INSTRUCTION
stringlengths 11
999
| RESPONSE
stringlengths 0
999
| SOURCE
stringlengths 16
38
| METADATA
dict |
|---|---|---|---|
さむいのはきらい vs さむいがきらい
I always thought that with construcions I like/I hate I should use noun + + adjective +, for example: But lately I have heard in some japanese podcast above sentence with that construction. What does that mean? Is it the same as or implies some other stuff?
Ps. I know that changes verb into verbal noun, such as in the sentence: . There is also that / but my question is all about used with adjective.
Thank you very much for your help!
|
is grammatical. But is not.
You understand how / is used with verbs, but it is used in the same way with i-adjectives and na-adjectives. The subject marker particle must follow a noun or noun phrase. So is ungrammatical just like is ungrammatical, and the problem is fixed in the same way, by nominalising the predicate.
As an aside, you can also change many i-adjectives into nouns by changing the final to . This would turn cold into coldness. Then you could say .
Another aside: I said that is ungrammatical, but that is assuming that is the subject particle. If were the conjuctive particle, meaning 'but', then this would be perfectly grammatical and could mean something like "It's cold but I hate it."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "word choice, usage"
}
|
Why using です in katakana?
This question might sound stupid but it got me thinking for some hours. A friend bought me this gel pen from a Japanese store in my country, and it is written in the pen:
>
instead of _kawaii desu_.
I do not understand why is in katakana. I mean, katakana is used for non-Japanese words, as far as I was taught when I was going to Japanese classes.
So I do not understand... Probably it is just because they wanted to do it that way! In that case, sorry for bothering!
 or who have a bit eccentric personality (e.g., ). In particular, using / everywhere ignoring ordinary grammar is recognized as one of the cute "character-specific sentence-endings ()"; users of this type of speak like , or . So, to be as specific as possible, I think the emphasis on in your example is for adding a bit of cute and/or exotic flavor to the otherwise uninteresting sentence.
There are a few _real_ native Japanese speakers who use katakana like this in a casual online chat and such, believing it's interesting, cute, or whatever. It's a matter of personal taste, but it may feel like someone who is trying to make themselves look young.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 12,
"question_score": 13,
"tags": "grammar, katakana, orthography, hiragana"
}
|
What does (name) でした mean?
During one of Yui's concerts I heard her say,
> Yui
<
What does it mean here?
I only know = it **was** an apple.
So it doesn't make sense for her to be saying I **was** Yui.
|
It wouldn't be odd if, in English, a singer ended a concert with 'Thank you all so much for attending. This **has been** Yui, and I'll see you again next time,' would it?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "phrases"
}
|
what does「デカいヤマをあてること」mean?
As someone with little to no knowledge on japanese, I've cracked my brain as to unfurl this passage's meaning.
Here's the full sentence:
>
roughly being "What's your dream?" or something along the lines of "Your dream:".
I come to realize that usually eliminates ambiguity, but that's as far as my knowledge reaches.
|
Here's the breakdown:
* **** : "dream"
* **** : topic marker
* **** : Japanese opening quotation mark
* **** : "big", "huge"
* **** : set phrase meaning "to make a killing", "to grab a chance", etc
* **** : "-ing", nominalizer (turns a verb into a noun)
* **** : Japanese closing quotation mark
So the sentence means "My/His/Her dream is grabbing a big chance (and become rich)." Since the sentence lacks a personal pronoun that corresponds to _my/your/etc_ , you have to determine whose dream the sentence is talking about from the context. If there is no further context at all (e.g., it's printed on a T-shirt), it should mean " _My_ dream is..."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Use of 当たる in this sentence
Character A and B (A's coach) discuss C (A's opponent), who is known for having an amazing defense. Then C joins in and positively talks with B about A's potential. Then C drops this line:
> !
My translation attempt is stuck on the following options for the first half:
* "At any rate, I don't know if I'm right (that you/A could defeat me)"; in which case "" has no translation.
* "At any rate, I don't know if you/A is on par with me"; in which case "" has no translation.
* "At any rate, I don't know if you/A can strike me anywhere"; which I would go for if the translation variation for "" and the particles didn't throw me off and if I didn't worry I might be trying to squish in a translation for every word where that is not applicable.
So, some feedback would be lovely.
|
This corresponds to the following definition from 2nd ed.:
> ###
>
> A
In English it's perhaps "will face ", "will take on ", "to be arranged to play with ", etc.
Let's not ignore , which is "where (in the tournament/league)". He said instead of because he had the list/chart/bracket of matches in his mind. Therefore:
>
> I don't know when your match with me will be, but...
> I don't know when we're supposed to fight, but...
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "translation, particles, verbs"
}
|
What is the meaning of カックン in the following sentence?
Context: before a boxing match begins, a boxer named Kamishiro says this referring to his opponent:
> **** …
What is the meaning of ? The opponent was a thug in the past and he his obsessed with precisely cut hair, but none of these details seems to be relevant. The only similar expression I could find is , but I don't think it could fit the context.
Here you can see the page before and the page with the sentence in question. Thank you for your help!
|
I think this means {}(crew cut). The thug's hair is . The speaker said as a funny way of saying .
This is .
![enter image description here](
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "meaning, katakana, manga, onomatopoeia"
}
|
Understanding of 働かせ in the sentence below
I came across the following sentence:
40005000
How is understood in this context? It looks like an imperative form of , but the imperative form over here doesn't make any sense here.
|
can be either the continuative form of or the imperative form of . Weblio
The in your example is the former. You can rephrase the sentence as 4000 **** 5000.
For more about using as a conjunction, you could refer to:
* Is there a term for using conjugating verbs such that the sentence continues with another clause?
* Masu stem to connect sentences
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, conjunctions"
}
|
Using 言う and ても to mean "even if you say"
I was trying to say something similar to "even if you tell me to not look, I will look", so my initial guess was something along those lines:
I was under the impression that X-form + would yield something like "even if you x, ..."
However searching for on weblio. So the question is, would have the meaning "even if you say X, ...", if not what would would be the idiomatic way to say it?
|
>
This looks already perfect to me, and it does mean "Even if you tell me not to look, ...". The subject of each verb can be safely inferred as long as you say this in the right context.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, meaning, usage"
}
|
How can I write things like "Does this dictionary use a different database from Jisho.org's?"
Sorry if that question is too specific. I don't know if I'm allowed to ask it.
I don't know how to say that part: use a different database from Jisho.org's?
I tried to write like this:
> jisho.org
Is there something wrong?
|
* Use instead of . It may seem to be a simple mistake, but it makes the sentence look very unnatural.
* Use instead of for the same reason why you have to say , , etc.
* It's better to say "jisho.org() **** " than "jisho.org". (The first after jisho.org is optional; for example does not mean the speaker is thinking is a dog.)
Corrected sentence:
> **** jisho.org **** ****
PS: General translation checks are basically off-topic. Next time please try to make a question and title that focuses on one specific grammar point, word usage, etc. (Because that is the rule; we can review other parts of your translation, anyway.)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
What do all the different たすける's mean?
Today I noticed during practicing kanji that lately I've been going through a lot of kanji that all mean _help / save / assist_ :
*
*
*
*
*
and I found two more that I had yet to learn (guess I don't have to anymore now)
*
*
What are the different usages of these kanji? Are all of them even used?
|
**** is the most common way to write using kanji. It means to save someone from danger, the same as expressed in the word . It's the only kanji with as a joyo reading.
**** means to lend assistance or help someone (). But this meaning can also be written as **** , thanks to the fact that is not a joyo reading for this kanji.
**** means to advise or assist someone, as in . To reiterate, it's not a joyo reading.
My dictionary doesn't have explanations for the other ways of writing it you mentioned, and my kanji dictionary lists all of these except for as non-joyo readings. Here is the dictionary entry with the information I mentioned for the 3 renderings above.
The instances in BCCWJ for each (or related forms) are
- 6708
- 21
- 42
- 35
- 6
- 2
- 0
In short, is the primary way of writing it, and you will occasionally come across other renderings, the meanings of which can mostly be guessed from their individual kanji nuances.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "usage, kanji choice"
}
|
okay to use 男／女 as opposed to 男／女の人 to refer to yourself?
A friend of mine is practicing Japanese and created the sentence intending to say "I am not a woman, I am also not a man"
I offered to improve the sentence as , still a little stiff but sounds more natural at least to my ears. Which got me wondering. I know that you should not use plain to refer to others because that is rude, which this question talks about, but what about using them to refer to yourself, is that fine? Does that sound more natural than using ?
Furthermore, if I were talking about someone else, and I said does that sound reasonably natural (albeit stiff). Furthermore does flow better, or is it just unnatural or ungrammatical?
|
is perfectly fine.
* When you refer to yourself, you don't have to add .
* Even when you refer to someone else, / tends to sound safe when used predicatively, because you are clearly focusing on one's gender in such a case. It is literary or rude when used as a simple noun (as a subject, object, etc):
> * : fine
> (/ is better if you need to speak politely)
> * : literary/rude
> * : literary/rude
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "word choice, politeness"
}
|
ここからさきにはゆかせぬ sentence breakdown
In Castlevania Rondo of Blood, Death fight starts with him saying those words. Now I'm trying to figure out exactly what that means and grammar rules used in this sentence. Here's where I'm at:
||||
here|from|proceed|I|...
Obviously the ... should be something along the lines of `won't let you` but I can't find the correct translation on jisho.org. Did I even break (and translate) the first part of the sentence correctly? Any help will be appreciated.
|
is pronounced here.
> -> ->
>
> I will not let you go any further.
Related:
* When becomes
* When is pronounced as , and when is it ?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "grammar, translation, meaning"
}
|
A verb ちがう and its indicators
I came across a task in which I had to complete different sentences by putting correct case indicators. Everything seemed to be fine until I reached a sentence which made me think a lot about what case indicator to put. So, the sentence is this:
> **(case indicator)**
At first I thought that would be a good option because I saw this sentence "". I'm not sure whether this is actually related to my situation but it seemed to be a good enough. I also was considering to be put there but since it only can be used with a negative form of predicate, this is not the option I need. Now I think that it's but am not sure.
P.S. I'm having zero problems with comparative constructions that use , , etc. so far, but the one I mentioned above makes me ask a lot of questions.
P.S.S. I also would like to know what case indicators work with this verb and their meaning.
|
I also asked for help on another language exchange forum and was told that the sentence " **(case indicator)** " has to have in it. That being said, if I need to say that "A is different from B", I use the verb {} with case indicator .
Here are some speech patterns:
1) AB- A is different from B -
2) AB- A and B are different -
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "comparative constructions"
}
|
What is the difference between "をいかがですか" and "はいかがですか"?
I saw both are in use. What's the different here?
Based on knownledge from primary textbooks, "" seems better.
|
is occasionally used, but it is much less common (only one hit on BCCWJ as compared to >500 hits of ), and some people may say it's unnatural or incorrect. I don't see any semantic difference.
Note that they are interchangeable only when it means "how about (having) " (e.g., /). You cannot use when it means "how is like" (e.g., ) or "why don't you " (e.g., ).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "word choice"
}
|
What does "なぜって‥‥‥ それは おかあさんには ないしょなの" mean?
I've been learning Japanese through phone apps and am now trying to read a Japanese children's book called . The first page is:
> ‥‥‥
I think the first two sentences mean:
> Sachan ate breakfast urgently. Mom always says "please ate slowly"' but today it cannot be helped"
I can't figure out that the last sentence. It starts with ‥‥‥ which I didn't recognize at all and apparently just means "why". Then means "that" and means "mother" but I dodn't know or . Apparently means "secrecy" or "privacy" and is an informal version of ?". Both Google Translate and Microsoft Translate give different translations of that sentence, neither has a word like secrecy or privacy in it and neither seem to make much sense in the context so I'm still not sure what that sentence means.
|
> ‥‥‥
_lit._ "(You ask me) why? ... That (=the reason) is secret from Mom."
"Why? ... I can't tell that to Mom. / I can't tell her why."
Breakdown:
* ("that") refers to ("why/reason").
* is referring to the reason for ("I can't take my time today. / I can't be eating slowly today.")
* is a noun meaning "secret".
* The in at the end is the attributive form of the copula . conjugates to when followed by .
* is a sentence-ending particle used in casual (and often childlike or feminine) speech.
* The is an adverbial particle used to repeat other's word and talk about it. From :
> **** ****
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
Uncertain event + ならissue
I'm studying conditional form now and cannot understand the following: In a "Dictionary of basic japanese grammar" there is a note that s1s2 (s=sentence) could not be used when: 1) s1 never fails to occur; 2)one can never tell whether s1 condition is true or false and 3) when the speaker already knows that s1 is true.
The question is connected to the 2nd rule. There is an example (of what is deemed wrong and ungrammatical according to 2nd rule): It is said that one could never tell whether tommorow will be rain or not. However, on Internet I have found a next example which is considered grammatical, as I've understood:
Both of them are connected to the uncertain future event, and it is impossible for the speaker to determine will the rain happen or not... Then what is the difference? Is it the use of Verb before which makes the first construction wrong?
Please help :)
|
I'm not 100% sure about this, but this is my feeling.
> x
This sentence conforms to rule 2). The speaker doesn't know if it will rain tomorrow. We can tell this because of at the end. So the sentence is ungrammatical.
>
In this sentence, perhaps the speaker has seen the weather forecast and is almost certain that it will rain tomorrow. The speaker is assuming that it **will** rain tomorrow and, if that's the case, they'll watch TV at his house. Whereas, in the first sentence there is no assumption that it **will** rain, it is just trying to say what might happen **if** it rains (ungrammatically).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "conditionals"
}
|
What is the etymology of shamisen (三味線)?
The instrument clearly has 3 () strings (), but where does exactly fit in?
|
The instrument originated in China as the []{sānxián}, and it came to Japan via Okinawa. The Okinawan instrument's soundbox is covered with a snakeskin. The older Japanese name for it was , literally "snakeskin strings". This instrument was introduced to the Osaka area from Okinawa during the era (1558-1570). Over time, the _jabi_ portion on the front shifted pronunciation to _shami_ : the "j" became unvoiced "sh", and the "b" lost its plosive-ness to become nasal "m".
The spelling for the _shami_ portion is an example of _ateji_ , with some meaning overtones of _jukujikun_ in the use of to refer to the three strings, and (as far as I can tell) pure phonetics for the .
See also the Wiktionary entry (full disclosure: I edited that), and the monlingual Japanese sources at Kotobank and Weblio.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 13,
"question_score": 12,
"tags": "kanji, etymology, ateji"
}
|
Is there a difference between 「まだ食べたり、飲んだりしています。」and 「まだ食べたり、飲んでいたりします。」?
Is this ungrammatical?
>
|
In general, you should always use , which is the correct way to apply the progressive to both verbs. Compare:
>
> She is eating and drinking.
>
>
> She (will) eat and drink.
>
> [?]
> [?] She eats and is drinking.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "て form"
}
|
しか[subject]がない meaning
I got the following sentence from Atashin'chi manga: , meaning "there's only this on the okazu" (Literally: "Without this, the okazu doesn't exist)
Can I create a similar sentence trying to use to same logic like "" meaning "there is only one question on the test" (Literally: "Without one question, the test doesn't exist)?
My teacher said I can't but he couldn't explain why.
|
How about thinking of it this way...
[subject] [quantity] / [quantity] [subject]
↓
[subject] [quantity] / [quantity] [subject]
So you can say...
> [] [] / [] []
> "There's this much okazu."
> ↓
> [] [] / [] []
> "There's only this much okazu."
In the same way...
> [] [] / [] []
> "There's one question."
> ↓
> [] [] / [] []
> "There's only one question."
So.. for "There is only one question on the test", I think you can (literally) say like...
> /
> /
Or maybe more naturally...
> /()
> /()[]{}
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
what is the meaning of いやがらずに?
So, this is the sentence I have come across:
I understand that Marusha worked without hesitating. I would like, however, to understand the grammar behind it. I have looked for the meaning of without success. Can you help me translate it?
Thank you very much.
|
is not listed in dictionaries because it's a combination of several words including an inflected verb.
* : a common godan verb, "to show hatred/discontent", "to hate"
* : "not to hate", a literary negative-form of .
* + : "without -ing", see the linked question.
So just means "without hating" (or more verbosely, "without showing any sign of discontent").
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
Can someone help me translate this sentence?
I was studying minna no nihongo 2 and this sentence appeared in the middle of a text. I don't quite understand it. Just the general idea.
> ****
This "" confused me. What does this sentence mean?
|
Maybe you're thinking of as "even if~". Here you should think of it as +. Noun+ has several meanings and in your example it means "as~" or "in the role of~". here means "also".
The basic structure of the sentence is...
> XXYY ****
> "XX came to be noticed **also as** YY." / "XX came to draw attention **as** YY **as well**."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
How to interpret 同情 in the following sentence
Context: in the manga , the boxer that will win the Level A Tournament will get the chance to challenge the Japanese champion. Some journalists are interviewing the champion about this and one asks him if he is keeping an eye on one of the participants:
> Journalist: ―――
>
> Champion: …… **** …
I know that means "to sympathize with, to feel bad for", but considering the context, I am a bit confused. Does he mean that he feels sorry for them because fighting in such a golden era will be hard for them?
What confuses me even more, is that . Does it express a contrast to what he has said before?
Here you can see the whole page. Thank you for your help!
|
I think your observation is correct. The champion is feeling bad for the because they have to defeat too many rivals before they can challenge him. And yes, is _rather_. He said it because the golden era is a good thing for many people but it's not really a good thing for the players themselves.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning, words, manga, interpretation"
}
|
Nominalized verb and connection to noun after が particle
I'm attempting to read a book and I don't understand the grammar 100% here.
>
Overall, I believe it means:
> Jack will soon be 9 years old. A lovable boy that reads and watches nature.
But, I don't understand why the second sentence does not end like:
> (No particle at all
>
> A lovable boy who reads and watches nature.
>
> OR
>
> ( particle moved to the front)
>
> A lovable boy that reads and watches nature.
How does the grammar work on the second sentence here? I know that is being nominalized and then it becomes a noun, which makes it usable by . But I do not understand how its connection with works.
|
I think you've misunderstood the sentence because of the ambiguities in the form `AB`.
For example,
>
can mean both that `(I am) a person that likes dogs` as well as `(I am) a person that dogs like` depending on the context (although I think it's most likely to be interpreted in the former way).
However,
>
can only mean `(I am) a person that likes sushi`. After all, it would be completely ridiculous that sushi could have the willpower to like a person unless this was some weird science fiction.
Your example is similar to this latter example. It would be absurd if the act of reading books/watching nature could love a person.
Therefore, the only way the second sentence can be understood is as:
> A boy that loves to read books and watch nature.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, relative clauses, nominalization"
}
|
What's the grammar behind 飲み足りる?
I've seen in subtitle of a tv show ""
I know there is form to mean "to be enough" but it should have been .
Is there any other grammar point I am missing?
|
Grammatically, it's a _compound verb_ (). `pre-masu-form + ` means "to V enough" or "to V to one's heart's content". The following compounds are used, although they may not be listed in all dictionaries.
* (5 hits on BCCWJ)
* (18 hits on BCCWJ)
* (6 hits on BCCWJ)
*
These may not be very formal, but they are not particularly slangy to me, either.
is another compound verb that should be listed in any dictionary.
* * *
By the way, `attributive-form + + ` means "to be worth V-ing" or "to be good enough to V" rather than "to V enough". means "to be worth drinking".
>
> _sake_ that is not worth drinking
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Meaning of 足に来る in sexual joke
Context: a boxer is giving "advice" to another boxer and his girlfriend. He says:
> ――
> [] ****
After this, the boxer laughs and the girl blushes. I don't know how to interpret , so I can't understand the joke. On Kenkyusha dictionary I found this example:
> one's feet show the effects of fatigue.
But in the sentence in question there's no noun+ before , so I don't know if this is the right meaning. Also, why is that stressed?
Note that the boxer that is speaking is a , a man who has never had sex except with sex workers.
Here you can see the whole page. Thank you for your help!
|
Yes that is , literally "fatigue coming to the legs". We also commonly say and without explicitly saying . Of course means something different.
If I understand the context correctly (the speaker is a heavy user), is emphasized probably because leg fatigue happens only in the case of ("having fun _together with_ a girl", i.e. intercourse), as opposed to / (i.e. acts/services in which a man doesn't have to move).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "meaning, manga, jokes"
}
|
「卒業して以来」と「卒業した以来」どちらが正しいですか？
I got the wrong answer when playing the 'JLPT Taisen' japanese game. The question is: "_____". I think the answer is "", but "" is correct.
Please teach me why?
![JLPT Taisen question](
|
~ is a set phrase. You just use it like that. It means "since + (an action described by a verbal sentence)".
~does not have any sense. It is not possible to precede with a verb in the ~ form.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "grammar, tense"
}
|
Is it common for Kanjis to have several pronunciations like for 乾?
While doing introductionary courses of Japanese, I stumble on a fact that affrights me about the difficulty of the language.
When congratulating each other around a drink: `` the Kanji `` is pronounced `` `Kan`, which I think is directly coming from Chinese for `` `GanBei` .
But when dealing with the fact of being dry: `` , then `` is pronounced `` `Kawai`.
Is it common for Kanjis to have several pronunciations ? Or is it some kind of rare exception ?
In case it is common for Kanjis to have several pronunciations, what is a common way for learners to remember those differences ?
|
Yes, it is very common. You can tell from the context: on-yomi is most often used in combinations of Kanji ; kun-yomi is most often used when Kanji is followed by Hiragana. There are exceptions ; you have to remember all the most common cases. There might sometimes also be some ambiguous cases.
Finally I'd add that for people name (given names), you often cannot know how to pronounce their name if you only see it written in Kanji, since a name Kanji can have several pronunciations parents choose from when naming the children.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "kanji, pronunciation, readings, multiple readings"
}
|
Can が be interchanged with を？
I've got a sentence which, I believe, has to be translated in Japanese using "AC" construction.
> Anna learns Japanese more (than for example English)
Can I translate it as ?
Or is it possible to write it this way:
UPD: I might've misinterpreted the sentence due to wrong emphasis, since the original sentence is in Russian.
> **Anna** learns Japanese more (than somebody else)
So, basically, it is
But what if the emphasis was on **Japanese**?
|
>
This sentence is fine.
> x
This sentence has two problems.
1. You have as the subject (marked by ) of , but it is not the **Japanese** that is doing the studying; it is Anna.
2. You have as the object (marked by ) of , but Anna is studying **Japanese**. She is not studying .
>
This sentence is fine.
You ask "But what if the emphasis was on Japanese?". I think you answered that with your first translation, didn't you?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, particle が, particle を"
}
|
Is 黙って言うこと a set phrase?
I've read today the sentence:
>
The part I understand says that even if she was screamed at or scolded by the mother, like a sheep...
Now, I can't find a translation for the rest of the sentence. I now the girl in the context listen to something but I couldn't find a translation for .
What does it mean?
|
means "acquiesce", so she acquiesced in what her mother said like a sheep.
This means (without complaining) and means (follow). It would be rephresed as "She followed what her mother said without complaining like a sheep".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation, parsing"
}
|
The grammar of Xには我慢がならん
> {}{}{} **{}**
> He couldn't bear folk who wore strange clothes.
My translation comes from the obvious context, plus the fact that Jisho says of "Cannot bear not to". But I can't understand how it works. Should I just learn () as a set phrase, or can the parts be understood separately?
My thought was that may be a contraction of (which seemed like a good idea because always pairs up with ). But then I literally have: X = patience does not become X. Which makes no sense.
Could you show me some other example using ? Do they have to use ?
|
Yes, is colloquialism for , which is a literary/older version of . Practically, you should learn () as a set phrase meaning "unbearable". We never say . This is obviously a negation marker, but there are several fixed expressions where has been almost incorporated in a single adjective.
Other examples:
* / /
* / /
*
*
*
If you want to understand the part etymologically, this means something like "to do/accomplish" rather than "to become" (cf. ). / by itself can mean "that's impossible" or "don't do it".
And also note that this is not "who wore" but "wearing". See: Use of (N5 question)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, set phrases"
}
|
What does 黒瞳 means?
I've came across this kanji when reading this fantasy light novel, **** (the furigana was also in the book), but I can't seem to find the meaning.
I've searched for it in both english and japanese but could not find it.
I know " means black" and " means pupil", So maybe I'm supposed to think that this means "black pupil"?! But google image only shows black pupils/eyes if I type .
For context, the following line contains that word in the book (where a girl's appearence is being described):
> ****
From that whole line, the only thing I can't understand is ... **Black eyes that make you presume she's super intelligent**?
|
Someone who owns a huge dictionary may find an entry for it, but perhaps a more important fact is that most Japanese speakers (including myself) do not recognize it as a standalone word. I am aware of no reason why having black pupils can suggest high intelligence. A quick google search gave nothing, either. The basic meaning ("black eyes") is self-explanatory, and I think most native speakers will read on without even wondering.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation, words"
}
|
What is the etymology of 選手 (senshu)?
means 'to choose' and means 'hand' or by extension 'ability'. I don't see how this can yield 'athlete'. Is ateji?
|
A dictionary definition of is
> {}{}{}
>
> A person chosen to appear in a sports competition
So, expresses , and expresses the person in question.
You noted that means "hand," and by extension "ability," but it's also, by even further extension, the person who possesses that ability.
You can see this in words like {} (driver) and {} (singer) as well.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 8,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "etymology"
}
|
What is the あと in 努めてあとを濁さないように
Sentence from jisho for . Can anyone help clarify what the here means?
|
This is (or ) in kanji. It has several meanings, but in this case it vaguely refers to "something left behind" or "the situation of a place after you left it". More concretely, in this sentence refers to a swamp where migrating birds have been staying. Note that this example sentence is taken from this well-known idiom.
Other examples:
> * ****
> * (idiom)
>
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "word usage"
}
|
Please help with deciphering the meaning of this sentence
>
First part is something like: **_since he/she was/is an omiai partner_** or **_since they met in omiai_** . I’m having difficulty in understanding the second.
Explanation says:
> is an idiomatic usage for one or something that suits something to a tee, that is “the very picture of~..”
I’d highly appreciate if you could help me with any simpler explanation.
|
Actually the first part just says the topic of the sentence is ``, `an omiai partner`. I don't think there's any connection with `since`.
The second part you don't really need to already know the idiom to understand it.
Let's focus on . The parts before the ~ is actually a clause by itself. means **like** or **similar to**.
For that clause, the particle tells is that is the direct object. What's the verb for it? . So we know the clause's main action is : `ideal(s) depicted`.
Next, we need to figure out what means. The here describes the target of the clause: the depiction as/into a painting. thus means `An ideal depicted as a painting`.
Then, means
> A man who was like an ideal depicted as a painting
Using more idiomatic English, you might get something similar to the explanation you were given. And if you connect it with the first part, you'll see that the man that is being described is the omiai partner.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning, nuances, expressions"
}
|
Regarding chau and cha contractions, what happens in -って and -んで cases?
When contracting - or - to - or -, what happens in the - and - cases?
For example, does become or ?
Similarly, does become or ?
I'm trying to write a conjugator, but my Japanese is limited.
|
The rule is fairly simple. Regardless of what comes before ``/``:
* `` contracts to `` or ``.
* `` contracts to `` or ``.
The character before ``/``, which is often `` or `` in godan verbs, must not be removed nor changed.
All of these conjugate like an ordinary godan verb such as and . Note that / sounds fairly rough (it almost sounds like delinquent/gang speech in fiction).
Therefore:
* → (or )
* → (or )
* → (or )
* → (or )
* → (or )
For other godan verbs:
* → (or )
* → (or )
For ichidan verbs:
* → (or )
* → (or )
* * *
This chart is helpful, too.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "conjugations, contractions, subsidiary verbs"
}
|
How do I say Every/Each "Noun"
So, the sentence I wanna build here is (talking about reading japanese books):
> Every/Each line you read, there are lots of new kanjis and words.
The only pattern I remember that is a bit similar to that is **…** , but I think that would end up changing the meaning to "The more lines you read, the more...".
So, with the research I did, the best I could come up with is:
>
google actually recommends me to use but I guess that's totally wrong.
|
> Every/Each line you read, there are lots of new kanjis and words.
I think the phrase you're looking for is ().
****
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, expressions"
}
|
When I need to say "I develop software" in Japanese which verb is the appropriate one?
I want to say "I develop software" in Japanese so I thought that I should use the verb . But I can also say "I write software" and use the verb . So which of the following sentences is the correct one/used the most?
> ==> I write software.
>
> ==> I do (develop) software.
Similarly I thought that I can use the word source code/code in order to say "I code"/"I am coding":
>
>
>
Which one of the above is the correct one?
|
As mentioned in the comment above, the more/most common way to say this is either
> * () → (lit.) I develop software
> or
> * → I "do" software development
>
(notice the different placement of ).
Also, remember that you don't necessarily need a verb to get your point across. Depending on the context, you could simply say
> * () → I'm a software developer
>
Then if your listener/audience doesn't know what all that entails, you can expound on it with specifics ("I write source code", "I create user documentation", etc.)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "translation, verbs"
}
|
Meaning of 以上 and 以下 according to water depth level
Reading a text like:
> 200m{}
The first thing that came into my mind was:
> Above a level of 200m depth
But then I realized that my understanding can be wrong and it may mean something like:
> At a depth over 200m
**Which interpretation is correct?**
It can be associated with this question but the answer may be different in this particular context.
Source for an example usage: NHK Easy News
|
As Kentaro Tomono noted in a comment, this particular context is talking about the depth of the water, so it would have to be _"more than 200m"_ , not _"less deep than 200m"_. Although the refers to "above", it's like saying in English, _"200m **or more** "_.
and are, strictly speaking, _inclusive_. If we say in Japanese, 200m, we're technically saying _"200m **or more** "_, and _including_ the 200m in the range of values we're talking about. If we say in English, _" **more than** 200m"_, we're being _exclusive_ , so that a value of 200m is _excluded_ from the range of values we're talking about.
Writers in Japanese often use and in their original inclusive senses. Possibly due to influence from English, they sometimes also use these terms in a way closer to the English "more than" or "less than" in their exclusive senses. So you really need to pay attention to context to discern the best way of translating these terms -- especially in fields like finances or medicine.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar, meaning, usage, nuances, numbers"
}
|
「を」Vてある - Typo or actual construction?
Seen in the introduction to a book entitled , so it would greatly surprise me if it's a typo. Each section in the book is broken into parts and one is entitled "", being described here:
The end of the sentence is a V construction, but uses instead of or . My understanding is that this is not correct. Is this a typo, or a usage I'm not familiar with?
|
V is used to describe a state that comes from completing _**V**_. ~V is used to indicate that _**V**_ has been completed in preparation for something. In your case, it's that the information has been provided for your edification.
The table from here helps show the two usages of V (though I think it's wrong that ~V can only be for intransitive verbs): ![](
And here are some examples, pulled from here and the previous link:
> ****
>
> A **** B
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, particles, verbs"
}
|
I have porridge for breakfast
!
I'm supposed to prepare a small speech for an oral exam I have on Monday based on the meals of the day. I'm just a bit confused as to what the correct structure would be;
1.
2.
And a side question porridge = ?
The doubt I have is that our hasn't taught us the grammar for the first phrase, so I'm not sure he'd be happy with me using that one. Cheers in advance guys!
!
|
For porridge where it is assumed that it is 'oatmeal porridge', would be fine. Porridge and are not synonymous though.
Porridge as a general, all-encompassing term is .
Rice porridge is , or more commonly .
> For breakfast, I eat oatmeal (porridge).
> For breakfast, I eat (unspecified) porridge.
> For breakfast, I eat rice porridge.
Don't be overly concerned about the above sentences using two particles.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "syntax"
}
|
は vs のほうが : when to use each one
In the Genki Workbook, it is asked to translate the sentence
"My computer is slower than yours."
I did so using the structure AB~ and wrote
However, in the answer sheet, it was written
After doing some research, I've managed to find that both these structures are correct. However, there are some questions to which I didn't found an answer to:
1) Are there contexts where one or the other structure is desirable, or mandatory?
2) In daily use, which is more natural to say?
|
This is all about how exhaustive-ga works in Japanese. Both sentences are translated as "My PC is slower than yours", but English speakers mainly use _emphasis_ to express the important nuance which is expressed by in Japanese. If you want to read it out loud like this:
> **_My_** PC is slower than yours.
Then you'll probably want to use the version with . So there must always be a certain context (e.g., someone said to you "My PC is slower than yours, right?" or "Whose PC is slower?").
On the other hand, the version using is plainly describing some fact out of nowhere.
> My PC is slower than yours.
Probably this happens less often in daily use.
Likewise, is plain "He can speak English", but is like " ** _He_** can speak English" or "It's he who can speak English".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "translation, word choice"
}
|
Past tense ...でする vs. past tense copula です confusion
Maybe this is a stupid question, because very likely it is possible for advanced learners to distuiguish this. However, in the present tense ... (particle ) and ... (copula) are distinct, while in the past tense they sound the same.
My current way to cope with this problem is to search in e.g. Google for expressions using the present tense, i.e. either or + and compairing the number of found pages.
Example phrase:
Google hits for
: 22
: 2.7 million
Clearly, copula wins over the other "possibility". This is rather awkward. Especially if there are terms that are less frequently used so Google returns either way few pages. Is there an easier way I am not seeing?
Thanks!
|
means "to do something as(because of) a memory", this is a postpositional particle that is used for "cause", "reason". For example, .
means "Something is a memory", is a copula.
can mean the both meanings. For example, (I kissed my girl friend at the our first date place as a memory), (My first kiss with my girl friend was a good memory).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "parsing, particle で, tense, copula"
}
|
How to write a sentence with several verbs associated to different objects?
I have searched the internet for help on using several verbs in one sentence when they are connected with different objects and performed by different people, but every search comes back with an explanation of the -form which is not quite the same thing. Every example of this form I have seen is used for listing verbs a single agent performed. What I have in mind, however, is something like this:
> The professor asked me to ask you to teach me about your research.
I have been trying an attempt at a translation of my own, but it is always so clumsy I'm not sure about it.
>
This is confusing to me because, since the order of the words is not important, and since the particle is used twice, it could mean that the teacher asked you to ask me to explain to you about your research.
Can you help me?
Thank you very much.
|
> The professor asked me to ask you to teach me about your research.
>
Your sentence is grammatically correct, but you're right that it's a bit clumsy.. I think it's probably because the subject changes too many times.. like, for , for , for ..
I suggest using "to have someone do~~" and (())"I was told to do~~", so that the subject of the whole sentence doesn't change (ie. the subjects of and are both ), like this:
>
> _lit._ I was told to have you explain your research by professor.
and you can omit the pronouns that are clear from the context, like this:
>
(As you may know, it'd be more polite and normal to say [name] + / etc. instead of .)
Alternatively, you can also say like this:
> [name]/
> [name]/
> [name]()/
> etc...
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "translation, verbs"
}
|
Appropriate "No, I don't have" response to "お持ちでしょうか"
I'm regularly asked at shops/supermarkets with something like:
>
My understanding is that the person is asking if I have a point card. I've also read What's the difference between and at the end of a question? that adding a basically just means that person is guessing or wondering if I have a point card.
What is the appropriate way to say "No, I don't have one"?
I understand comes from (to have).
But I'm not sure if I should say:
* (negative of )
* (progressive, "not carrying one right now")
* simply (seems off because the question is not using
* or some other?
I've tried all 3 and they seem to understand.
But maybe there's one that's most appropriate.
|
First, the ending serves a softening function and demonstrates uncertainty, making the question sound less direct, akin to 'I wonder if you might have a point card?' rather than 'Do you have a point card?'.
The clerk is asking if you currently have your point card on your person and, indirectly, if you would like to use it. As this is a continuous/progressive state of possession, you would not use or the negative equivalent . Not owning a point card (encompassing past present and future - infinitive form) you would use or . Upon hearing this though, the clerk might think that you might want one.
Possible answers include: /, /, , or simply . You can also start with , then add one of the other responses (This would be my recommendation).
Some people might use or , but that sounds like you're saying 'No thank you' (turning down an offer), which while understood to be a response in the negative still sounds wrong, as it is not actually answering what was asked.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "word choice, nuances"
}
|
What is the meanings of kanji 手 when it's part of a compound word?
The kanji (not the radical) is very common and i found hundreds of vocbularies are containing it and i thought that its using as a component in words is to refer to ( hand, ability, skill or possession) but i found some words that have this kanji but its meaning isn't from this list so i wanna know all real uses of this kanji and example for each. Thanks.
|
Meanings list : hand, arm, forepaw, foreleg, handle, hand, worker, help, trouble, care, effort, means, way, trick, move, technique, workmanship, hand, handwriting, kind, type, sort, one's hands, one's possession, ability to cope, hand (of cards), direction, move (in go, shogi, etc.)
Examples for words containing :
1- to make, to do, to produce, to work on.
2- underhand grip, backhand grip (e.g. in tennis), unexpected twist, turning the tables (on an opponent)
3- bearer, carrier, person bearing responsibility, person in charge.
**Find more about :**
1. Words starting with
2. Words ending with
3. Words containing
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "kanji"
}
|
What does ふぬぬぬぬ mean?
> ……
Is it the same as "…" onomatopoeia which uses when you're in a tight spot?
|
> ……
It's a variant of "…". These similar onomatopoeiae (or voices)............ etc. can be used for describing the state of being angry (), doing something very hard (), straining yourself ([]{}), standing hard (), or suffering / feeling pain (), as well as being in a tight spot ().
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "onomatopoeia"
}
|
Meaning of 言うではありませんか
I was reading a story on Hukumusume.
In this story, there is the following section:
I am guessing `` means something like "There was no word", meaning the subject was speechless. Is this correct?
|
in narrative is a kind of rhetorical device for a dramatic effect. It's often used in children's stories, folk tales etc. (, etc.) to present an unexpected event or express a character's surprise.
Your example could be written this way, in a regular, normal narrative...
>
>
> ****
... but writing this as ... makes this event look more surprising and unexpected. It's often preceded by phrases like "Surprisingly, ~~", "Lo and behold!" etc.
Examples:
> * **** ()
> * **** **** ()
> * **** **** ()
>
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation, literature, rhetorical questions"
}
|
Grammar explanation for '...ことができなくなります'
Is '' converted from ''? I've learned adj. '..' can convert to '..' in this case. Does verb's '' form also have such transformation?
|
> Does verb's '' form also have such transformation?
Yes. behaves just like an i-adjective. And the continuative form is just as you'd expect.
As you may already know, to say 'becomes _adjective_ ' you replace the of an i-adjective with and the of a na-adjective with , then add .
So (can do) -> (unable to do) -> (become unable to do).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, negation, i adjectives"
}
|
What is the difference between 検事 and 検察官?
I found the same translation for **** and **** : "public prosecutor". But I guess there is a reason for the two words to exist. Is one of them more formal ?
|
is "public prosecutor". is the name of a position of a public prosecutor. Their job descriptions are ,,,,sort by highest in rank to lowest.
Source: < <
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "word choice, word usage"
}
|
What does してて mean?
I was watching an Easy Japanese video on YouTube.
At 1:37, the interviewer says:
> ****
What does `` mean? Or is it a typo? `` makes sense here, but I don't understand ``. It's there in both the Japanese script and the English transliteration.
|
As you can see in here, in form + subsidiary verb can get dropped in casual speech, eg →, →, so..
> ****
is a colloquial pronunciation of..
> ****
is the te-form of , "be living", "be leading a life". It's like the progressive/continuous form, as opposed to the present/plain form (="live", "live a life").
In your example, () is used to mean "while (you're) doing~~":
>
> _lit._ "You're living a daily life, and you feel it, too?"
> → "Do you (still/also) feel it while you're living a daily life? / in your daily life?"
The is functioning as an adverb here, "normally" "usually" or "daily" (since we don't have a compound noun ). The adds a nuance of "too", "also", "still", or "even".
Some examples using () "~~ while/when doing~~":
> **()** I fell while walking.
> **()** I cut my finger while cooking.
> **()** I can do it even with my eyes closed.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
こんな、そんな、あんな、どんな + na-adjectives
How do they interact with each other? I know that depending on the part of speech these words may have/have no particle after them, but what about na-adjectives? Do these pronouns have any particle in this case?
1. + (noun)
2. + (adjective) / (verb) **** /
3. + () = **?** ()
|
Both and could be used, but the meanings would be different:
> ...
> A splendid cat like this ... (of all splendid cats, I'm talking about this one)
is modifying the noun.
> ...
> Such a splendid cat... (a cat that has this amount of splendidness)
is modifying the adjective.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, adverbs, na adjectives, demonstratives"
}
|
What is the difference between 旅する and 旅行する?
**{}** and **{}** both mean "to travel". What is the difference between these verbs ?
|
As you point out, the basic meaning of "to travel" is contained in both words, but the context in which they would be used is very different.
> **** \- to go on a journey, to sojourn
****
* As we **journeyed** through India, our hearts gradually opened up.
_(probably something you would read in a novel or story)_
> **** \- to take a vacation
****
* I'm thinking of **taking a vacation** to India with my family next year.
_(probably something you would overhear somebody say in real life)_
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "word choice"
}
|
-くて, -なくて forms of adjectives
I got confused by these forms. The book says that -(pos) and -(neg) have to be connected with stem of an adjective, e.g. : .
The positive form is pretty easy to understand and master, but the negative one is a trouble for me. Basically, I got confused by an adjective . Its positive form would be . But would the negative be ? The reasons I got confused are that IME did not recognize the negative form, and those multiple sound a bit odd to me.
Even google barely helped me with any of the i-adjectives in - form except for that was found accidentally here.
So, I wonder if I can add - to ANY of the i-adjectives and be good with it.
And the last question. Is it actually - form, or is it -?
|
The negation, -, is itself an -adjective. So you simply apply the rule to it. Welcome to piling up suffixes!
-form of : .
Negation of : . -form thereof: .
Voilà.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "て form, negation, i adjectives"
}
|
What's the exact meaning of とする in this sentence?
I'm trying to understand the construction in this line from Mob Psycho 100 Episode 12:
> ****
It's translated as "he looks like he's about to pass out"
I found a usage of on eow.alc.co.jp which matches the meaning "to zone out", but I'd like to understand how to deconstruct this form, if that's possible. (for example, my dictionary doesn't know the above construction, so I imagine it's a compound of some kind).
I thought this might be , meaning "to be about to ...", as that matches the translation, but according to jisho, that form must follow the volitional form of a verb, whereas here, it follows a -adverb (or -adjective, depending how you look at it).
I've also found in the wild which seems like a similar construct, but here is just a regular noun (and that word actually appears in the dictionary too).
Does anyone know if there is some rule that could explain this construct?
|
Did you see definition #8 in the Jisho link you posted to ? I think that should clear things up for you:
> to feel (e.g. after sound symbolism or psychological experience word); to look; to feel like
is clearly a psychological experience meaning hazy/"out of it", so can be translated as "to feel/act hazy".
The "about to pass out" part they provided is a freedom of translation. The actual Japanese sentence doesn't explicitly say anything about passing out.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "word choice, words"
}
|
か after short forms
In the Genki textbook, it is said that "In the casual conversational use of short forms, question sentences do not end with the question particle , but with rising intonation alone."
Nonetheless, in the manga I'm reading, it's written (meaning "I should get going" right?).
My thoughts here is that Genki didn't explain the whole context, as I've also heard this same expression in animes. Could someone clear it up?
|
The statement is an oversimplification. The ending tends to be dropped most of the time, because it makes it sound crude ... not necessarily rude, maybe possibly. And since fiction has a larger tolerance for more expressive speech, you'll encounter it more often.
Also when talking to oneself politeness isn't really required, so that's more permissive.
Ending also has a special usage in that it can mean a strong rejection (! ~ As if/no way I'm gonna do it!)
And embedded questions contain a following a plain form, since politeness is expressed by the main verb ... stating just for completeness
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "particles, syntax, colloquial language, manga"
}
|
What is the difference between はみ出す and はみ出る?
They are both intransitive:
> **** Your shirt is coming out of your pants.
>
> **** Your foot is over the line.
|
Those two verbs are almost the same. I checked the first 100 examples of "" on BCCWJ, and and were interchangeable **except** :
* is less commonly used in the form of bare masu-stem, (either as a noun or a replacement of te-form to continue a sentence). Although one-character masu-stems (, , ) are less common before a comma in general.
> : OK
> : Less common
>
> : OK
> : Less common
* also has a meaning of "misfit", "outlaw", etc (, , ...). In this sense, is not wrong but less common for some reason.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 5,
"tags": "word choice, nuances, transitivity"
}
|
What does ドジしたな mean?
In a manga, there was this conversation,
>
and I would like to know what the last part means, specifically .
Summarising, this is what I would like to have answered:
1. I think means something like clumsy. Then, is something like "did in a clumsy manner"?
2. Why is written in ?
|
1. () is basically closer to "to make a mistake" rather than "to do something in a clumsy way". It tends to refer to funny and/or affordable mistakes typically made by a dojikko character. There is another godan verb , which may be a little more common (, , ...) and has almost the same meaning. (You cannot directly modify with , though)
2. I think this answers your question, although there is not even a known kanji version in this case. Few people know or care about the etymology of .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, katakana"
}
|
鶴の一声 -- Origin and context?
So, I understand what the idiom actually means, roughly -- "the final word," "the word from on high." But where does it come from? Is there a story or a history that gives it context?
|
It is part of a longer saying , which means that rather having than the 1000 voices of commoners (represented by ) having a single voice from on high (represented by ) is preferable.
The reason for using is apparently because they have a long neck and their cry is extremely high pitched cry, which overpowers the sounds in the surroundings.
* * *
**References:**
*
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 6,
"tags": "etymology, idioms"
}
|
Why can には here ONLY mean にとっては?
_________________
So I answered the first blank with and the second one with .
My Japanese teacher, who is a native, told me that it should be because this functions as .
She then proceeded to say that the subject of potential verbs would normally be (if I heard it correctly).
But I have seen countless sentences like and , which both mean the same as and respectively (I think). So why is a big no no in this context? I feel like the second part of the sentence is saying .
I don't think my Japanese is good enough to ask her questions and understand her reply yet.
|
> * ****
> * ****
>
First, the particle after the first should usually be (although is not entirely incorrect), because ///etc does not introduce a _subordinate_ clause, and after is a contrast marker. The topic is () throughout this sentence.
In my opinion, both sentences make perfect sense, but the latter looks a little more concise and natural. This is because there is a clear contrast between **** and **** , and thus it's natural to assume these and are serving the same function. This way, we have a clean and straightforward contrast, " _To Japanese people_ , kanji may be easy, but _to us foreigners_ , writing kanji is very difficult."
and are completely interchangeable in this sentence:
> * ()()
>
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, potential form"
}
|
The difference between 'no naka' and 'no naka ni'
I understand that 'no naka' means 'in' or 'inside', but how does the meaning change when 'ni' is placed after it? For example:
Hako no naka - inside the box.
Hako no naka _ni_ \- ???
|
{}{} (hako no naka) simply means "the box's inside". It says nothing about the relationship between the inside of the box and another entity, e.g.
> {} (hako no naka wa hiroi.)
> The inside of the box is spacious.
(hako no naka ni) means " **in** the box's inside". It describes how another entity relates to the inside of the box, e.g.
> **** {}{}(hako no naka ni wa ookina zou ga iru)
> There's a large elephant inside the box.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "grammar, particles, particle に, relational nouns"
}
|
"Robust Software" in Japanese
I'm struggling with how to say "robust software" in Japanese.
From Wikipedia <
> In computer science, robustness is the ability of a computer system to cope with errors during execution[1][2] and cope with erroneous input.
There is no Japanese version of this page. I have searched weblio and Google and found examples of and being used, albeit not very many. There is also this document from The University of Tokyo on robust software. <
|
If you're looking for commonly used technical terms among Japanese software engineers go to Qiita.
Let me quote two version of _robustness_ :
> {}{}{}{}
Slightly more complicated:
> {}{}{}{}{}
From this article about antifragile. Also related is Chaos Engineering, where I found the _antifragile_ article.
Usually this term is being used among DevOps or people who manage a group of distributed and resilient services using `Containerized OS` or `Kubernetes`. From the technical discussion among people in this circle, you'll find what robustness means, and you can translate it in a better way.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation, nuances"
}
|
What's the difference between 運用 and 操作?
As i am learning Japanese,there are many words which have same meaning but still different usage,links to understand these differences would be appreciated.thanks!
|
Both are translated to "operation" but have completely different meanings.
* : "operation" as opposed to "development/test (phase)". It means actually running your system in production (and monitoring its status, replacing broken parts, etc). is similar.
>
> The system is currently in operation.
* : "operation" as a stiffer equivalent of "use". Mainly used with gadgets such as (keyboard) and (smartphone). is similar.
>
> to learn how to operate the system
Try to find a decent dictionary (preferably a monolingual one)!
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "words"
}
|
Is it acceptable to use あなた when referring to a superior indirectly?
I know that generally shouldn't be used when referring to superiors. However, I find it difficult to rephrase the following sentences which refer to a superior using in an indirect manner:
>
> He said you are a Japanese teacher.
>
>
> It is said you are a Japanese teacher.
Are there alternative ways to phrase such sentences which are more natural or is using here acceptable?
|
That's exactly what () is for... ^^
> ****
>
> ****
>
> **** **** or ****
>
> **** XX **** or ****
^^
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 14,
"question_score": 10,
"tags": "pronouns, second person pronouns"
}
|
「元気をなくすとは」meaning?
Does anyone have insight into what means? I am aware that is "energy" and is "to lose". So "to lose energy" makes sense? However I am not altogether sure what means in this instance. A Japanese friend asked me for an English equivalent and I wasn't sure if this was colloquial somehow?
Thank you in advance!
|
“” means “lose energy”, “lose their health” or “being down”. You can use on physical matter and mental matter both.
Regarding meaning of “”:
It’s hard to say without seeing whole sentence but if that word is using like below it have implication that "you shouldn't". I think there are no words in english to replace it completely. I tried to find good example..
>
> Don’t be so down just because she dumped you. How pathetic you are.
In this case, its meaning is similar to "".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
Meaning of フレンチでは in 知る人ぞ知るシェフ
This is from a review for a restaurant:<
>
Does it mean: "A chef known by a selected group of French (people)"? I guess is marking the agent ''. This seems to be the case with other example sentences I found like:
> There is no way of knowing by a simple mortal
which apparently is the same as saying:
>
Here is marking as the agent/subject same as .
Is this right so far? Is refering to people?
|
This is French cuisine, not French people nor France.
This is basically specifying the focus/scope of the sentence, so "in the field of French cuisine", "concerning French cuisine" or "when it comes to French cuisine" would be the literal translation of this . Compare it with these similar examples:
> * ****
> * ****
>
Of course, usually, something like "among French cuisine fans" is a reasonable option.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "meaning, particle で"
}
|
Confusion on use of だった with sentence that uses nominalized verb
I'm reading a book and have come across this sentence
>
I know this sentence translates to something like
> Annie was pointing to a long rope ladder.
But what I truly don't understand is what does the at the end modify? Is it modifying (Annie pointing) like I believe?
Or is it really modifying (rope ladder)? And the translated sentence is more like
> Annie pointed to what was a long rope ladder
|
This is a rather simple example of a cleft sentence.
>
> Annie was pointing to a long rope ladder.
>
>
> It was a long rope ladder that Annie was pointing to.
Grammatically speaking, is modifying nothing.
Note: This ``/`it` is referring to a tangible object, so in this case, it is possible to translate the sentence using the simple grammar of relative clause: "The thing (=) Annie was pointing to was a long rope ladder." But cleft sentence is a grammaticalized concept that has a wider range of usages.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, copula, past, cleft sentences"
}
|
は vs.では in こんなうるさいところでは勉強ができません
> ****
How is the meaning of the sentence above different from the meaning of the one below?
> ****
|
in a negative sentence can indicate the scope of negation. Compare:
> ****
> ****
Both can be used almost interchangeably in most situations, but the former can imply "I can't study in such a noisy place (but I could study in other places)." while the latter "I can't study in such a noisy place (but I could do other things here)." (i.e. in the former, part is negated, and in the latter, () is negated.)
( **** doesn't sound natural)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "particle は, negation, scope"
}
|
How to say "to work for"
I would like to say `"I work for" company X`.
I have found two ways of saying that:
* `` -> _company-name_
* `` -> _company-name_
But I can't find which one is correct or where to correctly use those expressions.
Can someone please help me out and explain the difference between the two?
Many thanks.
|
If you would like to just say “work for (company name)”, you can say:
1. (company name)
2. (company name)
Both are natural. I think 2 is little bit more formal but 1 is also not so casual word.
On the other hand, “(company name)” sounds incorrect if you simply work for a regular company/public organization. Because “” means “work for noble people/god” so you can only use this word in limited situations like those below:
(she must be a sister and works at a church (in the case of Christian))
(you may can imagine how rarely people work for queens)
In the old age in Japan, about 400 years ago, Samurai worked for their domain/shogunate and that was called “/”. It has shown that were absolute being at that time. Unfortunately we contemporary persons cannot normally use “”.
If you said “(company name)”, I would laugh and say “Hey, are you a knight or something of the company?”.
Hope this helps you.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 9,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "translation, nuances, verbs"
}
|
What word class is 恥ずべき?
is listed as an adjective in EDICT, as a 'compound word' () in kotobank (here), and as a "noun or verb acting pre-nominally" on the Midori app. My question relates to a sample sentence I saw on EDICT (link).
> > You should be ashamed of your folly.
All the other examples I found are `+Noun` (, , , etc), making them noun phrases. But in the above example is followed by the copula . Also, the inclusion of the particle would seem to make it a verbal use of since there is no other verb present.
So is that example sentence correct? If so, how is functioning grammatically with and the copula ?
|
is a combination of the verb **** and the auxiliary verb ****.
<
Both of these words follow somewhat archaic grammar patterns, so they don't behave like most modern verbs.
* functions with because it is a verb taking a direct object
* functions with the copula because is the form of the auxiliary verb that attaches to the copula
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, nominalization"
}
|
忙しいところ vs 忙しいなか
I've been preparing for an interview, and I've seen both of these phrases used when introducing yourself and thanking someone for their time or when support is being given. For example:
> ****
>
> ****
Is there a nuanced difference between using and in this kind of situation, or are they generally interchangeable? As well, what is the direct translation of ?
|
Those two are interchangeable. We don't feel any difference if they follow . People say differently just by habit. If you need some source => < (Note we don't have official recieved one, some manner instructor have slightly different policy. Also it depends on region, industry, company who belongs to)
> what is the direct translation of ?
if you want direct translation and make them different, it's close to
() = Of/In busy time(days).
() = Of/In your busy situation.
So whole sentences become (might be weird in English)
>
Thank you for taking time in your busy schedule.
>
Although you are in busy situation, let us ask your favor for this.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, nuances, politeness"
}
|
When should I use どんどん and when should I use 速く?
Both are adverbs meaning "quickly", but what is the difference of use between them ?
|
implies that you progress step by step.
does not include this nuance.
From <
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "word choice"
}
|
Where can I learn the proper way to answer professional emails?
I haven't found any good blogs or books explaining properly the way to start an email or to answer one.
For example, I received an email asking me about my availabilities for an interview:
>
> Company nameContact name
> ----
> 1/1023
>
>
How should I answer? I'd like to say any day any time is fine from 1/10 with a preference as soon as possible (next 2-3 days).
I'd also like to stay natural without using very complicated sentences someone with my Japanese level wouldn't say.
> company name
> contact name
>
>
> my name(Do I need to tell who I am since they contacted me first?)
>
>
> 1/10
>
>
>
If you have some references where I could learn that, please let me know.
|
Here's one link. If you type in into a search engine you should have a plethora of resources.
Some pointers:
1\. You don't need after the contact name (unless you're mirroring how they addressed you).
2\. You should always include your name prominently, so as to not necessitate their having to search for it and to alleviate any potential for confusion.
3\. I would suggest that instead of 1/10…, that you specified from and to dates (.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "keigo, email"
}
|
What are the origins of the words ぐう、ちょき、ぱあ in the context of じゃんけん？
Self explanatory. I've read that they stand for rock, paper and scissors, but I can't find any ultimate origin of why these terms are what they are. Thanks!
|
They are derived from the onomatopoeia used to describe the motions the hand makes when playing.
* comes from , the way you clench your fist
* comes from (or ), the sound scissors make when cutting
* comes from , the way you spread your hand
According to Japanese Wikipedia:
> *
> *
> *
>
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 10,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "words, etymology"
}
|
Can ずつ be used along with 間?
Original sentence is this:
> Everyone at a meeting talked for 5 minutes at a time
And I got confused because I want to put there but I'm not sure if it works well with and vice versa. Also, I'm not sure if actually has to be there. I know that means period of time, so I presume that it has a place to be there but then again I'm not sure.
> 5 ****
>
> 5
Is the 1st option ok, or can it work both ways?
|
Both are grammatically correct.
I think ... is way more common that ... though.
This idea is supported by a search on this corpus: < where returns many more results than.
I also feel like **** might be more appropriate with 5 **** because implies "over a period of time" in this context.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, time"
}
|
Why are phone calls cylindrical?
> **** ...
> He made several important phone calls and ...
Originally part of this question but separated due to _popular?_ demand.
Why is the counter used in reference to phone calls?
|
To be fair, is a really popular explanation (note that is does not imply anything about being round, I think that it is an usual extrapolation due to the fact that physical objects that are long and thin are _usually_ cylindrical).
But many usages actually go against this explanation, or a least do not fall into that classification. Consider the following examples:
*
*
*
As you can see, you really need to stretch your mind **really** far to find the thin, long thing here. At least I cannot find them...
I've made some quick research on the topic and there appears to be academical research on that topic (!). Like this one, where they distinguish 6 clusters of words to which applies to.
(for the case of the phone, the "message" coming from letter thing seems plausible though.)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 6,
"question_score": 12,
"tags": "etymology, history, counters"
}
|
What does the letter 'P' at the end of an author's pseudonym mean?
There are many authors on YouTube and NicoNico whose names end with the letter 'P', for example: P, P, etc. What does this 'P' stand for? Why do they all use it?
|
That P (simply read ) stands for (" **P** roducer"). Traditionally, P has been used like a name suffix for a super-high executive in the showbiz/broadcasting/anime industry (someone even higher than a "D", or /director). However, after the success of the _Idolm@aster_ franchise, where a "producer" has a role closer to that of an agent or a manager, this "P" suddenly became a very common suffix for amateur creators on YouTube and Nicovideo. You can read more about this on this Nicopedia article (in Japanese).
> ###
>
>
>
> ###
>
> PPproducerP
>
> P(PV)
>
> VOCALOIDUTAUMikuMikuDanceVOCALOID()P P20079 POSTER projectikakz ryo
>
>
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 10,
"question_score": 10,
"tags": "colloquial language, names, internet slang"
}
|
Is there any difference between 速さand 速度?
From what I understood, both **{}** and **{}** means "speed". Some say that they are synonyms (just like _speed_ and _velocity_ in English), but I guess there is a nuance between them, isn't it ?
**{}** comes from the adjective **{}** , like other adjectives ( **{}** : **{}** , **{}** : **{}**...), while **{}** is the combination of two kanjis : **{}** (speed), **{}**(degree).
Can I guess anything based on the words etymology, or is the nuance between them is more subtle ?
|
I would say there is no difference, at least in everyday language. Maybe has a slightly more casual feel to it... at least I see more myself using than in a daily conversation.
Now, is **velocity** and **speed**. That means that in the field of physics, they _are_ indeed different, namely:
* velocity is a vector, including not only a value but a direction
* speed is a scalar quantity (the magnitude of the velocity)
edit: just confirmed on wikipedia
> [...] : speedvelocity
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 10,
"question_score": 4,
"tags": "word choice, words, etymology, word usage, wago and kango"
}
|
Is やなこった just 嫌な子, or does it mean something as a whole?
Another phrase from that is puzzling me is . Apparently it means something as there is a quite lot of results on the interwebz. They are not much of a help though.
I saw it in a comic, where a character explains that he wants to fight alone without a girl that has been only a nuisance. So I though that it would be something like . The common usage together with the confuses me though.
Is it possible that this mean something en bloc? If that’s not the case, what is the meaning of that ? I guess it can be something like: „I have already said that the girl is only a nuisance“ But I am not sure.
![](
|
is a slang term that means "no way" (as in "no way Jose"). As pointed out in a comment, this is etymologically a contracted/emphasized pronunciation of .
In my opinion, this word form is no longer "alive" in my generation unless in a jestful manner. It's a typical older Tokyo inner city dialect () that is, today, mostly used by some fictional characters (like , who generally carries the trait). Or you can see it living in especially early volumes of Doraemon etc.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation, meaning, expressions, manga"
}
|
What does 話 mean here?
> 10
>
>
>
>
It's from the game Final Fantasy X, the scene before Operation Mi'ihen. It's the operation to destroy the creature "Sin", the world evil. Kinoc () is in charge of the operation. Both Aaron () and Kinoc know that operation is doomed.
I can't understand that means in this context.
Does Aaron refer to this question - "10 ", then would mean "talk" or he refers to this part - "" and then would mean "state of affairs"?
My translation:
> Kinoc: Tell me, Aaron. What have you been doing these ten years?
>
> Aaron: The operation begins. **I quess you're pleased with it's going like that.**
OR
> **I wonder if such a talk would be appropriate.**
>
> Kinoc: It's a failure plan anyway. We'll let them dream just a little longer.
|
refers to the topic of 10.
The is more like , topic.
() here means "Forget about..." "Never mind..."
can mean "not important" "doesn't matter" () or "unnecessary" "enough" ().
eg **** "Let's not discuss it anymore."
**** "Forget about washing-up."
> Kinoc: Tell me, Aaron. What have you been doing these ten years?
>
> Aaron: The(=Our) operation begins (now / soon). Forget about it (=the topic of what I've been doing)
> (Implying it's not the right time to talk about it. And using makes it sound like he doesn't really want to talk about it)
>
> Kinoc: It's a failure plan anyway. We'll let them dream just a little longer.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
まだほかにもある what is the subject in this sentence?
I understand this sentence means "there should be other things." But I just can't wrap my head into its structure. If I parse the sentence like:
1. , I can't explain the here.
2. , then the sentence is missing the subject because (in addition) is adverb.
Please show me how to parse the structure of this sentence. Thank you!
|
doesn't contain a subject in it; is an adverb, and is an adverbial phrase.
consists of noun + case particle + adverbial/binding particle .
is a noun, and is an adverbial phrase, "in addition" or "other than that". is another particle adding the meaning "also" or "still". For the noun to be a subject, you need to say //, not //.
eg
> ← is the subject.
> "There still is work, other than that." → "We have more work to do."
>
> -- ← The subject is not mentioned.
> "Is that all?" -- "No. There still is, other than that." → "We still have more [something unmentioned]."
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "particle に"
}
|
Difference between も and だって
Both of those particles can mean "too", "even" or "any" (when used with wh-question). Do they have any difference in meaning or connotation when used like this? E.g. `` vs ``.
|
and are different.
is an informal version of and is used in the same way, i.e. Noun+ = even (the noun). merely expresses 'too' or 'also' when combined with a noun. So the difference is as follows:
> > I also want to go to France.
>>
>> Even I (would) want to go to France.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 7,
"tags": "particles, particle も"
}
|
Are there differences in meaning or formality in the various readings of 家中?
In this example sentence,
[]{}[]{}{}
I searched all over the house for the missing watch.
Jim Breen's WWWJDIC (and Jisho, and tangorin.com) list ; (); whole family; all (members of) the family; all over the house
The suggestion here seems to suggest that it is read
Do these various readings have different meanings or registers?
|
{/} has two meanings. One is "an entire house", the other is "all people living in a house".
{} has three meanings. One is "the inside of a house", another is "all people living in the house", and the other is "generic name of vassals of a feudal lord in Edo period".
However {} is rarely used in present days as the meanings of "the inside of a house", "all people living in the house"
Source: <
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "readings"
}
|
What does どうかじゃない mean?
I get that alone means something along the lines of "please", but what happens when you add as a suffix? I've seen this being used before but I can't quite place my finger on what it might mean.
The full sentence would be .
|
= 'Even so, it's not about whether you can/are able to do it or not.'
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "translation"
}
|
Is 訴え連日通い a single word? If not, why no particles in between?
I'm reading **`. . `** , where I found the following clause in one of its lines:
> ****
I roughly translated it to **"Kazuo who strictly complains about his bad health on a daily basis."**
What I don't understand is ****
> **1:** I feel like there are 3 words here and not just 1: , if that's the case, why there is no particles in between them?
>
> **2:** If I understand correctly, ** is modifying ** , but if that is the case, what is the function of **** here? Is it working like an adverb and modifying ****?
|
You can parse it as...
>
does two actions: "complains about health problem / says he doesn't feel well" and "visits (somewhere) on consecutive days / every day".
here is the continuative form () of the verb . can connect verb phrases or clauses, like the form.
The phrase can be rephrased as **** , using the form.
is a noun, and can function adverbially, like , , etc.
eg **** ****
, "pay frequent visits", is a compound verb consisting of (visit) + (do ~~ continuously, frequently, completely, thoroughly, etc.)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 3,
"tags": "translation, words, adverbs"
}
|
What is the difference between なさいます and いたします?
> 1. ****
> 2. ****
>
I can't understand how one might be used instead of the other.
|
, whose polite form is , is 'honorific language', whereas , whose polite form is , is 'humble language'.
You would use to show respect for somebody performing an action, whereas humbles your own actions in respectful environments. Both are ultimately about respect, of course.
= 'What are you going to do about the drinks?'
= 'What shall I do about the drinks?'
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "grammar, translation, politeness"
}
|
What is grammar of strange form of やめる verb like "やめたくなったら"?
I found the word . I think it's a conditional past form of . Or maybe it's conjugated with (conditional form of ). But the in the middle distracts me: I can't find this form in a dictionary. Can you help me to find some grammar for that? And all I can guess for translation is only like "if want to stop".
|
is not the -form, it is based on ('I want to stop'). requires a construction either with (for nouns and -adjectives) or - (the adverb based on -adjectives).
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "verbs, conjugations"
}
|
About the affix ごっこ
I've been wondering about the affix when it's a prefix and when it is a suffix. There's the word , for example, that means "children's game" or "game of make-believe"; but there's also a song named that would mean, according some translations, something like "make-believe farewell" or "pretending to say goodbye". But the question is: I think that translating as "pretending to say goodbye" is purely interpretative because of the context of the song; I say that because it's written in Jisho that can also mean "something done together". I, however, have not found even one example that has this meaning. Can someone tell me some expressions in that has the meaning of "something done together"? If there's any rule about the meaning that plays in a phrase, please tell me too.
|
I think you can forget that definition "something done together". That's simply an over- (or false-) generalization. And is basically a suffix. is a word that collectively refers to many `` words. (Maybe this could be compared to how the English suffix "-ism" came to mean "doctrine" or "theory" by itself.)
is a made-up word. Without seeing the actual context, my impression of this word is someone who is _jokingly_ keeping distance from someone to see what will happen, knowing they will get together again soon. It's nowhere near "two people saying goodbye to each other".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "syntax"
}
|
Meaning of「残るは」in a sentence
Came across this sentence in a memoir and I have a grammar question about it. For context, a person is thinking about someone sleeping nearby:
>
Regarding , is this a set phrase or expression? It's not a nominalized verb, as far as I can tell, as those typically possess the particle , or . And I've seen it pop up in other things I've read. I understand the general meaning as:
> The guy who spoke up earlier won't be asleep for some time. That leaves the guy next to him, who I'm not sure is asleep.
Yet why is left with , as opposed to or ? Is it functioning in a similar way to after a verb, whereby it doesn't need to be nominalized with or ? Given the very modern context of the memoir I'm not convinced it's a case of classical Japanese slipping in, but it _might_ be a fixed expression used more generally in certain situations? It's hard to say.
|
For me this sounds like a shortened version of "" Usually the noun form of "" would be "" or "" etc, so this would be a rather rare(old-fasioned) and literal expression. According to the "related post" below, this nominalization occurs in limited cases (most often in a proverb).
Similar expression might be "", here "" is a noun meaning "to run away", which is normally expressed as "" or "". There is also a saying "", meaning, asking is a shame for the moment, and not asking is a shame for lifetime. (Although it is different, in a sense, "" here means the one remaining and "" means the action of asking. )
I don't have an answer for whether this expression is similar to "", sorry about that.
related post in Japanese: <
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 8,
"tags": "particles, verbs, nominalization"
}
|
Omission of the particle は
>
In the sentence above there is no after .
Can we say ``
If we can, does the omission of mean lack of formality?
I have come across another sentence similar to the one above:
> ****
|
In that case, there are two cases. One is omission of the particle , the other is just a call. You can judge it by the context. would be the former case, but is the latter case.
The omission of in the former case is colloquial.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "particle は"
}
|
Verb form before そうです
> ****
I'd say ``. Why is the form used here?
If he has already got divorced, perhaps, it's better to say ``. Does this make sense?
|
Because he has not divorced his wife yet. means "I hear (It is said) that someone will do something". means "I hear (It is said) that someone did something".
Of course, makes sense.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, verbs"
}
|
What does ことがないように express?
I've come across this sentence quite a few months ago, but I never understood the meaning of " **** ", I've searched and found about **** , but I think it has not the same meaning.
This is the sentence:
> ****
The translation I found is:
> "Please, do not do anything that can dishonor the name of Matsuno family"
|
> ****
> ****
Both are correct and mean the same thing. ( **** sounds a tiny bit more formal to me..)
is the continuative form of the auxiliary . comes from the noun []{} + the copula . Since the is originally a noun, it can act like a noun and can be a head noun of a relative clause.
> **/** ()
> _lit._ (in) the way/manner [that you don't dishonor the name of the Matsuno family]
> → so as not to dishonor the name of the Matsuno family
You could see as a relative clause that modifies the noun .
It has the same structure as:
> **/**
> the Japanese language [that Japanese people don't know]
For more on the - conversion, see: How does the work in ?
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, meaning, usage, expressions"
}
|
How to use 彼 and 彼女?
The first time I saw these two terms, they were used in a love context, to mean "boyfriend/girlfriend". Later, I came to know that you can also use these to refer to "that guy/girl".
So, what I wanted to know is:
1) Nowadays, what are these commonly used for?
2) Does the meaning depend enterily on context? If so, isn't there a chance to be misunderstood?
3) Does Japanese have a specific term to convey just one of these meanings? For instance, something just for girlfriend?
|
**(1)** The words are still used commonly as you describe, i.e. = he/him/boyfriend and = she/her/girlfriend
**(2)** Semantic context is definitely the easiest way to differentiate. Yes, there might be times when the words could be ambiguous or be construed in unintended ways, but that is probably true of some words in most languages. In any case, the speaker will usually make it clear from the context which meaning is intended.
**(3)** is a term specifically meaning "boyfriend" and is a term specifically meaning "girlfriend".
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 5,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "meaning, word choice, pronouns, ambiguity"
}
|
Contraction of ~ている
I've seen some examples of ~ contractions, like
> {}
1) Is this a common occurrence?
2) How does this affect the formality of the sentence?
3) Is there a "rule" for the verb? Meaning, does the verb also contracts in other conjugations?
|
It is very common in both speech and writing. Its use certainly lowers the level of formality, although it's common enough that you might even use it in situations that would normally be considered more formal, like with colleagues at work.
I don't think this falls under a broader set of rules; it's just a written representation of something that often happens in speech simply because it's easier to say. It is related to the similar phenomenon of , like instead of .
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, て form"
}
|
What does こと mean in this context? こと脚に関しては他のサーヴァントより優位におるぞ
> ****
<
So, sorry for repeating the title, but the question is simple, what does mean in this context?
|
~~ in expressions **** **** **** etc. means "things", , .~~
~~ mean "When it comes to~".
cf. = "now that things have come to this"~~
* * *
**EDIT:**
On second thought, it's more reasonable to think of it as []{}, "especially", "among other things", ≂[]{} .
......... are expressions to say "Regarding ~~, among other things, ..." "Especially when it comes to~~, ..."
This usage of is quite literary (and maybe a little archaic?). I don't think I've seen this used in other expressions.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 10,
"question_score": 9,
"tags": "grammar, meaning"
}
|
Confused on verb conjuation U-verbs ru-verbs or godan ones?
I am doing japaneese N5 lessons for second time and I get REALLY confused. As far as I know there are 3 categories of verbs:
* Irregular verbs
* Ichidan verbs
* Godan verbs
But the sensei tells us that there are the following categories:
* Irregular ones
* U-verbs
* RU-verbs
And I got pretty much confused on this issue: which is the appropriate one classification, are U-verbs just godan ones or not?
|
The terminology generally used to teach Japanese grammar to foreign language students is different from the terminology used to teach Japanese grammar to students in Japanese public school.
While the concept of "U-verbs", "RU-verbs", etc. are commonly taught to foreign language students, Japanese public school students only learn Godan, Ichidan, etc.
Broadly speaking:
* **U-verbs** are Godan Verbs{}
* **RU-verbs** are Ichidan Verbs{}{}
* **Irregular Verbs** are like "suru"{}"kuru"etc.
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 3,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "verbs, terminology"
}
|
おつかれさまでした vs おつかれさまです
I learned (otsukaresama deshita) as a form of good bye, used in the office. But I often hear my Japanese colleagues say (otsukaresama desu) instead, or at least that's what I think I heard. Is the just silent, somehow? Or if both are valid, what's the difference between the two forms?
|
Both are valid expressions and the difference is very subtle.
can be used for both "Hello" and "Good bye" (to tell someone leaving from workplace), and can be used for "Good bye" (to tell someone leaving from workplace).
Notes: -It is very frequent that you start Japanese business email to colleague with "". Presumably working in Japan is always tiring... -When you use it for meaning "Good bye", there are no perceptive difference in them for native speakers. Grammatically the person has done something tiring, so "" might be more correct, but we don't care indeed.. (Well the difference might be more controversial and you need to consult linguist for rigorous understanding)
Related posts: Difference vs while leaving from office?
<
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 2,
"question_score": 0,
"tags": "meaning"
}
|
Negative adjectives + です vs adjective + ではありません
For example, to translate :
> This dog is not cute.
We can use :
> {}{}
or :
> {}{}
Is there a difference between those two sentences? Are there conditions to use the former instead of the latter, or vice versa?
|
The first sentence is correct and the second one is not correct. That is because, is so-called (i-adjective). The second type of conjugation is correct for (na-adjective), but not for .
×
Instead, is (na-adjective), so the second type of conjugation fits in.
×
You may notice, you can replace na-adjectives with nouns and still the same conjugation holds.
×
Roughly speaking, older words are classified into (the first expression) and therefore it conjugates more naturally as adjectives, and newer words (the second expression) are sort of more clumsy, so it nearly conjugates as just nouns. (although there are exceptions as in most grammatical rules)
related posts: vs Why does Japanese have two kinds of adjectives? (-i adjectives and -na adjectives)^
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "adjectives, negation"
}
|
Difference between の間で and 間で?
These two sentences seem to use the same pattern, yet differently:
> ****
>
> ****
I found that could mean ''among'' in this case, but what is the difference between the first usage of and the second? I also presume that in the first sentence, is read '', isn't it?
Would and work as well?
|
Well to me the meaning of the two expressions would be quite the same, but I think some words don’t fit well in the expression “(kan)”.
* I suspect will generally fit well with “(aida)” :(Hitobito kan) :
* I suspect “(kan)” is used rather for a fixed expression Ex.
My advice is:
If you are not sure which to use, use “aida”, then you will be on the safe side. I can’t come up with an example you can’t use this expression when you can use “(kan)”. (Maybe it is partly because, “kan” has a lot of expressions with the same pronunciation, so “Aida” is preferred generally)
If you wish to make the expression shorter, use “(kan)”.
Anyhow, I think you just need to know there are practically no differences in meaning. (Although there might be some exception I can’t come up with right now.)
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 1,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar"
}
|
Clarification on comparative constructions is needed
Here's a sentence:
> ****
I understand what it says but I don't understand why is used right after , and why the word order is not like this:
> ****
Can the reason be in those 2 different comparative constructions in one sentence? I assume that one cannot say something like ABC, thus involving ABCto make it work properly.
Even if it's right, I'd like to know the reason is even taking place and, what's more, I'd like to know how to translate it properly. Every time I read it I want to say "Comparing to Siberia, eastern region is not that cold, as central one", but then again, "comparing to Siberia" just makes no sense for me. Also, I cannot understand why author used this, but not the ****.
|
What you actually stumble over is this expression:
> _region(s) to the east of Siberia_
Here is a noun predicate that modifies , and this has nothing to do with the rest of the sentence.
(lit. "more east than"?) may be a strange wording to European languages speakers, but it's a sound phrase in Japanese to describe what's at removes from a location in eastern direction (as opposed to being the east end of the location). Similarly:
> "above; higher than"
> "below; lower than"
> "to the left of"
> "to the right of"
If you reword them using **** etc. it'll usually be understood as "next to it to the left".
So,
>
> _Regions to the east of Siberia are not as cold as central Siberia._
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 4,
"question_score": 1,
"tags": "grammar, word order, comparative constructions, particle より"
}
|
How to write こたえ: 答え or 答?
In the microsoft IME keyboard, and my cellphone's as well, when I write it is suggested . However, in the Genki I textbook, I've seen it written as
> {}
Are both of these valid? If so, which is more normal to use?
|
Both are valid, but is more normal to use.
However, you cannot use instead of (verb).
Therefore,
>
>
>
>
> ×
References <
|
stackexchange-japanese
|
{
"answer_score": 7,
"question_score": 2,
"tags": "kanji, readings, orthography, okurigana"
}
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.