INSTRUCTION
stringlengths 11
999
| RESPONSE
stringlengths 0
999
| SOURCE
stringlengths 16
38
| METADATA
dict |
|---|---|---|---|
What is the correct reading of 血泡?
As stated in the title - what is the correct reading of ? I couldn't find a definitive answer (Jisho does not know this word at all, Google Translate thinks it should be kehhou, which seems unlikely). I ran across this in a book and while the translation seems clear ('blood bubbles' or 'bubbles of blood'), I'm not sure about the reading.
|
This is not an answer per-se. I did research into the word and it appears to be Chinese. So the reading in Japanese is a guessing game since it doesn't appear to be an actual Japanese word.
The candidates (including unlikely candidates)
*
*
* (probably definitely not this)
*
Opinion: I would bet on for reading it since it would be two separate words in Japanese () and (). In this particular case I don't think you'd join the kanji's on-yomi reading rendaku'd or otherwise. Also, typing all 4 spellings into my Japanese keyboard and was the only one that came up for a match at all and it was the first match.
Edit: Chocolate said and linked to the fact that gives several page hits. also gives some too. also gives a few. This doesn't suggest that any of these answers are right though, just that a group of people were swayed towards one spelling over another.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "kanji, readings"
}
|
Sexual joke/pun with メスブタ and オスブタ
Context: a boxer has a lot of female fans that worship him because of his handsomeness. They call him . His trainer is a pervert who likes to receive anal sex from women with sex toys. In an extra scene at the end of the manga, the boxer and his trainer meet a female fan that hands him a lipstick and a paper sheet saying:
> **** …
The boxer rubs the lipstick on his lips and kisses the paper sheet. Then he says:
> ****
After this, the trainer takes the lipstick and asks:
> ****
1) What is the meaning of and in this context? I know they are the female and male of the pig, but do they have a metaphorical meaning here?
2) What is the after and ?
3) What is the meaning of ? How does as a suffix work?
4) Why is it and not in the second sentence?
Here's the original page. Thank you for your help!
**EDIT:**
I found here this definition of :
> SM
But still, why does she call herself
|
1. is used when people insult women. This is a parody of .
2. is used when people insult something or themselves.
3. It means "a pig that covets anything", and it is similar to .
4. We sometimes write phrases with emphasis on vowel like that. and are the same meaning, and they are more casual in decreasing order.
As for your last question, it is because she effaced herself in front of the person she worshipped. This whole coversation is SM-ish.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "meaning, puns, metaphor, jokes"
}
|
Can 章 be used to mean "story arc"'?
I was reading an interview with a author about her serialized story
……
So, in my opinion, I think it makes more sense if refers to a story arc in this comment (the last one) rather than chapter, but when looking in the dictionary, the only meaning for is "chapter" or "section". Does it really mean chapter in this context or can this word also be used to say "arc"?
Thanks
|
When technical correctness matters, normally means "chapter", something smaller than ("part") and bigger than ("section"). But in this context just vaguely refers to "the final part" or "climax" of the entire series, and you should not try to analyze it too strictly. Perhaps even the author does not know exactly when the started. can be used more or less idiomatically (e.g. ). It could have been or .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
What does te form of verbs mean in these two sentences?
>
>
>
Are the grammar in these two the same? If yes, why is there a comma in the second one and not in the first one?
|
Yes, they are the same. The -form is used in both cases to connect multiple actions together (often sequentially in time). You can think of it as the English `and`.
In Japanese, the comma can be used basically whenever one wants to indicate a break in thought. It is also fairly optional. That is to say, there's no real difference in using a comma or not here. It's an optional separator.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar, translation, verbs, て form, punctuation"
}
|
What is the correct verb for "packing up?"
I am not sure what verb I would use for "packing up" (e.g. Packing clothes into a suitcase). Would I use the verb {}, which is "to stuff into?"
|
Yes, you would use . (you can also use variants such as )
You can get a lot of example sentences on Google, too.
This one is pretty useful as well.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "verbs"
}
|
Use of っ in けっこうです (kekko desu)
I have started learning Japanese a couple of days ago. One of the new expressions I have just encountered is "". In this case, is the "" not pronounced at all? And if it really isn't, could anyone explain to me why is included in the middle of the expression?
Thanks in advance, FS
|
The small tsu character, is used to indicate a double consonant. So, for example:
(nippon) - Japan
(kekkou) - fine
(sakka) - author
The last one you can compare to (saka), or hill. Saying sakka takes about 30-50% longer than saying saka, because the double consonant takes a certain amount of time to pronounce (you almost take a break during the double consonant, like you're saying "sak-ka").
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": -1,
"tags": "hiragana"
}
|
What does「ごとが」mean?
Is this (the phrase/word ) a grammar point or vocabulary? I tried to look it up in Takoboto dictionary but it doesn't return a specific word.
Also, if the phrase/word is a grammar point. How do I use it?
The context, where I found the word, lies in the song (an ending song version of Nichijou)
|
I'm assuming you mean the in
>
If this is the case, then you're parsing the sentence incorrectly. The forms part of a noun phrase with . You can find it on Takeboto under . Here's the underlying structure (I've used bold to highlight the different grammatical components):
> **** ****
The is your standard subject marker. Thus, the subject of the sentence is and the main verb is , which means for a to be come true/be fulfilled.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "particle が, parsing"
}
|
Difference between たっぷり and たくさん?
I understand that and means "a lot" but how can you tell apart the right time to use one or another.
Please point me a couple of examples.
Thanks
|
* works both as an adverb and a no-adjective. is an adverb.
> * : OK
> * : NG ( is not a no-adj)
* sounds a little more colloquial.
* mainly refers to the amount of uncountable things such as liquid, cream, time, etc. can modify both countable and uncountable things.
> * : OK
> * : OK
> * : OK (sounds like you read _many_ books)
> * : OK (sounds like you are reading for a long time, the number of books is not imortant)
> * : OK
> * : NG ( is countable)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "grammar, word choice, usage"
}
|
Changing を to は in negative statements
I've got confused and have a few questions:
In some situations speaker is obligated to change the particle e.g. answering yes/no questions.
> Question: **** (A)
>
> Answer: **** (B)
But what if I do not answer any question? I can simply say:
> (C)
Is it grammatically correct?
The verb here is (read).
Read what? > A book = = direct object
Who read? > I read = = subject (implied)
1.) Is it correct to say:
> (D)
In this situation we will have two in one sentence:
> ()(E)
Is this situation OK? Isn't it confusing for the person who is a receiver of this statement?
2.) Do we have to change to in negative statements?
Or is it correct to say:
> (F)
Or should it be:
> (G)
3.) How do we exactly understand statements F and G?
Do the particles have impact on meaning here?
Thank you very much in advance.
|
This answer talks a bit about the and differences. I think a good distinction to make is that , and such should be treated as special particles - you can't really just combine particles willy-nilly.
As for the other sentences, the in D, G and E don't really make sense (at least to me), mainly because a sentence can't really have two subjects. So C is the best.
Now this extends to the negative sentences as well. In your examples you'd still use .
Also, the use of doesn't really make sense in a negative sentence. Instead you should say "not much" or .
>
Finally, just an extra note. You can use by making a passive verb.
>
( The book was read. )
Hope this helps!
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar, meaning, particles, particle は, particle を"
}
|
Meaning of 鳥さえ in the song ウィンターワンダーランド
In this song, the lyrics go ****
I'm not sure what means in this context. Is this the particle or does it mean somthing else?
Can anyone help me out? Thanks!
|
I think this is the particle- (" _Even_ bluebirds are tweeting"). Although it does sound a bit weird to me, too, this is the only possible interpretation. It's also clearly different from what's said in the original lyrics, but this happens all the time in English-to-Japanese translation of lyrics.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "song lyrics, particle さえ"
}
|
How to express that somebody apologized on behalf of somebody else
To help describe my issue, let's imagine following situation:
* A foreigner comes to Japan.
* He is in the company of a native Japanese person. Suppose they are friends.
* During the day, the foreigner unintentionally did something against Japanese etiquette in public, which might offend other occasional spectators in public places like streets, public transport, restaurants etc. (like nose blowing for instance or saying something too loud in public transportation)
* His Japanese friend apologized to the potentially offended people **on his behalf**.
My question is: **How does one describe this activity in Japanese?**
Or in short, how to say: **He apologized on behalf of someone else**?
|
means "in place of " of "instead of ". For example you can say .
Another expression is ("on behalf of "), but this is a fairly stiff expression used, for example, when you make a formal speech as proxy for someone.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "phrase requests, culture"
}
|
What しとっても means here?
>
I don't quite understand form here.
I guess the whole sentence will be
> Even though they're slow on land, they're very quick in water.
Is another form of or ?
|
is a contraction of , which is a dialectal version of .
* In casual speech, + contracts to .
* This is the same as progressive-, but used mainly in western Japan. See: in honorific contexts
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "colloquial language, dialects, contractions, subsidiary verbs"
}
|
Is "爿" a 略字--if so, how is it pronounced/written normally?
If not. . .part of how I help myself learn is to translate things that interest me--comics and art and song lyrics now and then. While reading, I ran into this dialogue, starting with ""--and I've been stuck for a while.
I know that some kanji are shortened into ryakuji when handwritten, but I can't seem to find this anywhere. . .aside from that it's a radical and it can be shortened in some kanji to to make them quicker to write. If not for that the text is hand-written, I'd think of it as maybe being a typo.
If this isn't the abbreviated form of a kanji or something similar, is there a way this should be read? Am I misreading the kanji itself?
!handwritten text that, to my understanding, says
|
Sure looks like `` to me. You can see the two horizontal lines for the character in your image both come out the other side of the vertical line they cross, unlike ``, which I had never seen before your question. The bottom right vertical line also clearly curves out to the right.
The sentence also makes sense this way:
>
>
> (It is) apparently a game where the first person to eat a bunch/the most wins
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "kanji, manga, handwriting, radicals"
}
|
あなたはそれでよいのです what/how does the でよい bit here work?
Context: Jobs are being appointed and one of the minions is given a simple job of wrecking some place. The minion exclaims how simple it is (not the smartest cookie) and then the job giver (the strategist minion) says:
>
I'm not excatly sure about the meaning here of the bit.
I'm assuming that here is in it's cause and effect use. Like "If that (is done/is simple for you) then it's good/well/okay". I'm not sure if it's being said that:
1. "It will be fine if you do that"
2. "You'll do good/perform excellently if you do that"
3. "It's good that it's simple for you/that you understand".
4. something else?
PS: More context:
> Minion 1: LeaderLeader,
>
> Minion 2 (the strategist): Minion 1 Leader
>
> Minion 1:
>
> Minion 2:
|
* For this , please read: What is the difference between and here?
* This simply refers to his simple task (...).
So this implies "That's all I expect about you", or "If you can do this (simple) task, that's already enough to me". The leader is implying there are more important tasks, but they are not suitable for this minion.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation, nuances"
}
|
Why is のに being used here?
And what if I say ?
|
That basically means 'Did (someone) not notice that she was very excited?' The here isn't the 'although' - it's basic nomalizer + particle . I'm not too sure of my guess on the second one, but I think if you said it would be 'Was she so excited she didn't notice (something)?'
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
これまでだって似たようなものだった in this sentence
speaker was captured and is in midst of being interrogated.
>
>
> …… ****
>
> ..., seems like more of the same things they've already done to me.
i find it difficult to relate this use of as "even " or " also" or some sort of quote.
thanks
|
is "also" here, and is "so far" or "until now". It says what the opponent is trying to do is not only seen now but also just like what it has been so far.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Can you use 好き about someone else's feelings?
I'm aware that one can't normally talk directly about others' feelings in Japanese i.e.:
> *
> *
should be something like
>
>
Does this apply to ? sounds OK to me but I'm not sure.
|
is perfectly fine.
and are describing one's temporary appearance. You can think is like "showing signs of ". On the other hand, is a simple fact rather than a temporary "sign".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 10,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
What does Ukiyo (浮世) mean?
I'm not very familiar with this specific term, but do know intermediate Japanese. "Floating world" seems to be a direct translation of the two characters: for "floating" and for "world". However, the main definition for this word online is "fleeting life" or "this transient world", similar but more natural in English. Interestingly enough, the fourth entry in the definition is "(the world of the) red light districts". This final definition certainly matches the Wikipedia article and is hinted at with "fleeting" and "transient", suggesting to make the most of pleasure with your limited life.
What is the main definition, especially with respect to Ukiyo-e, ?
|
was originally ("this melancholic/miserable world") but reanalyzed as ("this transient/fleeting world") around the Edo period. It was associated with sadness and ethical corruption at first, but later it came to mean "secular part of our world" or simply "this modern world." It also gained associations with mass culture and eroticism. (I did not know could mean "red-light district" in isolation. I believe this usage is exceptional.)
In present Japan, is almost an obsolete word, and we seldom see it outside a few words and idioms including and . Most people understand it has something to do with the "pop culture" of the Edo period, though. The sex industry and pornography was certainly a part of the culture, but it's not limited to that.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 11,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "translation, definitions"
}
|
大恋愛の末に結ばれるわけではないから、アバタもエクボということはありえなかった。先行するのは条件である。
Could somebody please help me decipher the phrase above which I came across while reading It’s about two people in relationship. I understand that the first sentence means something like “since they were not tied together through a big love, theirs wasn’t a blind love. But I cannot seem to really decipher the second sentence. Any help much appreciated. Thanks!
|
The literal translation of is "What precedes is condition". This is just or "thing". refers to what is required for a successful marriage (aside from love). Google with `` and you can find many articles about what people typically consider . Especially in a context like this, I think mainly refers to more material and dry requirements such as income. Your understanding of the first sentence is fine.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation, meaning, nuances, expressions"
}
|
掘り下げなかったであろう in this sentence
> A line in a game review contains regarding some philosophical elements
>
>
>
> It's a bit of a shame that the game didn't go deeper into in the philosophical elements, but purposely not delving deeper, if the game maintains it's consistency, I have to admit that's a good decision.
* what is adding here?
* The writers has obviously already finished the game, looking for a second opinion if that makes the use of in ... **** feel a bit awkward. Compare to "" for instance.
|
This is adding the nuance of "presumably" or "seemingly" to . is an objective fact, but this author is not sure whether that was intentional or unintentional. In other words, he _thinks_ they _intentionally_ avoided , but he is not totally sure about that.
is a transitive verb meaning "to take into account/consideration".
* * *
>
> It's a bit of a shame that the game didn't go deeper into in the philosophical elements, but
>
>
> (concerning the fact that) their choice of not going into detail **seems to be an intentional one** ,...
>
>
> if I take the work's consistency into consideration, ...
>
>
> I have to admit that's a good decision.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
喪中 dialogue in incense commercial
I have trouble understanding this commercial.
(This page also provides Japanese subtitles)
The woman has received a lot of lately and so is worried about .
This part I understand but what the old guy says next is puzzling to me:
>
I get it that he recommends giving , possibly because it's easier on the purse, but what he says later is hard to parse:
> ""
My best try: he says the meaning of is "not to ask something in return" () but to "pay respect and have a leisurely chat". Doesn't make much sense to me.
|
They are concerning about the custom of and . is a monetary gift given usually on the day of the funeral, and is a small returning gift given usually several weeks after the funeral. She is worrying if it's too late to formally offer a because it may make the bereaved family worry about .
>
> (I present _senko_ ) thinking "No returning gift is necessary, but please let me know about the deceased person sometime soon".
This ad makes sense partly because _senko_ is not expensive and partly because giving _senko_ is (as far as I know) not a popular custom.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
What are the differences between 真ん中, 中心 and 中央?
Could someone please explain the differences in usage and meaning? It would be nice with some example sentences as well.
|
Definitions mostly taken from Goo/
is the most limited of the three. It only applies to and means the exact center/middle.
*
*
includes the definition of . It also means . That is to the say sub-organizations that are centrally important to an organization. For example,
>
references the central/ruling committee of a party. Accordingly, it can also refer to the central/national government.
includes the definition of , but also includes a few other definitions of note.
1.
* means with Osaka as the central example, the unique characteristics of Kansai region.
* means a central/major topic of conversation.
2. The center of a circle: ![](
3. The barycenter/center of gravity in physics. . It is also called
4. {}. The inside of your heart.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "meaning, word choice"
}
|
Can 風が強く also refer to disruptive behavior rather than a strong wind?
Im reading a comic and two guys are basically being noisy af, and messing around. Their friend walks in and says ....
I just assumed at first hes talking about the weather, but im wondering if its possible hes referring to the two guys being noisy and just horsing around ( i.e, its very lively/ loud this morning) , as it seems a rather random thing to say that the wind is strong ( given the scenario).
|
If the comic was the one @Chocolate mentioned, He's definitely talking about the weather.
But like you thought it has other meaning, the sentence itself is a bit too humble to say out loud for high school kids.
It is not that hard to guess that because of the weather, he got something he wants to share. the case of the comic, he peeked of his schoolmates.
So the phrase has a meaning of greeting and an introduction of the following story at the same time.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "word choice"
}
|
あわせて at the beginning of a sentence
The context of the question is the lyrics of a song by Chara. The very first two verses of the song begins with,
> ****
>
>
I am confused on the significance of in this instance. The best interpretation I have is to understand as "also," as in "Also, please give me a hug (in that way)." However, this does not make much sense to begin the sentence with "also." I was thinking maybe could also mean "according to (something)" in this instance. But I'm not sure if that's even grammatically correct. Any ideas?
|
According to my intuition, ("besides", "also") is very unlikely because it's a fairly stiff word usually found in formal business letters and such.
This can be interpreted both as () ("please put the hands together") and () ("please let me see you"), but apparently there is no clue that tells us which interpretation is correct. I feel the lyricist intentionally left it in hiragana so that it has a double meaning. In the latter half of the song, there is also written in hiragana, which can be interpreted both as and .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "song lyrics"
}
|
Do words differing only in the voicedness of consonants act as functionally homophonous?
In Japanese, there are some sound differences that clearly distinguish words from one another, such as falling on a different or on the ([]{} vs. []{} or []{} vs ); while other sound differences make no difference as all (English 'l' vs. English 'r', vanishing `<u>` sounds, vs. ).
Where on this spectrum does voicedness (e.g. vs. ) fall?
(I am aware that words are spelled one way or the other, but then you get situations like []{} vs. []{} where the is _clearly_ the same word, or the somewhat more extreme []{} vs []{}.)
|
No, Japanese is full of voiced-unvoiced minimal pairs. There are minimal pairs even when the constituent morphemes are the same:
* mountains and rivers (dvandva compound)
* mountain rivers (modifier-head compound)
Dvandva compounds typically don't trigger rendaku, so the former is unvoiced. You can find plenty of other minimal pairs showing contrasts in voicedness, for example:
* mosquito
* moth
And so on. The important point is that native speakers hear these as clearly contrasting words, so it's a fundamental distinction in Japanese phonology. They are not homophonous in any sense.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "nuances, pronunciation"
}
|
Meaning of こった in Xと、こったのもあった
From the story by :
> **** ****
> One person's _phrase_ to open the lock was to say "The tulips have bloomed". There was also one which said "You must make it secure". Among them, there was, for example, "The ears of a king are the ears of a robber".
The story seems to be describing locks shaped like ears that people unlock by whispering phrases into them.
I cannot understand the meaning of in the second sentence. Maybe would fit with the quotative particle, but the dictionary says that this means 'ask' which doesn't really seem to fit the context.
More generally I'm having trouble with the the two particles marked in bold. In is a pronoun describing a person or a phrase, i.e. is it 'there was one person who said ' or 'there was one phrase which said'? My guess is that it matches with the in , so it is **one** person with **two** phrases. Likewise I'm struggling with the in .
|
This is , which loosely means "to elaborate", "to have a variety of ideas", etc. See also .
> **** **** ****
This sentence has many 's, but they all basically mean "one", or "lock".
* means "one person's lock" (it's like meaning "mine").
* = = one (a lock) to which one (must) say
* = = = elaborate/tricky lock
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, reading comprehension"
}
|
fragmented statement and いつの世も
> Speaker talking about a painting with a goddess and an owl
>
>
>
> ****
>
> ……
The people who know that the owl flies off at night, after morning dawns. people only know that this occurs.
I find it difficult to follow the middle statement in terms of how to interpret ...with a period. and what is describing.
Along with what any of this has to to with knowing the future.
Thank you
|
> **** ( **** )
> It is (only) after dawn breaks and morning comes that people (can) realize the owl has flied off at night.
This is a cleft sentence where the part is pulled out for emphasis. at the end of the sentence has been omitted. The original sentence is:
>
> People realize the owl has flied off at night (only) after dawn breaks and morning comes.
* * *
means "in any age", "regardless of the era", etc. It's in the same vein as grammar.
>
> Regardless of the era, people can only know things that have (already) happened.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "reading comprehension, cleft sentences"
}
|
What does this sentence mean?
>
I don't understand the use of here. Jisho says it means "to look after" "to keep in custody" so I can understand a sentence like and but not the first one above.
|
>
"Out of 5,000 yen (note). Here's your change, 3,000 yen."
* * *
According to ...
>
>
So... seems to be a pretty new and slangy usage. (But () doesn't sound slangy, as discussed in the comments below.) The dictionary says it's probably used in the sense of "First, I'll keep (hold of) ¥ tentatively."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, words"
}
|
Passive referring to one's own actions
for example
> ****
>
> ****
In these cases, the first person narrator is describing his own actions.
In what circumstances would you choose to use the passive form for your actions?
thank you
|
>
The subject of **** and is the same person, so the is normal passive.
> "I **was given** an elegant smile, so I had no choice but reply that way."
**** , "to give an elegant smile", was done by someone else.
* * *
>
The **** is spontaneous (), not passive ().
For more on the usage of the spontaneous auxiliary , you could refer to Why is the passive form used in this sentence?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "passive voice"
}
|
What does "hennaiatsu" actually mean?
I don't know how it is written, but it was subtitled as "she's weird". For context: It was thought by one character after seeing another essentially tell others to go away so she could sleep in class.
I could only find definitions for "hen" and "atsu". "Hen" could mean "strange", and "atsu" could be a shortening of "atsukamashi", which means "impudent"/"shameless".
With "nai" in the middle, the closest I can come up with is "not just strange, but shameless", but I'm super iffy on that.
Any help will be greatly appreciated!
|
I think you may be parsing what you heard incorrectly. From the context you've provided I would reckon what was said was , which in the context you provided means "She's weird," and more generally means "(a person) is weird." is a vulgar/informal/derogatory way of referring to any person or object.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": -4,
"tags": "translation, meaning"
}
|
ちから, たわめる and を-Particle
I stumbled upon a sentence where I don't get the grammar:
> () {}{}{}
the topic being the waist of a woman.
What I don't understand shouldn't it rather be instead of (because the waist is bent with a springyness or elasticity)?
Or is it a case where and can be used equivalently similar like in this post here: Making sense of transitive usage of and - and ?
In my opinion it would be the waist that should be an object to .
BTW: is the potential form of ? because my dictionary has two different entries for - one potential form of "to bend/" and the other "to bend (a piece of wood)" which is not potential. Is there any real difference?
Thanks a lot!
|
Grammatically speaking, is a simple transitive verb, is its subject, and is its object. ( before an intransitive verb is also a kind of location marker like English "across" or "through", but that has nothing to do with this sentence.)
Dictionaries say is a transitive verb meaning "to bend (something)", although "to bend a force" makes little sense. Actually, is a more nuanced verb. It's used with an elastic sheet- or stick-like object (e.g., bow, bamboo, rubber mat), and implies the existence of a restoring force. Bending a steel pipe using a burner is but not because the deformation is irreversible. So, although is perhaps not a standard combination, I think it means "to _hold/store_ a (spring-like, elastic) force" here. is basically describing how her waist is "soft yet _bouncy_ ".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, particle を"
}
|
いやこうしている in this statement
Speaker asked how he was doing after waking up from his injuries.
> Q
>
> speaker……
>
> speaker ****
>
> speaker
my finger, ugh though it's like this (everywhere hurts?), hurts intermittently
How do i interpret here?
Thank you
|
You could understand the sentence like this...
> …
By , he tries to say something like , but corrects himself by saying "no", .
"(By moving just) a finger... no, even when I'm staying (still) like this, my joints hurt intermittently."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
What is the function of で in こうした家族の変化で、何が起きているのか?
> **** (source)
The indicates the "cause"(what is happening because of the transformation?) or the "location"(what is happening in the transformation?)?
|
It's an alternative way of saying `` (cause). It's not impossible to interpret it as "location" (for example, `` would be "location"), but I think overall (given the context etc) it's quite clear that it's the former in this case.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, particle で"
}
|
What does「のには」mean in this sentence?
> []{}[]{}[]{}
What is the usage of ? I think thatmeans, that is, a generic event. But I can't understand the usage of in this case.
|
as you said is the nominalizer. You could have used instead.
means "to be surprised". are just the normal particles, and would be translated by "at" here.
> : I got surprised at the fact she came in first.
The indicates a contrast, and you could have omitted it. The is the same you would use for other expressions like .
In the dictionary, you can see the exact definition for this usage:
> ……
(or at least I think this is the one)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "particles, には"
}
|
What でな means here?
>
It's from a video game "Final Fantasy X". At the beginning of the game Auron gives Tidus a sword and says this phrase before their first battle with enemies.
Is there some verb omitted between and , like ?
Or he just says, "It's for use in the real battle" ?
|
>
This "sentence" is like the ones where we omit the verb and just use at the end:
>
From the context, I would guess it means something like " _learn how to use it in a real battle_ " where the verb "learn" is omitted. As for the and the , is the , and is the so nothing special.
The full sentence could be:
>
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
Confusing use of くらい and の in this dictionary definition
A dictionary (5) definition of :
> ****
> ???? long and thin wood, bamboo or metal.
I'm stumped on the first part of this definition. I have = "Length to the extent that it can possess". Possess what?
And what is the following ? My guess is that it marks possession, i.e. each of wood, bamboo and metal have the property which is . When I try and put all this together I can't get anything that makes sense.
If I had to guess the meaning I'd have said it means "Wood that possesses length" but I'd have written that as . Besides which, that's a terrible definition. The key characteristic is that it is longer than it is wide, but I can't see any way that it could mean that.
|
I wonder if the comma after is throwing you off. Let's start with the second part of the definition:
>
I trust this is straightforward: Long and thin wood, bamboo, or metal.
When a noun is modified with , as in XY, it's often helpful to think of it as "an X kind of Y." For example: is a student. What kind of student? A Japanese student.
In this case, the modifier is:
>
A length that you can hold. here can be thought of as "to the extent that" or "enough that", so you could also say in English, "long enough that one can hold".
So to put it together:
>
Long-enough-that-one-can-hold long-and-thin wood, bamboo, or metal.
I'll leave the gloss into natural English up to you.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, particle の, particle くらい"
}
|
How do I say this sentence informally?
>
But if I were to ask a question, would have a negative tone so what word do I use instead?
|
>
To turn it to an informal question, you could use...
>
>
(Here, the is a normal noun, .)
* * *
The that you're talking about is a sentence ending particle (). I'd expect it used this way..
→ **** / ****
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, translation, word choice"
}
|
～てみると in this context
speaker invited to go into his girlfriends house for the first time, had previously walked her back home a few times
>
>
> ****
>
> ……
>
> (I know that?) Maybe it’s because I walked her home before, once I try to come to their doorstep, i've become utterly clueless on what to do now.
I have hard time reading what he is trying to get at with in the second statement with ..., ...
Is knowing "" suppose to result in ""?
is referring to something else?
or does this usage of apply here?
thank you
|
To me it looks like he is trying to say that "Even though I know the location of the house because I escorted (the girl), if I try coming before it, it has become that I don't know what is the best to do".
>
Because escorted (and other)
>
Even though I know, the place of house, because (I escorted)
>
Before the house
>
If I try to come.
So "Even though I know, the place of house, because (I) escorted, if I try to come before the house..."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Understanding 手のつけようがない
> ... ****
> Even expert lock breakers _can do nothing about it_.
This is my best effort at a translation from looking at example sentences using on Weblio.
I can't find this phrase in my dictionary, but it did have with a similar meaning.
1) Is there a good universal translation of these phrases that works in most cases?
2) Is there are difference between the two phrases?
3) Is there a sensible grammatical breakdown of these phrases, or should they just be learned as a set phrase? What does the verb mean in this case?
|
If you could not find them in dictionaries, that's because these are simple combinations of:
* "there is no way to "
...and either of the following two set phrases:
* "to start working on something", "to undertake", etc
* "to treat (a diseased/wounded person)", "to try to fix (a serious trouble)"
Therefore is closer to "I don't even know where to start" or "I can do nothing about it", whereas means "The patient/problem is helpless no matter what". Sometimes they are interchangeable, but sometimes they are not. For example you can say but not because the horse itself is not sick.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, set phrases"
}
|
Word-order with の- and に- particles
I have this part of a sentence
{}{}{}{}{}
along with its translation:
"in the part where the shadows gradually gathered and thickened"
which makes contextual sense, but still, I would have translated the sentence as "(where) the parts gradually thicken and gather inside the shadow(s)". So it is not the shadows that gather and deepen (contrary to the accompanying translation)
Where did I go wrong? Thanks a lot!
|
You could parse it this way..
>
is a relative clause modifying , so you can rephrase it as **** . is the subject of . adverbially modifies .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "particle に, particle の, parsing"
}
|
What is the grammatical function of と in the sentence 同じ心を持った人は二人といない
What is the grammatical function of in the sentence:
> ****
|
This is a less common but distinct function of . When `number + counter + ` is combined with a negation, it means "(not) even". says:
> ###
>
> ⑧ …… **** ****
>
> ⑨ … **** **** ****
It may be better to memorize , and as idioms.
Related: The role of particle in
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, particles, polarity items"
}
|
Question about interpreting an NHK news article, 子どもに話しかけたり
In an article, I was reading:
>
>
>
I'm a little bit confused about the meaning of in the first sentence first paragraph, as well as the meaning of in the second paragraph.
Does imply that these crimes have not stopped every year? Also does simply mean that the suspicious people were making conversation / talking to children?
My translation:
> Crimes that children have fallen victim to have not stopped every year while children have been going to and from school. According to the police department, there were 644 incidents two years ago. This year in Niigata-shi, a seven year old girl was killed.
>
> According to the police department, Before these incidents, there were suspicious individuals hanging around and talking to kids.
|
Yes, means that crimes have not stopped, i.e. continued to happen. It is the polite negation of .
As for your second question, it's part of a grammar pattern of ~~. It basically lists various actions/states. You can see it in action in this NHK article as **** ****. Note that in this case is the -form of + .
For this sentence, the first action/state is , which is the verb `to be`. So this means that there were suspicious people near the kids for long periods of time. The second action/state is . The base verb means to talk to/begin a conversation. So this means those suspicious people were talking to the kids.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
Meaning of 字 in this context
From a story where people no longer use keys for locks, but speak a special phrase into the lock:
> ****
> On the other hand, people accidentally saying their phrase while drunk happens all the time. After coming home you sober up, but there's no need for regret or panic. From the inside you should replace the _characters_ and _fix to_ a different phrase.
I'm really confused by the sentence in bold. The story has been about people **speaking** these phrases. There is no mention of anything being written down or typed in. So what is the meaning of here? I also don't really understand . Why is the particle used instead of ?
|
This literally just means "character(s)", but in this context it refers to the _displayed_ password to open the lock. Apparently, this is a type of lock which has a configurable panel, and you can change the password by replacing/retyping the phrase displayed on it to a new one. Keep reading, and you'll see this feature of the lock is important in the story. It looks like that the author did not want to use the word for some reason.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "meaning, reading comprehension"
}
|
Ambiguous use of 奥？
The standard english dictionary translation of is "interior" or "inner part". Being literal minded, I have had a hard time getting my head around its usage in a game I am playing.
> **{** …
As context, there are two buildings on opposite sides of the map, the mansion being on the west and the church on the east. There is a boundary wall furthest west (further than the mansion) and another furthest east (further than the church). The is not referring to the walls of the church (which is what I would expect), but the boundary wall slightly east.
I checked Kotobank and I think I got the gist, but I am not skilled enough to understand or translate the definition accurately:
> ****
So, my vague understanding is that here actually refers to an entrance that leads to a wider open area, in this case the outside, rather than the interior (of the church, which is smaller)?
|
If the viewpoint of the speaker is between the mansion and the church, can mean "the wall **behind** the church", and can mean "the wall **in front of** the church" or "the wall between the mansion and me".
←West [] [] [speaker] [] [] East→
This happens because this means "the further place (in relation to the church)". The wall doesn't have to belong to the church itself. If the speaker thinks the church is somehow hiding the wall from the speaker's viewpoint, that's enough.
Please see this related question, too: What is the difference between vs ?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "definitions"
}
|
What is the meaning of '育てられ方’ in this sentence?
I would appreciate it if someone could break down the grammar in this sentence for me and offer an English translation. What I am confused about is who the subject in this sentence is and whether '' is in passive or some other grammatical form. Also, why '' was used with ''
|
> ****
> How was _the_ friend raised by his/her parents?
`pre-masu form + ` forms a noun phrase meaning "way of ", or "how ". For example is "the way of eating it" or "how to eat it". Combined with some adjectival expression, it also works as a suru-verb. For example means "His way of thinking is interesting".
* : "to raise (a child)"
* : the passive form of , "to be raised"
* : the pre-masu/continuative form of
* : "the way of being raised"
The subject of the whole sentence is , but I believe should be marked with because it must be a definite person, i.e., must have been introduced in the universe of discourse.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, passive voice"
}
|
Interpretation and some questions about NHK article
> **** ****
>
>
Could someone please break down what exactly the uses of and are here?
I am have a bit of trouble parsing the first paragraph in english and making understanding of it, my attempt is the following:
> To better help serve the opposite sex whom is aging ), and also those whos bodies and heart ( mabye this means mind actually?) do not correspond directly with male or female and have trouble entering standard gendered washrooms ( where does come into play?). For the purpose of making toilets easy to use "Toilet ( how would kihon be translate exactly here?) policy" was put into plan in places like stores and train stations in shibuya.
I would appreciate any feedback.
|
> ****
means old people. This phrase is describing what kind of old people. **** means "receiving toilet care **from/by** people of the opposite sex". So here is **from/by**.
> (() () )
The structure here is ABCOpinions (of kind C) were expressed **from** people of kinds A and B.
Altogether:
> Old people who are receiving toilet care from members of the opposite sex and people whose physical gender and perceived gender differ gave opinions on the difficulty of entering men's and women's toilets.
This translation isn't entirely literal but I hope it's near enough for you to understand.
would be basic policy.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
Meaning of verb + かなど in article
I'm about to finish reading this article and I came across some grammer that I have never seen before in the last sentence. The last sentence is:
> ****
What is the bolded part here supposed to mean? I have never seen used before and definitely would not expect it to follow a verb.
My best guess translation:
> After this, the plan is to decide on how much to take or something
|
> ****
This is simply two separate particles performing their usual separate functions. means 'things like'.
is marking the embedded question (how much will they catch?). There are loads of posts on embedded questions on this site, but essentially the whole embedded question can act as a noun and can therefore be the object of .
Your translation effort is pretty close. I'd go with something like:
> After this the plan is to decide things like how much to catch.
Note that can mean 'catch' when talking about fish.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, particle など"
}
|
What is the difference between 隠す and 覆う?
It would be really nice if someone could explain the difference between these two words that both mean ´to hide´. Some example sentences that illustrate the difference would really help. :)
|
means "hide", but means "cover", "overlay" and "wrap".
means "to hide something from sight with a cover"
Some example sentenses of . <
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning, word choice, words"
}
|
A question regarding に従って
>
I've come upon unusual (at least for me) usage of and can't figure out how it works. As far as I know, should be used with verbs when there's some gradual change or be used with a noun in the sense of "according to". However, neither of these meanings seem to apply in this case. I tried to search for more meanings or some exceptions, but wasn't able to find any. My best guess with translating is something like "rules you should follow while staying at facility", but even if it's correct, I don't understand how works here.
Could someone tell me how to interpret this ?
|
”“ is an idiom and means “upon doing ”. It’s different from normal usage of which means to obey.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Meaning of たんか when used in a sentence or phrase?
i came across this phrase "" and i know that is probably referring to alcohol and probably means 'drinking' but the phrase ’’ does not give me any result when i tried to search for it. I'm just guessing here but is this a slang for "I cannot drink anymore"/"I've finished drinking (from my cup)"?
|
In Kansai, we say to mean .
(Kansai) means (or)(Standard), "Could you drink / Were you able to drink sake/alcohol?"
(As you know, is the past potential form of .)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation, meaning, manga"
}
|
The difference between 最高 and 一番いい
What is the difference between and ? Both mean the best. But they should be used in different situations. What would be the right use of the words? Thank you!
|
In my experience, **** means "the best" with a nuance of "an awesome thing". So you could say something like :
> {}{}{}{}The food today, it's awesome/amazing/the best! The food yesterday was also awesome/amazing/the best though.
is saying that, let's say, on a scale of 1 to 10, this thing is very close to 10. But not ranking things against each other like 1st or 2nd place. It just means that things are really good.
Now **** comes with a nuance of **ranking** , because it literally means **"The number 1 good thing"**
So, in my opinion, while casually saying the following sentence might be ok, it would be a little less "logical":
> {}{}{}{}- This game is The number 1! That game is also The number 1 though.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "meaning, synonyms"
}
|
Understanding ７７の海岸のうち６０％で、
> ****
> In 60% of the 77 coasts investigated, it is understood that there is a possibility that all the sand will be lost.
I'm a bit confused by the part. I'm assuming it means "in 60% of the 77 coasts investigated", but I'm uncomfortable with the lack of particle between and 60%. How do the following differ:
>
> this one feels ungrammatical to me
>
Maybe I'm trying to join and 60% into a single phrase when I shouldn't. Perhaps the correct answer is "Among the 77 coasts investigated, in 60% of them ...". Could I write with the same meaning as the original?
|
> * 7760%
> * 7760%
> * 7760%
>
These all mean the same thing, and they are interchangeable. is basically a noun, but it can form an adverbial phrase or clause without another particle, just as , can can do so.
From :
> ###
>
> ⑩
>
is often optional, but it can remove an ambiguity from a sentence. For example, 2 means either "the two friends (mentioned in the conversation)" or "two of the (many) friends" depending on the context. 2 only means the latter.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "reading comprehension"
}
|
What is the correct romaji/kanji for a phrase that sounds like “fui cabaru”
A japanese Aikido master used the term that sounds like “fui cabaru” or the “up” position of the a sword. I also believe it means something like “the place your hat goes”.
Can you tell me the correct romaji and kanji for this phrase?!upward position of the sword
|
With minimal research, it seems like it's [[]{furi}[]{kaburu}](
could also be written as , but in this compound, I'm seeing it mostly in hiragana.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "kanji, rōmaji, phonetics"
}
|
など無いも同然だった in this scene
narrator depicting a defloration scene
> A
>
> A ****
>
> However, the pain that A was feeling, wasn't only a outwardly visible wound, but rather the matter regarding her suffering was, without question, that there was was no pain from having her hymen split.
this is cannot be correct has she has already said that it hurts like hell, but it is how this sentence seems to read.
Thank you
|
Where did that "without question" come from? is a set phrase that means "virtually nonexistent". here is similar to , a way to make light of something. The sentence implies she is feeling some stronger pain, which is making her physical pain almost negligible.
>
> The (physical) pain of torn hymen was virtually nonexistent _(as compared to her psychological pain)_.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "parsing"
}
|
Translation for [竜とは逃げぬものなれば]
new in the language so I am having a hard time figuring out the meaning of this sentence. 'When it comes to dragons, you can't escape' would be my translation, but pretty sure I am wrong. If it doesn't take too much time, please give me a brief explanation about the grammar. Thanks a lot!
|
This sentence is using the grammar of classical/archaic Japanese. This sentence can be translated to modern Japanese as or .
* **** : "dragon"
* **** : quotative + thematic , used to give a definition or an important characteristic of something. See: Use of when there doesn't seem to be comparison
* **** : "escape", the ("irrealis form") of , which is an archaic version of
* **** : "not", the ("attributive form") of , which is an archaic negation marker (≒modern )
* **** : "thing", "existence"
* **** : "is", the ("realis form") of , which is an archaic copula (≒modern /)
* **** : "because", an archaic reason marker (≒modern /)
>
> (It's) because a dragon is an existence that does not escape.
> (It's) because dragons won't escape (from you).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, translation, meaning, classical japanese"
}
|
How to politely and indirectly tell someone they forgot to do something?
Let's say someone who's above me, like a teacher or a boss, forgot to do something. How would I notify them without being rude?
I only know the basic "~"(though I'm not even sure if that's correct), but I want to be a bit more humble and roundabout.
I would appreciate if you could give me multiple different ways to do this.
Thanks in advance!
|
I would suggest that you humbly inquire whether they have done it already, or humbly state that it hasn't been done yet.
So if your boss forgot to reply to an email from last week, you could say something like,
>
>
> "Have you already replied to (the) email?"
or
>
>
> "It seems that the client hasn't received a response yet."
(be sure to trail off with a long pause and make your face look real worried...)
* To avoid being rude, you should try to point out that _**something hasn't happened yet**_ and avoid _" assuming"_ that they forgot ;)
Also, for bonus points try to look and ask them if **you** can do the thing they forgot.
>
>
> "May I reply to the email from the client?"
(this is more effective if you appear to be out of breath...)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "word choice, politeness, phrase requests"
}
|
おすすめ品 on Doujins in Akihabara
I have seen written on stickers on doujins in Akihabara. In one shop this was literally on every single doujin. From what I know means recommended goods, which makes no sense here, as its on every product... Does have a specific meaning here?
|
As far as meaning goes, it simply means "recommended (item)" and nothing more. It's a common business practice and you don't have to take it seriously.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "manga"
}
|
Could this be some sort of typo
So I'm reading this manga, and at one point person A brings out a syringe and starts explaining to person B about how she needs to recieve what's in the syringe for a procedure to work, and then goes on to start explaining why which is when person B interupts them to say:
> or maybe
![enter image description here](
Which is followed by:
> Person A: > Eeeh?
>
> Person B: > Is something wrong?
>
> Person A: … > Ahaha! No...it’s the lack of any hesitation.
I've hit the dictionaries and there isn't anything for and while there are some entries for none of them seem anything relvant.
Given the context to me it seems like B said some equivalent of "Okay", which surprises A who expected to need to talk B into it.
Basically, is this a typo and in either case what's the meaning?
|
Note that the is small, so it's pronounced with the sound cut short. As opposed to a without a small tsu, where the sound extends naturally.
This is the for a sudden, abrupt movement. In this case jabbing with a needle. It carries the feeling of "" too, hence this .
You may also see it for light attacks and is usually used by girls and considered cute. The same spelling may be used for heavier attacks, but will be written with a font, size, etc. to convey a more forceful delivery.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
what is the meaning of this sfx/onomatopoeia? ダシーン
dashi () sometimes is for "run"
but this sfx is nothing about running!
example (the ball is a dough, they make bread) ![enter image description here](
|
Judging from the scene, it's obviously used as a variant of . It's not a common onomatopoeia, and I don't think I have seen this elsewhere. Mangaka often create original onomatopoeias, and I think this is another example.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation, manga, onomatopoeia"
}
|
How do I read 殺す者?
From a light novel I currently read []. Is it '' or '' and how do I know what to take...for future usage.^^
Thank You in Advance
|
It literally means "a person who kills goblins" or "goblin-killing person", hence "Goblin Killer/Slayer". This is read . is read as only in larger on-yomi compounds (e.g. "author", "guardian").
* : "goblin" (Other translations are possible, but I'm assuming you're reading _Goblin Slayer_ )
* : the direct object marker
* : "kill"
* : "person"
This is a simplest example of Japanese relative clauses. ("goblin-killing") is modifying ("person") as a relative clause.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "readings"
}
|
Grammaticality of two kanji verbs without their conjugating part
A friend told me he's going to get a tattoo with "".
doesn't exist on the dictionary without its - conjugating part, so is it grammatically correct using it alone, as if it was a noun? Does it make any sense? More generally, does it make any sense omitting the conjugating part from a two (or more) kanji verb and using it as a noun? Wouldn't it be better to use the form? Should I suggest my friend to rather get a "" tattoo?
Thank you for your help!
|
First, choosing a different _noun/suru-verb_ with a similar meaning and on-reading (e.g., , , , , ...) should always be a better option. Does he really need this "mundane" kun-reading word?
Next, is of course not grammatical in ordinary sentences. But in this case, if you absolutely need to use this word and feel adding non-kanji (or ) is aesthetically displeasing, okurigana omission might be applied, although it's far from conventional and should be considered as a last resort. This type of nonstandard okurigana omission is occasionally seen in names of a battle manga (e.g., instead of , instead of ). Place names usually do not have okurigana, either (e.g., and ).
(I would rather not repeat how Japanese people see those kanji tattoos here, but if this tattoo may be seen by Japanese people, please take time and do some research.)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "kanji, verbs, conjugations, nouns, renyōkei"
}
|
Appropriate word for "fellow"
I've been wondering how to appropriately say the phrase "My fellow members" lately and I've come up with the phrase but I feel like there's a more appropriate word for it.
Is there a more appropriate word for "fellow" than ?
|
English _fellow_ has multiple meanings and it's impossible to give a catch-all term. For reference, here's what ALC says:
> 1. **** **** ****
> 2. **** ****
> 3. **** ****
> 4. **** ****
> 5. **** ****
> 6. ****
> 7. **** ****
> 8. ****
>
* * *
You can use when it's close to "colleague", () when the sameness of social status or generation is important, for this sense, and for this sense. If it refers to teammates of an in-company sport team, or should work. When in doubt, you can always say , or such. is awkward because it sounds like "fellows who are also members (of another group)" or "members of (a group called) _Nakama_ ".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "word choice, word requests"
}
|
What's the polite way to invite someone to do something?
For example: "If you want to practice English, feel free/you are welcome to message me". How do you carry the nuance of "you are welcome to but don't feel obliged?" If I said that would, to my mind, sound too direct and commanding. But I'm not sure how to make it sound softer.
Edit: As Felipe correctly guessed, the context of use is for HelloTalk, for people I don't know well or strangers.
|
If you want to invite someone to do something politely, you can say ? For example, ??
If I were to change your example to a very polite form, I would say ?
I found an interesting page about expressions of request in Japanese. I hope this helps you. <
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "politeness, phrase requests"
}
|
How to read 死神界?
In this manga I'm reading, the word appears. I would have read it has but there was furigana indicating the reading to be .
If there was no furigana, how could I know the correct way to read it?
|
That kind of furigana is not for telling the reader the reading of the kanji, but what the character actually said. The kanji tell the reader what they meant.
It would be incorrect to read it every time it appears without furigana.
That kind of usage is common in manga and, depending on the genre, in novels.
As for why this is done, I think the most encompassing answer would be to **eliminate ambiguity and uncertainty** for the reader.
In the OP, the author is making sure the reader knows where "here" is by including both the word spoken and what was meant. I think it is easy to see why this would be necessary if you imagine a story in which teleportation is used a lot.
Here is a different kind of example from Appleseed. The reader may not know that is being used as slang for _(whether in this story only or in reality too is irrelevant)_ , so it is written like this to aid the reader with what was said and meant without having to use footnotes.
![Appleseed_1](
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 15,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "multiple readings, furigana, creative furigana"
}
|
What is the right word for existential goal?
I am looking for a Japanese word that corresponds to life goal. It does not refer to getting a good salary job, marrying with dream S.O., buying exotic cars, or other materialistic/worldly targets. But there may be a philosophic and existence-questioning version of the goal, maybe purpose of living.
|
I think (Self-actualization) is appropriate for the word you are looking for. It means . That is "to become exactly what one wants to be". <
is the word for buddhists.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "word requests, english to japanese, jargon"
}
|
understanding であると同時に construction
> ****
So I basically translate it as **"For Subaru, those footsteps that echoed absurdly loud were, at the same time, the source of his impatience and also the one thing he could rely on."**
What confuses me here is ****. It is the same as **** , right? Either way, I don't understand this construction/grammar.
I was thinking that maybe it would be ok to rephrase it like this:
> **** ****
Also, despite the grammar points, is my translation close enough? Those are the first lines of a book I'm reading btw.
|
says this type of is a special case where the whole combination of works like a conjunctive particle:
> ###
>
> … ****
> ……
> ……
I may be wrong, but I feel this is a remnant of classic grammar, and there is a hidden nominalization in this construction. is interchangeable with **** , where is a nominalizer and is a comparison target marker. So A()B basically means "while (being) A, (also) B", "in addition to being A, (also) B", "A, but at the same time, B" or "not only A but also B".
However, is ungrammatical. If I understand this correctly, this is because the verb/adjective before must be in the attributive form (). is the predicative form () of the copula.
AB() is semantically similar, but it is simply "both A and B at the same time", where the two items are treated equally. AB sounds a little more emphatic or rhetorical to me.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, translation, copula"
}
|
What is a 感謝の夕べ and is it free to attend?
I am doing volunteer work every month at an event organized by a big company (not mine). Now they invite me to a ``:
>
> XYZ
Searching the web reveals that is a popular concept, but I could not find a clear definition.
What does the word convey, opposed to for instance?
attendees usually have to pay, is it also the case for ?
|
is nothing more than a way to name an event held in the evening. In English, it's probably just " Night". For example, when we hear , we can guess it's an event where attendees will enjoy classical music. I feel it tends to be used as the name of some sophisticated/classy event rather than a noisy party, but this may not apply in your case.
I suppose you probably don't have to pay because you are a guest who will receive their , but that is by no means a grammatical rule.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
Meaning of a pattern "AといえばAにも見える"
I've came across a sentence
>
in a manga, but I can't find any explanation on this pattern, so I don't see how "speaking of" makes sense. A "bad move" isn't mentioned previously.
The character thinks "The last move was pretty interesting", and continues thinking on the next panel with the mentioned sentence.
The official English translation is
> "Most would consider it to be a bad move",
but I feel like there's more to the original.
|
This is not "speaking of ", but simply "if someone says ".
>
> It might look like a bad move if someone says so.
In this case it means something like "it may look like a bad move at first sight, but I think it's actually interesting". Depending on the context, the same sentence can mean something like "it looked like a good move at first sight, but since you say it's bad, it started to appear bad".
For the usage of this , see: I need help understanding the grammar in this sentence
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
What is the difference between 神社, お寺 and お宮?
All of them mean "shrine" or "temple", but what is the difference between all of them ?
|
is a generic word for a Shinto shrine.
is another word for , but a little more respectful.
is a Buddhist temple.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "word choice, words, kanji choice"
}
|
What is the difference between 試合 and 競技?
They both mean 'game' or 'contest'. Are they interchangeable or is there a difference?
|
They have different meanings. means "game", "match". I think the meaning of is close to "sports" rather than "game" and "match".
For example, we say , but we rarely say . We say but we don't say .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "meaning, word choice, words"
}
|
What nouns work with やめる when you quit doing something
> ****
> On the 8th, Wrestling's Saori Yoshida announced that she will quit _the sport_.
I'm not sure if my problem is with the use of or with here.
I understand to mean a person who does a sport (let's use the word 'player'). But you can't **quit player** , you can only quit **being a player** , or maybe quit **as a player**.
If I was going to quit being company president would be correct? This one sounds weird to me.
What about eating apples? Would both and both be okay? Both of these sound fine to me.
Basically, I think I'm trying to understand what kind of nouns I can use with , but I'm not even sure I can explain how it works in English. If is correct though, then it doesn't work the same in Japanese.
Please also see my comment below, which may or may not be related to the problem I seem to be having.
|
You can use it with pretty much anything. You could even say something like:
> : I quit being Japanese. (I stop Japanese)
As you said, in proper English it would be like " _Quit being..._ ".
> and ****
Both sentences are fine.
>
This is fine too.
Also, I think you're right about the other verbs in your comment. Unfortunately, I think it's something that you have to get used to, when you think about it with the "Japanese logic" though, it makes quite a lot of sense. One that you might encounter more often is as in:
> = What should I talk **about**...
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Usage of 断然 as の-adjective?
> ****
> At this year's European Mile route, even with other types of horses participating, () is the absolute number one
I know that is a taru adjective so shouldn't it be instead? Is a noun or an adjective here? if it's an adjectives, can I use other taru adjective with instead of , like if they were -adjectives? (I guess to not sound very strict/archaic)
Other sentences I found:
> 1. ****
>
> 2. emu ****
>
> 3. BBT ****
>
>
|
Personally, I use it only as a standalone adverb meaning "by a huge margin" or "definitely (better)" when comparing things. That is to say, I usually use it with /, and I almost never attach // to .
Regarding its no-/na-adjectival usage, I can find a few examples on BCCWJ, so it may not be entirely incorrect. But the number is very small as compared to its adverbial usage (i.e., no // at all), and I personally wouldn't recommend it.
> * ****
> * ****
> * **** 1…
>
As a taru-adjective, (, , etc) usually means "resolute", "determined" or "firm". () means "determinedly", etc. (e.g., (//φ)) This meaning is fine in serious novels, but is too stiff, literary or outdated for a daily usage. sounds too grandiose and even a little funny to me.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "particle の, adjectives"
}
|
Aoi aoi morideshita - sentence structure explanation
first post here. I'm currently reading a children's books titled ''. I think it's a good starters book however, some of the structures are confusing or contrary to what I have learnt. I understand the phrase ' aoi aoi morideshita' to mean 'the forest was blue'. I'm sure there is some rule I haven't seen yet, or some obviation to a rule, but wouldn't 'mori ha aokatta desu' mean the same thing?
Thanks guys! (P.S I'm sure I'll be posting more questions about this book!)
|
I'm assuming you're comfortable with hiragana, since you're reading this book!
>
Means "it was a green, green forest." (In Japanese, is often used for things we'd called "green" in English, such as trees and traffic lights.)
As Felipe Oliveira explained, in Japanese as in English, an adjective can come before or after its noun, depending on what you want to emphasis and how you want the phrase to sound.
>
It was a big dog.
>
The dog was big.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, syntax"
}
|
How to understand ひと断ちにする
****
Originally I understood this phrase as "I will rebuke this man, cut him in two with a great difference (in score)" but have not been able to sufficiently break down my understanding of to my own satisfaction.
I originally read as similar to (although actually taking seems to be rare according to exact google search) but that may not be correct.
To my understanding means to sever something, so I think is its noun form, making one slice by my reasoning, so I think literally he's saying that he will take him in one slice by a great difference.
Am I on the right track or am I missing something?
![sai declares his intention to punish a bully with a taste of his own medicine](
EDIT: I should have made this more clear. is talking about figuratively slicing someone in a game of go. It's not literal.
|
I don't think is any common saying, but we can somewhat grasp its gist as some admixture of the following popular idioms:
* "subdue by a single wrench" (= defeat easily)
* "knock down at a blow"
* "cut in two with a single slash" (= cut the Gordian knot; take merciless measures)
So it would mean something like "put down (easily) with a slash of the sword", but not knowing the plot, I can't decide whether the is intended to be a literal stroke of blade runs through his body, or figurative break of his spirit, will to fight etc.
Also, is "great difference" but this word is likely used for gap in amount nowadays, so it sounds most natural when he mentions some kind of scored match (again, not knowing the plot).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "words"
}
|
What does 囚えよう mean in this book?
I'm currently reading a screenplay regarding to Oda Nobunaga.
In one of the character line, it is written that
> ****
Base on my search, it seems that the kanji is associated with word like capture and imprisonment, while means prisoner.
However, I am unsure about the meaning and grammar of in this context.
Is it possible for someone to elaborate more on this?
|
It's intended to be a conjugation of "to catch/seize/grasp/capture etc". In this case, of course, you can understand that they mean "captivate" with the assistance of the kanji .
Funnily, I guess you won't find the written form in most dictionaries. That's because the kanji is normally only assigned to the paired intransitive verb . This asymmetry comes from that only has an extended meaning "be in capitivity; be confined", not just being caught. That said, those who know the other one would feel nothing difficult to read it by analogy, and infer that it means "put someone into captivity".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "meaning, orthography, parsing"
}
|
Is it possible to omit "電話を'
In the sentence like:
>
Can we omit "" and say:
>
The logic here goes this way: "" means "to make call" so, the "" should be implied. Is it correct?
Thank you very much in advance.
|
has some meanings, so you should not omit . However if it means obviously "", you can omit it.
For example,
A:?
B:
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Unsure of meaning for sentence found in article about an automatic train test
I'm reading this article and there is a sentence towards the end that looks like this
>
I'm not entirely sure about the meaning of this sentence as I could read it several ways. How wrong is my translation?
My translation breakdown:
> 1. = The research of the automatic train
>
> 2.
>
> -> People will become insufficient
>
> = People who do future work will become insufficient for JR Eastern Japan
>
>
> 3.
>
> -> -> to think
>
> -> -> to start = started to think
>
>
Final sentence
>
>
> The research of the automatic train has started thoughts about if people doing future work for JR Eastern Japan will become insufficient.
|
You're not parsing the sentence correctly.
is the subject of .
is the object of .
In , modifies , not .
**** means "thought ~~ and started" or "started, thinking ~~". "Started to think" would be .
You can parse it this way:
>
≂
(The has replaced/absorbed the . is the topic/theme of the sentence, so it's marked with the and moved to the front.)
"JR Eastern Japan thought that [the number of] working people would become insufficient in the future and started researching automatic trains." / "JR Eastern Japan started researching automatic trains, thinking they would become short of workers in the future."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, verbs, conjugations"
}
|
Metaphorical meaning of 買う
Context: in the manga Rikudou, Riku follows his trainer risky instructions in order to win (the trainer had told him to take a lot of punches in order to understand his opponent's fighting style). When, after risking his life, Riku is finally going to land a punch, his opponent thinks:
>
>
>
> …
> ****
What is the meaning of in this case? My guess is that the opponent is envious of Riku's determination end wants to "acquire" it himself by letting him beat him. Is it correct?
Here you can see the whole page. Thank you for your help!
|
sometimes means "to appreciate (someone's trait)", "to value", etc. It has nothing to do with purchasing.
> ###
>
> 2. to value; to have a high opinion
> We fully appreciate his excellence as a skier.
>
> ###
>
> ―
As is the case in your example, it's commonly used in decision-making contexts (e.g., , ). This () also implies the spaker made some decision (apparently "taking Riku's punches intentionally"?)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "meaning, verbs, manga, metaphor"
}
|
Meaning of いって来た in this sentence
> ****
> Until now, when either of them was in a bad mood the other would calm them and skillfully _go and come back_ , but somehow they ended up getting into an argument.
I have no idea how to translate in this sentence. I'm assuming it doesn't literally mean "go and come back".
Also, have I correctly translated as "somehow", i.e. not the expected result?
|
Edited (again -_-)
In this case means their relationship " **had been going well** " with their arrangement, so to speak, of one calming the other down, but something has happened and they are arguing now. Or you could say " **they had been getting along**."
Whether "somehow" is a good translation or not could depend on taste, but I do think it works the way you worded it. Another possibility might be " **but something happened and ...** "
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning, subsidiary verbs"
}
|
What is 「や」doing in these sentences?
From a book about space:
> ****
And from a ghost story:
> ****
The seems like some kind of "and" but I can't quite grasp how it's working grammatically in these situations. What is this? (not 100% sure these are even the same grammar, but they appear similar)
I know in the sense of but I fail to see the connection between that grammar and these sentences, if there is any.
|
This is the same you already know, which is used to list two or more nouns (or noun equivalents). But these Japanese sentences are actually poorly-written because the second item after is not a noun.
In your first example, is a noun phrase, but is not. The second part should be a nominalized clause, .
> ****
> Recently, the identification of a planet has been anticipated because of the advancement of observational techniques **and** the fact that it has been worked on as part of big projects.
In your second example, is a noun, but is not. The latter should have been a noun phrase such as .
> **** ...
> I used to go into a mountain with my friends on my way home or after returning home, ...
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "particles, reading comprehension, particle や"
}
|
Feminine speech: no だ before よ
Is it true that until recently women were expected to drop , ending a sentence with ? For example:
>
>
>
If it is true, was it thought to sound "gentler"? Why has this changed?
|
See this question for the grammar and the difference between masculine-: how could a sentence end with (noun + ""?)
The feminine- is still very common in fiction including live-action dramas and stage plays, but it has long been rare in real-life conversations. I don't remember when it was common or expected in real life, but on Japanese Wikipedia says the usage of feminine- was introduced in the Meiji era and declined before the 1980's. (The article says 1980, but from what I remember, there were already almost no one who were actively using or in speech in the 1980's... Maybe it was actually common around WWII.)
>
>
> 1980
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "colloquial language, feminine speech, casual"
}
|
Identifying the meaning of こんなこと in this context
For the full text see here. A girl has had an argument with her boyfriend. On the way home she thinks that maybe she should have apologised. She's now changing the password on her room door.
> **** **** ****
> While absentmindedly messing with the characters, the phrase "It's my fault. Sorry." was lined up. Even though it's no use saying such a thing at this late stage, I'm an idiot, aren't I? However, tomorrow I'll spend time saying these words.
I don't fully understand this passage. What does refer to here? Is it the phrase or is it . i.e. Is she saying that there's not point in calling herself an idiot, or is she saying there's no point in saying it was her fault?
Presumably refers to ? I'm not confident that I'm putting all this together correctly.
|
Both and refer to
By , she's saying it's foolish of her to change the password to "I am sorry" (so that she'd have to say it to the door every day from tomorrow), even though there's no point in saying it anymore.
**** literally means "However, from tomorrow I'll spend time saying these words", practically means she will use that phrase as the password and say it every day.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "reading comprehension"
}
|
How do 確認したところ and 全長15メートルほどの古い木造船が見つかり relate here?
The sentence in question:
> **15**
For full context, see here.
My attempt at translation:
> "According to the Aomori Coastal guard office, they sent out 2(?) patrol boats and the moment they confirmed that a boat of about 15 meters overall length was found and two men were aboard."
The problem is that the only way I can interpret so far is the way I did above. However, it's obvious that I can't really make a meaningful attribute to of it anymore...
|
I think simply means "When they checked".
> 15
> According to the Aomori coast guard office, they sent out 2 patrol boats and, when they checked, they found a wooden ship around 15m long with two men on board who were thought to be foreigners.
I changed the intransitive to transitive in English to make the translation sound less awkward.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
What does とみる mean here?
The sentence in question:
> ****
For full context, see here.
My attempt at translation:
> "At the actual spot in the ocean and the neighbouring coast, also until now there are frequent sightings of wooden ships which are expected to come from korea, and the coastal guard observes the two people who came from korea and investigates more and more details."
I'm confused because connects to with . I so far can only remember the combination of and in which translates to "regarded as". But this doesn't make sense here, so I used the interpretation I usually only use if I have "object + + ". I'm not very confident about this though, so I'm asking for your advice.
|
I think the meaning of the you are seeing is probably best rendered in English as "thought to" or "believed to". This isn't far from the "regarded" sense.
For the sentence:
>
→ In the sea and coast line near where this happened,
→ until now
→ wooden boats thought to have come from North Korea (at least in English Korea is at best ambiguous and at worst means South Korea)
→ have been frequently seen
→ the coast guard
→ two people who are thought to come from North Korea
→ investigating more thoroughly
= coast guard.
Piecing it all back together:
> In the sea and along the coast near where the incident happened, until now wooden boats thought to be from North Korea have been frequently seen, and the coast guard is investigating more thoroughly the two men* who are thought to have come from North Korea.
*at least in my dialect saying "men" here makes better sense than saying people.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
How can I express "a particular/a certain" thing?
I am studying vocabulary and I came across the word , either read as or (usually written in Kana) and means "A Particular/A Certain" noun. However, there was only one example sentence on there and it wasn't marked as a Common Word, which seems to be a red flag for me in terms of learning the correct vocabulary.
How can I use to express "a particular/a certain" thing? Secondly, is there a better or more natural way to express this phrase?
Example idea:
>
> In order to graduate, you must take a certain class.
|
It's always read as when it means "a certain ". You can think of it basically as a literary version of meaning "a certain " or "one ". In relatively casual situations, sounds more or less "serious", and it sometimes has a nuance of "don't pry into this".
* → sounds natural and neutral
* → uncommon; may sound like this class is somehow special/problematic when used in a casual blog article or such
* → neutral
* → maybe the speaker does not want to disclose the name of the company
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "words, usage"
}
|
Question about the particular use of 'か'
1. **** (Please, come today or tomorrow)
2. **** **** (Go or not, I don't know)
I guess in these two cases '' means 'or', but why is there no '' after ''. In example 2 there is a '' after ''. It is because you are 'counting' the possibilities? Need someone to clear that up for me. Thanks a lot!
|
Grammatically speaking, in Sentence 1 and in Sentence 2 are a bit different.
In Sentence 1, is simply like "or". In this case, the second is optional, but is _usually omitted_ in modern Japanese.
> * ()
> * ()
>
In Sentence 2, the two 's are forming two embedded questions placed in parallel. In this case, cannot be omitted (but the particle _after_ the is usually omitted, as described in the link).
> * ()
> *
> To be or not to be, that is the question.
>
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, particle か, embedded question"
}
|
What is the upper radical in the Kanji 悪?
I recognize the heart radical at the bottom of the kanji , but I cannot make my mind about the upper one.
* Do you know the name of this radical?
* Do you also know of another Kanji using this radical?
I have some notions of Chinese, and I don't seem to recognize a similar radical. I have been told Kanji/Hanzi have been simplified differently during history depending on Chinese or Japan. So maybe there's a different simplified Chinese form for this one.
|
> _Do you know the name of this radical ?_
It is **** , which is not only a component (calling it _radical_ is technically wrong) but an independent character that even has a dedicated page on Wiktionary.
> _Do you also know of another Kanji using this radical?_
Yes, and there is a relatively user-friendly website to look up kanji if you read Japanese.
When you search for , you will get its decomposition . And if you put in the search form as "component" (), you will get a handful of characters. But if you see the information page of , you will be notified that its traditional form is , which is likely to be used in more (i.e. non-) kanji. So if you look up as component, you will get a bunch of characters. Here is the dump:
>
>
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "kanji, radicals"
}
|
~た次第です, passive speech as active, etc. in this sentence
There's a sentence in the introduction to (a book written for teachers of beginner Japanese grammar):
> [an esteemed Japanese teacher the author of this book models himself after][the author of this book]
My questions are:
1. The passive voice used for 's work doesn't seem to make sense. Is this a case of substituting the active voice for passive as a matter of politeness?
2. What is 's exact definition? It doesn't appear in any dictionary, although several possible meanings are inferred ("mat a teacher would sit on and lecture from")
3. What is the exact translation of ~ here? The closest definition I can find is "reason" or "course of events", similar (I would think) to ~ or ~. Is ~ an acceptable substitute for these constructions?
|
Yes to ①; see this question and its answer, for example.
② can be found in a dictionary, as the comment above by snailboat points out.
Here I'll focus on ③: this {} has the connotation of _circumstances_. It is a humble/polite form used at the end of an explanation or clarification to an audience of superior(s). Often used in a professional/work setting. For example:
>
>
> "(The circumstances are that) I arrived here at work this late today as a result of my train being delayed due to an accident. Please accept my apologies."
(Example taken from here.)
* * *
Note though that there also exists a completely different (more common) sentence-ending `{X}` meaning `It is up to {X}`. For example:
> "How to spend that money is up to you."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, usage"
}
|
What does 気が遠くなるほど mean?
> , .
Having hard time fully understanding this sentence. Especially this part , or how it affects . My translation would be something along the lines of "Over and over and over again, the gods are astounded as they role the dice."
I would really appreciate it, if someone could break the sentence down a little bit and explain the grammar part, that I might have missed.
|
>
The construction is explained in this answer: "About ... constructions" that it literally means "they rolled the dice to the degree that you (almost) feel faint".
Actually, is a very common metaphor in Japanese that depicts how overwhelming the scale/number is (imagine that you count sheep over and over, and you will soon fall unconscious). Here the referent is a number, so you can just translate it like:
> They rolled the dice for countless times.
cf.
> _a nearly-eternal time_
> _an incredibly low probability_
> _a gargantuan project_
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, translation"
}
|
どうして「〜たいくらいだ」には「くらい」が出るのですか
I'd rather you teach me English
|
1. approximately1
2. only
3. this muchto the point1
3 ****
> ****
> (Your English is **so** good **that** ) I'd rather have you teach me English.
> (Your English is good **to the point where** ) I'd rather have you teach me English.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "words, particle くらい"
}
|
Any differences between 領収書 and 受領書?
First time asking a question here. I was curious if there is any relevant distinction between these two words that mean receipt: and .
|
is letter of acceptance of **any items**. only of **money**.
I suppose most times when you issue what is named "receipt" is about money. In these cases, Japanese conventionally prefers the narrower term, .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "nuances, definitions"
}
|
Is there any clear distinction in Japanese for the words 拉致 and 誘拐?
I'm writing an essay about the North Korean abductions of Japanese citizens. In English literature I found that the concepts "abduction" and "kidnapping" are used interchangeably. I'm not familiar with Japanese language, but some languages have clear distinctions between words where other languages have not. I wondered if the Japanese translations of the words can be used interchangeably and if not, what the distinctions are. Do they have different connotations?
|
This Japanese WP entry has a very clear summary:
>
>
> , as a Japanese legal term, indicates the act of placing a person under one's effective control by way of deceit or temptation. While it is not accurate to use referring to the act of taking away by brute force or intimidation (no Japanese dictionary describes with forcible connotation), mass media is prone to use even when someone is forcibly taken away against their will (), so are people in casual parlance.
is, of course, not limited to the North Korean conduct, but I think many people today would associate it with that matter as if it were the capitalized "Abduction".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "word choice, words, nuances"
}
|
Using のうちに to construct an adverb
For the full text see here. The fourth line from the bottom of the linked text is:
> ****
> When he'd finished attaching the earring he _unconsciously_ put his mouth to the door's ear.
I don't understand . I assume it means "unconsciously". But isn't a na-adjective that means unconscious? Why can't I just use ?
I would have read literally as "while unconscious", but I'm quite certain that is the wrong interpretation.
What is going on here?
**Edit** : Thanks for the comments so far, but they are missing the point. I believe that subconsciously, unconsciously and unawaredly (if that's a word) all have similar meaning. I'm not confused about the person being able to do something while his brain is shut down. The main focus of my question is on why is used instead of just and whether this is a grammar point that applies more generally.
|
> I don't understand . I assume it means "unconsciously". But isn't a na-adjective that means unconscious? Why can't I just use ?
You're right, means "unconsciously". In your example, it can be rephrased as without changing the meaning.
As explained in this thread, the indicates (situation) in which an action or event takes place. According to :
>
> ⑩ ……[]{}
>
gives a few more examples:
>
>
>
> The meeting ended successfully.
> []{}
> He left the stage amid loud applause.
>
> He died in great mental anguish. / He died with his mental suffering unrelieved.
So.. to answer to your question "...whether this is a grammar point that applies more generally", I'd say yes. Some more examples I can think of right now...
etc...
(Some examples can be rephrased using or , as in , , , etc. I think using sounds a bit more formal/literary.)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "grammar, adverbs"
}
|
Can みたい refer to a clause in the past?
I was thinking the other day that one of the differences between and (meaning "it seems") is that the first can be bound to a sentence in the past while the second forces the verb of the sentence to be always in the stem. I think that difference allows to create sentences like "" meaning "yesterday it seemed like it had rained" (I don't know if the sentence or translation is right). Is that right?
|
Yes you can use after the past tense of a verb, but the copula after does not have to be in the past tense.
>
> (Looking at the ground) It seems like it rained yesterday.
>
>
> (Recalling the appearance of the ground I saw this morning) It seemed like it had rained yesterday.
>
>
> (Looking at the sky) It seems like it's going to rain.
>
>
> (Recalling the appearance of the sky I saw this morning) It seemed like it was going to to rain.
Note the difference of the time of your judgement ("seems" vs "seemed").
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar, tense"
}
|
「だが」は単なる「が」に言い換えることができますか
|
(noun phrase) X Y
>
>
>
"but" "but ended up" "but in reality"
**:**
> I've had a lot of worries in my life, most of **which** never happened. (pronoun)
> A really tip-top man, **with** all his wrongheadedness. (preposition)
* * *
****
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "particle が, copula"
}
|
Using というのは in [PERSON A]，もしかして，あの人は一緒に，というのは，[PERSON B]
I am trying to write an ambiguous/evasive sentence. The sentence is:
> [PERSON A][PERSON B]
To the effect of "Person A, is it possible, that you and _that person_ , that is to say, Person B-"
Am I using this correctly or is there another, more suitable word to use? I want to keep the comedic disjunction of the sentence without sacrificing the meaning.
|
Personally, I think the first part is enough if you want to create some ambiguity. So you can say :
* [PERSON A] [PERSON B]...
This sentence is enough to be evasive. Also, you can replace by if you want the sentence to have a stronger suggestion of the meaning (I feel like, in this case, is better).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 0,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, usage"
}
|
difference of 湿らす vs 潤す
and . Both of them have the same meaning? what's the difference between them?
Thanks, Or
|
* (or its intransitive counterpart ) is a matter-of-fact verb that means "to make/become (mildly) wet".
* (or its intransitive counterpart ) is "to make/become (hardly/drippingly) wet".
* (or its intransitive counterpart ) is used with a narrower range of objects that are considered "unhealthy" when dry, e.g., skin, lip, throat, meat, earth. In other words, means supplying water to something and putting it into a healthy moist status. The kanji has a clearly positive connotations (see: ). even means "to (financially) enrich", "to (psychologically) comfort", etc., too.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "word choice"
}
|
What's the difference between て言ってた vs ように言われた?
I have learned recently that can be used for advice, command, ask and so on. Is there a difference between and ? For example:
> TV
>
> TV
|
Passive or active voice and indirect or direct quote.
The first sentence translates to
> I was told by my mother to turn the TV off.
The second one to
> Mother told me: Turn the TV off.
or follows a direct quote.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar, word choice"
}
|
What does he say to his teacher?
I watched the animated version of Erased on Netflix and now there is a live action version. I noticed in both a phrase being used but I can’t work out what it is.
<
If you go to 20:30 in episode 2.
Satoru is talking to his teacher. Before he leaves he says “...” and then something that sounds like “shitake” or something.
They also say it among friends as a sort of goodbye or see you later.
But I can’t find what they’re actually saying.
Adding some subtitles...
. And that katakana has me even more confused.
|
is Hokkaido dialect for goodbye.
<
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation, words"
}
|
Understanding 絵に描いたように
> ****
> In the Dursley family, _who were the very picture of contentment_ , there was just one secret.
My translation of is purely a guess based on Jisho's definition of as "The very picture of...".
I can't understand how this phrase is used. Literally, I would translate as "Contented as though they had painted on such a picture". So I can kind of see how it works, but what is needed for?
Could you give some other examples using this phrase so I can get a better feel for how it works?
|
modifies , so it means "Such a family, the Dursley family, who were the very picture of contentment, also had just one secret."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, set phrases, idioms"
}
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.