
>
> I was just looking at my master.
Context: The one speaking is a puppet made by the 'lazy king', who lost interest in it right after its creation. The puppet now seems to wonder about the meaning of his existence and considers the 'lazy king' as his master.
In this case, how would you read ? According to the dictionary there are five possible pronunciations:
*
*
*
*
*
Is there any notable difference between them? I feel like I heard in historical dramas a lot.
|
, on its own like that, means 'the Lord (God)'. means main or primary. is ; I don't believe it's a reading of . seems less like a person's master and more like the master of something, to me - like 'owner'. So I would guess that is the intended reading here.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "kanji, pronunciation"
}
|
What is the role of particle と in this sentence?
> **** ****
I know that could be used as a quotative particle or it could be used to make a conditional sentence. Particle can also mean "and" or "with". In the sentence above, I think the first means "with", but about the second , I am not sure if it is conditional or quotative.
What are the meaning and grammatical role of particle in this sentence?
|
First one is like "with" as you say.
Second one turns the prose behind it () into a sort of condition, a "what if" or "if x".
**Think of it like so; "if X were to happen/be the case, the outcome will be Y".**
/ To come across (a mouse) would be worrisome.
**Some more examples using this particular structure:**
/ If you don't sleep enough, you will become unhealthy
/ If you don't clean properly, cockroaches will appear
/ If you run quickly, you will arrive quickly
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, particle と"
}
|
Asking 'how much is the hotel for one night'
I'm trying to ask "How much is the hotel for one night?"
After doing some reading online, I've come to two answers. But I'm not sure which one is correct.
and
Is the needed?
|
That is not needed. is an example of the "X per Y" pattern which does not require . You can also say:
* ****
( marks a "condition")
* ****
( explicitly means "per ")
Using may be not be entirely wrong, but I feel it's less natural than the other options.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "particle が"
}
|
Meaning of 人 in Japanese internet slang
In a page from the Dead Tube manga, a man is being killed during a live video. Some of the viewers comment the scene simply with "". What is the meaning of this kanji when used in this way? Could its graphical aspect remind of clapping or praying hands? Here's the page in question (look at the second panel). Thank for your help!
|
`` represents two hands pressed together. It appears in many kaomoji. In this context it represents praying hands (), a traditional Buddhism/Shinto praying gesture. It can also mean more casual "please".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 23,
"question_score": 14,
"tags": "kanji, internet slang"
}
|
What does ダンッ mean?
What does mean in the following sentence from my book?
> ****
|
is an onomatopoeia (or sound effect) of bumping into something.. like "bump", "thud", "thump", similar to ...
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation, katakana, onomatopoeia"
}
|
How can I tell the reason after the fact in the second part of the sentence
Let's make an easy example sentence
>
In real life conversations I sometimes start a sentence with the second part
>
Then I want to tell the reason for this and I always try to somehow connect the sentences, but I don't know how. In the English language I could do it like this:
> Because I like Ramen, I am eating everyday in the cafeteria.
And then I could switch it around and do it like this:
> I am eating everyday in the cafeteria, because I like Ramen.
While in Japanese I always start to stutter and then I just begin a new sentence which goes like this:
>
or:
>
I am not sure if I'm overlooking something, but I think that there must be a smoother way to tell the reason after the fact without making a new sentence. I think you could do it somehow with the particle "", but it kind of doesn't sound right to me.
|
Japanese is a head-final language#Head-initial_vs._head-final_languages), and there is no "formal" way to say the reason after the conclusion part within a single sentence.
You can split the sentence into two:
> ()
Or using explanatory-no:
> ()
Or explicitly using ("because") or ("the reason is"):
>
>
Alternatively, it's possible to replace the period with a comma and "pretend" it's a single sentence:
>
This nonstandard word order makes the sentence look informal and colloquial. You should avoid this in formal writings unless you do want to vividly simulate a casual conversation.
Or you can form a compound sentence using //etc:
>
IMHO, you don't have to hesitate to split the sentence into two if you really want to say the conclusion first.
means "the reason likes ramen", which makes no sense.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, sentence, reason"
}
|
What does the onomatopoeia ジワリと mean?
I tried going to my sound effect dictionary for this one but nothing came up, any help in figuring out what that bolded bit of the sentence means is much appreciated.
****
|
> ****
is an onomatopoeia of liquid (blood here) oozing out / coming out (of wound, eyes etc.) It can also describe liquid (slowly) soaking (into cloth/fabric). Its variants include: , , .
These are close to :
> Liquids soaking and oozing
> Soaking slowly with sweat or tears
> (from <
* * *
Quite a few onomatopoeiae have the same or similar pattern of variants, eg:
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *
> etc...
>
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation, katakana, sound symbolism"
}
|
Are に and と interchangeable when used with adverbs?
Are sentences A, B, and C all correct? If not, which are incorrect and why? If they are all correct, does it mean that and can always be used interchangeably with adverbs? And that and aren't actually needed?
> **A:** ****
> **B:** ****
> **C:**
|
When means "furious(ly)", defines it as "an adverb that takes ", defines it as a na-adjective, and defines it as an adverb. Indeed it's confusing, but at least to me, in this sense is a **no-adjective** , which means I feel only Sentence A is correct. You can use it as a predicate.
> *
> *
> *
>
However, when describes strong sunshine, it _also_ works as "an adverb that optionally takes ", just like (), (), etc.:
> *
> *
> *
> *
>
In uncommon situations where works as a simple onomatopoeia, it's an "adverb that optionally takes ".
> *
> *
>
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "particle に, particle と, adverbs"
}
|
use of よりなく in this sentence
It seems difficult for ryouji to say, however ____, he initiates the conversation.
Having a hard time looking up.
thank you
|
`attributive-form + + ` means "have no choice but to ". Variations include , .
* Learn JLPT N2 Grammar: (yori hoka nai)
* [JGram - [] (hokanai)](
* Japanese grammar
* Expressing ~no option but
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.