INSTRUCTION
stringlengths 11
999
| RESPONSE
stringlengths 0
999
| SOURCE
stringlengths 16
38
| METADATA
dict |
|---|---|---|---|
What does 今更何を知ろう mean here?
>
It's from a video game Final Fantasy X. These are the words of the Grand Maester Maika, the party comes to him, but he didn't expect their arrival.
My translation:
> What would you like to inquire about now?
The volitional form in this case defines their will to know?
|
Yes is the volitional form of , so it's literally "want to know". is "at this (late) point (of time)". Also note that this is an authoritative statement without any keigo.
>
> What do you want to know after all this?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
Origin - subtitles
In the YouTube original series Origin. Ep 1. 9:15 in the person on the ground says (I think) ...
Which I took to mean “Please sit!” (Or something along those lines).
But the subtitles said “wait - wait a second”
Am I wrong in what I heard? Or did I interpret it incorrectly? Or are the subtitles not exactly a literal translation? Is it a slang?
Link to video <
**Edit**
Listening again and again I think he actually says “” in which case then I agree with the subtitles. :-)
But the first three syllables are almost squashed into a single syllable.
|
Yes, he says and not which wouldn't really make sense in the situation they were in.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
What does 通常進行 mean in the context of a two week serialized mangaka job?
I can understand both words separately, and even together in some specific contexts. I can't understand the meaning of these two together in the following phrase and context:
>
The author is a mangaka, with a serialization of 1 chapter per 2 weeks. The editor asks her to anticipate the deadline by three days, so she could go back to .
>
> 1\. usual; ordinary; normal; regular; general; common
>
> 1\. moving forward (e.g. vehicle); onward movement
> 2\. advance (work, procedure, etc); advancement; progress
> 3\. progress (of a disease); disease progression
> 4\. progression (harmonic, melodic)Music term
|
in a project managing context roughly means "schedule", "scheduling" or "managing". also refers to a kind of manager whose main responsibility is keeping tasks on schedule. ( is known as one of the toughest jobs.)
here means "regular schedule" or "normal cycle" of the bimonthly publishing. The editor is saying the mangaka's deadlines for the recent issues has been delayed for three days, and she wants to return to the regular cycle.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "kanji, compounds, interpretation"
}
|
use of 単に....だけか in this sentence
speaker secretly follows a bunch of thugs. And watches them enter a somewhat hidden cave while being in a cheerful mood.
>
>
>
>
> **> ……**
My issue is that
>
>
> Simply finding a secret hideout and they are excited? (speaker thinking it's an overreaction)
or
>
>
> Finding a secret hideout, and they are only exited? (speaker thinking it's an under reaction)
makes sense. but the actual sentence
> ……
>
> why? (they) simply found a secret hideout, are they are only cheerful? (can't tell what point this is trying to make)
having both and in the same sentence doesn't make sense for me.
Thank you far any clarifications.
|
>
Treat as one set action. As this answer explains, and are often used together for emphasis. You can drop one of them without largely changing the meaning.
> ****
>
They all mean "(I thought they were doing something different but) They're simply elated after finding a secret hideout?"
As an aside, in this context is an interjectory set phrase said when the speaker saw something and got disappointed. "So this is it?", "How disappointing", "Gosh", "Gee", etc.
If it were "", then it would mean something like "Are they merely excited even though they found a secret hideout?" Note the position of is different.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "reading comprehension"
}
|
Nominalized verb without の or こと
I saw this:
>
Is this a correct sentence? I got confused with . I thought we cannot follow a verb with another noun without nominalizing it with either or . Should this be ?
|
This is a very important construction called a _relative clause_.
> []{}[]{}
> a person who teaches
The rule is described in detail in this question: Relative clauses distinguishing whom/with which/that
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "word choice, syntax, jlpt, relative clauses, nominalization"
}
|
What is the difference between 〜るも and 〜ても
In grammar textbooks I see the pattern clearly defined, but recently I've encountered a similar usage of that I can't find a good explanation for. Here are two examples:
>
(from the monologue at the start of a anime episode)
>
(from a RocketNews24 article, talking about being unable to find the right electric shaver)
Is this a casual pattern, or maybe an abbreviation of another pattern? From context it seems similar in usage to , or maybe even just , but I'm not sure of the nuance.
|
It is an old fashioned way of saying . In old Japanese, particles were directly used after verbs' , without needing a nominalizer such as or . Nowadays, using a particle that way when it's normally used with a nominalizer is considered archaic, so this construct is mostly used in literature or formal situations.
<
> ………
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "grammar, particle も"
}
|
Japanese localization for the common phrase "powered by x"
There exists a common English phrase;
> Powered by x
Meaning something along the lines of;
> This thing is (made possible by/built upon/built with/runs on) (x)
Use case examples:
* This website is powered by WordPress
* Powered by Google
What would be a suitable Japanese localization for this phrase?
I can only think of more literal translations, such as;
*
*
And variations to this effect.
|
I don't think there is a single-word catchy equivalent. If you really need a translation, you can say:
> * WordPress /
> * Google
> * AWS
>
But IMHO it's often a good idea to leave it untranslated if this is a small remark in a footer pane. "Powered by" does look somewhat cooler than the lengthy Japanese phrases above, and Japanese IT workers who may be interested in such information can understand "powered by", anyway.
(Of course there is a reason not to say this at all, but that's another story.)
As an aside, is a very big word that is used for truly innovative creations or the genesis creation.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 10,
"question_score": 12,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
Are those kanas "しい" ? (text found on a banner)
Today I learnt that "bald tug of war championship" was a thing in Japan, and came across some weird kana that I can't figure out (in the top left corner, underlined in red) :
![weird kanas](
Is it simply `` ? That's what seems the most likely to me, but I'm not a hundred percent convinced. Could it by any chance contain one of the "kana iteration marks" ?
|
Yes, it is . There is a bit of a play-on-words happening here.
[]{} means "bald(ness)", but is being written in katakana on the top line ([]{}). The entire bottom row says []{}. Here, the is being used in conjunction with (written in katakana) to represent the adjective []{}, which means "intense" or "fierce". So is like "fierce contest/competition". Also note the elongation mark `` used for some emphasis.
So they're making a connection between the baldness and the intensity of the competition by writing in katakana in both spots. However, the is still written in hiragana to make it obvious that it's . I suppose they could have written it all in katakana as , but then it might not be as obvious and the meaning could have been lost.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "kana, puns"
}
|
Grammatic relationships inside a sentence - parsing
once again I need again your help: I have this sentence and also its translation (same auther/text as here) :
> {}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}
I think I understand the first part well enough ({}{})
but I have problems parsing the second part because I am unsure which parts belong together and why it is that heats the feelings. Furthermore, I have trouble understanding the role of .
Anyway, I believe at least that {}{}{}{}{} belongs together.
Thanks a lot for any help.
|
("to train") is a transitive verb. Its subject is , and its object is . ("red-ly as heated iron") is an adverbial phrase that modifies . This adverbial phrase is , therefore "I felt the deadly pain sharpen my senses so that they became red like heated iron" is the literal translation. It probably sounds fairly peculiar, but I think the original Japanese sentence is equally peculiar.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, particles, parsing"
}
|
い adjective + くて + verb
I encountered this sentence:
> ****
and got confused with . Isn't it used for adding adjectives? Why is it followed by a verb in the example given? Can I use instead? How will it change the meaning if I use **** ?
|
Whew. Found the answer. Note C Page 467 of A Dictionary of Basic Grammar (gotta love this book) where it states that the action/state expressed by the first predicate is the reason for or the cause of the action/state of 2nd predicate. Example given on the book : .
Should I just delete my question?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "て form, jlpt, i adjectives, conjunctions"
}
|
I need help understanding a phrase: 「盗むとこは盗ませてもらえ」
I don't know if it's an idiomatic expression or something, but I've been trying to get the meaning of this phrase . I've tried to search it but nothing would come up. Maybe it's supposed to be taken literally...? I'm really kind of confused.
|
is not an idiom. It's an ordinary sentence whose very literal translation would be "What(ever) you (can) steal, let them allow you to steal". is , which loosely means "elements/parts (of a skill)" here.
Of course it might mean something like "you should plagiarize everything" if the speaker were a villain, but in this context means something different. Here's an excerpt from :
> ###
>
> ④ ``
This actually refers to actively learning something by watching experts or by imitation. This way of using is not negative at all.
Thus, means "You must imitate what can be imitated (without bothering to ask your coworker for assistance)" or "(If someone is doing better than you about something,) you should learn to do it in the same way by watching him."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning, phrases"
}
|
What does the で in 付きで悪い
The sentence goes like this:
>
I know the sentence goes something like this
> In Hajime case, it wasn't just mere trouble, the reason he was not feeling good at school was due to feeling depressed.
But I still don't get the in
|
It's not but ("to feel uncomfortable") modified by . is an uncommon emphatic version of (although the former is a no-adjective and the latter is a standalone adverb). This is a suffix that means "with added" or "which comes with ", so the gist is "it's so bad to the point where can be added". BCCWJ has 7 entries of ``/``, most of which are used by elder writers.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "particle で"
}
|
Hiragana Unicode Chart has two characters for each
Below is a unicode chart for Hiragana characters. I see there are two a, i, u, e, o and so on, small and big ones. Please help me explain this as I am just starting to learn Hiragana today.
![Hiragana Unicode Chart](
I got this unicode chart from this page.
|
Certain sounds in Japanese are spelled with two characters, much like in English spellings like the "sh" in "fish" to spell the sound //ʃ//. These combinations are called **digraphs**. There was a separate post about a related issue over here that provides more detail.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "hiragana, unicode"
}
|
interpreting 私の生徒会に欲しいって会った時から言ってる
MC bumps into the new after her opening ceremony speech. MC and her are friends since the start of the last school year, but the reader doesn't know what happened between them previous year because of a time skip.
> MC
>
> MC
>
>
>
> MC……
* * *
> perfect timing, well then, why you you come with me to the student council room?
>
> MCnot going
>
> oh my, even though you said (or is it I said?) "" from(?) the time we met... nothing wrong with being obedient right?
>
> MC……about that, when we met you already had plans to be the ?
I am unsure how exactly to read "" in terms of who doing the wanting, what is being wanted here in this quote.
and the use of to indicate a point in time here is a bit strange for me.
thank you
|
Your understanding of this is fine. This after is either a purpose marker or a place marker.
> ()
> I've been saying I want (you) _for/in_ my student council
Similar example:
> ****
> In this company, he is necessary. / This company needs him.
>
> ****
> I want a picture postcard as/for a souvenir.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "reading comprehension"
}
|
Is there a name for verbs written as: Katakana+る?
The number of verbs that have the pattern `KATAKANA + ` seems to be increasing. Some examples include , , , , , etc.
Is there some kind of official name (or even informal name) for these specific types of verbs? It's not quite the same as wasei eigo, as far as I can see.
|
Linguistically, this kind of word is a bit like a **blend** or a **portmanteau** , where two (or more?) words are munged together. In Japanese, these are called either (a calque of "portmanteau word") or (a calque of "blended word").
In these cases, your sample verbs would be blends of the borrowed term and the verb-forming element -.
However, since the second portion is really only an ending, these might not be _quite_ the right kind of combination to qualify as blends. Broader categories to which this kind of word belongs include **neologisms** or , and **composite words** or .
While researching for this answer, I happened upon the article in the Japanese Wikipedia, which lists a few of these verbs and explains that . I suspect that this phenomenon is recent enough that formal academic linguistic terminology might not be settled yet.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "verbs, katakana"
}
|
What's the meaning of "と言いうるほどに"?
I'm having some trouble understanding the "" grammar in the following excerpt from Natsume Soseki's _Sanshiro_. Does this mean something like: "to the point of being able to say (danger, danger, while being in a safe position)"?
>
|
~closest meaning is "As I can say that~" express possibility. These expression by Soseki is not used frequently for modern Japanese language but sometime used in conversation.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, translation, literature, particle ほど"
}
|
On hiragana, romaji and pronunciation
I have heard a Japanese teacher explain how long vowels should be pronounced and how they should be written when using hiragana. That's what I saw on the whiteboard:
> - gakko **o** , ( _not_ gakko **u** )
Is it correct? I understand that the sound is pretty much the same. But if it's gakko **o** , then the hiragana version should be __ , which is not OK.
|
Do you know there are several romanization systems, each of which treats long vowels fairly differently? This Wikipedia article is a good starter.
****
* Nihon-shiki/Kunrei-shiki system: **gakkô**
* Hepburn system: **gakkō** (although there are many variants)
* Passport-shiki system: **gakko**
* JSL: **gakkoo**
* Wāpuro style: **gakkou**
If your teacher is using JSL, "gakkoo" is the correct Romanized spelling. Nevertheless, the only correct spelling in hiragana is .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "pronunciation, hiragana, rōmaji"
}
|
Meaning of 〜しては
I'm trying to understand the definition of at this site.
> ... ****
My confused translation:
> The reason it's __ [and not ] is not that the person who is described as __ is being trampled and being kicked themselves, but rather (???) _they_ are doing the trampling and kicking and then are forced to do such disagreeable things.
So what I'm not sure about is the meaning of in this context, as it's clear that it's not related to or which are the usual ways I encounter it.
I guessed in my translation that this is actually an instance of ( _X and then Y_ ) but I'm not sure exactly how to make sense of it in context.
|
modifies .
"something that you don't want to get trampled or kicked" or "something that you don't want to trample or kick"
You're right that the means "X and then Y" or "if~~".
()= "hate it if~~" → "don't like/want..."
refers to .
> (= )
"they (accidentally/unintentionally) trampled and kicked something that they didn't want to get trampled or kicked / something that they didn't want to trample or kick"
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, translation"
}
|
JLPT N3 task explanation
I have been solving the grammar tasks for JLPT N3. I have made a mistake in the following question.
>
>
>
>
>
>
I know the right answer is , but I still don't understand why. Can you explain to me please why other answers are wrong? It just seems to me that there is not enough context to solve this task.
I can guess that the first part translates like: If after I get money, it doesn't come off, the delivery of the item is... But I can't guess the right answer only from this. Can you help me please to understand it?
|
your confusion stems from the fact that you are mis-translating as "can't come off". However this is actually a portion of a standard sentence fragment:
>
which is a phrase meaning "something can't happen until something else happens first" (here is a link that might help: <
so this sentence, with correctly attached, translates to
> Until/Unless I/we receive the money I/we cannot deliver the goods.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "jlpt"
}
|
なんだこの「ギャラリー」？ What does he mean by gallery?
Panel this is taken from for context. This is commentary about a school go tournament that will start soon.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
My translation attempt:
> Oh, you came to look too? There's so much at this gallery [??] [Attempt 2: There's so much to see] [Attempt 3: So many people are here to watch]
>
> The Kaiou Middle School Go Club is at a top level, so it would be a loss if you don't look.
I am wondering if maybe there is some Japanese usage of gallery that I am missing?
Fake EDIT: Judging from weblio I wonder if it might be sense 3:
> ③
>
> 3: Spectators for golf, tennis and so on. Also, a place where spectators gather.
If that's the case, then I think my attempt 3 is on the right track but I am not sure.
|
It seems I may be right that in this case means a lot of people gathered to watch, since sense 3 of according to Weblio is "spectators for golf, tennis and so on" as I said above. Since this is about a gathering at a go tournament, this interpretation seems to make the most sense.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning, loanwords"
}
|
Verb form for titles and section headings
I read this question and realised that I don't know what the natural way to make a title/section heading is.
Supposing I had a section in a science report which was "Designing the experiment". What would be natural ways to write this? Here are some guesses:
1)
2)
3)
1) feels wrong to me. I'm not at all sure about 2). 3) Seems okay but it only works because I used a verb.
Presumably the context is important too. Adding in 2) sounds formal. I guess I wouldn't see that in a magazine headline. What about "Eating in fancy restaurants" as the title of a magazine article. Would the verb be , or some other conjugation?
In summary, how do you write "Doing X" as a headline/title/section heading in formal and informal contexts?
|
Suru-verbs are also nouns, so something like or should be enough. ( is usually for product design.) Non-suru-verbs are uncommon in scientific articles in the first place. You should use // instead of , instead of , ///etc instead of , and so on. In addition, some established nouns formed from masu-stem are suitable in technical contexts, too.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
What does the 'ga' at the front of 'ga hanasemasu' do?
I have just learnt that 'hanasemasu' means 'to speak' and that 'ga hanasemasu' means roughly the same. On Google Translate, 'hanasemasu' comes up as 'able to speak' and 'ga hanasemasu' comes up as 'I can speak', but as far as I know, there is no conjugation in Japanese, so if you want to specify ' **I** can speak', you would add 'watashi wa' at the start. I have also seen it written as 'wa hanasemasu'. So my question is: what does the 'ga/wa' mean?
|
> hanasu / hanashimasu means "to speak"
> hanaseru / hanasemasu means "to be able to speak"
"X-san ha (pronounced "wa") Y-go ga hana **seru** / hana **semasu** " means "X-san **can speak** Y language".
As other people have mentioned "watashi ha" does not have to be inserted when talking about yourself, because in Japanese, in a phrase with "no subject", the subject is understood by context. If there is NO context, the assumption becomes that you must be speaking about yourself, so that
"nihongo ga hanasemasu" becomes "I can speak Japanese."
in such a case, simply speaking, the "ga" connects the topic and the verb.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, words, syntax"
}
|
Could Vた-form be an adjective?
In the following sentence:
>
Though it sounds strange and amateurish, I see as an adjective for . So what is the grammatical role of in this sentence? and if it is the case that somehow alike to the way past participle is used as an adjective in the English language, in the Japanese language -form could be also used as an adjective?
|
> Could V-form be an adjective?
No, the past tense form doesn't change the nature of the word, it's still a verb even in the past tense.
Although it is most of the time translated in English as an adjective, the right way to understand it in Japanese is as below:
> : the comet that cracked
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, relative clauses"
}
|
「って云って下さい」に関する質問
> ..
>
> ****
>
> **** ...
-
What is the difference between and ?
,,
> a few more options like ,, but these are **even less plausible**
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, literature"
}
|
|
Usage of になる and こう in this sentence, sentence structure
I came across the sentence
>
I would translate the sentence as:
> There is no way I would read a newspaper or something said Tomoko as if it would be something to be proud of and laughed.
First thing which confuses me is the usage of . If I had to write a sentence like that I would have written: Does the usage of imply that not reading newspapers is one of many things one/she could become proud of?
The second thing ist about . To me it seems like a breach in the sentence structure which disturbs the reading flow. I would have probably written …
Could I rephrase the sentence like that? Does the usage of emphasize the aspect that the first half is the impression of the protagonist while the later half is rather objective/for everyone to observe?
|
When you look up #4 in goo or #6 in Jisho.org, you can find that X means "function as X" or "play a role of X". So, means "(as if) it's accepted as her honor".
is just an demonstrative pro-adverb to indicate the contents in the parentheses. In other words, the sentence is the same as … with a different word order.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, meaning, syntax"
}
|
When describing location can ある take more than one に?
> **** {}
> The small shrine located in a place near the mountains on the edge of town had been washed away by a landslide.
I can't decide how to parse the part in bold. I can see two ways:
> 1) ()
> 2) ()()
For 1) I'm translating as "Shrine located in a place which is near to the mountains." i.e the place is **near** the mountains but not **in** the mountains.
For 2) I'm translating as "Shrine which is located in a nearby place, and is located in the mountains." i.e. the nearby place is **in** the mountains.
Is the sentence ambiguous or is one of these obviously wrong? And why?
I'm guessing at option 1) since I'm not sure you can have the structure AB. But I think many shrines are located in the mountains so 2) seems possible.
|
This sentence should be parsed like option 1. Grammatically, it's very similar to a sentence like
> () (I live in a place that is near the station)
I think it can't be the option 2 because you would need to have before the part about . So something like
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, particle に"
}
|
「守りが甘い[上手]{うわて}」…どういう意味ですか？
>
![](
> "If you play this stronger player for whom 'protection is sweet' you will be done for."
is my best attempt to understand. The context in which this happens is the teacher of this go club sits down next to this group of first years to play the strongest arrival to his go club, a first year who is in fact at a professional level and should not be there. This teacher is making an offhand comment to Uno and the other first years sitting nearby. If necessary here is the panel just before this.
So far I am getting the sense that can mean is relaxed and so on from the entries at eow.alc.co.jp, so perhaps "player for whom defense is easy?" but I am not sure.
|
I think this is 2 sentences really: and .
here means not good enough/insufficient, in other words her defense is not enough. The second sentence then states that if she were to play a strong opponent, she would be done for.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "idioms"
}
|
Why does the word for "surgery" 外科 have the 外 kanji?
I can't seem to figure out what "outside" has to do with "surgery".
Surely, one type of surgery is amputation () which is about removing () a body part, but there are many other (much more common) type of surgeries.
|
stands in contrast to . While has the straightforwardly corresponding term "internal medicine" in English, I do not think the term "external medicine" corresponding to has as much currency in modern English-language medical materials, where instead this is rendered as "surgery". (Separately, I do note that the term "external medicine" seems to have some use in English-language Chinese medical contexts.)
That said, broadly speaking, "internal medicine" is concerned with treating the body from the inside, via medicines, behaviors, diet, etc. Meanwhile, "surgery" is concerned with treating the body from the outside, by opening things up or otherwise entering the body from the outside (such as via endoscopic techniques). This rough categorization of medical approaches is expressed in Japanese as and .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 18,
"question_score": 11,
"tags": "kanji, etymology"
}
|
How to decide between ている and てます
is the polite form of . On the other hand, is the casual and colloquial form of . The plain form is also used in casual situation. How to know if it is better to use or ?
|
is probably the most blunt form of the word. It'd be adequate if you are talking to juniors, or when you know the other person so well that the bluntness shows closeness.
is more polite, as you note. This is adequate, for example in the business setting, talking to somebody you don't know well,
is the humble form. This is better when you are talking to somebody whom you should show a formal respect, such as your boss, your teacher, etc.
or are casual forms. The former is a little more polite than the latter. These forms are adequate among your friends.
My advise is that if you are uncertain, always go for more politeness. It's a far smaller offense to talk too formal and polite to people who feel close to you, as opposed to talk too casual and impolite to people who expect otherwise.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "honorifics"
}
|
used of と侮る in these sentence and ~と侮る vs ~を侮る (perhaps related to 知る as well)
speaker is someone that normally fights demons, but fell for a trap set up by A, a human. Speaker has always hated A.
> …………A…… pass out
>
> I, of all people.... A...isn't a demon....underestimating (someone) like A, I became conceited.
from what i can tell ~ seems common as ~
from , i assume that this is used as a quote to describe the preceeding claused just like ""
are both **** and A **** attached to or is it ……A?
more generally
If a random sentence had ~ instead of ~, i probably wouldn't bat an eye. I suppose i could say the same for ~ vs ~. CTRL-F'ing my past texts i found is used 5x more often than
After this encountering this ~ sentence i realized i really can't tell the difference between ~ vs ~ either.
Thank you for any clarifications.
|
(AB) is one of the verbs that take both and and means "to (verb) A as B". The part marked by can be a full quote (clause or mini-sentence), but it can be a bare noun or a noun phrase, too. As usual, both the -part and the -part may be omitted.
* Difference between vs before
* grammatical and semantic difference of "" and ""
* Can used with /
> * A
> to make light of A as not being a _mazoku_
> * ()
> to make light (of someone) as (being) a (mere) human being
> *
> to make light of human beings
> * ()
> (literally) to underestimate thinking it's mere hyperventilation / to underestimate hyperventilation
> * [×] (unnatural)
> [×] to underestimate mere hyperventilation (sounds like you have to underestimate something other than hyperventilation)
>
The difference between and is similar, but usually takes a full quote (i.e., mini-sentence with a verb). In fixed expressions and literary expressions, `noun + ` exists.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "particle と, particle を"
}
|
What is the meaning of こう見えて in this sentence?
>
I get the part, but what does the first part of the sentence mean?
|
>
is used to say "Despite one's appearance", "Contrary to how one looks", "Even though one may look otherwise".
>
> Contrary to how he looks, / He may not look like one, but he is quite a schemer.
literally means "Even though (one) looks/appears this way". refers to how one looks/appears, and the phrase is used to say that it (= how one looks / one's appearance) doesn't match what one actually is.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
What does いちいちパスタ mean in this sentence?
> ****
I don't see what could mean "one by one pasta" in this context?
|
As was mentioned in naruto's link, **** is a word that implies that someone is saying or doing something step by step or giving a long-winded explanation, and helps convey the speaker's annoyance about this.
is basically "to annoyingly insist" or "to keep saying over and over (despite my lack of interest/despite how unimportant it is)" or "to go on and on about"
>
would thus be translated as something along the lines of
"It's strange to harp on and on, insisting on calling Japanese spaghetti a 'pasta' dish."
or adhering more closely to the Japanese word order:
"For Japanese spaghetti, annoyingly insisting on referring to it as 'pasta' is strange."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
unamed subject in this conversation and use of ~のに... in this sentence
gossip among unnamed students while being made to run laps, about a time when the gym teacher got really angry at something.Reader does not anything about what had happened.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
this(running laps) is revenge, () is mad at XX for showing signs of being disgusted.
that volleyball time?
yea, that time when the ball that XX got from had hair attached to it, XX was disgusted.
Speaking of that, () was incredibly mad wasn't he, his face was already bright red.
the ball (XX?) touched _was pretty unpleasant_ . Cuz the hair looked like pubes.
* How is ~ used here?
* is the in ... the ?
* is the person (unnamed XX) described as showing the same person as in the last sentence?
I found this conversation quite hard to follow.
thank you
|
>
> A ball he (=) touched is already disgusting, but, you know, (this time) it's ('s) hair!
refers to , not the unnamed students. is "even" (or we can use "already" in this context). is like "but". is a sentence-end particle used to convince someone or to seek for agreement, like "you know".
Related:
* What does and imply in various situations/contexts?
* Meaning of vs for "even"
* Different ways to say even
* Ending sentence with or
* Etymology of
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "parsing, reading comprehension"
}
|
Why is a blackboard called 黒板, but a whiteboard is not called 白板?
I'm curious as to why Japanese uses a for whiteboard , but a native word for blackboard, . Is there a historical reason this emerged? If you called a whiteboard a {}, would people understand you or would they laugh at you and think you were strange?
|
This mainly depends on _when_ these concepts were imported to Japan. Words introduced to Japan before WWII (e.g. , , ) tend to have kanji names, while recent ones (e.g. , , ) tend to have katakana names. Although some kanji words may be gradually replaced by new katakana versions, most words will remain the same after it was introduced for the first time.
* Is there a defined cause for the recent rise in the popularity of gairaigo?
* What is the rule in assigning kanji to a new word?
* What are the origins of the Chinese derived words?
doesn't sound funny and Wikipedia says it's another name for . Although people will probably understand when you say it, it's still fairly uncommon.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "words, etymology"
}
|
How to say that an article is published (in a newspaper, blog, etc)
When looking online in dictionaries, I can't figure out what word to use to say the following:
An article I wrote has been published in a newspaper.
> ****
>
> ****
>
> ****
Are any/all of these correct?
|
is "to publish (an entire issue)". is a (relatively uncommon) literary verb that means "to author/write (a book)." is a reasonable word choice, but is _transitive_.
After fixing the transitivity, we get:
> ****
> (I noticed) (someone) had kindly published an article I wrote.
While this is now grammatical, this is a fairly nuanced sentence. For one, is probably not necessary unless you really have a reason to say it. For one, means you just noticed the article had been already out for a while.
A natural way to say " is now published" is actually much simpler:
> (or )
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "grammar, word choice"
}
|
Usage of そこ with と勘違い
Context: A guy is trying to differentiate his group from an old group (nwo) because some people may think they are doing the exact same things nwo did in the past.
> nWo
The last sentence seems to be saying: "don't confuse us as being a different thing". That sounds like: "We are not different than them" which I don't think makes sense. This is the translation from the US version:
> And I hear that a lot. About nWo Japan. “Aren’t you just an nWo ripoff?” I don’t want people to think that. If anybody does I want to let them know we’re a different thing.’
Is there something omitted? what's referring to?
|
It's from an interview, so (as you might have noticed) its grammar is a bit iffy. I think you can understand it like...
> /
> (≂ /)
Literally: "I want them to think 'They're a different thing', and don't want them to misunderstand on that point."
I think the is like "regarding that" or "on that point" (≂).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
What does フェイスアップからよろしく！ 俺もあがって今日は寝るわー mean?
> ** **
It's a scene taking place in a konbini. I know what is because I looked it up(and all the other words) but I don't understand much the rest of the sentence.
EDIT: means rearranging the shelves when the articles at the front are sold to make it look good.
I don't see what I can do for the rest of the sentence except saying some nonsense based on the literal translation of the words?
> Because , do well! Me too I go up today I will sleep.
|
>
The is "from~~" or "starting with~~", not "because~~".
The means "leave (office)" or "finish (work)".
So it's like...
"Please start with rearranging the shelves! I'll call it a day, too, and go to sleep."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "reading comprehension"
}
|
Meaning of 過ぎ in 20日過ぎに海行くんだ
> 20
I'm pretty sure this means
> going to the sea in 20 days
but signifies elapsed time, so could it possibly be
> going to the beach **for** 20 days
?
|
Of course @Chocolate has already given the correct answer, but let me just note that the meaning of of "elapsing time" that you mentioned is correct, although I would rather think of it as _passing_ a particular point in time (or _exceeding_ a particular fixed period of time).
> 8 = 8
> Please call me after 8 o'clock = Please call me when 8 o'clock has passed
Here it refers passing a particular point in time (8 o'clock); similarly the transitive can also be used for passing a physical location, as for example in (see "Norikosu" vs. "Norisugosu").
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "words"
}
|
Different ways to say "member" (of an association/group etc)
I would like to ask about which is the most general/common way to say 'member' in Japanese when talking about a group, organization, association, etc. In particular, is there a word that is "always ok" to use, or does each different type of organization (a school club vs. a research society vs a sports team vs an NPO, for example) use a different term?
and seem to be the most common words, is that correct? Can they be used interchangeably/in any situation?
I know about but I'm interested more in "non company" type of organizations.
Second question: if I want to ask how many members there are in a group/association, do I just use or is there a specific counter?
|
is the safe choice that can be used in place of , , , , , , , and so on. refers to a member of a club/society (, , ), and it can _not_ refer to a member of a company, a member of a sport team, etc. If you really want a kanji word, there is a word which does mean "member (of any organization)", but this is a very stiff word and sounds almost like a legal term.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "word choice, nuances"
}
|
Why is 高いです acceptable but 高いではあります not acceptable?
This interesting thread got me thinking about the various forms of the copula and how `` is a contraction of ``. I am wondering why the standard X Y does not seem to work for certain words, like i-adjectives. Please correct me if I am wrong, but I think that the following examples show what I mean:
> **(1)** **O**
>
> **(2)** **X**
>
> **(3)** **O**
>
> **(4)** **O**
**(2)** is the only one that feels unnatural to me but I'm not sure why.
|
This is because an i-adjective does not require (or its te-form ) in the first place. at the end of a sentence like is **not a copula** but a politeness marker which never conjugates.
* Why should I use and not :
> Usually, is a polite copula, similar to but more polite. But can also be a politeness marker added to adjectives. When it's a politeness marker, doesn't inflect for tense.
* after some verbs
> In Japanese, there's no need for a verb like be to show tense on adjectives. Adjectives can indicate tense all on their own, using the endings - and -. In this case, doesn't have its usual grammatical function. Instead, it's functioning as a politeness marker.
Instead, you can say without using / at all.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 13,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "grammar, adjectives, copula"
}
|
What does 皮膚の裏側 mean?
> ****
'rear of the skin'?
|
I think it means the skin of the nostrils. They are wet.
I think the writer described the other side of the surface skin of the nose as .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
Is there a name for the ending year of an era?
[]{}[]{} is a term for the first year of an era, i. e. =1989 starting with 8 January. But what is the term of the ending one, i. e. 2019 for Heisei?
|
I think the phrase is {}.
According to Goo:
>
It can be used without the as well. However, it seems that this phrasing isn't common and both 64 and are much more common
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "words, word requests"
}
|
Meaning of 〜の前では in the following sentence
A boxer is watching the super featherweight champion fighting and praises his speed:
> []… … ****
Considering the context, I think that in the second sentence he is saying that what allowed the champion to win the belt is his speed. Could have the meaning of "thanks to"? Otherwise, I don't know how to interpret it here. Is it a grammar structure I am unaware of? Has something been omitted? Is the sentence incomplete? Thank you for your help!
|
I think it's an incomplete sentence. The remaining part is something like:
>
>
>
The here tells you that the omitted phrase is based previous information. That previous part builds up the image of the 's impressive strength due to his speed. Therefore, we expect the following phrase to be the logical conclusion, that you cannot win against that strength (given normal circumstances).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, meaning"
}
|
who 己 is indicating in this sentence
The person the speaker is talking to previously warned of disaster if the the speaker didn't do something, but the speaker did not want to break traditions and did not interfere. That person shows up again in front of the speaker after that disaster did in fact occur.
> other person ……
>
> speaker:
>
> speaker
>
> other person
You came here to admonish me for being steadfast (to my beliefs).
* (me)
You came here to admonish me in a resolute way.
* (you)
Normally it's pretty obvious from context who is referring to, but i found it difficult in this case.
thank you
|
Judging from the context you provided, I can be pretty sure that it means _myself_.
{} could surely sometimes mean _oneself_ and sometimes _you_ , but their registers) are so different that we almost never confuse them in real settings. means _you_ in vulgar talks (or common in some dialect), and _oneself_ in elevated parlance.
In this case, it is clear that speaker is giving a formal, bookish line, not only in form but in matter. Thus it is only natural to be interpreted as _oneself_ , in this case, _myself_.
**PS**
Not knowing the plot, I'm not sure whether the means "belief" as in your translation, or "spirit", "soul", "super-ego" kind of thing (opposed to some demon or evil).
**PPS**
The translation of the second line:
>
should be literally like:
> The reason I came here is to restrain myself lest it loosen/waver.
The accurate interpretation of , , and is up to the context, though.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "parsing"
}
|
What's the difference between 母方 and 母系? The same question goes to 父方 and 父系
I saw these words a while ago but just now I decided to ask it here because I didn't find the answer anywhere.
As the title says, I don't really know if there is a difference between X , and X as well.
The sentences I've come across are:
>
and
>
|
First, let me point out that your second example,
>
is a very unnatural sentence. You could hardly say something like that, if not never. When I searched I only found this example from Tanaka Corpus, which contains many errors and should not always be deemed as authoritative Japanese usage (see their disclaimer).
Instead you should always say:
> **** _paternal grandfather_
> **** _maternal grandmother_
Generally speaking, is what you call your mother/father's house or kinship from your perspective, so you are mentally facing your parents' direction. means _matriline_ / _patriline_ , which is a line of descent passed down from your ancestors to you (they are genealogical terms). For this reason, is usually used to describe hereditary, or inheritance matters, that conceptualized in descending order, not when you call your grandparents.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "meaning, word choice, words, usage, nuances"
}
|
What is the meaning of 開発体制?
I'm working in an IT environment, my supervisor explained that is not "Development rules" in developing/coding. It is about departments in a company...??? Somehow I still not understand.
I looked at another site (< but unclear too.
This is full sentence:
>
Could anyone explain for me?
|
refers to the structure of your development team. refers to the structure of an organization, or how people are assigned to a certain project. It has nothing to do with coding (style) guidelines. For example, 5 means five people are assigned to the project, means organizing a support team, and 24 means your team is organized so that your project is developed 24 hours a day.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "business japanese"
}
|
When to use ~たい for things such as 食べたい？
What are the grammar rules for making verbs into "to want" form? ie .
I want to be able to say "I want to visit hokkaido next summer." ie is this correct?
|
Yes it's correct.
verbal auxiliary goes after the of a verb:
→ →
→ →
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, conjugations"
}
|
What does 中３の２５％ exactly mean?
I am not sure about the first part of
>
Do you read as here? 25% of 3 would be 0.75% if I am not mistaken. Therefore does it mean something like around 0.75% of the population does have trouble with reading and understanding short sentences? But then... wouldn't one just write 0.75% in the beginning?
|
yes, you read as , and as
is a shorthand way of writing 3 which is **(Japanese) Junior High School 3rd graders** or in other words, 9th graders.
so would be "25% of (Japanese) 9th graders"
so the full translation of
>
is
"Twenty-five percent of 9th graders have difficulty understanding short passages."
Thanks to @Mars and @Eiríkr Útlendi for suggesting the more accurate word choices.
After all this editing, I realized one final point that can be made: in the expression **** , **** carries the meaning "even", so the most apt translation would be:
"Twenty-five percent of 9th graders have difficulty understanding even short passages."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 20,
"question_score": 12,
"tags": "meaning, readings, numbers"
}
|
A better understanding of 分には
I came across this sentence :
> ****
I looked up on this very website the meaning of , but I'm still not sure as to what it really means.
Is there a way to translate it into english, or is it just fine to take it as a way to emphasize the verb ?
For instance, would it bear the same meaning if I were to say
?
EDIT: As I said: **I looked up on this very website the meaning of , but I'm still not sure as to what it really means. Meaning: I ve read the subject marked as duplicate.**
|
The meaning is really close. But there is a deeper nuance with .
Basically, means "part", like a portion of something we divided. So it literally means:
> : in the portion/part that I see doing (like) this, blahblah
You can see it being almost the same as . It creates "borders" around what you see () and the rest of the sentence is about what is within these borders.
With , it's a "plain conditional", meaning it's just the same as "if" in English.
I admit they would probably be translated the same way if we wanted to write good English though.
> : If we look (at them) like this, they look like nothing but real
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation, meaning"
}
|
サインもらっとけとでも言う - Breaking this phrase down
!1
What I thought he was saying: "Are you saying we should get his signature now while we still can!?"
I was stuck for several days on this sentence having trouble making sense of it, suspecting that there was some contraction I was having trouble with. I suspected that was a contraction of but wasn't sure where else to go from there.
I was also wondering is what is the grammatical meaning of having the form here, instead of or something? I've noticed that other questions like this one mention the form but doesn't really explain why the sentence uses that form specifically.
|
Pretty good effort, I don't think I've ever seen someone hit on the answer to their question AS they are writing it. ^_^
A couple of points though: has more of a meaning of "right away/right now", with "while I can" being a more casual interpretation. And before the verb carries the meaning of "or something"
Also, according to what Chocolate said in your link, " is the imperative of which means to do and leave it as it is." .... therefor I think the implicit meaning is more along the lines of
`"Are you telling me to get his signature right away and get it over with, or something!?"`
(... although now that I think about it, maybe what she means is that carries the meaning of having achieved the goal of the action... which is hard to convey in conversational English... maybe ""Are you telling me to go and make sure to get his signature right away, or something!?")
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "set phrases, contractions"
}
|
What's the purpose of ta-form +りする and how to use it?
Just wanted to know how to apply the to a verb when saying something like "I want to visit japan and eat food." I've seen " " but is it as simple as putting after the ta-form for all things listed prior to the last action?
|
You can use "do things like ~~ and ~~" to list two or more actions. So your sentence means...
> **** ****
> In my next summer vacation I'll do things like going to the river and going to the beach. ( implies you'll probably do other things too.)
If you want to say "I **want to** do things like ~~ and ~~", you can use , as in:
> **** ****
> In my next summer vacation I **want to** do things like going to the river and going to the beach. ( implies you probably want to do other things too.)
* * *
To say "I want to visit Japan and eat food", you could use the form for connecting the two verb phrases, and the form for "want to~~" (e.g. ...), as in:
> **** ****
> I want to visit Japan and (then) eat the food (there).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, kanji"
}
|
What does 会えたらいいです mean
I get that is to meet and is good but a bit confused on the part? Looked it up and it's like a conditional formatting for a verb?
So would the sentence translate to something like, it would be good to meet you?
|
being "conditional" means that it imparts a sense of "if X then Y".
So: **** = **can** meet, = if/then, = good,
> = "If we can meet, then it'd be good."
Or more naturally in English:
> **"It'd be good if we could meet."**
> or **"I hope we can meet."**
> or **"I hope I can see you." / "I'd like to meet you."**
(depending on context, one of these might feel more natural than the others, for example, a business setting vs. a friend get-together vs. a date)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Is おはようです just weird
I'm watching the anime . There's a character in it who greets people with ****. At first I thought it was just a cute affectation, but then I wondered, if is okay then why not ?
There seem to be quite a few hits on Google for this phrase. Is it a different level of politeness? Is it a regional thing or is it just weird?
|
> I wondered, if is okay then why not ?
Grammatically, is a contraction of , which is a Western dialect form otherwise should be in Standard Japanese. Since as such is not a valid word except for this fixed idiom, you can attach nothing to grammatically.
* - keigo -adjectives
* Historical prospective of transformation (e.g. => ))
> Is it a different level of politeness? Is it a regional thing or is it just weird?
Contrary to what was said in the previous paragraph, strictly speaking, is not prohibited to be attached to any phrases to make polite direct quotation out of them, and you can certainly treat it as a simplified polite ending by taking over this grammar. This usage is neither conventional nor standard in Standard Japanese, so you can think it of a mildly broken grammar. A girl speaks in off-point grammar is, some kind of, sign of cuteness.
*
Additionally, some dialects indeed use this versatile as their normal way of speaking. See:
*
*
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "greetings"
}
|
Why is there を coupled with potential form?
For full context: <
The sentence in question:
My attempt at translation: We found out that afterwards, if they cant undergo appropriate care, it can severe cases where they cant love the next child.
The way I translated a instead of an would be needed. But maybe I just misinterpreted the whole thing, that's why IM asking here ^^
Furthermore, I couldn't really find an entry on jisho for . All I found was this < but it leads to a dead link ^^ I just assumed that it would mean "to love" but I couldn't find confirmation anywhere, especially since I must admit that I cant really use goo jisho...^^
And finally, just on a sidenote: Why is put into brackets? The way I used it it's kind of a relative attribute, but it seems to be more of a quotation from an interview or the like.
|
The potential form can use and it is generally equivalent to using . Ironically, you asked about this before in the similar medical context How does the passive function in this sentence. You can read more here: The difference between and with the potential form of a verb
+ potential + negation = + negation =
I think the brackets are just used to more clearly indicate the type of things is referring to. A style thing so to say.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, particle を, potential form"
}
|
Is this enough to make intransitive use of the transitive 設ける?
The sentence in question:
For Full context: <
My attempt at translation: "The...hospital has made preparations/prepared itself."
On < is a transitive verb, but here it seems to be used in an intransitive way since there is no + object phrase attached. Did I interprete this correctly? I didnt see this pattern before, I think, so I wanted to have it confirmed ^^
|
>
() is transitive. The object of is in the previous sentence. It's left out since it's obvious from the context.
=
The hospital provided (it = time to spend with the stillborn baby).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, transitivity"
}
|
How to interprete these は and parse the sentence
The sentence in question:
For full context: <
My attempt at translation: "A woman who knew it had died and originally couldn't think of meeting the child. [now follows her dialogue, see the article)"
So, first off, I don't know whether I should treat these in the sentence as topic or contrast markers. In my translation I more or less just tried to figure out a halfway meaningful translation, because I was even more confused by preceding the first . As I understood the content, this woman already knew the child was dead before it was born, and even though she couldn't imagine meeting it, she then asked for it (see context). Thats why I related to the part, in a way. But as I said, I'm thoroughly clueless on how to deal with this sentence correctly^^
|
> ****
First of all, we can see that the whole bolded part is linked to the so called "quotation particle" . So it's all what the "says" ().
>
If we take this part individually, we can translate it literally by something like " _at first/the beginning () I knew () about the fact () (he) died ()_ " which would be " _at the moment I knew he died_ " in (more or less) good English.
>
This part can be interpreted as " _I couldn't think () about the fact () of meeting with my son ()_ " = " _I couldn't think about seeing my son_ ".
Now you can just put the parts together and you something like:
> A woman who says at the moment she knew her son passed away, she couldn't think about seeing him.
Basically the woman was told her son was dead because she didn't feel it anymore, and when she "gave birth" to her dead son, the asked her if she would see him or not.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
What does 声かけをしてくれ mean?
The sentence in question:
For full context: <
My attempt at translation: "The nurses give plenty of sayings (help with consolidating words?), let us meet one."
I must admit this translation is almost as good as none. Im really clueless how to deal with this. Before, the article switched between what seems to me like a dialogue between a patient and a nurse and descriptions what happened in between (the roles are highlighted through the coloring of the textbackground, green being the patient and red the nurse). However, what follows in this "nursepart" doesnt fit the pretext. It sounds more like a narrator giving a summary.
However, even so, I cant make much sense of all this. I must also admit that I dont really know what this concluding in does ^^
|
You can understand it as...
> or etc.
The nurses suggested to me many times (that I should meet the baby), and/so I thought / decided, "Then, I'll meet (the baby)."
(similar to ) has a few meanings. I think here it's used to mean "to make a suggestion" or "to encourage".
A verb phrase like or is left out at the end. The is quotative.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Why is it なくて and not ないで
>
Shouldn't it be:
> __
|
doesn't stand for reason/cause (but a condition without the object). Now, in this example, shortage of money is the reason why you couldn't buy the book. So, you can't use it.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, negation"
}
|
The role/meaning of なる in 邪魔をするOrganisationなる”羽虫”
Big boss leader with his cronies is looking for something and says:
>
>
> **Organisation** ””
Now IMO this basically boils down to:
> according to the data we got from the pig tailed one, it (what they are searching for) is somewhere along this coast.
>
> Then there is also those gnats from the meddlesome Organisation, but if we smush them one by one, we will be discovered.
The weird bit is the Organisation”” specifically "Organisation". Why would you mate a noun and without the particle. And I don't really see fitting in there. Unless she is trying to say something like "Insects who'll turn out to be the troublesome organization" or something.
So what's up with that ?
Also I'm not 100% on who refers to (the thing they are looking or them) buuut I can save that for later.
|
> Organisation""
> a "gnat" called _Organisation_ that disturbs us
This is the attributive form of the archaic copula . In modern Japanese, `AB` is a stiff and literary way of saying "B in A", "B that is A", "B known as A" or "B called A", etc.
From :
> ###
>
> ②
> …
> …
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
Sentence-ending で in a formal context
I am aware that there is another question that talks about sentence-ending . But the example in that question is in an informal setting.
I have an example of a sentence-ending in a newspaper headline:
>
I know what the sentence means, and I am guessing the ending is somehow still a variation of , as it was explained in the answer to the other question. Is this correct?
|
In newspaper headlines, the most important information is placed at the top, and particles and verb phrases are often left out.
So the in your example is a normal particle , rather than a sentence-ending . You can rearrange the word order and read it this way...
> () **** **** **** () ****
For more about "headline grammar", see these threads:
* what is the name of the abbreviated writing style used in newspapers?
* why does the following title end "..." and not ""? just to save space?
* What form is ?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "particles"
}
|
What does this 数えてみたら mean?
The following sentence is from this article on NHK Web
>
My attempt at translation:
> When one tries to count it, they took care that the time shared with the son is very limited.
I'm pretty sure that here basically means what I wrote above, meaning something along the lines of
> If one tries to measure the amount of time...
But since it sounds very cumbersome in my translation, I wanted to ask for confirmation.
|
>
Your translation of meaning "When one tries to count it" is spot on, although in this context it more likely means "When **I** tried to count it" — you misinterpreted the (implied) subject of the sentence, because I think you mixed up "to notice / realize / become aware" with "to take care".
> ****
> Trying to count it, **I became aware** of the fact that the time I was able to spend with my son was very limited
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "meaning, verbs, reading comprehension"
}
|
Difference between 結ぶ and つなぐ
In the context of tying things, e.g. shoe laces, rope, neck tie etc, I think is the correct verb. In all these cases can I replace with ? Would it change the nuance?
I have a feeling that is more general than . My feeling is that can only be used for the sort of things I listed above, but can also be used for other things like bridges connecting islandsconnecting people etc. Is my feeling correct?
|
is "to join" or "to connect", whereas is "to tie", "to knot", etc. They are usually not interchangeable. and sound very weird because nothing is joined. and may be interchangeable when you are trying to extend a rope by tying it to another rope. and are also interchangeable, but the latter (yes, the latter) tends to have a figurative meaning ("to become partner with ", "to collaborate").
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "word choice"
}
|
ってことはどっか Usage in プロってことはどっかスポンサーがついてるってことですよね？
In Terrace House, several people are sitting around a table sharing information about themselves and answering questions.
One of the guys asks a snow boarder the following question:
>
From my understanding, means "saying () somewhere". The whole sentence in my head translated to English would be something roughly like "Didn't you say something about you being a professional sponsored somewhere?"
According to Netflix's translation on their English CC's, it actually translates to:
> "If you're a pro, that means you have a sponsor?"
According to Google translate, by itself translates to "Does it mean something?"
I know that English translations aren't to be taken literally, but both sources suggest that translates to "meaning something" rather than "saying () somewhere".
Why is this the case?
|
You may have broken this sentence up incorrectly, and that's likely what's confusing you.
It should be this:
>
Thus, you get something like this -
> Since you're a pro, you must have a sponsor somewhere, right?
is a colloquial shortening of , which might also be part of your confusion.
In the right context, it could also mean that this person must have brought a sponsor to the event they're at, but based on your question, that doesn't seem quite right.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, sentence"
}
|
Meaning of 掃き溜める
Context: a boxer is telling another one that he is too weak to participate in a tournament.
> **** …
Looking in the dictionary, I could find only as a noun, not as a verb. Is it an uncommon use? And what is its meaning here? Considering the context, I think it could mean something like "I hate I was put in the same tournament with such weak boxers...". Is my translation correct? You can see the whole page here. Thank you for your help!
|
It's most likely a transformation of the word. is defined as a garbage dump, but in this case turned into a verb (Remember Google? is "to Google something"). This is where you add your own contextual understanding of the sentence.
It seemed that the speaker is pissed off at being treated like trash, "binned" or "boxed" together with other... in his words, garbage-quality athletes.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning, usage, verbs, nouns"
}
|
interpretting お前を倒さずして、消滅などできん！
> enemy returns a while after being defeated by the mc
>
> mc…… ……
>
> enemy
>
> enemy charges....
i will "do it" without beating you, i can't extinguish you, makes no sense in context.
What is he trying to say?
thank you
|
>
> I can never vanish without/before defeating you!
* ` + ` is a literary way of saying "without ing". It's a literary version of or . See: vs.
* is intransitive.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "parsing"
}
|
Possible translations for 殺気
I'm trying to translate the in the second sentence below to a English equivalent that denotes a emotionless attacker attacking from behind the narrator, but the only words that I am finding online are "bloodlust" (can't use as it denotes emotion);
"thirst for blood" (again, can't use as it denotes a _active desire_ to kill),
and "deadly intent", which my peers have marked confusion with upon reviewing my English only translation.
>
> I leap away, my back facing the girl as I search for a way out.
>
> () ****
> Without time to look around, from behind a **lethal intent** descends upon me.
What would be a better way to word the second sentence so that my translation conveys the meaning behind the original sentence(thereby staying faithful to the source material), and what English phrases/words would work for ?
|
Assuming it is the girl who is harboring the lethal intent ( _or is there someone else in the room?_ ), why not attribute it to her (or whoever) directly, as would be more natural in English? The disembodied might make sense in Japanese but it sounds a little odd in English. If I were translating this, I would take a little more license and phrase it something like:
> I had no time to turn and look, but I could sense her murderous intent as she approached me from behind.
or
> I dared not waste time by turning to look, but I could feel her murderous intent as she drew closer from behind.
If it is someone else in the room, you could use creative ways to name them like "the silent figure" or "a shadowy form", etc. Personally, I tend to stray a quite far from the source text sometimes, but I think you get my point :)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation, meaning"
}
|
Meaning of 瞳だけはぶっ飛ばない
Context: in a gym, a boxer attacks another boxer saying that he was provoking him with his eyes. After punching him, he thinks:
> ****
>
>
>
> ……
What is the meaning of the verb when it refers to the eyes? Looking at its meanings in the dictionary I couldn't find one that fits the context. Is it used metaphorically here?
Also, could you please explain the grammar behind ? Is it the contracted form of ?
Thank you for your help!
**EDIT:** since it looks like a strange metaphor, I uploaded the original pages to provide more context.
Pages where the fight starts (here is used with furigana)
Pages with the sentence in question
|
I think has the similar meanig of , which means "He still has a fighting sprit (even if his body was damaged)." and "He hasn't yielded yet (even if his body was damaged)." It isn't a common phrase.
As for the grammar, I found an explanation, and it says changed to . is used when you say about someone's action with contempt or hatred such as . About , a dictionary says .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, meaning, verbs, metaphor"
}
|
What's the difference in nuance between multiple 形容詞 (い-adjectives) with and without て-form?
When multiple adjectives refer to the same noun, the adjective(s) other than the last one are usually written in the -form:
> **①**
However writing all adjectives in their -form is not (necessarily?) incorrect either AFAIK.
> **②**
Can anyone shed some light as to how they differ in meaning/nuance, and why and when anyone would opt for form ②?
|
is usually unnatural and you should avoid it in most cases. But there are some exceptions:
* It may appear in lyrics and poems where rhythm is important.
* When a comma is inserted between the two adjectives, the first one can be in the dictionary form: This may even sound more formal since the te-form can sound a little colloquial/informal depending on the situation.
* Although uncommon, when the same adjective is repeated for emphasis, you can say, for example, ("long long ago").
* When the first adjective is part of a relative clause, you can say, for example, ("a heavy book using large characters").
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "grammar, nuances, て form, adjectives, i adjectives"
}
|
Question about switching formality in a conversation
In case I am talking with someone using the informal form but we are not close friends yet (perhaps a close acquaintance or someone I'm chatting with online) and I want to ask him a personal question (what is his occupation, something about his family ,etc.), should I proceed with the informal form or should I switch to polite (or even honorific) language to ask him the question?
|
This heavily depends on your character, your age, the relationship between you and him, and how personal the information you're trying to get is. In general, using honorific forms is probably an overkill, but temporarily switching to the / style will not harm.
Personally, I am relatively slow to start dropping /, and I am unlikely to talk with someone using the informal language if I don't even know his occupation.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "formality, conversational"
}
|
Is there a subtle difference between 少なくても and 少なくとも？
My sense is that the meaning is identical but that is somewhat more formal than . Is that observation valid?
|
According to :
>
>
>
> ()
> ×/
> /
It says as an adverb is not interchangeable with .
I think cannot be replaced with in examples like:
> (×)
> (×)
> (×)
> / (×)
It seems some people (have recently started to?) use with phrases containing /, but it doesn't sound natural to me, and the dictionary says it's (it's not idiomatic / it doesn't match the idiomatic usage):
> (×/? )
> (?/× )
When it's not used as an adverb (i.e. when it's conditional), of course you can use . Here, is more formal than :
> ()
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 12,
"question_score": 12,
"tags": "grammar, meaning"
}
|
What does 私様 means?
I see that apparently this word is used by a character in a videogame called danganropa. It's a word like boku, atashi or something like that? Or it's something different? It's used to call yourself superior or something like that maybe? Maybe it's her nickname?
|
It's a sort of {}, though I don't any other character in fiction that uses it. {} makes her 'regal' personality sound both queenly and extremely arrogant, which is the exact vibe she is going for. Interestingly, in the first game she pairs it with more modern 'regal, haughty woman' speech, but in the second it's an older style. For example, in the first she would probably phrase 'I have been waiting for you!' as while using that personality, but in the second she'd phrase it as .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "expressions"
}
|
か usage in subordinate clauses
So I know there are many uses of , but the one I want to focus on is using a question word with . For example:
>
>
>
For these two sentences, the inbetween the two words acts as a connector and replaces the particle. However, I was wondering what to do if this is at the end of a sentence. For reference, I am trying to write the following:
> The contents of the reading are about how baseball entered Japan.
>
What I am unsure of is how to end this sentence is both plain and polite ways, i.e.
> ****
or
> ****
or something else.
|
An embedded question using forms a noun. You can say **** , although this is usually omitted. Likewise, you can attach / to an embedded question, too. People often insert a comma between and /.
>
> This article is about how baseball entered Japan.
>
>
> This is an article about how baseball entered Japan.
>
>
> What is important is whether or not it will rain tomorrow.
>
>
> I'm paying attention to what will happen to the stock price.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
How to say "See you soon" when meeting up with someone
I'm just wondering a simple way to say "See you soon" when the context is that you are talking to your friend remotely (via phone/messaging) and you plan to meet up with them in the very near future (1 or 2 hours).
Would it be as simple as "Sugu ni miru"?
Thanks for your help, Bazz
|
> a simple way to say "See you soon" when the context is that you are talking to your friend remotely (via phone/messaging) and **you plan to meet up with them in the very near future (1 or 2 hours)**.
In that situation I would say (← casual)
is the contracted pronunciation of , literally "Then".
as a greeting is a shortened way of saying []{}, literally "Let's meet later" or "See you later".
If you want to sound more formal, you could say or even more formally
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 12,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "phrase requests"
}
|
General conditional (-えば form) expressing something without supposition or back thought?
I found a resource which says the _-eba_ form is a form used to express a conditional without supposition or back thought.
I didn't find any others resources that spoke about the same thing. Is this a mistake in my resource or is it real ?
Is there another conditional form to specifically express something conditional but with a supposition or a back thought ?
I also found this useful post for Differences among ---, etc but it doesn't help my case.
Edit : If someone is French, here is the link of JLPT-Go (the ressource which says that)
|
I read the explanation given in the link and it may be confusing to state it like this. In fact, the ~conditional form suppose no constraint on the context and is the most "open" conditional form. It implies that the condition (sentence in ) is less probable to happen compared to the other conditional form but, if it went to happen (no matter how low are the odds), the action described in the second sentence would happen too. The emphasis is more on the fact that the condition is hard to meet. Examples :
* ==> If you agree/if you're fine
* ==> Same meaning but sounds more hypothetical than the first one, implying that you're requesting something more rude/asking for a favor that burden a lot the person you're speaking to
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, conditionals"
}
|
What does 夢がない said by this speaker mean?
A and B waiting for C to bring more leaked photos of XXX.
> AC……XXX
>
> B
>
> A
- "that" (full panty shot) is not a dream, just a glimpse....
has to mean something closer to "that's a pipe dream is it not" to make logical sense, but how does it get there?
|
First of all, you seem to have ignored the basic grammar; is a subject marker and means "there is no ".
* () That is not a dream.
* There is no dream.
So literally means "There is no dream in it (=)" or " has no dream". I think you can now guess the meaning, but here ("having no dream", "dreamless") means something like "does not stir one's imagination", "has no room for imagination", "too explicit and thus not exciting", etc. means "promising", "dreamy", "fantastic", "not very realistic but exciting anyway", etc.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
「に」used to signify addition?
There are several instances where I noticed people use to mean something along the lines of "and". Here's an example: <
I think the narrator says, " **** [?].
Also, a line from a manga that describes a superhero reads
The in question is the one in the third line.
I've searched all over the web for something that explains this usage, but I've found nothing. Does anyone what it is?
|
can be used to enumerate things and be translated by "and".
Literally, it means "onto" (I think), so it feels like you're adding up something onto another thing.
<
>
It should be two words (or more) from the same semantic field. As you can see in the example sentences, the words are kinda related to each other.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, usage, particles"
}
|
Why is 雌 also read as メン?
I noticed the rare reading of contained in the word {} and I wondered how this unusual reading could have come about. I am not aware of any other words which use this reading for . Is it simply that is easier to say than or ? If that is the case, shouldn't be ? Or is there a different reason such as the reading being a relic from an archaic pronunciation?
|
According to ...
> ‐
> ...
> ‐‐
> ...
And says...
>
>
>
>
So it seems...
→ →
→ + →
Some examples of include...
→
→
→
→
→
(But you don't call female tiger as ...)
* * *
**UPDATE:**
As pointed out by @Eiríkr in the comments below, it might be more reasonable to think of it as...
() → contraction(→)+(→) →
... Now I'm not totally sure... Let's wait for others to post better answers! ^^
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "readings"
}
|
Why is 歪形 read as いがみなり?
I saw the word **** written in a food blog and was surprised to learn that the reading is **** (Weblio Definition). If this were a standard case of _jukujikun_ , I think it would be read differently. And it is definitely not standard _ateji_ either since the meanings of the kanji are clearly being employed. The part seems to resemble and also has the of - is it possible that it is some kind of hybrid of these two readings? Is sometimes used as a type of glossary reading of the kanji
|
Those just happen to be one reading of each of those characters. From my dictionary (using **Gjiten** with **edict** in Linux)
> * []{} → to warp; to swerve; to deflect; to be crooked; to be distorted; to be bent; to incline; to slant; to be perverted; to be gross-grained; to get bent; to be strained;
> * []{} → (n) strain; distortion; deformation; bend;
> * []{} → (n,adj-no) (uk) style; way; shape; form; appearance; state;
>
So it's not a ; just two s together.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "readings"
}
|
Particle-と used with numbers: Are these different?
after counting something and here meaning?
The first link says that we can't use concrete numbers but it doesn't seem to be the case in the second link?
|
Yes these are different. There are (at least) three ways of using `number + counter + `, and they have different nuances.
1. `concrete number + counter + + adjective`
This is for showing a concrete figure before using an adjective like // or a verb like //. Probably this is a kind of quotative-. The number/amount can be big, small, or neither.
> * 22
> * 15.2%
> * 23℃
> * 13002
2. `abstract number (usually with ) + counter + + verb`, `abstract number + counter + + noun`
This is used only when the number/amount is big. "no less than", "as much/many as", "millions/thousands/tons of ", etc.
> *
> =
> *
> =
3. `round number + counter + + negative expression`
"(not) even", "no more than", etc. Used with some small round number and implies the actual number/amount is even smaller.
> * 1
> * 500
> * 5
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "particle と"
}
|
When can I get away with implying the の possessive?
I was reading the bible in Japanese a bit and came across this bit of Jonah 1:
>
Notice how the noun-phrase "Jonah son of Amittai" in the NIV became "" in the Japanese JLB. From what I can tell it could also have been written "" but instead the second possessive is implied by word order.
I've seen this in other instances as well, and I'm really curious: when exactly can one get away with implying the possessive like this? I'm really curious as whenever I try to, apparently I can never get it right and still have no clue what I'm doing wrong.
PS. If asking when can you imply the possessive is to much, feel free to answer when you CAN'T imply it if that would make it more answerable.
|
Apposition without (i.e. …) sounds fairly formal, or could be theatrical or narrative, compared with the one with it (…). So, you will do it when you want that rhetorical effect.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "nuances, possession"
}
|
に indicating the source of causation?
Consider this sentence
> speaker is talking to himself about how to deal with an adversary (X), he has so far tried to hire a to beat up X, and a to snoop on X, both of which have failed.
>
> **** ……
in this case would interpret this as:
* ()(X)……
Compared to
>
>
> ****
and
>
>
> **** ....
At first glance it would appear
"causing" - i don't think () applies here
"causing"
As far as i can tell, that does not seem grammatical. But i can't easily add unspoken (...) to these for them to make sense.
compare to:
>
where is no doubt 'ing.
How is and the following causative expressions used here?
thanks
|
Both and are " _intransitive_ verbs that do not take " when used plainly. When you form the causative form from these verbs, you have to mark the agent (causee) with **** , not (See this rule). Here plays a role that has nothing to do with the grammar of causation (I believe you already know this is ).
(simple intransitive usage)
(simple intransitive usage with )
(causative usage)
(causative usage with )
Don't confuse this with causative forms made from transitive verbs, where the agent is marked with (e.g. , ).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "particle に, causation"
}
|
What does this mean to you if you were to see an application named "Japanese 語"?
My friend is creating a word card application to help people memorize Japanese words / Kanji. The subject of what to call the application came up and he asked me for some suggestions. One of the requirements is that it's a very simple name with the word Japanese in English and then something else.
I suggested "Japanese " be the name of the application and I would like to get some input from the people here.
I already looked up the meaning of but what I would like to know is does it look totally confusing or make some sense with the English word "Japanese" before it.
|
I would say it's indeed confusing at least to native Japanese speakers.
* meaning _word_ is not really common outside academic contexts. Words listed on a word card/list are usually called by Japanese people who study foreign languages.
* is also a suffix meaning _language_ or _-ese_. For example means _Japan_ and means _Japanese_. When I see "Japanese ", I can't help reading it as something weird like "Japanese-ese".
"Japanese " would be at least not confusing.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "meaning, kanji"
}
|
relative clause with direct object
Generally:
AB <-> BA
but i do not think i can't rearrange this in terms of
~~~B
However if it its a sentence with an indirect object as well:
>
compared with:
> YYXX -- active voice
are all of the following correct?
<->
YYXX <-> YYXX
AB <-> AB
thank you for confirming
|
You can rearrange...
AB
→ A **** B ("B that A eats")
→ BA ("A that eats B")
(You _usually_ don't use the topic particle in a relative clause. AB would sound more natural than AB in most situations.)
→
→
(In , modifies (), not ().)
YYXX
→ YYXX
→ XXYY
AB ("I give B to A")
→ **** AB ("B which I give to A")
→ **** BA ("A who I give B to")
→ AB ("Me who gives B to A")
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "relative clauses"
}
|
Different usage of 普通に?
So, I was watching this show called Terrace House, and the following exchange between two participants caught my attention.
> : ……
>
> :…
There are two things I don’t really understand here, by the context and the scene itself, she seems very happy about what he told her...
**so is it right for me to assume that is close to ? And can I use it in other situations? Like saying the food is good **
**My second question is about , jisho says it means “property”, but I can’t really understand how it fits the context here...**
|
In this context means "just ", "plainly ", "simply ", " in its plain sense" or "not in a tricky way but in a straightforward manner". This usage is relatively new and many people see it as slangy, if not incorrect. is different because is about the type/quality of joy whereas is about the degree of joy.
You can also say which means it's simply delicious rather than "delicious in a sense". From the blog of (novelist):
> ###
>
>
Other examples include ("It's just plain wrong") and ("He is simply strong" rather than "He is moderately strong").
* * *
("property") usually refers to one's money, real estate and other things that have financial values. But it sometimes figuratively refers to one's valuable experience, unforgettable memory, important human relationship, etc. For example you can say "". In 's case, seems to imply "calling as my may be too much (but still it was the best thing that happened here)".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "meaning, words, expressions"
}
|
translation question AND what does にただけで mean?
I'm playing a visual novel that gives LECTURES on how different types of guns work and other real life how-to-use-weapon facts; when I come across the following after my character has test-fired a S&W for the first time.
Teacher assassin:
Teacher assassin: ,
The English Subtitles say that the above translates to
"Even if the bullet misses a crucial area, the enemy will die instantaneously. The shock forces the blood backwards and the heart bursts."
However, after posting a question as far as fact-checking the translated statement on Quora, I've gotten a lot of flack from military experts and nurses, who say that the above is not possible. So now I'm wondering, did the original translator mistranslate, OR is it a case of the game-makers Not verifying the truthfulness of those two lines of dialogue before giving Ein-sensei her dialogue?
And what does mean in the above sentence?
|
The translation is almost correct.
>
>
> Even if the bullet misses a crucial area, the enemy will die instantaneously only by hitting a thicker vessel,
>
> ,
>
> because the shock forces the blood backwards and the heart bursts.
`` is a typo. The correct sentence should be without the ``.
>
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, translation"
}
|
説得にかかる vs other ～にかかる expressions
>
>
> Mom tried tenaciously to convince me(stop my foolishness), but in the end she was the one who gave up.
Reading this at first, i would have read it literally as "mom got caught in my persuasion" or "she got convinced". But with this sentence structure with the ... construction, that wouldn't make sense with two agreeing ideas in a row. So i looked up the expression.
:
compared to other expressions i can recall:
: /
or
:
Why does end up interpreted in the active voice while the others are in the more intuitive passive voice?
|
There are many meanings for , just like there are many meanings for words like `take`, `make`.
`` falls under this usage type (`start doing`, `work on`):
>
>
>
`` falls under this usage type (`get caught`):
>
`` falls under this usage type (`be handled`):
>
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "words"
}
|
How to reply to 「いま、すごく幸せです？」
I have a colleague who is blessed with a girl child and I posted a greeting saying
>
In reply to this, he said
>
I guess he is asking me about my well being. How should I reply to such questions in Japanese if I want to politely say [I'm good thank you!]?
|
> _I guess he is asking me about my well being._
In fact, I don't think so. usually doesn't mean normal well-being but only the full-of-joy state, that like whoever has their child. It's not a word you use to ask if somebody is fine.
In this case, unless it's typo or mojibake, the final represents some degree of unsureness or hesitation towards previous words (or, choice of words). It's bit slangy, orthographical (non-verbal) usage of the sign, but quite widespread at least on the internet. They as often as not enclose the question mark with parentheses , in that case, more unambiguous to readers. With all of these it's still open to wide interpretation, but I guess he want to tell something like:
> It hasn't hit me yet, but I suppose I'm really happy.
>
> Is that so-called, I couldn't be happier?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "phrases, greetings"
}
|
The meaning of the sentence
> ****
I would understand this sentence if the part in bold was omitted: New Year is celebrated from January 1 to January 15. What is "” for?
|
`` means `or`.
So, the sentence means `New Year is celebrated from January 1 to January 7 or January 15.`
>
Other examples:
>
I'll go to the US, or Japan.
>
Please hand this test to Smith-sensei, or Johnson-sensei.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
Meaning of 盗み飲み
>
So, I can guess from the words "steal" and "drink" that she drank secretly without anyone knowing, however I can't find this word in a dictionnary. Why is that ?
|
Compound Verb Lexicon recognizes only five verbs that start with , namely , , , and . However, as a noun formed from masu-stem, there are several more words that have . For example, , , are relatively common "nouns" that also work as suru-verbs. is not particularly common, but anyone who knows can instantly guess its meaning.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning, words, compound verbs"
}
|
Question regarding conjugation of two verbs with a (-たい）ending
Learning Japanese on my own so i will be using this site as i means to practice and have some questions answered! If you provide the answer in Kanji, if you coul dplease put also the furigana (no romanji) i would appreciate it ! Thank you!
My question is, i want to make the sentence:
"I thought you didn't want to see me"
I want to use the word to meet) and
Would i conjugate as and then add
how do i link those two verbs? I was thinking first use the particle to make a noun, but that wouldn{t make sense.
Don{t think i could use the form since i want to say i want.
Can someone please help me with the translation and how you got to do it? Both polite and informal ways please :)
Thank you in advance!
|
You need to use form when you express what you have judged from situations. i.e. .
( basically means "I thought you had not wanted to see me", but you can use it for "I thought you didn't want to see me" too.)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, translation"
}
|
What is the significance of number 8 (八) in Japanese?
I've noticed a couple of words with the character that have (seemingly) nothing to do with the number 8.
* - greengrocer
* - taking out anger on someone
* - skillfullness
Furthermore, this is the only number which I've noticed this pattern on. All other words consisting a number have a much more obvious relation, (even when it's a ).
* * *
On jisho.org, the count of #words containing each of the numeral characters shows a noticeable spike on as well.
1713 787 1264 438 364 196 172 357 308 320
* * *
And here's a table of how common each is in newspapers. Doesn't really show anything but I thought to include it since I looked into it as well. I wonder what the count would be if was stripped from the count on .
2 9 14 47 31 93 115 92 55 8
|
This one puzzled me, so I did some digging.
I couldn't find anything definitive on where the "many" meaning may have come from. This kanji _does_ seem to have this meaning in Chinese as well, as we see over at the Wiktionary entry for the Chinese term, and also over in the Unihan entry.
This is conjecture, but I suspect the "many" sense may come from the idea of the eight directions -- the four cardinals, and the four in-betweens: north, south, east, west, northeast, northwest, southeast, southwest.
The "many" sense appears to be quite old in Japanese, and it's specific to the _kun'yomi_ or native Japanese term, so I don't think this was an import from the Chinese. However, the sense development may have been similar in both languages -- "eight" → "eight directions" → "all over, all directions" → "many, various".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "kanji, etymology, numbers"
}
|
Is that drawing in japanese? if so, can you please tell me what it says?
 words:
* _nakayoi_ , meaning intimate or close (in terms of friendship)
* _nakayoshi_ , meaning an intimate or close friend
In both cases, the _naka_ part is written in kanji (Chinese script used in Japanese), and the other part is written in hiragana (the main "syllabric" script in Japanese). My money is on it being nakayoshi, but I'm definitely not a calligraphy expert.
There is also an artist's signature and seal in the corner, but the photo quality isn't good enough to make them out.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": -1,
"tags": "translation, meaning"
}
|
Japanese term for morning office mantra ritual
This is a follow-on question to this question which was asked on the English Language stack.
The phenomenon in question is the typical Japanese workplace ritual where team members will begin the day with some type of communal mantra or recitation of the workplace values, etc.
The question is whether there is a specific single word or term in Japanese for this ritual and, if so, what is it called?
|
This is part of {} (chourei/chōrei). Here's some blog posts about the practice:
* <
* <
* <
Mantra/company values are called {} or {}.
The part of that involves the process of chanting it I don't think quite has a formalized name, but the most common seems to be {}. I've also seen the following:
* {}
*
*
*
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 12,
"tags": "word requests"
}
|
魅力的って言われてもお前だって困る in this context
> girl……
>
> mc
>
> girl…………
>
> mc
>
> **mc**
uh no, i'm not saying that your boobs don't have appeal, rather they're amazing, your boobs are amazing!
but even if (I am) saying that's your appeal, you are troubled too?
i'm not sure what the MC is trying to claim in the last sentence, from the girls initial reaction it's obvious she doesn't liker her boobs being her .
thank you
|
A fairly literal translation might be something like:
> But even if you were told that was attractive, you'd be bothered right!?
In parts:
> ()
Literally `Even if you were told something like that (of yours) was attractive`. The use of `` here is just to emphasize that the topic, ``, is in a genre of things that one likely wouldn't want to be complemented on.
>
`` is sometimes hard to translate literally, but this would be something like `Even you'd be bothered` or `You'd be bothered too`. I would lean toward the latter because it does a good job capturing the fact that the MC outright complementing a girl on her chest would presumably be awkward for both of them.
A fairly interpreted but more natural English translation might be something like:
> But that's not the kind of thing you want to be complemented on anyway, right?!
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "parsing"
}
|
Trouble understanding this small review
> ****
> ****
> 8 **** 840 **** from here
1. What does mean? I've searched but found nothing.
2. Who is the subject of ?
3. What does the particle mean with the verb ?
4. means "received a call" but I don't understand how it fits the context?
I understand more or less each word separately but can't understand the global story from this text because of the omission of the subjects etc.
Please don't tell me that I haven't searched because it is not the case, I even have asked in some other places before posting here but nobody gave me an answer.
|
1. I think it is a typo. It would be **** .
2. The reviewer.
3. It has the same meaning as 8 (I made a reservation for eight o'clock).
4. I think that the reviewer received a call from the hotel receptionist because the reviewer was late.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "reading comprehension"
}
|
How to say "Next 'ANY_DAY_OF_THE_WEEK'"?
Couldn't find the answer here, so I thought it would be a nice and easy question.
Which would be the right way to say "Next 'ANY_DAY_OF_THE_WEEK'"? Eg: Next Monday?
is fine? Are there any other ways to say it?
Thanks in advance!
|
As said in the comments, for example would be the most common. And it would be used to mean "the monday of next week" whereas would be used to mean "next monday" so there is a slight nuance.
means next monday as I said, so it can be next monday from any week (the current one or next one). specifically means that it is the monday from next week that we are talking about.
however is not used.
It is the same for "previous week". ( and not )
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, english to japanese"
}
|
Difference between 会う and 集まる
I don't know exactly the difference between those two? What are the most commons use for those ones?
For example, what are the difference between these sentences?
>
>
>
|
does not make any sense. It should be . But even then the meaning is not the same.
: meet
: gather
> : my friends gathered
>
> : I met my friends
They aren't related at all.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "word choice, verbs"
}
|
Saying "It's the principle of the matter"
How does one say "it's the principle of the thing", in particular for when giving feedback.
For example, it's not the 1$ over change but the principle of the matter. (as in the one dollar doesn't really matter but the principle of being overcharged is what is at issue).
I took a look at ALC and it gave me {} and {} but these don't really seem to fit the definition very well.
|
{} is a principle or rule. I think this would apply to your personal principles or values.
So for the "it is the principle that matters", you could respond:
>
>
> Since it is my principle.
Alternatively:
>
>
> Since it is the principle that is important.
For a less literal translation, Jisho.org gives the meaning of {}{}{} as the "principle of the thing". So the most fitting phrase would be:
>
>
> It is the principle of the thing.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "word choice"
}
|
Difference Between かなり～ and 結構～ as Adverbs
Is there any difference in meaning between and ? How about other usages?
|
is a little stronger than , i.e., > .
> A
>
> B
In this example, A is better than B.
Also, can only be used for positive evaluation.
If in daily use, I suggest that you use .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "nuances"
}
|
Is there a reason why 嚥 (swallow -deglutition) and 燕 (swallow -bird) are similar like in English?
I recently came across the kanji , and found out about today.
According to jisho.org, both translate to "swallow", except that the first one means swallow bird and the second one (with the "mouth" radical) means the act of swallowing.
Both kanji look very similar, and both English words are homonyms. After some research, I found that some people pointed out the fact swallows swallow insects and hold them in their throat to feed their youngs, which indicates this pair of words could be related at the other end of the world too.
It still seems mysteriously coincidental to me, which is why I decided to ask.
|
I believe that the apparent relations are a coincidence.
* The English _swallow (deglutition)_ and _swallow (bird)_ are unrelated, according to the Proto-Germanic reconstructions given in Wiktionary:
* _deglutition_ ***swelganą**
* _bird_ ***swalwǭ**
* _Zhengzhang's_ Old Chinese phonetic series for( ***qeːns** ) suggests several semantic groups which are homonyms:
* Those relating to _food_ (, - _banquet_ )
* Those relating to the bird (, , possibly - _horse with a white backside_ )
* Those relating to a proper noun (, )
* A word meaning _beautiful_ ()
Coincidental homonyms for unrelated words are possible for any language, and it is likely that the Chinese words are just that.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 10,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "kanji, etymology"
}
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.