Datasets:

p1atdev

/

japanese-stackexchange

like 2

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 3, "body": "While in English, the word \"gaijin\" is far more common than \"gaikokujin\", I've\nheard that in Japanese [外人]{がいじん} has been replaced by [外国人]{がいこくじん} for\nreasons of political correctness.\n\nWhat differences are there between the two words?\n\n 1. Is it merely replacing one word with another, a case of a euphemism treadmill?\n 2. Is the former perceived as a contraction of the latter, though Wikipedia claims that the former word pre-dated the latter? Contractions are often seen as derogatory.\n 3. Does the latter emphasize that it's nationality that's being talked about, rather than race?", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-12-31T12:37:40.427", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4131", "last_activity_date": "2018-09-26T23:21:46.943", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "91", "post_type": "question", "score": 12, "tags": [ "synonyms", "offensive-words" ], "title": "Why is gaikokujin more politically correct than gaijin?", "view_count": 13254 }

[ { "body": "`外人` means \"outsiders\" or \"strangers\", not necessarily foreigners. When this\nword is used against foreigners, the point of view is set to Japan, and it is\npresupposed that anything that belongs to outside of Japan, or anything that\ncame from outside of Japan is an \"outside(r)\" or a \"strange(er)\". On the other\nhand, `外国人` means \"people from a foreign country\" or \"foreigners\", and it is\nappropriate to use it against foreigners. It does not have the negative\nimplications mentioned above that `外人` has. `外人` is not shortened form of\n`外国人`, although some people mistake it as so. They overlap, but are not the\nsame. `外人` hasn't been replaced by `外国人`, but over the recent time, more\npeople became aware of the misuse and came to use the correct word.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-12-31T13:23:02.597", "id": "4132", "last_activity_date": "2011-12-31T18:54:22.137", "last_edit_date": "2011-12-31T18:54:22.137", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4131", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "You've stepped on a potential land mine of debate there. Whether or not\n`外人{がいじん}` is offensive, politically incorrect, or means something other than\njust \"foreigner\" is the topic of a lot of heated debate. Take a look\n[here](http://www.debito.org/kumegaijinissue.html) for the \"gaijin is\noffensive side\". Take a look at the [Wikipidia\nentry](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaijin#cite_note-Koshiro_1999_114-10) for\nlinks to the \"gaijin is just a word\" side.\n\nWhich means that for starters, it can't simply be taken as axiomatic that\n`外国人{がいこくじん}` _is_ more politically correct, which makes answering your\nquestion a little tough.\n\nAs far as I know, NHK and news programs favour the use of `外国人{がいこくじん}` over\n`外人{がいじん}` because it is considered more politically correct. However, if you\nlook at the links in [this\nanswer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/2081/119), `外人{がいじん}` does not\nseem to be on the list of \"unbroadcastable\" words (although the lists linked\nto are unofficial, so perhaps broadcasters have their own in house rules).\n\nThe Wikipedia entry you (and I) link to covers a lot of the history and two\nsides of the issue, so there's no need to retread them here.\n\nI think that for the purposes of this site and wondering about usage in\nJapanese, you can't be given hard rules on this one. I think the guidelines\nyou need to consider are:\n\n 1. Some people do find it offensive, so know your audience.\n\n 2. Most Japanese are unaware that it is an issue, simply because foreigners in Japan are such a tiny minority that _most_ issues relating to foreigner relations go under the radar for most Japanese.\n\n 3. Whether offensive or not, the word is most often understood to mean non-Chinese, non-Korean foreigners.\n\n* * *\n\nPersonally, I feel it is too simplistic to simply assert that a word like\n`外人{がいじん}` is or is not offensive. People seem to want to put the entire\nburden of responsibility on either the speaker or listener, on intent or\nperception, but I believe language is a relationship in which two parties\nparticipate in understanding. So `外人{がいじん}` can be made offensive, or not, it\ncan be understood as offensive, or not. If you and I were having coffee\ntogether, I could show you how I can take a neutral word like \"woman\" and use\nit as a weapon. But that becomes part of a broader debate about language and\nsocial norms. Too broad to cover here.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-12-31T13:26:10.970", "id": "4133", "last_activity_date": "2011-12-31T13:26:10.970", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.260", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "119", "parent_id": "4131", "post_type": "answer", "score": 13 }, { "body": "I think a lot of the political debate stems greatly from how one recognizes a\nperson, in which 外人 and 外国人 have subtly different implications.\n\n> 外人 \n> 'outside' + 'person' \n> stranger, foreigner, outsider\n\nIn the context of culture, someone who is not Japanese and is among Japanese\npeople, or in Japanese land, is a 'stranger,' a 'foreigner,' or an 'outsider.'\nThat this word can be used as a pejorative though not always carries the\nconnotation that the 'outside person' may not be welcome, may be rude, may be\ndisrespectful, as a virtue of being from outside.\n\n> 外国人 \n> 'outside' + 'country' + 'person' \n> someone from another country\n\nThis variation can be used to describe the same person, in the context of\nprominence. This person does not have to be a cultural outsider, but is from\nanother country. This word is usually not used as a pejorative, although it\ncan be used to mark a possibility for lack of understanding, though most\noften, in a negative comment, 外人 is more commonly heard, thus lending its\nnegative connotation.\n\nThe end result is that there's a fine line that separates both words, because\nboth have similar, but not exactly the same, meanings. I would say that 外人\ndoes not always but can border on xenophobia and come up in xenophobic\nremarks, whereas 外国人 doesn't necessarily carry the same connotation.\n\nThis is all, of course, up for debate, and up to interpretation. I generally\ngo by the rule that tone and context provide the true meaning of the word when\nit is said, so if someone refers to you as a 外人 in a non-negative way, I doubt\nthat they are being xenophobic towards you, for example.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2018-09-26T23:21:46.943", "id": "61789", "last_activity_date": "2018-09-26T23:21:46.943", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "21684", "parent_id": "4131", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4135", "answer_count": 3, "body": "Are there any tips for deciding to write みな or みんな? If I'm not sure can I just\ngo with 皆?\n\nAlso, in speech is there a distinction made? If not, which pronunciation is\nmore common in standard Japanese?", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-12-31T22:43:43.733", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4134", "last_activity_date": "2022-03-19T06:23:38.457", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "54", "post_type": "question", "score": 13, "tags": [ "word-choice" ], "title": "How do you know when to use みな or みんな?", "view_count": 5733 }

[ { "body": "みな and みんな have the same meaning, but みな is more formal and みんな is a little\ncolloquial. In fact, historically, みな was the original form and みんな arose by\ninserting ん to みな.\n\nBoth みな and みんな can be written as 皆, but this does not mean that you can\nreplace both みな and みんな with 皆 without losing their nuances. For example, if\nyou want to add the informal feeling of みんな, it is probably better to write it\nin hiragana.\n\nIn certain set phrases such as 皆まで (みなまで) and 皆の衆 (みなのしゅう), only みな is used.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-12-31T23:26:41.040", "id": "4135", "last_activity_date": "2011-12-31T23:26:41.040", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "4134", "post_type": "answer", "score": 15 }, { "body": "* 控えい、控えい、皆の者、この紋所が目に入らぬか。 \n\n\n * [皆の衆～](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3uq1Vb27Uxw) \n\n\n * みんなのうた \n\n\n * みんな、笑っていいかな? \n\n\n * みんな、あいしあってるか～い? \n", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2011-12-31T23:45:17.920", "id": "4136", "last_activity_date": "2021-12-26T17:10:48.010", "last_edit_date": "2021-12-26T17:10:48.010", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4134", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "If San is added it is みなさん、and not みんなさん。", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2022-03-19T06:23:38.457", "id": "93769", "last_activity_date": "2022-03-19T06:23:38.457", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "50858", "parent_id": "4134", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4142", "answer_count": 1, "body": "Consider this panel:\n\n\n\nWhat do ビ and シッ represent? I'm conjecturing ビ is the mimesis for the raised\nfinger, and シッ is the mimesis for the scarf as she turns around.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-01T15:40:24.027", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4140", "last_activity_date": "2013-03-13T10:40:18.603", "last_edit_date": "2013-03-13T10:40:18.603", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "542", "post_type": "question", "score": 4, "tags": [ "onomatopoeia" ], "title": "Sound mimesis (or 擬音語【ぎおんご】 or 擬態語【ぎたいご】) of ビ and シッ", "view_count": 658 }

[ { "body": "It is not ビ and シッ but a single word ビシッ. It is a 擬態語 signifying firmness of\nan action. From [びしっと in\nDaijirin](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?p=%E3%81%B3%E3%81%97%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A8&stype=1&dtype=0&dname=0ss):\n\n> [2] 厳しいさま。ぴしゃりと。 \n> びしっと断る (my translation: reject flatly)\n\nIn your example, both ビシッ and the raised finger have the effect of showing\nthat the character in the panel is stating her opinion firmly as if it were an\nobjective fact.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-01T16:34:32.377", "id": "4142", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-01T16:34:32.377", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "4140", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4143", "answer_count": 1, "body": "I need help understanding why にとって cannot be used in this circumstance:\n\n> その仕事は私｛には/*にとって｝出来ない。 ( `*` denotes unacceptable)\n\nThis is what I read:\n\n> にとって cannot be used when it marks an experiencer or agent\n\nBut I get confused when this sentence is acceptable:\n\n> これは我々にとって無視できない問題だ。\n\nIsn't `我々` an agent? `我々` is the one who is doing the ignoring right? So what\nam I understanding wrongly?", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-01T16:22:55.083", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4141", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-01T18:54:29.987", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "542", "post_type": "question", "score": 8, "tags": [ "grammar", "word-choice" ], "title": "Help with には and にとって", "view_count": 958 }

[ { "body": "`にとって` 'As from the point of view of ' is a sentence modifier. The sentence\nhas to be meaningful without it, and it implies that its truth depends on\nwhose point of view it is described from.\n\n> これは(無視できない)問題だ \n> 'This is a(n) (unignorable) problem.'\n>\n> **我我にとって** 、これは(無視できない)問題だ \n> 'For us, this is a(n) (unignorable) problem.'\n>\n> これは、我我にとって、(無視できない)問題だ [`これは` can be moved to the front.] \n> 'Regarding this, from the point of view of us, it is a(n) (unignorable)\n> problem.'\n\n`に` in question here is a dative case marker, which optionally marks the\nsubject of the embedded clause of a potential verb.\n\n> 我我がこれを無視する \n> 'We ignore this.'\n>\n> [我我{が/ **に** }これを無視]できる [`する` is deleted before `できる` due to the\n> irregularity of potential form.] \n> 'It is possible that we ignore this.'\n>\n> これは、我我{が/ **に** }無視できる [`これは` can be topicalized and moved to the front.] \n> 'Regarding this, it is possible that we ignore it.'\n\nAs usual in Japanese, the subject can be omitted, and be understood\nimplicitly:\n\n> これは、(我我{が/ **に** })無視できる \n> 'It is possible that we ignore this.'\n\nAttaching `にとって` to this sentence does not work semantically because the\npossibility is independent of the point of view.\n\n> * 我我にとって、これは(我我{が/ **に** })無視できる \n> 'For us, it is possible that we ignore this.'", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-01T18:49:15.727", "id": "4143", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-01T18:54:29.987", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4141", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4148", "answer_count": 4, "body": "I was reading this and it didn't make sense to me. This pirate wanted a drink,\nbut the store was sold out. So one of the guys offered to give him an unopened\nbottle, but it only made the pirate mad. Maybe it's because I don't understand\nenough Japanese or Japanese culture, but it seems that he was insulted. Did\nthe guy who offered him a drink not have good manners?\n\nWhy did the pirate say ナメたマネ?\n\n\n\n", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-02T04:53:15.943", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4144", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-02T21:00:32.880", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-02T21:00:32.880", "last_editor_user_id": "15", "owner_user_id": "69", "post_type": "question", "score": 3, "tags": [ "meaning" ], "title": "Why did this pirate get angry when he was given a bottle?", "view_count": 565 }

[ { "body": "I'm not sure if there are other contributing factors but just in the first two\npanels these are present:\n\n * **おれ** 達\n\n * 尽くし **ちまった** (Contracted ~てしまう)\n\n * **すまん** (Very short version of すみません）\n\n * よかったら **やる** よ \n\nI think those in bold may be rude.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-02T05:07:26.363", "id": "4145", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-02T05:07:26.363", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "542", "parent_id": "4144", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "The pirate is basically saying \"Don't fuck with me\".\n\n> ナメたマネするんじゃねェ\n\nHere `ナメたマネ` is the kana form of `舐めた真似`. `舐める` is slang for \"take lightly\";\n`真似` is a way of acting, and conveys a hard-to-translate contempt. So, more-\nor-less literally, the pirate is saying:\n\n> You are not to do the looking-down behavior\n\nAs for the scene, he's angry for the internationally comprehensible reason\nthat someone drank all the booze and is now cracking jokes at him.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-02T05:41:17.733", "id": "4146", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-02T05:41:17.733", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "895", "parent_id": "4144", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "Isn't the answer in the text that follows?\n\n> ビン一本じゃ寝酒にもなりゃしねェぜ\n\nHe's insulted by the fact that the guy thinks he can be placated with a single\nbottle after they drunk all the rest of the sake.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-02T05:43:14.183", "id": "4147", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-02T05:43:14.183", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "315", "parent_id": "4144", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "Let's imagine that somebody went to a bar (asking for three barrels of wine*),\nseeing everyone in the bar drinking, but the owner told him there's no wine\nleft. And now, someone (drinking in the bar) says: we've drunk all the wine\nhere, oh, there's one bottle left, do you like to have it?\n\n* * *\n\n*This is the content of previous pages. \n\n* * *\n\nWell, the words used are not in the normal polite form, but I cannot say\nthat's too rude. He just used the way to speak to some friend.\n\nThe one who came to ask for wine is someone considering himself \"boss\" of the\narea, and anything not working in his way is an insult to him. (He is one of\nthe \"bad\" characters who are deliberately written as such.)\n\nFinally, you must really be very careful in using mangas to understand\nJapanese culture. Most of the mangas are not about the everyday life in Japan,\nand a lot of them are in some imaginary world. Usually, what the characters\n(either \"good\" or \"bad\" characters) do would not reflect how a normal Japanese\nperson would act in such situation.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-02T06:22:18.677", "id": "4148", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-02T06:36:06.407", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-02T06:36:06.407", "last_editor_user_id": "903", "owner_user_id": "903", "parent_id": "4144", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4152", "answer_count": 2, "body": "In most hiragana the horizonal stokes are drawn first, but も is an exception.\nIs there any reason for this?", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-02T14:22:43.627", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4149", "last_activity_date": "2017-06-23T12:22:28.677", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-22T01:24:59.600", "last_editor_user_id": "125", "owner_user_id": null, "post_type": "question", "score": 14, "tags": [ "stroke-order", "irregularities-exceptions" ], "title": "Why is the stroke order of も peculiar?", "view_count": 2368 }

[ { "body": "To quote [Toritoribe](https://www.jref.com/forum/threads/stroke-order-\nof-%E3%82%82-doesnt-follow-the-rules.46305/) from JapaneseReference (JRef.com)\nforums:\n\n> も was made from the 草書体[そうしょたい] of the kanji 毛[モウ, け]. So, the stroke order\n> of も was also from the the stroke order of 毛. Incidentally, the stroke order\n> is different in 楷書体[かいしょたい]. (The link of the wiktionary page doesn't work\n> due to garbled characters. Please search 毛 on Wiktionary. The page has the\n> flash of the stroke order.)\n\nAnd then, on why `も` and `モ` have different stroke orders, and the origins of\n`ね`, `わ`, and `れ`:\n\n> モ was made from 毛 in 楷書体 unlike も. That's why those two kanas have different\n> stroke orders.\n>\n> ね, わ, れ are from the 草書体 of 祢, 和, 礼 respectively", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-02T17:37:59.340", "id": "4151", "last_activity_date": "2017-06-23T12:22:28.677", "last_edit_date": "2017-06-23T12:22:28.677", "last_editor_user_id": "22684", "owner_user_id": "921", "parent_id": "4149", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "I think silvermaple's answer is right, but to add a little bit:\n\n * The katakana `モ` was derived from the 楷書体 (block writing) [`毛`](http://www.winttk.com/kakijun/2/20230.htm). **The initial short stroke was dropped** , ending up with two horizontal strokes, and then the vertical stroke.\n * The hiragana `も` was derived from the 草書体 (script) `毛`, in which, for the sake of writing speed, **the vertical stroke was conflated with and became part of the initial short stroke** , ending up with the initial long stroke and then the two horizontal strokes.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-02T20:02:50.620", "id": "4152", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-03T20:54:55.997", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-03T20:54:55.997", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4149", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4159", "answer_count": 3, "body": "It's a topic of debate to what extent Japanese has sarcasm and irony. In any\ncase, Japanese speakers seem to use a whole lot less of it than English\nspeakers.\n\nMy question is: whether or not Japanese speakers use it themselves, do they\ntypically recognize what is—to Americans at least—very blatant verbal irony?\nOr will they commonly assume the sarcastic party has gone suddenly insane?\n\n> ### _Example_\n>\n> **A:** どうしてサハラ砂漠になんて行きたいんですか？ハイキングでもしたいの？\n>\n> **B:** いや、泳ぎに行こうと思ってます。\n\nWould a super-fluent speaker be able to sell this kind of irony? Would a\n`なんてね` at the end of sentence **B** make it work?", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-03T02:34:23.343", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4154", "last_activity_date": "2015-10-19T03:51:19.297", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-04T20:14:06.033", "last_editor_user_id": "895", "owner_user_id": "895", "post_type": "question", "score": 25, "tags": [ "culture" ], "title": "Will verbal irony and sarcasm be understood and/or appreciated?", "view_count": 11885 }

[ { "body": "Quick related side story: Recently I was with my friend who is much better at\nJapanese than me. So much so that I won't try in this story to emulate the\nJapanese he used, because I'd just mess it up.\n\nIt was a cold day and we were in a liquor store to buy some ice. We couldn't\nfind as much as we needed, so we asked if there was more in back. The older\nwoman running the shop asked if we were buying the ice \"for drinks\". My friend\nreplied, \"no, I just don't think it's going to be cold enough tonight, so\nwe're going to go up to the roof and throw the ice off.\"\n\nThe older woman replied, \"oh, then you'll need more ice.\"\n\nNot just a successfully executed instance of sarcasm, but also a well received\ndeadpan return on the part of the woman. I laughed. We all knew it was all\ndone in good fun.\n\n* * *\n\nThe short answer is \"yes\". A native speaker, and even a non-native, can sell\nirony and sarcasm in Japanese.\n\nThe prevalent belief that Japanese culture and language simply doesn't have\nit, or that it can only be perceived as \"mean\" is just plain wrong.\n\nSure, it can reasonably be said that the degrees to which sarcasm and irony\nare used are different, but that's only part of the story.\n\nWhat makes sarcasm and irony work in any language is the context of\nunderstanding, which extends far beyond just the topic and words used. The\nentire context of the interaction matters. The people involved, the time, the\nplace, the feelings present... everything. What I can't convey to you in the\nstory above was the lilt in my friend's voice, the understood nature of the\ninteraction, all the things that can't be written down that make it seem a bit\nmean in writing but fun in person.\n\nSaying Japanese doesn't have sarcasm is like saying sarcasm can't be written\nin English. It's not true, but the whole reason for the existence of\n[emoticons](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emoticon) is because otherwise it\ncan be more difficult to convey sarcasm in writing. Not impossible, but you\ncan see it takes a higher level of skill to convey sarcasm in writing without\nresorting to emoticons. Same deal applies when being sarcastic in Japanese.\n\nWhile some of the time a miss said phrase or poor use of the language can be\nat fault, it is also just as likely that when a non-native speaker attempts\nirony or sarcasm and fails, it's not because that form of irony and sarcasm\nsimply doesn't exist in the target language, it's only that they have misread\nsome aspect of the overarching context of the interaction. They weren't as\ngood friends as they thought, the situation wasn't as casual as they thought,\nthe timing wasn't right, or something like that.\n\nIt's an error, of course that can happen even between two native speakers, and\nof any language.\n\nHowever, because of this persistent insistence that Japanese doesn't have\nsarcasm or irony, people are quick to blame the language and culture.\n\nThere is a phrase in Japanese that applies: `空気{くうき}を読{よ}む`. The ability to\n\"read the air\". Having a feel for the context is what drives the ability to\nsay one thing while meaning another.\n\nIt is, of course, an art, not a science, so no one can advise you, \"do X and\nyou will successfully achieve sarcasm and irony in Japanese.\"\n\nIf you can learn to \"read the air,\" though, you can tell people you intend to\ngo swimming in the Sahara and get the chuckle you hope to get.\n\nHope that helps.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-03T07:27:00.857", "id": "4159", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-03T07:27:00.857", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "119", "parent_id": "4154", "post_type": "answer", "score": 36 }, { "body": "It's true that the concept of irony/sarcasm exist in Japan. Having said that,\nI can testify that a Japanese usually finds it hard to detect them. I've been\nconversing in English daily for quite some time and I still often have trouble\ndetecting them. Same for my family/friends.\n\nWe just don't use it as often as western people do, and even when we do, we\nuse it quite differently. If you ask me, it's sensible to [follow the advice\ngiven\nhere](http://www.japanintercultural.com/en/news/default.aspx?newsid=213).", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-01-26T23:54:15.610", "id": "11056", "last_activity_date": "2014-03-03T09:04:17.407", "last_edit_date": "2014-03-03T09:04:17.407", "last_editor_user_id": "125", "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "4154", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "My boyfriend is Japanese, and he is one of the most sarcastic persons I know.\nHe's always making jokes and messing with me, saying dirty things, and after I\nsay to him to \"Stop saying X\" he would go like \"How you dear to say X!, I\ndon't know you anymore, I hate people who say that!\"\n\nThe problem I see with many foreigners with telling sarcasm in Japan, is that\nthe context is always lost. For example, if the foreigner is talking in\nEnglish, the Japanese listener is making a big effort trying to understand\nwhat that person is saying, and is not expecting sarcasms.\n\nThe other one is that if people don't have a fluent accent in Japanese,\ndetecting sarcasm is very difficult.\n\nThe other one is that, there are in fact a lot of persons who do not get\nsarcasm in japan, because they are oversensitive. But I think that applies\nanywhere in the world.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2015-10-19T03:51:19.297", "id": "28764", "last_activity_date": "2015-10-19T03:51:19.297", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "11485", "parent_id": "4154", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4158", "answer_count": 2, "body": "> 今年も良い年でありますように！ I hope you have another good year!\n\nWhat is going on exactly where the ように means hope? Does the よう derive from a\nverb? I would also like to know how to describe this word in the relevant\ngrammatical terms, both in english and japanese. From what I understand from\nthe answers it is a noun that turns into an adverb?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-03T04:33:19.377", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4155", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-03T21:58:09.687", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-03T05:27:35.683", "last_editor_user_id": "706", "owner_user_id": "706", "post_type": "question", "score": 12, "tags": [ "grammar" ], "title": "How does this ように work?", "view_count": 6144 }

[ { "body": "I believe it comes from an abbreviation of 「〜ように願います」, where ように here means\n\"so as to\" or \"so that\". In that case it would be the same ように which appears\nin e.g. 「〜ようにご注意ください」 \"Please be careful so as to ...\" or 「〜ようにする」 \"make it so\nthat ...\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-03T04:51:14.747", "id": "4156", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-03T04:51:14.747", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "578", "parent_id": "4155", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "## What it means\n\n`ように` at the end of a sentence is a set expression for the volitional\nsubjunctive. In layman terms, it means the preceding sentence is a wish!\n\n## Why it means that\n\n`様{よう}` is [\"a word that expresses the state of\nthings\"](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/thsrs/13632/m0u/%E6%A7%98). `に` is a\ntarget particle. Therefore, if it helps you understand, `ように` means \"towards a\ncertain state\". So when I say something like\n\n> 明日{あした}は晴{は}れるように — May it be sunny tomorrow\n\nI'm saying \"towards the state of things where it's sunny\". As happens\nfrequently in Japanese, I am omitting the verb of this sentence because it is\nobvious in context.\n\n> 明日{あした}は晴{は}れるように祈{いの}ります — I pray it may be sunny tomorrow\n\nIt expresses a yearning for a particular `様{よう}`.", "comment_count": 19, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-03T05:10:11.983", "id": "4158", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-03T12:00:40.903", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-03T12:00:40.903", "last_editor_user_id": "15", "owner_user_id": "895", "parent_id": "4155", "post_type": "answer", "score": 20 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 1, "body": "> 来年は是非明るい年でありますように願うばかりです I hope that the next year will be great for you\n\nWhy is で used in 年であります? Is であります an older form of です? Also, what would the\nばかり translate to here? I thought maybe it could be \"just\", but that meaning\ndoes not seem right. Also, what is the nuance of this expression? Is it clunky\nand outdated, florid and verbose or none of these?", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-03T15:12:35.317", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4161", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-03T19:12:20.993", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-03T19:12:20.993", "last_editor_user_id": "706", "owner_user_id": "706", "post_type": "question", "score": 4, "tags": [ "grammar", "translation" ], "title": "How are で and ばかりused in this expression?", "view_count": 198 }

[ { "body": "1\\. である is a copula\n\n2\\. ばかり is used to mean \"nothing but\"\n\nLet me try building the sentence step by step:\n\n> * 来年は是非明るい年である。- \"Next year will certainly be bright/cheerful\" \n> (Literally: Next year **is(である)** a certainly bright/cheerful year)\n>\n> * 来年は是非明るい年でありますように願う。- \"I wish the next year to be bright/cheerful (for\n> you).\" \n> (Literally: To wish in a way such that next year will be certainly\n> bright/cheerful)\n>\n> * 来年は是非明るい年でありますように願うばかりです。- \"I wish **nothing but(ばかり)** next year to be\n> bright/cheerful (for you).\"\n>\n>", "comment_count": 9, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-03T15:32:22.810", "id": "4162", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-03T15:32:22.810", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "542", "parent_id": "4161", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 3, "body": "> 来年は是非明るい年でありますように願うばかりです I hope that the next year will be great for you\n\nIs this sentence grammatically incorrect? In what way(s)? If incorrect, why\ncan でありますように not be followed by an explicit verb? Can it be followed by\nanother type of verb?\n\nHere is the original example <http://omo-ashi.progoo.com/bbs/omo-\nashi_topic_pr_704.html>", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-04T05:46:40.930", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4164", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-05T10:17:43.047", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "706", "post_type": "question", "score": 5, "tags": [ "grammar" ], "title": "Can でありますように be followed by a verb?", "view_count": 548 }

[ { "body": "I understand this sentence perfectly and don't think it is grammatically wrong\nor sounds awkward, but I think 'でありますように' already implies 'I hope', so if you\nadd '願うばかりです' to it then it'd sound like the 'I hope' part is repeated and\nredundant.\n\nI also doubt '是非' can be used this way. It'd literally mean 'by all means'\nhere but I think this kind of 是非 is usually used when you\nrecommend/advise/ask/suggest someone (to) do something, like\n'是非出席してください。'/'是非読んでみてください。'\n\n(edit)\n\nI'd rather say\n\n'来年は是非とも明るい年となってくれるよう願うばかりです。'/'来年は明るい年となることを願うばかりです。'\n\nor '来年は明るい年でありますように。'/'来年は明るい年となりますように。'", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-04T06:26:59.570", "id": "4165", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-04T14:02:09.920", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-04T14:02:09.920", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4164", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "でありますように can be followed by any verb that can make it part of a sensible\nsentence.\n\nThe most prevalent verb to fit that bill is 願う.\n\nIt is so prevalent in that use, in fact; that when people say 〜ように。; they\nusually mean 〜ようにねがいます。.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-04T13:20:32.283", "id": "4177", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-04T13:20:32.283", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "519", "parent_id": "4164", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "I think 「～でありますように、～」is OK, but I'd rather say 「来年は明るい年となるようにお願いいたします。」.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-05T10:17:43.047", "id": "4192", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-05T10:17:43.047", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1024", "parent_id": "4164", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4174", "answer_count": 2, "body": "I'm reading through a book on how to draw in a classic Japanese manga style.\nSpecifically, the book is about the basics of `デッサン`, \"sketching\".\n\nThey use the term `アタリ` a lot. For example, this typical sentence:\n\n> アタリ線{せん}は残{のこ}っている。下描{したが}きのりんかく線{せん}がはっきりわかるように、アタリはごく薄{うす}い線{せん}で描{か}こう。\n\nThe context is that in the example drawing, they have more or less finished\nthe drawing by having laid down the bolder lines that emphasize the final\nimage, while leaving some of the sketchy lines underneath so one can see the\noriginal contours used to create it.\n\n`アタリ線{せん}` clearly refers to the \"final\" lines, so I guess that could work as\na translation. But obviously \"final\" is far from a literal translation of\n`アタリ`.\n\nLooking up `アタリ` specifically in katakana, I see that it is defined as\n\"collision, overlapping\". Overlapping makes sense, but it still feels off to\nuse it directly. When one is drawing, one doesn't merely sketch and sketch\nuntil overlapping lines become the ones you keep (at least, that's not the\ndefault assumption. I guess some people might draw like that). Instead, one\ndeliberately lays down the lines one intends to keep.\n\nTranslating `アタリ線{せん}` as \"overlapping lines\" seems to convey too much\nserendipity.\n\n\"Bold\" lines? \"Clean\" lines? \"True\" lines?\n\nWhat would be the best translation for `アタリ` in this context?\n\n* * *\n\n**Bonus question:** Does the katakana `アタリ` come from `当{あ}たる`, `中{あた}る`, or\nmaybe a different origin? I ask because I notice that when I look it up using\nkatakana, I get different definitions than when I look it up using kanji.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-04T07:17:45.463", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4166", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-04T15:25:39.653", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "119", "post_type": "question", "score": 5, "tags": [ "word-choice", "translation" ], "title": "What's the best translation of アタリ in the context of drawing?", "view_count": 932 }

[ { "body": "Maybe it comes from '[辺]{あた}り'?\n\n[http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=y2vWL5KS9Sg](http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=y2vWL5KS9Sg)\n\nアタリ線 is not the final line at least, because:\n<http://www17.oekakibbs.com/bbs/poo_middle/45300/45181.png>\n\nIt's also referred to as '[補助]{ほじょ}[線]{せん}'(auxiliary line?).", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-04T08:43:46.883", "id": "4167", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-04T15:25:39.653", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-04T15:25:39.653", "last_editor_user_id": "519", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4166", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "アタリ線 refers to the lines that are laid down to delineate the rough shape and\nposition of limbs, elements, etc; usually in the later stages of sketching.\n\n[辺り]{あたり} is the likely source of the term; meaning \"around; in the vicinity\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-04T13:05:52.790", "id": "4174", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-04T13:05:52.790", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "519", "parent_id": "4166", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4180", "answer_count": 2, "body": "Through this question I want to understand exactly how `ぜひ` is used\nadverbially.\n\nMy problem is that `ぜひ` is not behaving as I expect it to be. It appears that\nthe English translation does not reflect its correct usage:\n\n> ぜひ: \"certainly, without fail, right and wrong, pros and cons\"\n\nI take \"certainly\" and \"without fail\" to be its adverbial use.\n\nI observe that:\n\n 1. [These sentences](http://eow.alc.co.jp/%E3%81%9C%E3%81%B2/UTF-8/?ref=sa) do not appear to me to have the sense of \"certainly\" and \"without fail\". E.g.,\n\n> ぜひおいでください。 \"We'd like you to come.\"\n>\n> ぜひお試しを。 \"Please try our products\"\n\nI would (poorly) interpret them as follows instead:\n\n> \"Please come without fail\"\n>\n> \"Try without fail\"\n\nThere seems to be some intermediate step that causes \"without fail\" to soften\nand become part of a request (the actual requesting should be from a ~てください or\nan implicit one).\n\n 2. In English, \"~ certainly is ~\" and \"to without fail be ~\" and \"~ without fail will be ~\" are possible sentences. However, what I would expect to be the equivalent in Japanese - `ぜひ～だ` is ungrammatical. I seem to be misunderstanding something very important about the usage of `ぜひ` and I can't figure it out.\n\n 3. From sawa's comments in \"[How are で and ばかりused in this expression?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/4161)\",\n\n> * 是非 is an adverb expressing the first person's expectation, and has to\n> concord with a predicate that expresses such meaning. Your first sentence\n> with 是非 without 願う is ungrammatical.\n>\n> * Because just a copula is an assertion. There is no room for the first\n> person's expectation to come in.\n\nI've been meditating on those 2 points and I guess I just don't get it. It\nshould be because I do not understand the usage of `ぜひ`. In what way does `ぜひ`\nexhibit expectation?\n\nSo please tell me what have I understood wrongly.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-04T11:32:55.657", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4169", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-04T15:12:37.107", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:43.857", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "542", "post_type": "question", "score": 3, "tags": [ "adverbs" ], "title": "Reconciliation of adverbial ぜひ with its Japanese-English translation", "view_count": 2560 }

[ { "body": "@Williham-san\n\nUsing kanji(是非) to mean 'please' seems fine to me, like '是非お越しください'/'是非お試しを'.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-04T13:10:38.740", "id": "4176", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-04T13:10:38.740", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4169", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "1. ぜひ does not only mean \"certainly\", \"without fail\". It has the meaning of \"expressing the first person's expectation, and has to concord with a predicate that expresses such meaning\" (thank to @sawa) or in a short way, \"please\" (thanks to @Williham).\n\n 2. English and Japanese are two different languages, sentence structure that works in one language may not work in the other. And you can never do translation using word replacement, like from \"~ certainly is ~\" to \"ぜひ ~ だ\". There's seldom a word pair that can be translated in his way.\n\nIn all, ぜひ is not an equivalent of \"certainly\" or \"without fail\". It also has\nother meanings (like \"please\"), and not every \"certainly\" or \"without fail\"\n(or \"please\") in English can be translated to \"ぜひ\".\n\nI will try to translate the explanation of the adverbial ぜひ given by\n[大辞泉](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/je2/41583/m1u/%E6%98%AF%E9%9D%9E/):\n\n> １ どんな困難も乗り越えて実行しようとするさま。どうあっても。きっと。 \n> Try to carry out an act/accomplish a task whatever difficult is met. \n> (May be \"without fail\")\n>\n> ２ 心をこめて、強く願うさま。なにとぞ。 \n> Ask full heartedly. \n> (\"please\")\n>\n> ３ ある条件のもとでは必ずそうなると判断できるさま。必ず。きまって。 \n> Under a certain condition (we) can judge that a certain result can be got. \n> (\"certainly\")", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-04T15:12:37.107", "id": "4180", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-04T15:12:37.107", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "903", "parent_id": "4169", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4599", "answer_count": 1, "body": "I have trouble trying to find this specific grammar in text books.\n\nI have a negative adjective in polite form:\n\n> 寒くないです\n\nI want to use the superpolite form:\n\n> 寒くないございます\n\nThat seems right, but I have seen in a grammar book that when using other\nwords, they replace the い with う, like this:\n\n> 面白うございます\n\nIs the first example correct? If not, what is the general rule to apply in\nthese cases?", "comment_count": 9, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-04T12:27:29.777", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4170", "last_activity_date": "2017-09-14T23:50:06.727", "last_edit_date": "2017-09-14T23:50:06.727", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "9", "post_type": "question", "score": 3, "tags": [ "politeness", "adjectives" ], "title": "General rules in negative adjectives in superpolite form", "view_count": 911 }

[ { "body": "This is a bit tricky.\n\nI would first of all suggest you never use お寒うございます at all.\n\nThe key to understanding this is understanding what this form really is.\n\nIt is from classical Japanese. In modern Japanese it's usage is restricted to\nthis set. This is primarily used as greeting between older people. There is no\nnegative form in modern Japanese.\n\nIn classical Japanese the negative of 寒うござる would effectively have been 寒うござらん\nor 寒うごらざぬ. The う can be considered to have the same effect as く in modern\nJapanese so 寒うない may have also been used at some times.\n\nWithout reading a body of classical texts, it is impossible to be sure what\nwas considered to be \"correct\" in any given period. However it is clear that\nthere is no modern negative equivalent of this form. Use either a positive\nadjective that effectively negates it, such as [暑]{あつ}う or use ～くありません.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-07T22:36:46.807", "id": "4599", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-07T22:36:46.807", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1129", "parent_id": "4170", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 1, "body": "”正直友達が死んだらこんなにへこむなんておもってみなかった”\n\nI cant understand this sentence.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-04T12:30:36.547", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4171", "last_activity_date": "2012-09-13T23:30:18.533", "last_edit_date": "2012-09-13T23:30:18.533", "last_editor_user_id": "100", "owner_user_id": "1018", "post_type": "question", "score": 4, "tags": [ "usage", "meaning" ], "title": "Usage of なんて in this sentence", "view_count": 398 }

[ { "body": "Lol, yeah what is the question.\n\n正直=honestly\n\n友達が=my friend\n\n死んだら=if...dies\n\nこんなに=so much\n\nへこむ=get depressed\n\nなんておもってみなかった=Never did I imagine (that I would...)\n\nP.S. Grammatically it should be '思って\"も\"みなかった'.\n\nP.P.S Oops, you were just asking about 'なんて'？", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-04T12:38:54.940", "id": "4172", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-14T07:27:04.683", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-14T07:27:04.683", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4171", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4179", "answer_count": 5, "body": "I'm planning to go to Tohoku for at least a week, and Lonely Planet,\n[Wikitravel](http://wikitravel.org/en/Tohoku#Talk) and\n[TVTropes](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TohokuRegionalAccent)\nall mention that Tohoku-ben is a bit different from how Tokyoites would speak.\nTVTropes also mention that not all Tohoku residents speak in the same way,\neither - not relevant to this question, but I don't want to misinform anyone.\n\nWhat advantages and disadvantages are there in speaking in the local dialect\n(ie their vocabulary and grammar) and/or accent (ie how they pronounce words)?\n\nDisadvantages:\n\n 1. If I'm seen as deliberately doing an \"zuuzuu-ben\" accent, will people think I'm making fun of it? TVTropes mentions that that accent has been made fun of in fiction. It's possible I'll accidentally pick up a Tohoku accent during my stay, but then it'll be the real thing, rather than an exaggeration of it.\n 2. I'm more likely to get something new wrong rather than something I've practiced for a while.\n 3. A foreigner speaking a local dialect or accent may be seen as a bit silly.\n\nAdvantages:\n\n 1. Speaking with a local accent would probably make it easier to understand when other people speak with that accent. For example, if I have previously said \"itsu\" with a Tohoku accent, then I'll be more likely to understand when someone else says [\"itsu\" with a Tohoku accent](http://amyamiller.blogspot.com/2011_05_01_archive.html). \n 2. Speaking in the local dialect or accent may give the impression the speaker is putting more of an effort into what they're saying, which is seen as respectful.", "comment_count": 12, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-04T13:10:01.303", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4175", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-13T18:01:22.290", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "91", "post_type": "question", "score": 6, "tags": [ "dialects", "spoken-language" ], "title": "Should I speak in the local dialect and/or accent of an area?", "view_count": 3043 }

[ { "body": "I live in Kansai area and speak Kansai-ben, and would not try to speak in\nTohoku accent if I ever stayed in Tohoku for weeks/months, nor would I expect\nanyone from Tokyo to speak in Kansai accent when he/she is staying in Kansai\nfor weeks/months.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-04T13:49:40.097", "id": "4178", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-04T17:29:04.760", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-04T17:29:04.760", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4175", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "I agree with Chocolate: it is not expected, regardless of whether the traveler\nis a native speaker of Japanese or not. And as a result of doing something\nunexpected, some people may interpret it as making fun of the local accent,\nbecause it seems to be the most plausible explanation why anyone from another\narea would imitate (probably very poorly) the local accent.\n\nIf other people know that you are trying to speak in the local accent in a\nsincere attempt to communicate better with locals, then the situation might be\ndifferent. But you cannot keep explaining it to everyone you talk to.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-04T13:59:35.977", "id": "4179", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-04T13:59:35.977", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "4175", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "I feel that speaking a foreign language in an accent other than the 'standard'\none is kind of like playing the violin: it sounds really awful from a\nbeginner, but from someone skilled it can sound very nice.\n\nI myself lived for two years in the Kanto area and learned to speak 'standard'\nJapanese. After that I spent a year in Kyoto and though I learned to\nunderstand the Kansai dialect in general and more specifically the Kyoto\ndialect too, I didn't try and speak it myself. My wife (also from the Kansai\narea) laughs at me the few times that a Kansa-ben pronunciation has come out\nof my mouth. She said it sounds forced and unnatural.\n\nOn the other hand, one of my friends is American and lived in the Kansai area\nfor over 4 years, and he only speaks Kansai-ben. Coming from him it sounds\nvery natural, and so he is never made fun of for speaking it, but instead is\nusually complimented on it!\n\nSo my take away message is that if you're going to be living there for a long\ntime, there's no reason why you shouldn't learn to speak in the local dialect.\nBut if you're only going to be there a few weeks/months, it's probably better\nto stick to standard Tokyo-ben.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-05T16:43:52.397", "id": "4193", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-05T16:43:52.397", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1026", "parent_id": "4175", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "In Okinawa, I got into a cab and asked in Japanese to go my destination. In\nTokyo, the taxi driver might comment favourably that I can speak Japanese. In\nOkinawa, the taxi driver was impressed that I could speak _standard_ Japanese\n(標準語). I realized then that I spoke Japanese with a Tokyo accent.\n\nIf you going to a different area for a short time I see no benefit. If you\nwere going to become part of a family and stay for a long time, I say would\nthere is a benefit.\n\nThe exception would be if you were one of those people who have totally\nmastered standard Japanese and have a natural gift for dialects and\neffortlessly could pull it off.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-09T14:31:00.900", "id": "4231", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-09T14:31:00.900", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "215", "parent_id": "4175", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "I think the answer depends on how much you know about the dialect, which in\nthis case doesn't seem to be that much. The term _dialect_ refers to a much\nmore complicated system than just the zuuzuu phenomenon, so even if you\nchanged your pronunciation, unless everything else is dialectally accurate,\nthen you are uttering an incorrect sentence. And that's IF you actually do\ncontrol your accent well enough to do so. For instance, pitch is also going to\nbe different, so unless you control pitch in Standard Japanese...\n\nLearning a dialect is a worthy cause, but not in a week, or for a week.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-13T18:01:22.290", "id": "4266", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-13T18:01:22.290", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "801", "parent_id": "4175", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4186", "answer_count": 2, "body": "Is there one? Or does it even matter? I personally start at the top and go\nclockwise. Just curious.\n\n* * *\n\n**Update:** I realized the other day that the reason I start at the 12-o'clock\nposition and go clockwise is because this is the same motion (more or less)\nused when writing あ, お, め, ぬ, の, etc.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-04T22:24:25.310", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4183", "last_activity_date": "2021-09-12T13:45:23.347", "last_edit_date": "2012-08-23T14:35:39.970", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "78", "post_type": "question", "score": 11, "tags": [ "kana", "stroke-order" ], "title": "Stroke order for han-dakuten", "view_count": 1562 }

[ { "body": "Well, a han-dakuten isn't a kanji, so I would say that it doesn't matter one\nway or another. However, the actual kanji `〇` has a \"stroke order\" (stroke\ndirection?) of a single stroke starting at the top and going counter-\nclockwise. ([Link](http://kakijun.main.jp/page/zero01200.html)) So, if `。`\ndoes have one, my bet is that's what it is.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-05T02:48:48.367", "id": "4186", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-05T03:09:16.443", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-05T03:09:16.443", "last_editor_user_id": "921", "owner_user_id": "921", "parent_id": "4183", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "This [blog post](https://blog.goo.ne.jp/moonie-\nmoonie/e/5009c6ccb7dbd9f492cd2a976111e0b7) refers to an elementary school text\nbook for the writing order of a 半濁点. It starts from 6 o'clock and goes around\nclockwise.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2021-09-12T13:45:23.347", "id": "90292", "last_activity_date": "2021-09-12T13:45:23.347", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "39516", "parent_id": "4183", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4194", "answer_count": 1, "body": "I'm having trouble coming up with a way of saying \"not greater than 0\" and\n\"not less than 0\".\n\nWould the following sentences be natural/grammatical? If not, in what ways can\nthe following be expressed?\n\n * greater than 0/less than 0\n\n> 0より大きい/0より小さい\n\n * greater than or equal to 0/less than or equal to 0\n\n> 0以上である/0以下である\n\n * not greater than 0/not less than 0\n\n> 0以上ではない/0以下ではない\n\nSpace ALC says that [greater than or\nequal](http://eow.alc.co.jp/greater+than+equal/UTF-8/) is `～以上で` and [less\nthan or equal](http://eow.alc.co.jp/less+than+equal/UTF-8/) is `以下の`.\n\nI thought that `以上` meant \"above\" and `以下` \"below\". If that's the case, is\nthere any way to tell that usage and their usage as \"greater/less than or\nequal\" apart?", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-05T01:01:55.037", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4184", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-05T17:09:41.933", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-05T01:26:37.430", "last_editor_user_id": "796", "owner_user_id": "796", "post_type": "question", "score": 7, "tags": [ "phrase-requests", "mathematics" ], "title": "Expressing \"not greater/less than\" and \"greater/less than or equal to\"", "view_count": 7332 }

[ { "body": "There are two ways of answering this question. Are you looking for\nmathematical terms for 'not greater/less than' and 'greater/less than', or\nways of expressing this in more general conversation?\n\nMathematically, the greater than symbol ＞ is pronounced 大なり（だいなり） and the less\nthan symbol ＜ is pronounced 小なり（しょうなり）. The greater than or equal sign ≧ is\npronounced 大なりイコール and the less than or equal sign ≦ is pronounced 小なりイコール.\n\nIn terms of daily conversation, I think you pretty much have it. より大きい and\nより小さい do _not_ include the value being used for the comparison, while 以下 and\n以上 do. Although keep in mind that this is a dictionary definition, and my\nexperience is that in normal daily conversation they tend to be used a bit\ninterchangeably without paying too much attention to that specific detail.\n\nAlso there is the term 未満（みまん）, which you can use as a 'less than' term that\ndoesn't include the number being used. Example: １８歳未満禁止（じゅうはっさいみまんきんし） means\n'no admittance to those under 18'.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-05T17:09:41.933", "id": "4194", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-05T17:09:41.933", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1026", "parent_id": "4184", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4189", "answer_count": 2, "body": "My Japanese friend uses the work ｢アヒル」when referring to ducks in a public\npark. However, another Japanese friend uses 「鴨」（かも）in similar situations.\n\nIn English, as far as my limited knowledge of the animal kingdom goes, we just\nhave the word \"duck\". Can anyone explain the difference between these two\nwords? Which is more common (and more correct) in the situation I've outlined?\nAnd do the rules change if we're talking about duck as a dish in a restaurant?", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-05T05:05:42.650", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4188", "last_activity_date": "2020-11-23T12:42:21.953", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "757", "post_type": "question", "score": 11, "tags": [ "animals" ], "title": "When should I use「かも」 versus 「アヒル」?", "view_count": 2139 }

[ { "body": "Referring to [Japanese\nWikipedia](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%AB%E3%83%A2), it seems the main\ndifference is that `アヒル` is used for [domestic\nducks](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_duck) and `鴨` for [wild\nducks](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_duck).\n\nAccording to this [Chiebukuro\npost](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1225531217),\n`家鴨{あひる}` \"house duck\" came about due to selective breeding from `真鴨{まがも}`\n\"true duck\" or \"[mallards](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mallard)\". Apparently\nthe former is a tame duck created for food and enjoyment.\n\nI think there's a fair amount of overlap in practical usage, but that `アヒル`\nmight sound slightly more feminine/cuter than `鴨`. This is just anecdotal, but\nI've often seen `アヒル` used in that kind of way in Anime etc, and I've seen\nsome females use pen-names of `アヒル` but never `カモ`. It also might be worth\nnoting\n[アヒル口](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%A2%E3%83%92%E3%83%AB%E5%8F%A3),\nwhich is apparently regarded for it's \"cuteness\" and \"sexiness\" according to\nWikipedia.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-05T05:29:05.793", "id": "4189", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-05T22:47:18.187", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-05T22:47:18.187", "last_editor_user_id": "796", "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "4188", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "Ahiru are white and kamo are the other ducks. Duck in cooking is usually kamo.\nI was corrected for referring to ducks on a lake which were not white as\nahiru.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2020-11-23T12:42:21.953", "id": "82754", "last_activity_date": "2020-11-23T12:42:21.953", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "40993", "parent_id": "4188", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4196", "answer_count": 2, "body": "I am practicing the ば-conditional and my main reference right now is the\noxford grammar book. It only mentions how to convert keiyoushi or i-adjectives\nand not keiyoudoushi or na-adjectives.\n\nCan someone please break down how the various verb forms and adjectives\nconjugate into this conditional?", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-06T01:31:42.237", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4195", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-13T00:34:56.760", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-06T02:32:38.903", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "926", "post_type": "question", "score": 5, "tags": [ "verbs", "conjugations", "adjectives" ], "title": "How to Convert Na-adjectives and Nouns to the ば-form?", "view_count": 1736 }

[ { "body": "The form used with \"ば\" to show condition is called \"仮定形\".\n\nThis [wiki\narticle](https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ja/wiki/%E5%B7%B2%E7%84%B6%E5%BD%A2)\ngives a good description of this form (the \"口語\" part. The \"文語\" part is for\nclassic Japanese). I will copy the part used for modern Japanese here:\n\n```\n\n 品詞　　　活用の種類　　 例語　　　 語形\n 動詞　　　五段活用 　　 書く　　　 かけ　　 -e\n 　　　　　 下一段活用　　 受ける　　 うけれ　 -eれ\n 　　　　　 上一段活用　　 起きる　　 おきれ　 -iれ\n 　　　　　 カ行変格活用 来る　　　 くれ　　 -uれ\n 　　　　　 サ行変格活用　 する　　　 すれ　　 -uれ\n 形容詞　　　　　　　　　 ない　　　 なけれ　 けれ\n 形容動詞　　　　　　　 静かだ　　 しずかなら　 なら\n \n```\n\nIn general, for verbs, the last kana changes to え-dan(え段). For Na-adjectives,\nthe ending changes to \"なら\".\n\nAs to Nouns, they do not conjugate itself. The verb used after the noun\nconjugate. For example, \"先生である\" -> \"先生であれ(ば)\". The verb \"である\" conjugate to\n\"であれ\".", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-06T02:02:58.557", "id": "4196", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-13T00:34:56.760", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-13T00:34:56.760", "last_editor_user_id": "921", "owner_user_id": "903", "parent_id": "4195", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "For nouns and adjectival nouns (形容動詞), the ば conditional is formed by\nattaching the appropriate form of the copula, e.g. ならば for だ, or であれば for である.\nHowever, ならば is not frequently used, and the usual form is なら.\n\nFor so-called consonant stem verbs (五段活用動詞), the ば conditional is formed by\nattaching _-eba_ to the stem, and for the vowel stem verbs (一段活用動詞), we attach\n_-reba_. For the irregular verbs we have:\n\n * する → すれば\n * くる → くれば\n\nFinally, the adjectives (形容詞) form their ば conditional by attaching _-kereba_\nto the stem.\n\n(In the traditional analysis, these are all explained by the rule of attaching\nば to the conditional stem (仮定形). Some of the other conditionals are,\nmorphologically speaking, special cases of this.)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-06T02:11:25.847", "id": "4197", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-06T02:11:25.847", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "578", "parent_id": "4195", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4200", "answer_count": 1, "body": "How do you read 方 in\n\n大きいクラスでは、一時間にせいぜい一、二度当たればいい方だ。 \nIn a large class, on a good day, you will be called on at most once or twice.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-06T06:38:21.340", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4199", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-06T07:09:33.177", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1030", "post_type": "question", "score": 5, "tags": [ "readings" ], "title": "How to read いい方", "view_count": 355 }

[ { "body": "It should be read as 'ほう' 'hou'.\n\nいい here is an adjective means 'good'. It is implicitly comparing this\nsituation with the one when you would never be called, which is bad and also\nquite possible in this condition (big class). 方 referring to one of the two\nparties being compared is pronounced ほう.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-06T06:55:32.950", "id": "4200", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-06T07:09:33.177", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-06T07:09:33.177", "last_editor_user_id": "903", "owner_user_id": "903", "parent_id": "4199", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4202", "answer_count": 2, "body": "For example, while I am running I feel great. This makes me feel happy.\n\nWhen doing lots of work for low wages I feel tired.\n\nWhat are the common ways to express my physiological/psychological state?", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-06T06:58:44.443", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4201", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-06T11:08:14.110", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-06T10:15:50.097", "last_editor_user_id": "542", "owner_user_id": "926", "post_type": "question", "score": 5, "tags": [ "set-phrases" ], "title": "Is there a general way to express how you feel?", "view_count": 436 }

[ { "body": "* 気持ちいい 'feel good'\n * 爽快だ '(often after sweating, or drinking carbonated drink, etc.) feel refreshed'\n * 疲れた 'got tired'\n * 飽きた 'got bored'\n * うんざりだ 'be sick of'", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-06T07:11:39.803", "id": "4202", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-06T07:11:39.803", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4201", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "It depends on physiological/psychological state. \n「気持ちいい」- \"I feel good\" \n「よく汗をかく」- \"I worked well\" (\"work\" = \"exercise\") \n「楽しい」- \"It's enjoy\", \"It's pleasure\" etc. \n「疲れた」- \"I feel tired\" \n「さっぱりだ」- \"I`m feeling refreshed\" \netc.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-06T11:08:14.110", "id": "4204", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-06T11:08:14.110", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1024", "parent_id": "4201", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4205", "answer_count": 1, "body": "In English we have some common sounds that are used to fill spaces in songs\nlike \"ah\" \"la\" \"nah\" \"oh\" \"yea\".\n\nWhat do we use for Japanese songs?\n\nSo far I think I have only heard `る` used.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-06T10:22:22.160", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4203", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-06T11:37:53.753", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "542", "post_type": "question", "score": 4, "tags": [ "word-choice", "song-lyrics" ], "title": "What is the Japanese song-metric filler?", "view_count": 275 }

[ { "body": "As for the short shouts, Japanese popular songs are influenced by American\nculture, so you can hear almost anything that you would expect to be shouted\nin an American or other English songs.\n\nAs for the sound used for some length, I think `ら` is the most popular one:\n\n * [桜らららら](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aafLEt9Mg9c#t=1m9s)\n * [悲しみにさようなら](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esKK8GO0Qas#t=3m48s)\n\nA standard song sang in elementary school:\n\n * [気球に乗ってどこまでも](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PteQGzUAUt8#t=53s)\n\nYou can hear it throughout this song:\n\n * [人間なんて](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaBXVZJSkns)\n\nThis one is made solely of this kind of sounds, and includes some variaties\n(`あ`, `ん`, `ら`, `ふ`):\n\n * [北の国から](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-3gnAk3G-w)\n\nI found one with `や`:\n\n * [Yah Yah Yah](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtLEgAUNfao#t=1m10s)\n\nConclusion is that `ら` is the most popular (and sometimes even `や`), and my\nvery rough guess is that this has connection to the fact that the epenthetic\nconsonant in Japanese is usually a liquid (r) or a glide (y, w) as you can\nobserve in the phonoloical rule applied to vowel ending verbs: `mi-u → miru\n(見る)`, classically `mi-u → miyu (見ゆ)`, `mi-are-ta → mirareta (見られた)`", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-06T11:23:34.473", "id": "4205", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-06T11:37:53.753", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-06T11:37:53.753", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4203", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4212", "answer_count": 3, "body": "Are honorifics used for dead people? For example, would チンギス・カン have something\nafter the name (presumably not just a mere さん!) when you're not referring to\nthe [dish](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genghis_Khan_%28Hokkaido_dish%29)?", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-06T12:22:04.787", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4206", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-21T00:35:37.660", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-07T23:45:55.267", "last_editor_user_id": "91", "owner_user_id": "91", "post_type": "question", "score": 11, "tags": [ "honorifics" ], "title": "Are honorifics used for dead people?", "view_count": 2440 }

[ { "body": "You could use the prefix `故【こ】` to say \"the _late_ ~\". That's about the only\none I know.\n\n例： 故斉藤氏 → The _late_ Mr. Saito\n\nBTW, thanks for making me hungry for ジンギスカン （ブツブツ）...", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-06T15:45:30.383", "id": "4209", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-06T15:45:30.383", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "4206", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "Since honorifics generally apply when you are interacting directly with that\nperson, they usually aren't used for people that have died (Maybe spiritual\nmediums do something different because they are supposedly 'interacting\ndirectly' with the deceased, but I don't know).\n\nThink of great people from Japanese history: 織田信長（おだのぶなが） 徳川家康（とくがわいえやす）\n聖徳太子（しょうとくたいし）, all of them are referred to just by their name. Deceased\nformer prime ministers are simply referred to by their name. Deceased Emperors\nare called by their reign (i.e. what we call Emperor Hirohito is just\n昭和天皇（しょうわてんのう） the Showa Emperor in Japanese), while the current living\nEmperor Akihito is referred to in Japanese by 天皇陛下（てんのうへいか） or His Majesty the\nEmperor.\n\nGoing closer to home, people refer to their deceased relatives the same way\nthey did while they were alive. Buddhist beliefs give the deceased a new name\nfor the afterlife, but I have never heard of this new name actually being used\nto refer to the deceased.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-06T18:07:56.287", "id": "4212", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-06T18:07:56.287", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1026", "parent_id": "4206", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 }, { "body": "I would say yes. For example, if you were talking about a deceased teacher, it\nwould be perfectly natural to say (for instance) 先生が亡くなられた後..., which uses an\nhonorific. The honorific 先生 would also be used.\n\nIf a person personally knew and had a relationship of some kind with 岸信介, I\nsuggest that even now such a person would talk of 岸さん and use appropriate\nhonorifics. History books, on the other hand, would refer to him as 岸.\n\nGenghis Khan and other long-dead historical personages don't count, unless you\nhappen to belong to a group that sees itself as directly (religiously?)\nconnected to Genghis Khan. It's the relationship that's important, not whether\nthey are alive or not.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-08T09:01:02.470", "id": "4224", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-21T00:35:37.660", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-21T00:35:37.660", "last_editor_user_id": "1038", "owner_user_id": "1038", "parent_id": "4206", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4208", "answer_count": 1, "body": "On [this\npage](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E3%81%B9%E3%81%8D%E4%B9%97%E6%89%93%E5%88%87%E3%82%8A%E5%BE%85%E6%A9%9F%E6%B3%95),\ndifferent readings are give in different dictionaries for べき乗打切り待機法: べき **のり**\nうちきりたいきほう in JMDict and ベキ **ジョウ** ウチキリタイキホウ in コンピューター用語辞典. The English\ntranslation given in both dictionaries are the same: \"truncated binary\nexponential back-off\".\n\nWhich of these readings is correct? Or, if they are both correct, can they be\nused interchangeably?\n\nI know the べき乗 for exponent is read as べきじょう. Where does the reading べきのり come\nfrom?\n\nNote: I don't actually use the word, nor do I understand its exact meaning. I\nsaw it on [this answer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/699/903). I know\nべき乗 is read as べきじょう, which means exponential, so I thought the reading in the\nanswer was wrong. I tried to find out what it actually means, but search\nresults from the internet are mostly dictionary results. Most of the readings\ngiven are べき **のり** うちきりたいきほう.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-06T14:09:47.043", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4207", "last_activity_date": "2012-06-13T03:21:58.760", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.157", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "903", "post_type": "question", "score": 1, "tags": [ "readings" ], "title": "What is the correct reading for べき乗打切り待機法?", "view_count": 262 }

[ { "body": "[冪乗](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?p=%E5%86%AA%E4%B9%97&stype=1&dtype=0)\n(“power” or “powering” in mathematics; often written as べき乗 because “冪” is not\na 常用漢字) is read as べきじょう. Reading it as べきのり is wrong. Moreover, translating\n“truncated binary exponential back-off” as べき乗打切り待機法 is also incorrect (where\ndid “binary” go?).\n\nI think that “exponential back-off” is usually translated as 指数バックオフ or\n指数的バックオフ. I do not know a standard translation of “truncated binary\nexponential back-off.”\n\n> Where does the reading べきのり come from?\n\nJMDict contains many errors. This is just one of them. And an error in a\n“dictionary” spreads out quickly because many pages are automatically\ngenerated from the underlying data of JMDict.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-06T14:24:59.233", "id": "4208", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-06T14:24:59.233", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "4207", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4214", "answer_count": 2, "body": "私は先生がネコを好きだと思います\n\nWhy を and not が twice?", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-06T15:55:35.113", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4210", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-06T19:58:24.343", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1031", "post_type": "question", "score": 13, "tags": [ "grammar" ], "title": "Why is を used in this situation? 私は先生がネコを好きだと思います", "view_count": 1625 }

[ { "body": "私は先生が猫を好きだと思います sounds all right to me, while 私は先生は猫が好きだと思います would sound more\nnatural.\n\nActually the first sentence (in the OP) is more like answering to the question\nasking 'Who likes cats?' while the other one (which I showed here) is\nanswering to 'What do you think your teacher likes?'\n\nI wouldn't say 私は先生が猫が好きだと思います... Why not? It just sounds unnatural... Well I\nmight say that but wouldn't write that at least.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-06T16:54:33.637", "id": "4211", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-06T17:01:32.487", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-06T17:01:32.487", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4210", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "This is an interesting phenomenon. In a simpler sentence:\n\n> 先生が猫が好きだ,\n\nthe predicate `好き` is a na-adjective, so it does not have the ability to\nassign accusative case to its arguments. Therefore,\n\n> ×先生が猫を好きだ\n\nis ungrammatical. However, when it is embedded under a verb that can assign\naccusative case and there is no other noun phrase that needs to be assigned\naccusative case, then the object of `好き` can receive accusative case\n(remotely) from that verb. Either the nominative (`が`) or the accusative (`を`)\nbecomes available.\n\n> 私は[先生が猫{が/を}好きだ]と思います\n\nIn the example above, `猫` receives accusative case `を` not from its predicate\n`好き` but from the verb `思う`. This is called **Exceptional Case Marking\nconstruction**.\n\nSimilarly in English, the subject in a simple sentence needs to be in\nnominative case:\n\n> He is smart.\n\nso having accusative case on the subject is ungrammatical:\n\n> ×Him (is/to be) smart\n\nHowever, when it is embedded under a verb that can assign accusative case and\nthere is no other noun phrase that needs accusative case, then the embedded\nsubject can receive the accusative case (remotely) from the verb in the main\nclause:\n\n> I consider [him (to be) smart].\n\nHere, `him` is accusative case marked not by its predicate `smart` but by the\nverb `consider`.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-06T18:16:05.057", "id": "4214", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-06T19:58:24.343", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-06T19:58:24.343", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4210", "post_type": "answer", "score": 19 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 1, "body": "I know that one of them is なくてはいけません and the other one なければなりません, I just don't\nknow which is which, also a few example sentences would help a lot, thank you.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-06T18:10:31.323", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4213", "last_activity_date": "2019-03-28T16:03:47.543", "last_edit_date": "2019-03-28T16:03:47.543", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "1032", "post_type": "question", "score": 14, "tags": [ "て-form", "contractions", "negation" ], "title": "Difference between ~なきゃ and ~なくちゃ", "view_count": 10304 }

[ { "body": "Obviously 「・・・しなくちゃ」 is a contracted form of\n「・・・しなくては（なりません）」/「・・・しなくては（いけません）」.\n\n> e.g. 勉強しなくちゃ。 \n> ＝ 勉強しなくては。 \n> ＝ 勉強しなくてはなりません / 勉強しなくてはいけません。\n\n* * *\n\n「・・・しなければ」 can be contracted into 「・・・しなけりゃ」 but we don't say 「・・・しなけりゃ。」 to\nmean 'I gotta do...'\n\n> × 勉強しなけりゃ。 \n> ○ 勉強しなけりゃ試験に合格しないよ。\n\n* * *\n\nAnd I think 「・・・しなきゃ」 is a contracted form of 「・・・しなけりゃ（いけない）。」 \n→<http://okwave.jp/qa/q441217.html> (See A no.2)\n\n> e.g. 勉強しなきゃ。 \n> = 勉強しなければ。 \n> = 勉強しなければなりません / 勉強しなければいけません。\n\n* * *\n\nYou can also say 「勉強しないと。」/ 「勉強せねば。」", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-06T23:48:18.997", "id": "4216", "last_activity_date": "2017-05-18T06:37:26.767", "last_edit_date": "2017-05-18T06:37:26.767", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4213", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 1, "body": "> **Possible Duplicate:** \n> [Difference between ~なきゃ and\n> ~なくちゃ](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/4213/difference-\n> between-%e3%81%aa%e3%81%8d%e3%82%83%e3%80%80and-%e3%81%aa%e3%81%8f%e3%81%a1%e3%82%83)\n\nWhat does いなきゃ mean?", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-06T21:29:51.723", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4215", "last_activity_date": "2017-05-18T06:31:26.487", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:43.857", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1033", "post_type": "question", "score": 1, "tags": [ "て-form", "contractions", "negation" ], "title": "What does いなきゃ mean?", "view_count": 2007 }

[ { "body": "「いなきゃ」 is short for 「いなければ」.\n\n 1. いなきゃ ≒ いなければ ≒ いないのであれば 'If (someone) is not (somewhere)...'\n\n> e.g. 君がいなきゃ、会議が始められないよ。 \n> We can't begin the meeting without you.\n\n 2. いなきゃ ≒ いなければ ≒ いなければならない '(Someone) has to be (somewhere).'\n\n> e.g. 君がいなきゃ。 \n> We can't do without you (=You have to be here).", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-07T00:16:44.897", "id": "4217", "last_activity_date": "2017-05-18T06:31:26.487", "last_edit_date": "2017-05-18T06:31:26.487", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4215", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4219", "answer_count": 1, "body": "One thing that always puzzled me was why some terms and names that are based\non numbers will mix the _on_ and _kun_ readings. I never really understood the\nrules for that, but it occurs to me that there must be some.\n\nFor example, the word _yakuza_ is derived from 8-9-3, a no-score hand in the\n花札 ( _hanafuda_ ) card game. This comprises:\n\n> や — 8, _ya(ttsu)_ , a _kun_ reading \n> く — 9, _ku_ , an _on_ reading \n> ざ — 3, _za_ (for _san_ ), an _on_ reading\n\nSimilarly, the famous Admiral Yamamoto had a given name of Isoroku (meaning,\ncuriously, \"56\"), which mixed _kun_ readings (or their variants) for 5 and 10\nplus the _on_ reading for 6.\n\nI just want to know how to make sense of this — or if it is even necessary\nthat it make sense. Perhaps it is simply a matter of putting together sounds\nthat the originator(s) of the term found pleasing?\n\n**Edit** : I want to add that the usages sometimes seem capricious to me, as\nwhen you hear 二人（ふたり）to refer to two people but 二人前（ににんまえ）to refer to a\nrestaurant serving for two people or the task that two people have before\nthem, although you can hear ふたりまえ there as well.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-07T03:41:15.583", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4218", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-07T15:15:49.017", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-07T15:15:49.017", "last_editor_user_id": "85", "owner_user_id": "85", "post_type": "question", "score": 4, "tags": [ "readings", "numbers", "puns" ], "title": "Why the mixture of *on* and *kun* readings of numbers?", "view_count": 1282 }

[ { "body": "This is actually an interesting topic, here's a quote from\n[wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_word#Japanese):\n\n> In Japanese, hybrid words are common in kango – words formed from kanji\n> characters – where some of the characters may be pronounced using Chinese\n> pronunciations (on'yomi, from Chinese morphemes), and others in the same\n> word are pronounced using Japanese pronunciations (kun'yomi, from Japanese\n> morphemes). These are known as jūbako (重箱) or yutō (湯桶) words, which are\n> themselves examples of this kind of compound (they are autological words):\n> the first character of jūbako is read using on'yomi, the second kun'yomi,\n> while it is the other way around with yutō. Other examples include 場所 basho\n> \"place\" (kun-on), 金色 kin'iro \"golden\" (on-kun) and 合気道 aikidō \"the martial\n> art Aikido\" (kun-on-on).\n\nFor more in-depth reading into the topic, see\n[here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Japanese_vocabulary).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-07T04:38:09.570", "id": "4219", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-07T04:38:09.570", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "921", "parent_id": "4218", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4221", "answer_count": 2, "body": "Can anyone tell me more about 潔い? I've looked in _Goo_ , _Alc_ , _Kenkyusha_ ,\nand _Edict_ , and the definitions refer to \"sportsmanlike\", \"gracious\", or\n\"take it like a man\". However, I'm doubtful if these are literal translations.\n\nMy Japanese teacher gave me a very interesting and different definition along\nthe lines of \"having an attitude of living properly and beautifully rather\nthan living long\". She gave the example of cherry blossom which has a short\nlife and dies at its peak. She also mentioned 武士道 (bushido, samurai code).\n\nI don't want all my Japanese friends to think its better to die young than\nlive long lives :)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-07T21:05:57.560", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4220", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-08T05:42:19.413", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-07T22:07:08.793", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "988", "post_type": "question", "score": 11, "tags": [ "meaning", "definitions", "i-adjectives" ], "title": "[潔]{いさぎよ}い　meaning", "view_count": 391 }

[ { "body": "It means to acknowledge, in the middle of doing something, that it has turned\nout impossible for one to reach the goal, or that one has lost against an\nopponent, due to lack of one's own ability or luck, and to give up.\n\nOften, but not always, this word is used in the context of a competition, such\nas swordsman fighting. If it is obvious that you lost, but you don't admit\nthat, it is considered anti-bushido. If you resign in the right timing for the\nright thing, then it follows bushido (But if you resign so easily, that is\nalso anti-bushido).\n\nYour teacher's example makes sense as a metaphor, but is not the core case. It\nis assuming that cherry blossoms are animate living creatures and are fighting\nagainst their life span, but that they admit when their life comes to an end.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-07T21:54:51.817", "id": "4221", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-08T05:42:19.413", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-08T05:42:19.413", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4220", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "If you play Starcraft(2) then you can think of it as knowing when to say \"gg\"\nand resign from game in acknowledgement that the opponent is the better\nplayer.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-08T02:37:52.903", "id": "4222", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-08T02:37:52.903", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "542", "parent_id": "4220", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 1, "body": "I thought of this question and quickly realized that I already knew a possible\nexample. Japanese band ZONE's most popular song is called 「secret\nbase～君【きみ】がくれたもの～」. The lyrics can be read\n[here](http://music.goo.ne.jp/lyric/LYRUTND13687/index.html) or at another\nlyrics site of your choice. There is also a fairly new \"answer/reply\" song\ncalled 「約束【やくそく】～August, 10years later～」. You can find these lyrics\n[here](http://music.goo.ne.jp/lyric/LYRUTND115838/index.html).\n\nIn the original song, `もの` is only used in the title, but I think reading the\nlyrics should give a sense of what the title means. However, in the answer\nsong, there is a line (referencing the title of the original song) that does\nuse もの:\n\n> 今【いま】もこの胸【むね】には 君【きみ】がくれた`もの`が 10年【ねん】たってもかわらずに\n\nBut I don't think these songs are talking about physical things that the\nsupposed 君【きみ】 gave to the speaker, as the actual definition of `もの` would\nimply. Rather, this 君【きみ】 gave the speaker things abstract things, such as\nwonderful memories (`最高【さいこう】の思【おも】い出【で】を…` from the original song) and\ncompanionship (`一緒【いっしょ】にいたかった 一人【ひとり】で泣【な】かないで` from the answer song) So,\ncould `もの` be used in a figurative/poetic sense to imply that something\nabstract (a `こと`) has great value? Or have I greatly misinterpreted the song?\n\nBonus: Could the reverse be done as well? Could `こと` be used to imply the\ninsignificance/worthlessness of something that is physical, something that is\na `もの`?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-08T10:15:01.303", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4225", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-15T04:56:35.260", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-09T08:47:50.593", "last_editor_user_id": "125", "owner_user_id": "575", "post_type": "question", "score": 10, "tags": [ "usage", "nuances", "meaning", "formal-nouns", "song-lyrics" ], "title": "Can もの be used to imply the value of something that is a こと?", "view_count": 759 }

[ { "body": "I think you are right in saying 君がくれたもの doesn't have to be a physical object.\nIt could be life experiences, an understanding of things, etc. The common\nthread seems to be that these are things that can be kept.\n\nOn the other hand, 君がくれたこと would, I think, often be understood as 'the fact\nthat you gave to me' ('the fact of your giving to me'). 君が教えてくれたこと 'things you\ntaught me' makes sense, but 君がくれたこと '(abstract) things you gave me' doesn't\nmake so much sense.\n\n* * *\n\nYour question is difficult to answer because of your use of the expressions\n'add value' and (particularly) 'imply the significance/worthlessness of'.\nThese represent to me a misunderstanding of how こと and もの are used.\n\nWhat makes discussing this difficult is the fact that substituting one for the\nother does not necessarily mean a simple change in nuance of the word 'thing',\nbecause もの and こと actually have other uses that are quite different from each\nother.\n\nFor instance, 勉強したことがある/ない means 'to have studied / not to have studied'.\n勉強したものだ means something like 'used to study' and is a reflection on how much\nyou used to study at some time in the past. What this means is that swapping\none for the other in a particular context could result in completely different\nmeanings, meanings quite unrelated to the opposition that you're trying to\nestablish here.\n\nBut there _are_ cases where there seems to be interchangeability between こと\nand もの. For instance, both 勉強したこと and 勉強したもの exist.\n\n勉強したこと simply refers to content that you've covered in a lesson or course. For\nexample, 勉強したことのまとめ means a summing up, or summary of what you've studied.\n_There is no implication that what you've studied is trifling or\ninsignificant_. There is, perhaps, an implication of objectivity. It just\nmeans 'things that you've studied' -- no value judgement.\n\n勉強したもの is similarly used for content that you have studied, and is _generally\nvery little different in meaning from 強したこと_. If there is any difference, my\nfeeling is that it suggests that what you studied has more content, more\n'weight', or perhaps is something that remains with you (i.e., things you have\n'learnt' rather than things you have 'studied'). But there does not seem to be\na very clear difference between the two.\n\nTake another example.\n\n言っていいこと means 'something that it's ok to say'. The implication is that there\nare some things that it is ok to say to people, and there are some things it's\nnot ok to say to people (言っていいこと、言って悪いこと). This is a social or perhaps moral\njudgement -- for example, don't say things that will hurt or offend people.\n_こと here will tend to refer to the actual words that are spoken_. For example,\n「太ったね！」は言っていけないこと。'\"You've put on weight!\" is something you shouldn't say to\npeople'.\n\n言っていいもの is somewhat different. For instance, it could be used in expressions\nof describing (これは完全なフィクションと言っていいものだ. 'It is something that could be described\nas pure fiction'). When used to refer to saying things, unfortunately a\ndifferent meaning can also come into play. The meaning of もの can be understood\nas 'Is this the done thing?' rather than 'Are these acceptable words to use'.\nOne example from the Internet is 私は彼に「会わないで」って言っていいものなんでしょうか？ Here the word もの\ndoesn't refer to the words 会わないで, it is asking for a judgement on the\nacceptability of a telling someone not to meet. That is, it is asking whether\nit is acceptable to make such a request, not whether such words are\nappropriate say to a person.\n\nI realise that I haven't given you a good explanation of how to use こと and how\nto use もの, which makes this unsatisfactory as an answer. My understanding of\nthe difference is that こと describes things in a more abstract manner, used of\nfacts, actions, or words. もの is used of more substantial things, including\nphysical objects, and abstract things that can be the subject of thought. The\nproblem with most dictionary definitions is that they are too vague or\nabstract to enable you to distinguish the two.\n\nHowever, what I can say is that your understanding here is incorrect. Using こと\ndoesn't make something trifling or worthless. Using もの doesn't necessarily\n'add value', although it may add weight.\n\n* * *\n\nI struggle to answer your question because you seem to be asking:\n\n 1. \"By using もの instead of こと here, is it indicating that this something has more value?\"\n\n 2. \"Is that because もの refers to physical things that it implies more value?\"\n\nThe problem here is that we have to narrow the context and syntactic\nenvironment right down, excluding any extraneous elements, to get the question\nto make sense. Specifically, the context is くれたもの / くれたこと (past tense verb +\nmono/koto). Swapping structures around can very subtly alter the meaning and\nfrequency of expression. For example, ものをくれる (noun + verb) tips the balance\nalmost completely in the direction of 'give a physical object'.\n\nAs for ことをくれる (noun + verb), this is used, but the sense is very vague. From\nthe Internet:\n\nたくさんのことをくれる 家族にも 両親にも 親戚にも お友達にも 今年の最後に 『ありがと。』 \nTo our families, our parents, our relatives, our friends who give us so many\nthings, for the last time (or the end of) this year (we want to say) 'thank\nyou'.\n\n嘘つきだろうと 落ちぶれだろうと やさしいことを くれる人ならば たとえ世界が空から落ちても あたしは あの人をかばう やさしくしてくれるなら\n\n(From song lyrics) No matter if they are a liar or a drop-out, if a person\ngives me tender things (?), even if the world should fall from the sky, I will\nprotect that person, if they are tender to me. (Notice that やさしいことを くれる is\nrephrased as やさしくしてくれる in the second instance. The meaning of やさしいことを くれる thus\nseems to be 'tenderness', or 'be tender to me'.)\n\nドラマで共演しているソン・イェジンに対して「多くのことをくれる女優」と評価した \nSon Eijin who had a co-role is recognised as 'an actress who gave us a lot'\n\n初めてのあのライブで、あの音で、完璧に心を打ち抜かれました。 それって、とても素晴らしいことですよね。 こんな素敵なことをくれたのは、翔太さん \nThat first live concert, that sound totally wiped me out. That is something\nreally wonderful. The one who gave us something so wonderful was Shōta.\n\nThe last quote shows that こと can also be quite wonderful, not trifling or\nworthless at all. So what is the difference between こと and もの in くれたもの /\nくれたこと?\n\nI would suggest (as in my original answer to you) that the use of もの indicates\nsomething that can be kept and treasured, as opposed to something that is\nsimply an experience or action received. もの does not necessarily indicate\nsomething concrete, but it does indicate an 'entity' of some kind. That is,\nnot simply a one-off instance of kindness or love, but something that is\ngained and can thus be kept. (I suspect that the use of こと and もの in 勉強したこと /\n勉強したもの is similar. The first is simply _the content_ that is studied; the\nsecond is _what is gained_ from study. But I would be very careful not to\nexaggerate the difference here; in actual usage it doesn't seem to make much\ndifference.)\n\nIt's possible that もの takes on the meaning of something gained and kept\nbecause もの refers to physical objects, but I'm hesitant about that\nexplanation, because it is perfectly normal for もの to refer to non-physical\nobjects. In fact, it's one of the dictionary definitions of もの:\n人間が考えることのできる形のない対象.\n\nI'm afraid I can't give you any more than this. I think you need to acquaint\nyourself with the full range of uses of both もの and こと in order to get a feel\nfor them. The range of uses and meanings is quite broad, abstract, and in some\ncases overlapping, and it's hard to gain a grasp without a sense of all the\npossible usages and meanings. It's rather narrow to just focus on one rather\nparticular usage and (in a sense) try to build a mini-theory of meaning based\non that single usage.\n\nI hope this is of some help to you. I'm afraid I can't give you any more.\nPerhaps a Japanese native speaker can give you a more definitive answer.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-08T11:29:10.043", "id": "4226", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-15T04:56:35.260", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-15T04:56:35.260", "last_editor_user_id": "1038", "owner_user_id": "1038", "parent_id": "4225", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4229", "answer_count": 2, "body": "Browsing for art late at night, I came across this beautiful poem by\n[Yoshitoshi](http://www.yoshitoshi.net/), said to be his death poem:\n\n> yo o tsumete\n>\n> terimasarishi wa\n>\n> natsu no tsuki\n\ntranslated as:\n\nholding back the night / with its increasing brilliance / the summer moon\n\n...which I'd like to be able to write. How is this written? Which kana and\nkanji are used?", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-09T02:06:47.657", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4227", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-09T04:10:00.403", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "350", "post_type": "question", "score": 1, "tags": [ "kanji", "kana", "quotes" ], "title": "Which kana/kanji are used to write Yoshitoshi's death poem?", "view_count": 801 }

[ { "body": "Here it is:\n\n> 夜{よ}をつめて照{てり}まさりしか夏{なつ}の月{なつ}\n\nI found it [here](http://www.tmtkknst.com/journals/bn2009_08.html) (near the\nbottom), and it seems to have \"ka\" where what you found says \"wa\"...I've found\nother romaji versions with \"wa\", so I'm not sure which is correct...", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-09T02:57:49.870", "id": "4228", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-09T02:57:49.870", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "921", "parent_id": "4227", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "This was originally a comment to point out that it may not have been written\nwith the kana/kanji in use today, but I realized it's an example of an\nalternative way to write it: \n\nIt's a painting of Yoshitoshi that was published by another artist in the same\nmonth he died.\n\nThe [source](http://metro2.tokyo.opac.jp/tml/tpic/cgi-\nbin/detail.cgi?Kbseqid=858&orgkbseqid=&Sryparam=001&Backpage=/tml/tpic/resprint_d/all/isbn001_0_30/isbn001_001_395.html&Srhfname=/resprint_d/all/isbn001_0_30/isbn001&Rp_kind=8&Displmt=30&Backpage2=&Srhfname2=&Cpage=&Size=&bSize=&Dstate=)\ntranscribes it the same way it's written in silvermaples answer.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-09T03:33:41.747", "id": "4229", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-09T03:33:41.747", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "54", "parent_id": "4227", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4232", "answer_count": 1, "body": "I have been living in Japan now for the last 3 months and my hair is starting\nto look like it needs a cut. But I have never been to a Japanese barbers\nbefore so as you can imagine I am a little nervous about it.\n\nI have a couple of questions about getting your hair cut in Japanese:\n\nWhat are common/useful words/phrases that can be used when getting your\nhaircut?\n\nSpecifically it would be nice to know how to say I want certain parts of my\nhair a certain length.\n\nAside from those two specific things are there any other useful phrases, words\nor anything else that would be useful to learn before going to the barbers in\nJapan?", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-09T13:32:39.710", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4230", "last_activity_date": "2016-01-30T02:29:42.207", "last_edit_date": "2016-01-30T02:29:42.207", "last_editor_user_id": "1035", "owner_user_id": "1035", "post_type": "question", "score": 22, "tags": [ "words", "set-phrases", "culture", "phrases" ], "title": "Getting your haircut in Japan", "view_count": 12820 }

[ { "body": "Thin it out. すいてください。 \nThin out this part. このあたりを、すいてください。 \nI want this part this long. ここを、このくらいの[長]{なが}さにしてください。 \nKeep the front. [前]{まえ}[髪]{がみ}を[残]{のこ}してください。 \nTake about 1 centimeter off my bangs. [前]{まえ}[髪]{がみ}を1センチくらい[切]{き}ってください。 \nShorten it in back by about 5 centimeters. [後]{うし}ろを5センチくらい[切]{き}ってください。 \nTrim a little more. もう[少]{すこ}し[切]{き}ってください。 \nTrim this part a little more. このあたりを、もう[少]{すこ}し[切]{き}ってください。 \nCan you make it look like this photo?\nこの[写]{しゃ}[真]{しん}のようにしてください。/こんなふうにしてください。 \nCan I make an appointment for a haircut. カットの[予]{よ}[約]{やく}をしたいのですが。 \nHow much is it for just a simple cut? カットはいくらですか。 \nHow much is it for a cut and shampooing? カットとシャンプーだといくらですか。 \nHow long will it take? どのくらいかかりますか。 \n\nHmm...what else?", "comment_count": 16, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-09T16:19:37.207", "id": "4232", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-09T16:52:40.700", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-09T16:52:40.700", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4230", "post_type": "answer", "score": 25 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4235", "answer_count": 1, "body": "I'm in the midst of creating a show flyer for an upcoming event and one of the\nartists uses the name \"Bakka!\" (without quotes)\n\nI'm aware that the real word for this is Baka, so I'm curious as to how it\nwould affect the spelling of it with two K's?\n\nAnd, as hyperworm suggested, I'm curious how this affects the meaning of it by\nhaving two K's?\n\nIf anyone could shine some light on this for me I would greatly appreciate it,\nthank you!", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-09T20:17:52.687", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4234", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-09T21:00:17.160", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-09T21:00:17.160", "last_editor_user_id": "1041", "owner_user_id": "1041", "post_type": "question", "score": 4, "tags": [ "translation", "readings" ], "title": "Japanese translation for \"bakka!\" (Not Baka)", "view_count": 21261 }

[ { "body": "* Baka = ばか、バカ、or 馬鹿【ばか】\n * Bakka = ばっか or バッカ\n\nBTW, the second part of your question could be considered off-topic and may be\nedited out.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-09T20:28:48.753", "id": "4235", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-09T20:28:48.753", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "4234", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4238", "answer_count": 2, "body": "> こんなくそみたいな帽子{ぼうし}かぶせやがって！\n>\n> \"こんな仕事{しごと}させやがって！\"\n>\n> \"こんなまずいものを食{く}わせやがって！\"\n>\n> \"あいつは本当{ほんとう}に良{い}いものを作{つく}りやがる\"\n\nI was recently acquainted with the inflection \"やがる,\" as illustrated in the\nexamples above. Would it be right to describe it as a 活用形 (inflection)? Can\nanyone explain how to use it and what role it serves?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-10T00:38:50.550", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4236", "last_activity_date": "2019-06-15T14:09:37.020", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "706", "post_type": "question", "score": 11, "tags": [ "grammar", "morphology" ], "title": "How to use the inflection \"やがる\"?", "view_count": 13144 }

[ { "body": "やがる is a 助動詞 (auxiliary verb).\n[活用形](https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ja/wiki/%E6%B4%BB%E7%94%A8#.E6.B4.BB.E7.94.A8.E5.BD.A2)\nis used to refer to the conjugated form of a word.\n\nやがる is used to state the action of the opponent with emotion of scorn or\ndislike.\n\nFrom [Yahoo\ndictionary](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&p=%E3%82%84%E3%81%8C%E3%82%8B&dtype=0&dname=0na&stype=0):\n\n> 軽蔑や憎しみなどの気持ちを込めて、相手の動作をいう意を表す\n\nIt is used after the 連用形 of verbs, and 「れる」「られる」「せる」「させる」.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-10T01:04:30.710", "id": "4237", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-10T01:04:30.710", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "903", "parent_id": "4236", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "`やがる` is a verb since the endings it takes is the same as the other verbs:\n\n> 食べやがる non-past \n> 食べやがった past \n> 食べやがれ imperative \n> etc.\n\n`やがる` attaches to stems; it is an affix that attaches to a verb and creates a\nverb.\n\nIts meaning is to add the first person's feeling that the act was done\ndisfavorably or turned out to be disfavorable to the first person. It is the\nopposite of `-てくれる`, which expresses the first person's feeling that the act\nwas favorable. Unlike `-てくれる`, though, `やがる` is colloquial and mildly\ninsulting.\n\n> 帽子を被せる \n> 'put a hat on someone' [Neutral]\n>\n> 帽子を被せてくれる \n> 'put a hat on someone' [Favorable]\n>\n> 帽子を被せやがる \n> 'put a hat on someone' [Disfavorable]\n\nIn your last example, the reason `やがる` is used despite the positive\nconnotation from `よいもの` is because the first person is expressing jealousy\n(serious or not). From the point of view of the first person, it is not a good\nthing that the other person made a good thing.\n\n* * *\n\nTraditional grammar confuses classification of words based on their meaning\nand classification based on the (morphological) form. It considers whatever\nword or morpheme that has the meaning comparable to the meanings expressed by\nauxiliaries in western languages (such as modaility, etc.) as 助動詞 'auxiliary\nverb'. However, parts of speech is a morphological (and syntactic) notion. It\nis a classification of words and morphemes based on their forms. It has\nnothing to do with the meaning. The traditional classification is\ninappropriate.\n\nFurthermore, in modern analysis of Japanese, there is no such thing as 活用形.\nAll there is is the verb stem, and an affix that attaches to it. What\ntraditional grammar calls 活用語尾, on which 活用形 manifests, is actually the\ninitial vowel of the affix (and/or some few sounds surrounding it). For\nexample, traditional grammar says that the negative form verb `書かない` consists\nof the stem `書`, its 活用語尾 `か` and a 助動詞 `ない`. But notice how unsophisticated\nand complicated that analysis is. In modern analysis, all there is is the verb\nstem `kak-` and the negative affix `-anai` (which is itself an i-adjective).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-10T02:26:55.847", "id": "4238", "last_activity_date": "2017-05-11T13:19:41.320", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4236", "post_type": "answer", "score": 21 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 1, "body": "It is in the title of a book named そうべえまっくろけのけ. How to split そうべえまっくろけのけ?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-10T03:53:48.483", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4239", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-10T19:52:35.157", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-10T19:52:35.157", "last_editor_user_id": "37", "owner_user_id": "1042", "post_type": "question", "score": 4, "tags": [ "meaning" ], "title": "What does そうべ mean?", "view_count": 250 }

[ { "body": "`そうべえ` is the name of a person. `そうべ` does not mean anything.\n\n> そうべえ まっ くろ け の け \n> Soubee purely/really black -ish and \"ke\" \n> 'Soubee, who turned entirely black-ish-ish'\n\n`のけ` does not mean much, but is just making it rythmic, repeating the `け`.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-10T03:55:51.290", "id": "4240", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-10T04:01:10.753", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-10T04:01:10.753", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4239", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4242", "answer_count": 1, "body": "I can't find コシなし defined in any dictionary. It looks like it might have\nsomething to do with udon noodles.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-10T08:07:25.703", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4241", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-10T08:24:44.683", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "69", "post_type": "question", "score": 6, "tags": [ "meaning", "definitions" ], "title": "What is koshinashi?", "view_count": 155 }

[ { "body": "From goo dictionary:\n\n腰がある\n\n餅・うどん・そばなどの歯ざわりがしっかりしている。\n\nEnglish example:\n\nこの餅は腰がある This rice cake is chewy.\n\nFor noodles, 'chewy' is probably not the best choice. I've seen it equated to\n_al dente_ in English and that is probably a better translation.\n\nコシなし would be the opposite, what we might call soggy noodles in English.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-10T08:24:44.683", "id": "4242", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-10T08:24:44.683", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1038", "parent_id": "4241", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4244", "answer_count": 1, "body": "They both seem to mean \"quick as lightning\". What are the nuances between\nthem? In what sort of context would they be used? Are they interchangeable?\netc.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-10T20:16:53.783", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4243", "last_activity_date": "2020-11-08T04:57:14.543", "last_edit_date": "2020-11-08T04:57:14.543", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "78", "post_type": "question", "score": 12, "tags": [ "word-choice", "nuances", "words", "set-phrases", "yoji-jukugo" ], "title": "What's the difference between [電光石火]{でんこうせっか} and [疾風迅雷]{しっぷうじんらい}", "view_count": 420 }

[ { "body": "According to [this Chiebukuro\npost](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1243624362),\n`電光石火` can be used to describe something that is so fast that it's as if you\ndon't even notice it, and can be used for greater exaggerations than `疾風迅雷`,\nand that it's often more suited to shorter distances within arm's length.\n\n> 示{じ}現{げん}流{りゅう}の **電光石火** の[太]{た}[刀]{ち}が、相手の[脳]{のう}[天]{てん}を[切]{き}り[裂]{さ}いた。 \n> \"The sword of lightning speed of [Jigen-\n> ryū](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jigen-ry%C5%AB) cut off the top of the\n> opponent's head.\"\n>\n> ジンギスカンの[軍]{ぐん}[勢]{ぜい}は、 **疾風迅雷** の[勢]{いきお}いでホラズム軍を[撃]{げき}[破]{は}した。 \n> \"Genghis Khan's military forces crushed the Khwarezm troops with a force as\n> quick as lightning.\"\n\nConsulting the `四{よ}字{じ}熟{じゅく}語{ご}辞{じ}典{てん}` from `学習研究社`:\n\n`電光石火`:\n\n> 非常に短い時間のたとえ。また、[動作]{どうさ}がすばやいこと \n> \"An analogy of an extremely short period of time. Also, something where\n> movement is quick.\"\n>\n> * 電{でん}光{こう}: 稲{いな}妻{ずま} (a flash of lightning).\n> * 石{せっ}火{か}: The fireworks of flint.\n>\n\n>\n> Both 電光 and 石火 are an analogy of an extremely short period of time.\n\n`疾風迅雷`:\n\n> 勢いや行動がすばやいようす \n> \"A state where force or actions are quick.\"\n>\n> * 疾{しっ}風{ぷう}: Refers to wind that's blowing at a furiously fast rate. \n>\n> * 迅{じん}雷{らい}: Refers to furiously roaring thunder.\n>", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-11T02:47:51.957", "id": "4244", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-11T08:19:17.577", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-11T08:19:17.577", "last_editor_user_id": "796", "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "4243", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4296", "answer_count": 3, "body": "In my JLPT workbook, it has a section which gives a list of idioms that use\n`[虫]{むし}`.\n\n> 仕事{しごと}の **虫** (worker bee)\n>\n> 点取{てんとり} **虫** (derogatory term for a student who tries too hard)\n>\n> **虫** がいい (selfish)\n>\n> 泣{な}き **虫** (cry baby)\n>\n> 弱{よわ} **虫** (weakling)\n>\n> 腹{はら}の **虫** がおさまらない (extremely angry)\n>\n> **虫** が知{し}らせる (forebode)\n>\n> **虫** が好{す}かない (antipathy to)\n>\n> **虫** の居所{いどころ}が悪{わる}い (in a bad mood)\n>\n> 娘{むすめ}に悪{わる}い **虫** がつく (daughter has a lousy boyfriend)\n\nI'm curious about the origins of the \"bug\" being used in these phrases.\n\nIn one sense, some of them are evocative of a sort of character, a \"bug\" that\nis present when things are bad, when there's a sense of foreboding, when one\nfeels down. Almost like the bug is an entity that causes trouble wherever it\ngoes.\n\nIn another sense, sometimes the person being described _is_ the \"bug\", as if\nthey have become the \"bug\" by being weak, by being a drone, by being a whiner,\nor whatever the case is.\n\nSo, do some or all of these uses of `虫` come from the same origin?\n\nWhat exactly is \"the bug\" when it's the first sense of a character that is\npresent, such as when it's \"in the stomach\"?\n\n* * *\n\n**Bonus questions:**\n\nIs there any connection in terms of origins between the phrases\n`「腹{はら}の虫がおさまらない」` and `「腹が立つ」`?\n\nIs `「仕事{しごと}の虫」` equivalent to \"workaholic\"? Or does it not have negative\nconnotations of over-work?\n\nIs `「点取{てんとり}虫」` equivalent to \"teacher's pet\"? Or does sucking up to the\nteacher having no relation?", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-11T09:13:29.940", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4245", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-17T01:03:06.163", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-14T01:31:56.073", "last_editor_user_id": "119", "owner_user_id": "119", "post_type": "question", "score": 21, "tags": [ "word-choice", "translation", "idioms" ], "title": "What's bugging the Japanese language?", "view_count": 1593 }

[ { "body": "I might furnish the answer in future. But here's what I have tentatively:\n\n 1. 虫 can be used as a (derogatory) diminutive suffix for certain types of people that exhibit an arbitrary trait that is commonly collocated with `虫`. `点取虫`, `泣き虫`, `弱虫` belongs to this usage.\n\n 2. I think `虫が知らせる` is based on the different behaviours of insects due to different environmental conditions. For example, insects react to weather change. If it's about to rain one would suddenly notice more flying insects indoors. So one way to \"predict the future\" would be to observe the natural adaptive behaviour of insects. So in a way, insects forebode and provide us with a presentiment of things to come.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-11T11:27:21.090", "id": "4246", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-11T11:27:21.090", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "542", "parent_id": "4245", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "This should be tracked back to 7th century where Kanji first came to Japan due\nto China's influence. Those phrases mentioned are actually from the Chinese\nLanguage, where when it's used, 「虫」has the meaning of \" something alive and\nactive \", \" something bad and irritating \".", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-11T11:30:02.060", "id": "4247", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-11T11:30:02.060", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1045", "parent_id": "4245", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "According to the [Wikipedia article for\n`虫`](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%99%AB):\n\n 1. `体内の架空、仮想の生物の意味で用いるもの。` \nUsed for the meanings of \"imaginary inside the body, imaginary creatures\":\n\n> * 三尸{さんし}の虫: A [庚申{こうしん}](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C5%8Dshin)\n> belief originating from Taoism from China that inside the bodies of humans\n> there are three bugs.\n>\n> * 虫の知らせ: A premonition. As if given a prediction by the inner-body\n> \"bugs\", a feeling about things that aren't generally known and events that\n> will occur in a distant place.\n>\n> * 虫が（の）いい: Only think about oneself (selfish.)\n>\n> * 虫の居所が悪い: In a bad mood. This is because it was believed that unless\n> the inner-body \"bugs\" settled down, the person's mood would worsen.\n>\n> * 虫が（の）好かない: Something (you) don't like.\n>\n> * 獅子身中の虫: Though a friend, has an element that does harm (treacherous\n> friend.)\n>\n> * 腹の虫が治まらない: Cannot contain one's anger.\n>\n> * 腹の虫が鳴く: The sound which comes out of your stomach when you're hungry.\n\n 2. `実際の虫のイメージで用いるもの。` \nUsed the way the image of bugs is in reality:\n\n> * 虫の息: At death's door. Originates from the the fact that breath is\n> small like a small bug or creature, but isn't necessarily used to refer to\n> breath in reality.\n>\n> * 悪い虫が付く: To get involved with an unsavory/bad person.\n>\n> * 虫酸が走る: To be disgusted.\n>\n> * 虫も殺さぬ: Obedient and quiet (\"wouldn't hurt a fly.\")\n>\n> * 飛んで火に[入]{い}る夏の虫: Jump into failure, things that are dangerous to\n> oneself. (\"like a moth flying into the flame.\")\n>\n> * 蓼食う虫も好きずき: \"To each their own (taste).\" From that the leaves of\n> [蓼{タデ}](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%BF%E3%83%87) have a\n> characteristic harsh taste and there virtually aren't any bugs which eat\n> them, but there are some which are fond of their taste.\n>\n> * 一寸の虫にも五分の魂: Even if small, has power and presence (\"tread on a worm\n> and it will turn.\")\n\n 3. `他に、嫌な人の意味で使う事もある。` \nOtherwise used to refer to a detestable person:\n\n> * 弱虫: A weak-hearted person.\n>\n> * 泣き虫: Someone easily moved to tears.\n>\n> * 点取り虫: A derogatory term for someone who gets high scores in school\n> exams (I'm guessing it doesn't mean \"teacher's pet\". Space ALC defines it as\n> \"grade grabber\" and \"obsessed with grades\".)\n\n* * *\n\nThe Gogen-allguide article for [虫の知らせ](http://gogen-\nallguide.com/mu/mushinoshirase.html) seems to back up the Wikipedia article.\nIt says that the `虫` in those expressions refers to the `三尸{さんし}`/`三虫{さんちゅう}`\nbugs that influence subconscious awareness and feelings/emotions and\ncorroborates that `虫の知らせ`, `虫がいい` and `腹の虫が治まらない` have that etymology.\n\nAccording to the etymology page for [虫唾が走る](http://gogen-\nallguide.com/mu/mushizu.html), `虫唾` comes from the acidic liquid that comes\nfrom your stomach out of your mouth while feeling nauseous in your chest, and\nthe `走る` refers to it coming out of your mouth. In other words, something\nthat's as unpleasant as the acidic liquid coming out of your mouth. There are\ntheories of the etymology coming due to saliva that comes up out of your\nstomach output by parasites as well as acidic liquid due to parasites. For\nthat reason, it can be written as `虫唾` (bug saliva) and `虫酸` (bug acid) and\nhistorically has been written as both `むしづ` and `むしず`.\n\nThe page for the etymology of [腹](http://gogen-\nallguide.com/ha/hara_karada.html) says that in ancient times it was thought\nthat one's mind was inside the abdomen/stomach, so it says a lot of words use\n`腹` to mean emotions/feelings and I think it's likely that might be the root\nof `腹が立つ` rather than `虫`.\n\n* * *\n\n**EDIT:** Removed the Kanjigen section as I wasn't sure of it's accuracy and\nadded a section on `虫唾が走る`.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-16T05:54:50.043", "id": "4296", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-17T01:03:06.163", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-17T01:03:06.163", "last_editor_user_id": "796", "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "4245", "post_type": "answer", "score": 15 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4577", "answer_count": 3, "body": "_**Warning:** I have no sense of how offensive any of these words might be.\nThey are repeated only insofar as they help me learn what not to say.\nApologies for any accidental offense, and please do not read if you feel it\nmight be potentially upsetting._\n\nI was going [through this list of unbroadcastable\nwords](http://www.geocities.co.jp/WallStreet/4845/odio/kinku.html), and most\nof them, being racial epithets, terms of derision, or simple vulgarities, are\neasy enough to understand why they are objectionable.\n\nHowever, some of them are puzzling. To a non-native speaker like myself,\nwithout enough knowledge of the history, or enough feel for the language, a\nlot of them seem kind of arbitrary. So I'm hoping some people can give short\nsummaries for why some of these words are not considered politically correct.\n\n * Why is `芸人{げいにん}` any different from `芸能人{げいのうじん}`?\n\n * My dictionary defines both `人非人{にんぴにん}` and `ひとでなし` as \"brute of a man\". Putting aside the old-school English definition, what differentiates them to make `人非人{にんぴにん}` worse?\n\n * Why are `家柄{いえがら}`、`血筋{ちすじ}`, and `身分{みぶん}` bad at all? They are defined as \"lineage\", \"blood line\", and \"social status\", respectively, all of which seem kind of neutral to me. Why ban them and not things like `上流{じょうりゅう}`, `階級{かいきゅう}`, or `地位{ちい}`?\n\n * Following from the above, what makes `名門校{めいもんこう}` bad? There's a note saying that in a particular use in reference to baseball it might be accepted, but why would it ever be seen as a bad thing?\n\n * Does `ザギン` have any more impact other than just being a slang way of saying `銀座{ぎんざ}`?", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-11T15:29:07.697", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4248", "last_activity_date": "2015-07-13T19:21:30.573", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-11T23:09:03.460", "last_editor_user_id": "119", "owner_user_id": "119", "post_type": "question", "score": 8, "tags": [ "word-choice", "slang", "offensive-words" ], "title": "Why are these words considered less politically correct?", "view_count": 1385 }

[ { "body": "Regarding 家柄, 血筋 and 身分: the page itself indicates that the words aren't so\nmuch banned as \"requiring extra care\" or \"better to avoid if possible\"...\nConsidering their group (discriminatory words) and their neighbours (部落民), I\nthink it's quite easy to understand why they might be considered potentially\n\"offensive\" words. By their history, they were most often used to make\ndistinction between people based on social rank, lineage and other\ndiscriminatory criteria.\n\nAs a mildly off-topic aside: you may want to keep in mind that the Japanese\napproach to \"offensive\"/\"politically incorrect\" terms is rather different from\nthat of many Western countries, in that very often, terms with no intrinsic\npejorative meanings are banned for the sole reason that they are _associated_\nwith a thing/person/practice frowned upon. The most famous example being\nprobably 部落民【ぶらくみん】, which was a rather \"neutral\" term (in a heavily\ndiscriminating system, of course) akin to something like \"negro\" in English,\nand is now just as taboo as the _other_ N word.\n\nGenerally, Japanese tends to scrub off those words that are loosely or even\nindirectly associated with disagreeable topics and favour euphemisms instead.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-11T17:38:13.723", "id": "4251", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-12T03:46:18.127", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-12T03:46:18.127", "last_editor_user_id": "290", "owner_user_id": "290", "parent_id": "4248", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "I think the difference between the words [家柄, 血筋 and 身分] vs. [上流, 階級, 地位] is\nwhat _kind_ of status the words imply. The first group of words refer\nspecifically to what social caste you or your ancestors were _born_ into. This\ntouches upon the 部落民 discrimination and all that unpleasantness.\n\nThe second group of words though, refer to a more general type of\nsocioeconomic status, not one's ancestry. 上流 is a much more general word and\ndoesn't only mean 'upper classes', it can just mean upper level, upper course,\netc. Similarly 階級 is the general word for social class, so it's used in words\nlike proletariat, bourgeois, upper- middle- and lower-class, etc. 地位 is even\nmore general and can apply to your position in a company or even just a\nphysical position.\n\nSo the reason why those first three words are distasteful is because they\nrefer to discrimination by birth specifically, which is illegal and taboo,\neven though it still exists. This is totally different from discrimination (or\ndifferentiation, to use a more neutral word) by socioeconomic status, which\noften has absolutely no relation to birth ancestry. There are members of the\nJapanese Diet (certainly wealthy and powerful) that are descended from 部落民,\nwhile I'm sure there are many descendents of Japanese nobility that are\nnothing more than freeters.\n\n名門校 I think is touching upon discrimination by education. While endemic,\ndiscussion of it is distasteful and so avoided.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-12T18:34:40.990", "id": "4259", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-12T18:34:40.990", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1026", "parent_id": "4248", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "The Japanese Wikipedia article has an entry on 放送問題用語 which includes some\ndiscussion of the different types of words that are considered problematic. It\nappears there is not a single list that applies to all broadcasters: (from\n[the entry on\n放送禁止用語](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%94%BE%E9%80%81%E5%95%8F%E9%A1%8C%E7%94%A8%E8%AA%9E))\n\n> 今日の日本には放送禁止用語は正しくは存在せず自主規制のみである (Currently in Japan no \"banned words\" list\n> exists and there are only voluntary restraints).\n\nIt seems that the list you can find floating around was a NHK list but it is\nnot currently \"official\". Interesting categories other than the obvious listed\nin the entry for 放送問題用語 include:\n\n> 誤った言葉・不正確・不明確な言葉・表現 (words that are misleading or unclear)\n>\n> 通信制高校または定時制高校 (I think this touches on the 名門校 issue: e.g. discrimination by\n> education or against certain types of school as dbassett suggested)\n>\n> 特定の職業に関する言葉 (certain terms relating to occupations)\n\ne.g.\n\n> 「～屋」は、一般的に注意を要する言葉。商店やサービス業などの日銭が入る **職業を軽蔑するような用い方は禁止**\n> 。企業名としての「○○屋」を用い、または自称で○○屋とする場合や「～屋さん」と敬称を付けるのは問題ない。\n>\n> \"~ya\" is a term which generally requires caution. The use of it to express\n> scorn towards small businesses in service and retail sectors or similar\n> occupations is banned. There are no problems in the use if the business name\n> contains ~ya, or where someone uses the term self-referentially, or if\n> ~yasan is used.\n\nWho would have thought there would be such consideration into where you could\nuse 屋?\n\nI think the bolded section might also be the source for some of the other\nwords: it might not be clear from the meaning in English, but a word could\nhave been used (historically or otherwise) to discriminate against/insult\npeople based on occupation (職業差別).\n\nFor some of your other examples: 人非人 I think may take its unacceptability from\n非人. ザギン apparently is ズージャー語 and ズージャー itself (as opposed to ジャズ) is also on\nthe list - this might just be an issue of avoiding slang or certain types of\nslang, though, as opposed to these words being strictly offensive. I would\nguess that some types of slang (for example, slang commonly associated\nwith/used by criminal organisations) would be an automatic no-no even if the\nmeaning of the words was fairly harmless.\n\n<http://monoroch.net/kinshi/> has pretty much the same list, with some notes\nfor some of the words.\n\nAnother interesting source for a general overview of standards is:\n<http://www3.nhk.or.jp/pr/keiei/kijun/index.htm> , particularly 第１１項 表現\n\n芸人 is still a mystery to me: I wonder if it's just that it is preferred to\nspecify お笑い芸人 or 芸能人.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-06T15:32:08.350", "id": "4577", "last_activity_date": "2015-07-13T19:21:30.573", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "571", "parent_id": "4248", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 1, "body": "This looks like やる in a colloquial form. Can someone clear up what this says?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-11T17:12:47.547", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4249", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-11T17:29:11.090", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "69", "post_type": "question", "score": 2, "tags": [ "meaning", "slang", "colloquial-language" ], "title": "What is やっちゃるけんな?", "view_count": 381 }

[ { "body": "やっちゃるけんな(in the Kyushu dialect)＝やってやるからな＝やってやるぞ", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-11T17:29:11.090", "id": "4250", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-11T17:29:11.090", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4249", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4254", "answer_count": 1, "body": "The words `飛ぶ` and `跳ぶ` are both read as `とぶ`, the former meaning \"to fly\" and\nthe latter meaning \"to jump\" (generally; don't know if they are\ninterchangeable at all).\n\nThe compound-verb suffix `〜込【こ】む` means that the action \"goes in (to)\",\n\"enters\", etc.\n\nSo the word `とびこむ` means \"to jump/dive into\", both literally and figuratively\n(\"jump into (doing) a mountain of homework\", \"butt in to someone's business\",\netc.).\n\nHowever, `とびこむ` is written with the \"to fly\" version of the kanji: `飛び込む`.\n\nWhy is this? When `跳ぶ` means jump and `〜込む` means \"into\", why wasn't **`跳`**\nchosen for `とびこむ`? This doesn't make sense to me at all.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-11T21:47:45.537", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4253", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-12T03:47:45.270", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-12T03:47:45.270", "last_editor_user_id": "290", "owner_user_id": "78", "post_type": "question", "score": 6, "tags": [ "kanji", "words", "etymology", "homophonic-kanji" ], "title": "\"Dive\" = \"fly into\"?", "view_count": 609 }

[ { "body": "`飛ぶ` is the general term that covers all the uses of homophonous kanjis such\nas `跳ぶ` and `翔ぶ`. `跳ぶ` is a specific one, entailing some mid-air movement\n(such as pedaling your legs, etc.). As usual with homophonous kanjis, the\nspecific one can be replaced by the general one, but not the other way around.\nIn the literal sense \"to dive in to e.g. a swimming pool\", you can use `飛び込む`\nas well as `跳び込む`. For the metaphoric sense \"jump into homework/business\",\n`跳ぶ` is probably too specific because those senses do not accompany movement\nin the air, and you have to use the general `飛ぶ`.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-11T22:05:05.440", "id": "4254", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-11T22:05:05.440", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4253", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 1, "body": "> 羨【うらや】ましい!\n>\n> You're so lucky!/ I envy you!/ I'm jealous of you!\n\nAs I learned it, 羨ましい as an exclamation does not carry much of a negative\ncontext, so perhaps a combination of these three interpretations would be\nbest. However, in Western society, jealousy and envy are generally considered\nnegative. Though this same impulse is also present in Buddhist tradition, I am\ninterested in how this term takes on a (mostly?) positive nuance. Furthermore,\nare there any opinions as to why this exclamation is so common in Japanese,\nwhile an English (semi-)equivalent is not?\n\nAs a reference, here is a journal entry written by a Japanese native who is\npuzzling over how to express うらやましい in english:\n\n> 日本語の「うらやましい」の中には「ねたみ」とか「嫉妬」の部 分があまりない（全然ないとは言えませんが）ような気がする のです。\n>\n> だからこの場合、 ’They are lucky to travel to Korea.\" という軽いあこがれを 表現したかったのです。", "comment_count": 9, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-11T22:52:38.420", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4255", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-12T20:42:24.307", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-12T20:42:24.307", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "706", "post_type": "question", "score": 9, "tags": [ "words", "culture" ], "title": "How to define 羨ましい?", "view_count": 24884 }

[ { "body": "I think you are mostly answering your own question:\n\nうらやましい does not automatically have a \"negative\" slant (as in: implying\njealousy). A more accurate general translation than \"I am jealous\" would\ntherefore be:\n\n> I envy you!\n\nWhich does not have any intrinsically negative meaning (although people might\noften project one, perhaps for cultural reasons as you point out above).\n\nI guess the gradation could be made between `Something good happens to you, I\nwished it happened to me too` (envy) and `Something good happens to you, I'd\nrather it happened to me than you, or not at all` (jealous)... but this is\nmore about nuances in English than Japanese. As you say yourself, うらやましい is\nmore toward the former... though it is very possible in some context or with\nspecific intonation/body language, to make it imply jealousy/anger...", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-12T03:56:15.557", "id": "4258", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-12T03:56:15.557", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "290", "parent_id": "4255", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4257", "answer_count": 1, "body": "What does `ほか` mean when it is used in a sentence like this: [situationA] ほか,\n[situationB]\"\n\nSpecifically I would like a little help clarifying the following sentence:\n\n> 事件事故が減った`ほか`、緊急時以外の通報の減少が主な要因とみられる。\n\nI am familiar with ほか in other situations, but I'm not sure how it's used\nhere. As far as I can figure out, it's either _along the lines_ of \"It's not\nthat the number of accidents has decreased, but...\" or \"The number of\naccidents has decreased, but more importantly...\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-12T03:06:07.640", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4256", "last_activity_date": "2012-12-15T17:19:32.657", "last_edit_date": "2012-12-15T17:19:32.657", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "921", "post_type": "question", "score": 7, "tags": [ "grammar", "conjunctions" ], "title": "How is ほか used as a conjunction?", "view_count": 1388 }

[ { "body": "It means \"besides\". It confirms the existence of [situationA], and states that\nthere is another [situationB]\n\nYour example may be translated as:\n\n> Besides the decrease of the number of emergencies(accidents, ...), the\n> decrease of the calls when there is no emergency is an important reason.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-12T03:32:38.717", "id": "4257", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-12T03:32:38.717", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "903", "parent_id": "4256", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4264", "answer_count": 2, "body": "While trying to write a plugin to (unofficially fan-)translate this website to\nJapanese, I've been noticing that \"all\" has multiple different translations.\n\nWhat exactly is the difference between `全部（の）`, `すべて（の）`, `あらゆる` and `全体（の）`?\n\nThese are the translations I've currently come up with, but I don't know if\nthey're correct:\n\n * \"all tags »\"/\"all badges »\" links on the right panel of the \"Top Questions\" page: \n`すべてのタグ »`/`すべてのバッジ »`\n\n * \"All Questions\" page: \n`すべての質問`\n\n * The \"all sites\" tab in the Stack Exchange popup (in the top left corner): \n`すべてのサイト`\n\nWhat would be the difference between `全部のサイト`, `あらゆるサイト`, `すべてのサイト` and\n`全体のサイト`?", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-13T03:23:25.843", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4261", "last_activity_date": "2016-02-13T07:12:14.463", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-13T04:01:14.440", "last_editor_user_id": "796", "owner_user_id": "796", "post_type": "question", "score": 12, "tags": [ "word-choice" ], "title": "The various ways of saying \"all\"", "view_count": 6061 }

[ { "body": "According to [goo\ndictionary](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/119767/m0u/), すべて and 全部 are\ninterchangeable in a lot of situations. However, すべて may be used more in\narticles, and 全部 more in conversations (「すべて」は文章語的で、「みな」「全部」は口語的である。).\n\nあらゆる may be more like \"every\" instead of \"all\".\n\n全体のサイト is a wrong expression in my opinion. 全体 means the \"entire entity\", but\nnot a collection. E.g. その旅行全体にわたって (during the entire trip/all through the\ntrip).", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-13T05:39:42.017", "id": "4264", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-13T05:39:42.017", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "903", "parent_id": "4261", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "> * \"all tags »\"/\"all badges »\" \n> `すべてのタグ »`/`すべてのバッジ »`\n> * \"All Questions\" page: \n> `すべての質問`\n> * The \"all sites\" \n> `すべてのサイト` \n>\n>\n\nI think all these are the best translations. \n \nAs fefe said, 全部の sounds more colloquial and less formal than 全ての. \nあらゆる is more like 'every~/every single~' than 'all.' \n全体 is like 'the whole ~', like 「このページ全体」= 'this whole page'. \n \nMaybe you could write it in kanji (全ての), btw.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-13T05:51:08.227", "id": "4265", "last_activity_date": "2016-02-13T07:12:14.463", "last_edit_date": "2016-02-13T07:12:14.463", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4261", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4263", "answer_count": 1, "body": "Do you know the English expression, \"you make a\"?\n\nIt's pretty simple:\n\n> You make a fine wife.\n\nIt might be more correct as\n\n> You'd make for a...\n\nbut they're tenses are different then. I could be using it incorrectly, but\nthat's okay.\n\nI saw my friend in a red cloak-like jacket and wanted to say, \"you make a cute\nRed Riding Hood\" or \"you'd make a cute Red Riding Hood\", but got hung up after\nかわいい赤ずきんに. I was thinking なられる。 But it didn't feel like what I wanted to say.\n\nIs there a similar expression to what I was thinking?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-13T04:07:36.897", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4262", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-13T05:32:11.220", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-13T04:13:02.783", "last_editor_user_id": "54", "owner_user_id": "54", "post_type": "question", "score": 7, "tags": [ "expressions" ], "title": "How can I express \"you make a.../you'd make for a...\"?", "view_count": 387 }

[ { "body": "You make a fine wife. \n「君はいい奥さんになるよ」/「君はいい奥さんになれるよ」 \nYou'd make a cute Red Riding Hood. \n「かわいい赤ずきんになれるよ」", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-13T05:32:11.220", "id": "4263", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-13T05:32:11.220", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4262", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4272", "answer_count": 3, "body": "I have been looking at conjunctive forms of verbs and my grammar books shows\nme a negative and affirmative version of ば but what about a past tense and a\npast tense negative?\n\nWould they be `じゃなてれば` and `くなかてれば`?", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-14T05:35:45.380", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4267", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-14T07:55:10.753", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-14T05:51:52.070", "last_editor_user_id": "921", "owner_user_id": "926", "post_type": "question", "score": 6, "tags": [ "conjugations", "conjunctions" ], "title": "Is there a past tense conjugation form for ば？", "view_count": 598 }

[ { "body": "Recall that `ば` (-eba) attaches to a verb, and past tense affix turns a verb\ninto something other than a verb. That means you cannot directly attach `ば` to\npast tense. You need to insert `なら` or `ら` in between the past tense and `ば`.\nIn that case, `ば` can be omitted.\n\n> ...た(な)ら(ば)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-14T05:59:40.297", "id": "4270", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-14T05:59:40.297", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4267", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "* the present tense affirmative:\n\n> 「走れば」, 「走るならば」, 「走るのならば」（＝「走るなら」, 「走るのなら」）\n\n * the present tense negative:\n\n> 「走らなければ」, 「走らないならば」, 「走らないのであれば」 （＝「走らないなら」, 「走らないのなら」）\n\n * the past tense affirmative:\n\n> 「走ったならば」 （＝「走ったら」, 「走ったなら」, 「走っていたら」）\n\n * the past tense negative: \n\n> 「走らなかったならば」, but I think 「走らなかったら」, 「走っていなかったら」 would be more natural.\n\nOops, I was off the point?", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-14T06:01:40.797", "id": "4271", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-14T07:55:10.753", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-14T07:55:10.753", "last_editor_user_id": "796", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4267", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "The past tense is shown by た, and its ば form should be たらば. However, \"ば\" is\nusually omitted in this case, so normally \"たら\" is used by itself without \"ば\".\n\nE.g. 雨が降っ **たら** 中止だ。 If it rained the (event) will be cancelled.\n\nThe negative for past tense is なかった (E.g. 降ら **なかった** ), formed by ない + た, so\nits ば form should follow the rule for た to be なかったら. Again ば is omitted.\n\nE.g. 私が行か **なかったら** 、がっかりしますよね。 If I don't go, (he) would be disappointed.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-14T07:02:34.113", "id": "4272", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-14T07:13:05.033", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-14T07:13:05.033", "last_editor_user_id": "903", "owner_user_id": "903", "parent_id": "4267", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4274", "answer_count": 1, "body": "I feel like mastering conjugations is a major contributor to self expression\nin Japanese. I realized that some of the grammar points I have been working on\nhave taught me new conjugations.\n\nUsually its just a matter of explanation. I am wondering how to turn\nadjectives into the above listed forms of non-past, past, non-past negative,\nand the negative. (Provision, conditional, presumptive, imperative,\nprogressive.) In the case of progressive I am only curious about na-\nadjectives and nouns. What should I do with da?", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-14T07:22:11.120", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4273", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-08T08:42:58.087", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-08T08:42:58.087", "last_editor_user_id": "125", "owner_user_id": "926", "post_type": "question", "score": 4, "tags": [ "conjugations", "adjectives", "imperatives" ], "title": "How do you conjugate i- and na- adjectives (into the presumptive, imperative, conditional, provisional, and progressive forms)?", "view_count": 3392 }

[ { "body": "Adjectives (both 形容詞 (a.k.a. -i adjectives) and 形容動詞 (a.k.a. -na adjectives))\ndo not have the same sort of conjugational forms as verbs do, but I'll do my\nbest to give you an equivalent of the verb forms to which you're referring.\nThey often just borrow from other verbs (mostly だ) when appropriate.\n\nI'll use 深い (deep) and 深刻な (deep, serious) as my examples, in order to make\nthis a deep and serious explanation (har har).\n\n**Presumptive**\n\nI assume you mean the conjugation which is also often called \"volitional;\"\ne.g. 読もう for 読む. In this case, you'd get this:\n\n深い → 深いだろう （The conjugation 「深かろう」 existed in old Japanese but nowadays I\nthink you'd only see it in literature/manga.)\n\n深刻 → 深刻だろう\n\n**Imperative**\n\nIf you're implying a change in state, a lot of times you might see 〜なる used\nfor imperatives here. My examples (which don't make any sense in the\nimperative mood, but for the sake of grammatical illustration) would be like\nso:\n\n深い → 深くなれ\n\n深刻 → 深刻になれ\n\nI don't think this would be too common, though. It sounds like it would be\nawkward for most usages. Most of the time some other roundabout construction\nwould replace this.\n\nAlso, technically, 「深刻であれ」 would be the grammatical imperative of 「深刻だ」, but\nit sounds incredibly awkward.\n\nAnother way to say it which does not imply a change of state would be as\nfollows:\n\n深い → 深くしろ\n\n深刻 → 深刻にしろ\n\nThis means \"be deep/serious\" rather than \"become\" deep/serious.\n\n**Conditional**\n\nI'll assume you mean the \"〜ら form\" when you say \"conditional,\" and the \"〜ば\"\nform when you say \"provisional.\"\n\n〜ら form:\n\n深い → 深かったら\n\n深刻 → 深刻だったら\n\nThese are common.\n\n**Provisional**\n\n〜ば form:\n\n深い → 深ければ\n\n深刻 → 深刻であれば、深刻なら (the latter is more common)\n\nThese are common.\n\n**Progressive**\n\nThis isn't really something you'd normally use--a progressive form of an\nadjective is a bit strange, wouldn't you say? The normal present tense should\ndo fine in most contexts. In most of the examples I can think of where we'd\nuse an equivalent of the present progressive of an adjective in English\n(something like \"he's being stupid\"), Japanese would use an entirely different\nconstruction (「彼はとぼけている」 or something).\n\nHope this helps. For more information and lots of charts, just read\n[Wikipedia's page on Japanese\nconjugations](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_verb_conjugations_and_adjective_declensions).", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-14T09:48:38.110", "id": "4274", "last_activity_date": "2012-09-15T16:36:45.990", "last_edit_date": "2012-09-15T16:36:45.990", "last_editor_user_id": "1575", "owner_user_id": "1048", "parent_id": "4273", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4279", "answer_count": 2, "body": "I have learned that when using a \"-たい\" form, when the sentence would normally\nrequire \"を\", you can use either \"を\" or \"が\", but \"が\" was actually preferred,\n\"を\" sounding unnatural.\n\nI searched about the reason, but could only find the same, \"が\" is preferred,\n\"を\" doesn't sound natural to native speakers.\n\nWhat is the reason? since the particle is before the \"-たい\" verb, it can't be a\nphonological deformation, so what is the logic behind it?\n\nThanks a lot!", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-14T18:29:13.150", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4278", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-25T15:24:55.243", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-14T19:17:27.253", "last_editor_user_id": "1049", "owner_user_id": "1049", "post_type": "question", "score": 9, "tags": [ "particles", "particle-が", "particle-を" ], "title": "Logic behind \"が\" preferrence when using a \"-たい\" form", "view_count": 429 }

[ { "body": "Originally I didn't think I had a full answer to this question, but in the end\nmaybe I do.\n\n`たい` is actually an adjective. When describing things with adjectives, が is\nused:\n\n> ようこさんは髪【かみ】が長【なが】いです。\n>\n> Youko's hair is long.\n\nI think that adding `たい` to the ます form of a verb means it is no longer a\nverb, but rather an adjective. So don't think of `たい` form as a verb but\nrather an adjective, and this use of が should make sense.", "comment_count": 14, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-14T20:23:01.937", "id": "4279", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-16T15:18:11.973", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "575", "parent_id": "4278", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "I'm not really sure if it makes sense to talk about 'logic', but I'll still\ntry to see if I can add some system to the madness.\n\nJapanese often uses が, not を, after what would typically be the object in\nEnglish, when there's no actual action inflicted upon said object. 彼が好き,\nお金が欲しい, 日本語が分かる, りんごが食べたい, 字が読める, あいつが憎い.\n\nOne way to look at it could be: if for example you _want_ to eat an apple (but\nhaven't done it yet), is it really **you doing something to the apple** , or\nis it **the apple doing something to you**? You might argue that it is the\n**latter**. This might be why what English speakers regard as the object can\ntake on the more subject-like が.\n\nIn the Indo-european languages that I know of, the topic of a sentence seems\nto be the subject by default ( _I_ want money, _I_ can read letters), but\nJapanese, having a separate topic marker は, doesn't really have this\nrestriction. After having said 私は, there is more freedom to make different\nparts of the sentence into the subject (even if the topic is often implied in\nJapanese).\n\nHowever, there are also ～たい cases where only を feels much more natural (maybe\nが is even wrong):\n\n> 空を飛びたい <\\- (I) want to fly in the sky\n>\n> 家を出たい <\\- (I) want to exit the house\n\nIn these cases, (maybe depending on who you ask) 空 and 家 aren't real objects,\nbut rather the place that a motion takes place through (the former) and the\nplace that a motion takes place from (the latter). I wouldn't be able to back\nup any claim as to why を is more natural here, but maybe this way of using を\nentered into the language at a different point in time, and therefore\ndifferent rules apply (Linguists, please come to my rescue).", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-25T15:18:10.247", "id": "4441", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-25T15:24:55.243", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-25T15:24:55.243", "last_editor_user_id": "1073", "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4278", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4283", "answer_count": 2, "body": "How can I change a statement like どこへいきますか to mean \"Where _should_ I go\"?\nBasically, what is the rule for changing a question into a request for advice?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-15T01:47:32.823", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4280", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-15T09:09:16.763", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-15T09:09:16.763", "last_editor_user_id": "578", "owner_user_id": "1050", "post_type": "question", "score": 6, "tags": [ "grammar" ], "title": "Changing a question into a request for advice", "view_count": 2005 }

[ { "body": "All of the following could be used:\n\n> \"where should I go?\"\n>\n> どこへ行{い}けばいいですか？ \n> どこへ行ったらいいですか？ \n> どこへ行くべきですか？\n>\n> \"where should I go I wonder\", sounds a little softer:\n>\n> どこへ行こうかな？ \n>\n\nAccording to [this blog\npost](http://blog.hjenglish.com/shichua/articles/933113.html), there isn't a\nlot of difference in meaning between `良{よ}い` and `いい`, but `良い` gives an\nimpression of being more formal and is more likely to be used in written form\nand `いい` more likely to be used in spoken form. If in doubt, I think it's best\nto stick to `いい`.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-15T02:57:57.533", "id": "4283", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-15T05:25:21.213", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "4280", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "I would use どこへ行けばいい？ for 'where should I go?'", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-15T04:01:08.720", "id": "4284", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-15T04:01:08.720", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1038", "parent_id": "4280", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4967", "answer_count": 5, "body": "Nowadays, katakana tends to be used for gairaigo and onomatopoeia, while\nhiragana tends to be used for native Japanese words. This is a slight\nsimplification - more information is available\n[here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/3987/91).\n\nHowever, English loanwords weren't a major concern when they were originally\ncreated. What were the main motivations for creating the two kana (or possibly\nmore?) rather than just one?", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-15T02:07:11.200", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4281", "last_activity_date": "2018-07-16T08:09:30.740", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.740", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "91", "post_type": "question", "score": 42, "tags": [ "history", "kana", "hiragana", "katakana" ], "title": "Why was both katakana and hiragana created?", "view_count": 47625 }

[ { "body": "There was a really interesting program on TV recently about the development\nabout the Japanese language, both written and spoken. Some details I remember\noff the top of my head regarding this is that it was young women who preferred\nwriting hiragana and warlords preferred katakana. Their reasons seemed to be\npretty similar. Women liked hiragana because they were easier than kanji and\nwarlords used katakana because it was quicker.\n\nWell let me not bore you with just describing it in words. I actually\napparently found a video link to the whole episode. Highly recommended to\npeople on this site.\n\n<http://veohdownload.blog37.fc2.com/blog-entry-12588.html>", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-17T11:41:18.637", "id": "4311", "last_activity_date": "2012-03-13T06:20:19.747", "last_edit_date": "2012-03-13T06:20:19.747", "last_editor_user_id": "258", "owner_user_id": "258", "parent_id": "4281", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "_Potentially controversial answer_\n\nFrom what I remember being told (by a Japanese friend of mine), all of the\nKana where invented by a single woman or a small group of women. I'm not sure\non the validity of this, as it seems to be a hot topic with Japanese scholars.\n\nAs far as I'm aware, the Kana where both developed to aid in the study of\nKanji. Since most kanji have multiple readings, it would make it easier for\nnovice learners to remember the phonetic pronunciations of Kanji using a\nsimple key.\n\n**PERSONAL OPINION SECTION STARTS HERE**\n\nI feel as though Hiragana uses shapes that are very similar to some elementary\nKanji. Since Kunyomi readings seem to be the simpler ones to remember (your\nexperience may differ), I'd say that shapes resembling the kanji where chosen\nfor Hiragana for that purpose.\n\n**PERSONAL OPINION SECTION ENDS HERE**\n\nThis might be why most systems use Katakan for onyomi readings and Hiragana\nfor kunyomi readings - at least, that's how I view it.\n\nLooking at most of the Hiragana characters, it's easy to see why women would\nhave used them for writing, whereas Men would have used Katakana + Kanji (as\nhas been pointed out by others)\n\nThe other thing to remember - as with most cultures - the skill of reading was\nusually taught to those who had the ability to pay to be taught (it was,\nusually seen as more of a privilege than a right, as it is these days). Thus,\nchildren who were born to families with the means to educate them, and the\ndesire for them to reach high standing would pay for their children to study.\n\nThe consensus back then was that women had no place in the court, and the only\nplace for someone who was educated was - you guessed it - at court. So, men\nwould have be taught Kanji as part of their education in Chinese classics,\nConfucianism, Buddhism and history; whereas Women would have not have been\ntaught such things.\n\nI've no idea when, but at some point someone decided to invent a written\nscript so that they could communicate - which is where the theory that it was\na woman comes in. This implies that the person (or people) who invented the\nKana where of high standing (otherwise they'd have to toil all day), and that\nthey needed to communicate, in writing, with someone who was educated -\nprobably a Husband or Father, due to the history of \"Kidnapping\" one's\nopponent's family members (again, this is speculation on my part).\n\nthis would also enable the Wives, Sisters and Mothers of the men of the court\nto educate eat other, and learn to read Kanji, This, in and of itself, would\ngive rise to women being able to read and write - which gave rise to things\nlike \"The Tale of Genji\".\n\nI realise this answer is a little ramble-o-matic in nature, that I may have\nskated around the topic, and that I haven't quoted any sources (I'm at work at\nthe minute, but I'll edit later on as and when I find evidence); so I\napologise if this isn't of a high enough standard to answer the original\nquestion.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-03-08T15:19:39.013", "id": "4962", "last_activity_date": "2012-03-08T15:19:39.013", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1206", "parent_id": "4281", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "As I understand the Japanese wikipedia articles:\n\nHiragana and katakana were both developed from 万葉仮名【まんようがな】, itself a phonetic\nscript using kanji for their readings. For hiragana, there was an intermediate\nstage, 草仮名【そうがな】, a cursive style of 万葉仮名, and the continued simplification of\nthese characters lead to hiragana. Katakana, on the other hand, was initially\ndeveloped by Buddhist monks for a specific purpose: to provide annotations to\nexplain how to read Chinese texts in Japanese (和読【わどく】).\n\nIn some cases, both were used. For example, in 周易抄【しゅうえき】 (a text from 897年),\n草仮名 were used for for annotations to do with meaning, whereas katakana were\nused to provide readings. Because katakana was primarily used early on by\nscholars as an aid to reading kanji, it gained a scholarly feel. Conversely\nhiragana became used for poetry and personal material like letters.\n\nThe actual word 平仮名【ひらがな】 appears from the 16th century onwards and in fact 平\nhere takes the meaning of 普通【ふつう】, to differentiate it from 片仮名【かたかな】。 There\nwere also initially a number of variant forms of the kana, but these were\neventually standardised in 1900. The alternative forms are called\n変体仮名【へんたいがな】.\n\nAs to other forms:\n\n合略仮名【ごうりゃくがな】 : characters made by combining two or more kana, for example より\nor こと, into a single unit. Used from the Edo period but use discontinued after\n1900.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-03-08T17:41:25.907", "id": "4964", "last_activity_date": "2012-03-08T17:41:25.907", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "571", "parent_id": "4281", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "It isn't 100 percent clear, but the following is the “well-established”\ntheory:\n\n# Hiragana (平仮名)\n\nAs noted in your [other\nquestion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/4958/were-women-unable-\nto-learn-kanji-during-the-heian-era), hiragana was originally called 女手{おんなで}.\nIn the late Nara, early Heian periods,\n[万葉仮名{まんようがな}](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man%27y%C5%8Dgana) written in 草書体\n(sosho style) was used for “unofficial” texts such as Japanese poems (和歌{わか}),\netc. From this 万葉仮名, women in the imperial courts (宮中の女官達) developed the\nsimplified writing style (女手 or what is now called “hiragana”). Originally, it\nwas mainly used by women (hence the name 女手), but because of its ease of use\ncompared to Chinese characters, men also began using it when writing. However,\n“official” writing still used Chinese characters and hiragana was used mainly\namong commoners (non-governmental people) and in poems and short stories, etc.\nAlso, the 平 of 平仮名 also comes from its “simplicity” and “general use”. You can\nsee it in words like 平易、平凡、平素, etc.\n\n# Katakana (片仮名)\n\nNow, katakana also originates from 万葉仮名, however it came into use first by\nBuddhist monks. Also, unlike hiragana, it was not used as a separate writing\nsystem from Chinese characters, but rather together with Chinese characters.\nIn order to read those difficult Buddhist scriptures (お経), Buddhist monks\nwould use katakana as a form of shorthand or annotation (called\n[訓点](http://www.aozora.gr.jp/annotation/kunten.html)) as a supplement to the\nChinese characters. In this way, katakana became used in official documents\nand for scholars, as Buddhism, 学問 and government was very closely related.\nSince it mainly was used by men, some people referred to Chinese characters\nand katakana as 男手 in contrast with hiragana (女手). Also, the 片 of 片仮名 comes\nfrom the fact that “pieces” of Chinese characters were taken to develop the\nwriting system (and also there is implication that katakana is “temporary” in\nthe sense that it is only to supplement the Chinese characters).\n\nSo to answer your question, the reason that the two exist is because they were\ncreated separately out of need at the time and they were originally used for\ntwo different purposes ― hiragana for a common language separate from the\nofficial writings (which used Chinese characters) and katakana as a supplement\nto official writing (and other text that used Chinese characters).\n\n# References\n\n * [日本語の起源](http://www.snap-tck.com/room04/c01/nihon/nihon04.html) << This site explains it way better than I do, so if someone took the time to translate this...\n * [なぜひらがなとカタカナと漢字が存在するのでしょうか](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q139479478)\n * [Wikipedia-Man'yōgana](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man%27y%C5%8Dgana)\n * [Wikipedia-Hiragana](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiragana)\n * [Wikipedia-Katakana](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katakana)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-03-09T02:12:02.620", "id": "4967", "last_activity_date": "2018-02-19T13:15:09.153", "last_edit_date": "2018-02-19T13:15:09.153", "last_editor_user_id": "3295", "owner_user_id": "1217", "parent_id": "4281", "post_type": "answer", "score": 32 }, { "body": "I think it is largely a myth that women invented _hiragana_. This myth likely\ncomes from the fact that the script was called 女手 _onnade_ or \"women's hand\",\nand _katakana_ was called 男手 _otokode_ or \"men's hand\". _Hiragana_ was\nprobably called 女手 not because it was invented by women, but because they used\nit exclusively to write — like in the Tale of Genji — because as you\nmentioned, they were not literate in _kanji_.\n\nWe see many documents written by men at the time that mix _kanji_ , _katakana_\n, and _hiragana_ , so _hiragana_ was not only used by women, but women only\nknew how to use _hiragana_. The reason I say that women probably didn't invent\n_hiragana_ is that were gradually simplified forms of _kanji_ called\n_man'yōgana_ , and women didn't know _kanji_ , so how would they know how\nthose _kanji_ were pronounced?\n\nAlso, the Buddhist monk Kūkai is generally credited with making the _kana_.\nWhile we know this isn't true, and that the creation of _hiragana_ was a\ngradual process, he greatly sped up the process of making _kana_ by\nintroducing the first purely phonetic script, Siddham (still used in some\nBuddhist temples in Japan today). By introducing Japan to the idea of\ncompletely phonetic characters that didn't have any separate meaning attached,\nthe _kanji_ that had been used phonetically ( _man'yōgana_ ) could be\nsimplified and used as purely phonetic characters without any meaning attached\nor alternative readings.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2018-07-12T04:59:52.270", "id": "60043", "last_activity_date": "2018-07-16T08:09:30.740", "last_edit_date": "2018-07-16T08:09:30.740", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "30142", "parent_id": "4281", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 4, "body": "せっかく and わざわざ seem to be pretty close in meaning/usage, but is there ever a\ntime you would use one and not the other? Or is there a small nuance there?\n\nJust to give some example sentences:\n\n> 「せっかく来てくれたから、昼ごはん奢るよ。」\n>\n> 「わざわざ美容院に行ったのに、雨で髪がくしゃくしゃになっちゃった。」", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-15T07:30:28.607", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4285", "last_activity_date": "2014-11-28T03:09:41.717", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1051", "post_type": "question", "score": 21, "tags": [ "word-choice", "nuances" ], "title": "What's the difference between せっかく and わざわざ?", "view_count": 13022 }

[ { "body": "We say 'わざわざ来て下さって有難うございます' but never say 'せっかく来て下さって有難うございます'. I think\n'せっかく~' clause requires 'のに~/から~' clause.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-15T08:29:27.510", "id": "4286", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-15T08:29:27.510", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4285", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "Despite the similarity, I've never thought of these as meaning the same thing\nbecause their usage is so different:\n\n * `わざわざ` means that someone has gone out of their way to do something.\n\n * `せっかく` means that someone has made an effort, or some unexpected opportunity has come up, and it would be a shame to waste it. Mostly it is used positively in the sense of grasping the opportunity, but sometimes it is used in turning down the effort.\n\nThis is explained well in the [類語例解辞典 entry for\nせっかく／わざわざ](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/thsrs/2592/m0u/):\n\n>\n> 【１】「せっかく」は、「せっかく…のに」「せっかく…だから」「せっかくの…」などという言い方で、努力してそのことをしたのだから、それが無駄にならないようにという気持ちを表わす。また「せっかくの…だが」「せっかくではあるが」などの形で、相手の頼み、申し出などを断る場合に使う。他に、「せっかくの休みに雨が降る」など、たまにしかない機会が無駄になる事態を惜しむ気持ちを表わすこともある。「折角」とも当てる。\n>\n>\n> 【２】「わざわざ」は、あえてそうしなければならない必然性はないが、何かのついでではなく、その事だけのためにするさまをいう。特に、相手に気を使って、あるいは心を尽くして、相手のために何かをする場合に用いられることが多い。また、しなくてもいいのに、あえてするような場合にも使う。 \n> \n>\n>\n> 1. _Sekkaku_ is used in the expressions _sekkaku... no ni_ , _sekkaku ...\n> dakara_ , _sekkaku no..._ , and expresses a feeling that since an effort has\n> been made to do something, it should not be wasted. In the form _sekkaku no\n> ... da ga_ or _sekkaku de wa aru ga_ , it is used to refuse the other\n> person's request or proposal. Also, in expressions like _sekkaku no yasumi\n> ni ame ga furu_ ('just when we had a holiday it rained') it expresses regret\n> at a situation where a rare opportunity is wasted. Also written 折角.\n>\n> 2. _Wazawaza_ describes a situation where, although there was no necessity\n> to go to the trouble, a person has specially gone out of their way to do\n> something, and not merely in passing. In particular, it is often used where\n> something is done for another person out of concern or care for that person.\n> It is also used in cases where someone is going out of their way to do\n> something that they don't need to.\n>\n>\n\n(Please forgive the clunky translation. The explanations are full of Japanese\nterms that don't go easily or directly into English).\n\nIn 1) the emphasis is on appreciation of an effort or opportunity and regret\nat the possibility that it will be wasted. In 2), the emphasis is on the fact\nthat someone has gone out of their way to do something, usually (but not\nalways) with appreciation of that action.\n\n* * *\n\nIt is interesting that you've managed to come up with two examples where\n`わざわざ` and `せっかく` are similar in meaning and usage!\n\n`わざわざ来てくれたからご飯をおごるよ` and `せっかく来てくれたからご飯をおごるよ` differ only in that the first is\na 'reward' to the other person for making a special trip; the second is a\ndecision to take advantage of (i.e., not waste) the effort that has been made.\n\n`わざわざ美容院に行ったのに、雨で髪がくしゃくしゃになっちゃった` and `せっかく美容院に行ったのに、雨で髪がくしゃくしゃになっちゃった` are\nvery similar. The first suggests that a lot of effort was made but the result\nturned out no good. The second suggests that a lot of effort was made and it\nwas a shame that it was wasted. (It might be slightly more natural to say for\nthe second one: `せっかく美容院に行ったのに、閉まっていた`.) In most cases, however, the usages\nare quite different.\n\n* * *\n\nExamples from the same dictionary:\n\n> 〔せっかく〕(副)▽せっかくの好意を無にする▽せっかく来たのに留守だった▽せっかくですがお断りします\n> 〔わざわざ〕(副)▽わざわざ持って来てくれた▽わざわざ来るには及ばない\n>\n> Sekkaku: (adv) _sekkaku no kōi o mu ni suru_ 'to bring to naught goodwill\n> that is not come by every day' or 'to bring to naught goodwill that one\n> should be grateful for' ('sekkaku' is not easy to translate here -- it\n> doesn't mean 'goodwill that someone has gone out of their way to present';\n> it expresses regret at a wasted opportunity), _sekkaku kita no ni rusu\n> datta_ 'Even though I made a special trip (to see you) you were out',\n> _sekkaku desu ga o-kotowari-shimasu_ 'I appreciate your making this\n> request/proposal, but I regret that I have to turn it down'.\n>\n> Wazawaza: (adv) _wazawaza motte kite kureta_ '(he/you) specially brought it\n> (to me/us)', _wazawaza kuru ni wa oyobanai_ 'there's no need to make a\n> special trip / go out of your way to come by'.\n\nIn these sentences there is very little overlap in possible usage.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-15T09:50:20.207", "id": "4287", "last_activity_date": "2014-11-28T03:09:41.717", "last_edit_date": "2014-11-28T03:09:41.717", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1038", "parent_id": "4285", "post_type": "answer", "score": 29 }, { "body": "It's quite easy: use わざわざ when thanking somebody for going out of their way to\ndo something for you, and せっかく when you want to whine that someone has (or,\nmore commonly, you have) gone out of their way to do something for somebody\nelse and hasn't received what you feel is sufficient recognition, recompense,\nor treatment. Most commonly found as \"せっかく XXX のに．．．\" spoken in a high,\ngrating pitch with a pout at the end for effect. I never say this. I often\nhave to fight the urge to slap full-grown adults who do.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-17T00:51:06.063", "id": "4309", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-17T01:00:59.480", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-17T01:00:59.480", "last_editor_user_id": "1043", "owner_user_id": "1043", "parent_id": "4285", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I think `わざわざ` is very different to `せっかく`. `わざわざ` is closely related to\n`わざと`, which means \"on purpose\". I think that \"purposely\", \"explicitly\",\n\"expressly\", or \"specially\" might be good literal translations for `わざわざ`.\n\nJapanese Q&A at [Space\nALC](http://home.alc.co.jp/db/owa/jpn_npa?stage=2&sn=202) on the difference\nbetween expressions with `せっかく` and `わざわざ`:\n\n> * せっかく: `後に続く事柄が、望ましいものとして評価されている。` \n> \"The matter which continues afterwards is valued as something desirable.\" \n> (I think that for `せっかく～のに…`, \"I wish that...\"/\"it's disappointing that...\"\n> might often work and \"may as well...\"/\"why don't [we/you/I]...\" might often\n> work with `せっかく～から…`.)\n> * わざわざ: `後に続く事柄が、困難・労力を伴うものであり、本来する必要がないと考えられている。` \n> \"The matter which continues afterwards is something that goes along with\n> some difficulty/distress or labor/effort/trouble, and can be thought that\n> there isn't a fundamental need to do it.\"\n>\n\nAn example with `（わざわざ／せっかく）～のに…`:\n\n> `...`来てもらったのに留守にしていて悪かったね。 \n> It was bad that although (you) came that (he/she) isn't home. \n>\n>\n> * `せっかく`: The speaker emphasizing that it would be desirable that that\n> person be home (\"It's disappointing that he/she isn't home given that you've\n> come.\") \n>\n> * `わざわざ`: The speaker emphasizing the difficulty/effort that it took to\n> get there while it wasn't really necessary (\"it's a pity he/she isn't home,\n> I recognize the effort you made in coming.\")\n>\n\nBecause of the above points, `せっかく` and `わざわざ` are not interchangeable in the\nfollowing sentences:\n\n> * せっかく鎌倉に来たのだから、長谷まで足を伸ばそう。 \n> \"We've gone as far as Kamakura, so we _may as well_ go a little further to\n> Hase.\"\n>\n> * せっかくですから、遠慮なくいただきます。 \n> \"You've gone that far, (you) _may as well_ eat up without reservation.\"\n>\n> * 彼がわざわざ出向くからには何か理由があるはずだ。 \n> \"There has to be a reason why he went to the _explicit trouble/effort_ of\n> going out.\"\n>\n>\n\nI've found `せっかくの` and are sometimes difficult to translate into English, but\n\"precious\" and \"...that took great effort\" (as general terms), \"long awaited\"\nand \"much awaited\" (for holidays and describing releases of products in\nadvertising etc) and \"kind\" (for invitations etc) seem to work in a lot of\ncases. The Kodansha Furigana dictionary defines `せっかくの` when turning something\ndown as \"precious but not taken advantage of\":\n\n> * せっかくの休みなんだから、どこかに出掛けよう。 \n> \"It's the _long-awaited_ holiday, so let's go out somewhere.\"\n>\n> * 折角のお招きですが、今回はお受けできません。 \n> \"It's a _kind_ invitation, but I can't accept this time.\"\n>\n>\n\nFor `わざわざの` I think that \"expressly\"/\"express\" etc work a fair amount of the\ntime:\n\n> * わざわざのおいで、たいへん恐縮です。 \n> \"I'm grateful for you _expressly_ coming.\"\n>", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-17T09:10:40.053", "id": "4310", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-19T22:49:45.110", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-19T22:49:45.110", "last_editor_user_id": "796", "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "4285", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4290", "answer_count": 1, "body": "What is the difference in usage between these three words for \"audience\"?\n\n> 観客{かんきゃく} (audience, spectators)\n>\n> 聴衆{ちょうしゅう} (audience, attendees)\n>\n> 観衆{かんしゅう} (audience, onlookers)\n\nThe dictionary definitions offer variations, but, none of those variations\nclearly make any of the three mutually exclusive from each other. It doesn't\nseem wrong to choose any of those to describe a group of people at a live\nperformance.\n\nIn other words, as far as I can tell, if one wanted to say, \"The audience at\nyesterday's show was rowdy,\" all these would convey the same meaning:\n\n> 昨日{きのう}のショーの観客{かんきゃく}は[騒々]{そうぞう}しかった。\n>\n> 昨日{きのう}のショーの聴衆{ちょうしゅう}は[騒々]{そうぞう}しかった。\n>\n> 昨日{きのう}のショーの観衆{かんしゅう}は[騒々]{そうぞう}しかった。\n\nDoes changing the word for \"audience\" change the impression of what kind of\nshow it was? Are any of them incorrect?\n\nWhat are examples where one is acceptable and another not which clearly\ndifferentiate them?", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-15T14:36:08.883", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4288", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-15T06:57:03.593", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-16T11:45:10.753", "last_editor_user_id": "119", "owner_user_id": "119", "post_type": "question", "score": 7, "tags": [ "word-choice" ], "title": "What is the difference between these words for \"audience\"?", "view_count": 1589 }

[ { "body": "視聴者：A person watching and listening to a radio or television program.\n\n観客：Someone watching a movie, play, sporting event, etc.\n\n聴衆：A group of people assembled to hear a concert, etc.\n\n観衆：A large group of people gathered to see a performance, event, etc.\n\nI'm mostly just literally translating dictionary definitions here, but I think\nthis should help you appreciate the differences between the words. A lot of it\nhinges on the type of medium being enjoyed and the size of the group (single\nor multiple people).", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-15T20:59:28.753", "id": "4290", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-15T20:59:28.753", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1048", "parent_id": "4288", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4303", "answer_count": 1, "body": "In daily life, I usually hear the words `お客様{きゃくさま}`, `お客{きゃく}さん`, and maybe\nother variants that use `客{きゃく}/客{かく}` to refer to customers at a shop.\n\nHowever, in the dictionary, the first word that comes up for customer is\n`顧客{こきゃく}`.\n\nI feel like I've never heard that word, though it wouldn't be the first time I\nrealize a word I was unfamiliar with had actually been all around me all\nalong.\n\nWhen is `顧客{こきゃく}` used, and how does it differ from the other variants of\n`客{きゃく}`?", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-15T14:43:01.213", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4289", "last_activity_date": "2016-03-21T06:23:51.093", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-16T00:59:54.557", "last_editor_user_id": "119", "owner_user_id": "119", "post_type": "question", "score": 7, "tags": [ "word-choice" ], "title": "When is 顧客{こきゃく} used for \"customer\"?", "view_count": 4111 }

[ { "body": "> [顧客]{こきゃく}:\n>\n> * 客/おとくいの客/customer/custom/client/patron/patronage\n>\n\n>\n> お[客様]{きゃくさま}/お客/客:\n>\n> * たずねてくる人([訪問客]{ほうもんきゃく}/[来客]{らいきゃく})\n> * [招]{まね}かれてくる人([招待客]{しょうたいきゃく})\n> * [旅館]{りょかん}に[泊]{と}まる人/caller/visitor/ company/guest\n> * [物]{もの}を[買]{か}う人/customer\n> * 物を[見]{み}に[来]{く}る人([観客]{かんきゃく})/audience/spectator\n> * [船]{ふね}や[車]{くるま}に[乗]{の}る人([乗客]{じょうきゃく})/passenger\n>\n\nShop owners/sales clerks usually address their customers as 'お客様', and\nsometimes as 'お客さん', which sounds less polite and formal. When they just talk\nabout customers, they might say 'お客さん/お客'. \n \n'顧客' is more formal (but not 'polite', so they never address their customers\nas '顧客様' or '顧客さん'.), and I think it is more likely to be used in a meeting or\nwritten in a document, and in the news/newspapers too.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-16T14:03:08.223", "id": "4303", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-17T00:02:29.477", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-17T00:02:29.477", "last_editor_user_id": "796", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4289", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4293", "answer_count": 1, "body": "I was wondering if there is a form I can use to express \"more than X\".\n\nFor example, \"reading _more than_ 200 pages a day is a challenge\". Or maybe\nsomething like, \"reading _as much as_ 200 pages a day is a challenge\", or \"I\nhave never read so many pages before\".", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-15T22:54:07.963", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4291", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-16T01:04:33.320", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-15T23:30:22.600", "last_editor_user_id": "37", "owner_user_id": "926", "post_type": "question", "score": 7, "tags": [ "set-phrases" ], "title": "How to express \"more than something\"?", "view_count": 2683 }

[ { "body": "I'd probably write them like:\n\n> * 一日に200ページ以上を読むのは大変だ。 \n> \"Reading more than 200 pages a day is difficult.\" \n> (\"200 or more pages a day\" but I'm not sure the difference of a single page\n> matters here.)\n>\n> * 一日に200ページも読むのは大変だ。 \n> \"Reading as much as 200 pages a day is difficult.\"\n>\n> * これまでこんなページ数を読んだことがなかった。 \n> \"Until now I haven't read such a number of pages.\"\n>\n>\n\nAccording to Chocolate's comment, it looks like `も` is better than `ほど` for\nexpressing a degree here. According to Edict, the second sense of `も` is:\n\n> 2: about (emphasizing an upper limit), as much as, even\n\nYou could probably use `難しい／チャレンジ／大チャレンジ` etc in place of `大変`. `読むことは大変`\ncould also be used instead of `読むのは（が）大変` I think.\n\nI have no idea if these sentences are natural or not so please consider this a\ntemporal answer...", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-16T00:41:07.213", "id": "4293", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-16T01:04:33.320", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-16T01:04:33.320", "last_editor_user_id": "796", "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "4291", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4325", "answer_count": 1, "body": "What's the difference between 目を覚ます and 目が覚める? It seems both of them have the\nsense of literally waking up and also to wake up from some delusion.\n\nHow are they different in usage?\n\nPerhaps because of transitivity the transitive version `目を覚ます` would indicate\ndeliberate agency or indicating that the action is in line with\nconscious(unconscious? Since the person is asleep literally/figuratively)\nvolition, while the intransitive version `目が覚める` indicates spontaneity?", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-16T00:23:15.697", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4292", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-18T07:26:47.457", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "542", "post_type": "question", "score": 7, "tags": [ "word-choice" ], "title": "Usage of 目を覚ます and 目が覚める", "view_count": 3490 }

[ { "body": "As you said, one is transitive, the other is intransitive.\n\n目が覚めす You would use it when your body \"wake up\" by itself. example: I woke up\nin the middle of the night.\n\n目を覚ます You would use it when someone/thing \"wake your body \"up\". The example of\nchocolate: Go wash your face and wake up/come back fresh ! ('wake up' as a\n'get focus'). You, not your body, will wake you up.\n\nOther example, an alarm is called 目覚まし. Because the alarm wakes you up.\n\nDoes it make any sense?", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-18T07:26:47.457", "id": "4325", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-18T07:26:47.457", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "4292", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4295", "answer_count": 1, "body": "In Japan I often have to call somewhere and explain my name such that the\nperson on the other end can write it down. My name is \"Sepponen Bemmu\", which\nI want them to write down as \"セッポネン・ベンム\".\n\nIs there a way to \"spell\" katakana verbally?", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-16T04:38:17.487", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4294", "last_activity_date": "2013-09-29T02:40:04.807", "last_edit_date": "2013-09-29T02:40:04.807", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "367", "post_type": "question", "score": 14, "tags": [ "pronunciation", "katakana" ], "title": "Spelling over the phone", "view_count": 373 }

[ { "body": "Generally you just read out the individual kana, and for little-tsu you can\nsay `小さい「つ」`. If you want to specify it's katakana, you can say `かたかなで、、、`.\n\nIf there is some confusion you can say the \"group\" of kana it's in, then say\n`の` then whatever one it is specifically. So for `か` you would say\n`か、き、く、け、こ、の「か」`. With any luck that is how you learned them, so it shouldn't\nbe too hard to get the hang of.\n\nFor separating your first and last names I'm not sure if the person you're\nspeaking with will realize they're separate, so you would add in `そうして`, or\nsomething similar, in between.\n\nSo, if you wanted to spell your name it would be something along the lines of\nthis:\n\n> かたかなで、セ、 小さいツ、 ポ、 ネ、 ン、 そうして ベ、 ン、 ム\n\nAt least, that is how I would do it.\n\nI realize it's a bit difficult to understand without hearing it, but hopefully\nI explained myself clearly...", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-16T05:48:01.957", "id": "4295", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-16T05:48:01.957", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "921", "parent_id": "4294", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4298", "answer_count": 1, "body": "What is the meaning of \"マスオさんする\" in the following self-introduction extract?\n\n> 家は表参道と近所ですが、特段お金持ちなわけではありません、妻の実家でマスオさんしてます。\n\nMy translation attempt:\n\n> I live near Omotesando, but I am not rich: I \"do M. Masuo\" at my wife's\n> parents' place.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-16T05:59:22.547", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4297", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-17T21:22:02.500", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-16T18:23:22.473", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "107", "post_type": "question", "score": 8, "tags": [ "culture", "anime" ], "title": "Meaning of \"マスオさんする\"", "view_count": 429 }

[ { "body": "According to [Zokugo-dict](http://zokugo-dict.com/31ma/masuosan.htm):\n\n> Masuo-san refers to the husband of Sazae-san in the popular anime \"[Sazae-\n> san](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sazae-san)\", Fuguta Masuo. Masao-san lives\n> together with Sazae-san and their parents at their parent's home, and it's\n> come to mean a person who lives at their wife's parents' home.\n>\n> Furthermore, it's become used in a broader sense to refer to a son-in-law\n> taken into a family (`婿{むこ}養{よう}子{し}`; in the Anime Masuo keeps his Fuguta\n> name, so isn't a `婿養子`.)\n>\n> In particular, because in 1989 these kind of males increased, the expression\n> \"Masuo-san\" became a trending phenomena.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-16T06:13:17.487", "id": "4298", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-17T21:22:02.500", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "4297", "post_type": "answer", "score": 14 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4301", "answer_count": 1, "body": "Could somebody tell me what the Japanese text in the screengrab below says?\nUnfortunately, I do not know how to type it, so I've got it only as an image.\n\n", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-16T09:56:32.320", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4299", "last_activity_date": "2015-04-17T15:48:26.747", "last_edit_date": "2015-04-17T15:48:26.747", "last_editor_user_id": "3275", "owner_user_id": "1056", "post_type": "question", "score": 2, "tags": [ "translation" ], "title": "Meaning of ポケモンをねかしつけていません", "view_count": 538 }

[ { "body": "You have to know about Pokemon to translate this one. It literally means\nsomething like 'You have not got Pokemon to go to sleep'.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-16T10:52:06.503", "id": "4301", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-16T10:52:06.503", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1038", "parent_id": "4299", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 2, "body": "I understand もし寝過ごせば、起こしてください is wrong. I believe instead it should be\n寝過ごしたら、起こしてください。\n\nIn \"A Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar\" it says the second part of the\nsentence \"...can be a command, a request or a suggestion... in this case,\nhowever, [the first part] can not be an action\".\n\nAs the second part of the above sentence is a request then I take it\n寝過ごす「ねすごす」is an action? If I'm right can anyone give more examples of action\nverbs as I would not have thought of oversleeping as an action like coming and\ngoing. Is their any connection between transitivity and intransitivity of\nverbs and whether they are classed as an action?\n\nThanks", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-16T10:04:51.910", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4300", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-21T16:02:54.667", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-18T18:43:55.063", "last_editor_user_id": "125", "owner_user_id": "988", "post_type": "question", "score": 2, "tags": [ "verbs" ], "title": "Action verbs and conditional ～ば", "view_count": 610 }

[ { "body": "I think what the dictionary meant by \"not an action\" means that the action is\nnot realised yet. For example anything in `~ば` means \"in the case that ~\"\nwhich is hypothetical.\n\nS1 ば S2 makes a condition that S2 will hold true under S1.\n\nThis makes for a generic conditional statement that cannot bear a unverifiable\nvolition. How I derived this conclusion is because sentences such as\n`安ければ買います。`((I) will buy if it's cheap) is possible. It is also possible if\nthe person is someone you can empathise with(i.e. share the viewpoint\naccurately enough). But once it becomes a request it cannot become a true\ncondition of \"If A is true, B is true\".\n\nAnd for `~た(な)ら(ば)`, observe that it is actually the \"past tense\" for `~ば`\nwhich conveys a subjunctive past. It presupposes that the action(S1) is\nrealised, then S2. This makes for a statement that once S1 completes, do S2.\n\nThis can be used for making requests. \"If A has happened, please do B\".", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-16T12:36:22.270", "id": "4302", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-16T12:36:22.270", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "542", "parent_id": "4300", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I would say that anything that happens (is realized) at some point is an\n\"action\" in this context. The action 寝過ごす is realized when the train you're on\nreaches your station, but you're sleeping. Some other verbs like this would be\n起きる, 寝る, 食べる etc. So you _cannot_ say\n\n * 彼が起きれば、私に電話をするように伝えて下さい <\\- WRONG!!\n\n\"Non actions\" in this context would be e.g. adjectives, verbs that specify\nsome state, like いる or ～て／でいる forms of other verbs, like 起きている, 寝ている. So you\n_can_ say\n\n * 荷物が重ければ、私に電話をして下さい Please call me if the baggage is heavy\n * 彼が家にいれば、私に電話をするように伝えて下さい If he is at home, please ask him to call me\n * 彼が起きていれば、私に電話をするように伝えて下さい If he is awake, please ask him to call me\n\nTo try to answer your second question, I don't think transitivity has much to\ndo with it. As I've already argued with the 起きる vs 起きている example, there are\ncases where it's more how the verb is used than the type of the verb itself.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-21T15:55:49.437", "id": "4374", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-21T16:02:54.667", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-21T16:02:54.667", "last_editor_user_id": "1073", "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4300", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 1, "body": "A friend of mine wrote this sentence in Japanese:\n\n> 彼女のどんな困難からも逃げない態度を尊敬しています。 \n> 'Her attitude of not running away from any hardships is something I\n> respect.' \n> 'I respect that she has this attitude of always sticking to her guns.'\n\nIf I change the `の` here to `が`, would it be grammatically correct? If so,\nwhat would it mean?\n\n> 彼女 **が** どんな困難からも逃げない態度を尊敬しています。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-16T21:35:35.817", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4305", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-16T23:32:56.053", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-16T23:32:56.053", "last_editor_user_id": "706", "owner_user_id": "706", "post_type": "question", "score": 6, "tags": [ "particles", "particle-の", "particle-が", "subjects" ], "title": "の versus が used to mark the subject of an appositive clause?", "view_count": 311 }

[ { "body": "There are many instances where の and が could both technically be used, but\nwhere one is more natural-sounding (or seems more relevant to the intent of\nthe sentence) than the other. I'd think I'd say that this is probably one of\nthose situations, though I'd never say it the second way, personally; I'd\nalways use の.\n\nThe clause 「彼女がどんな困難からも逃げない」 is most certainly grammatically correct and\nnatural, but when you change it to modify the word 「態度」, the structure of the\nphrase changes to be 「彼女のどんな困難からも逃げない態度」, because you're talking about _her_\nattitude (hence the 「彼女の」).\n\nYou can rewrite it like this to see how the modification works:\n\n彼女の（どんな困難からも逃げない）態度\n\n「の」 is really the natural particle to follow 「彼女」 here--if you replace it with\n「が」 it sounds a bit strange, since a 「が」 clause doesn't seem like the best way\nto modify the noun 態度.\n\nHopefully that explains it well--perhaps someone with a bit more experience in\nlinguistics could give a better reason why the 「の」 version sounds better :)", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-16T22:04:18.050", "id": "4306", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-16T22:04:18.050", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1048", "parent_id": "4305", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4308", "answer_count": 1, "body": "I was reading a short news article on students taking entrance exams in Japan,\nand it listed the number of students from the prefecture who took what test.\n\nHere is the excerpt I had a question about:\n\n> 、、、、受験者数は、地理歴史・公民（１）２０５１人、同（２）４８０４人、、、、\n\nIt goes on to list subjects and give the number of people taking the test.\n\nI know `同` is used to like \"the above-mentioned [blank]\", usually about a\ngroup or organization, but here I think it's referencing to the subjects. I'm\na little hesitant on the (1) and (2) parts.\n\nWhat I _think_ it says is this that 2051 people are taking the `地理{ちり}歴史{れきし}`\n(geography and history) and 4804 people are taking `公民{こうみん}` (civics). What I\ndon't understand is why `地理歴史・公民` has to be broken up like it is. All the\nother subjects are listed individually (including separating \"foreign\nlanguage\" and \"English listening\").\n\nSo my question is two-fold. A) Did I understand it correctly, and B) Why was\nit written like it was?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-16T22:37:03.127", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4307", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-16T23:04:47.963", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "921", "post_type": "question", "score": 5, "tags": [ "grammar" ], "title": "Help with newspaper shorthand", "view_count": 161 }

[ { "body": "「地理歴史・公民」is a group of subjects which\nincludes「世界史Ａ」、「世界史Ｂ」、「日本史Ａ」、「日本史Ｂ」、「地理Ａ」、「地理Ｂ」、「現代社会」、「倫理」、「政治・経済」、「倫理、政治･経済」. \n \n(1) and (2) show how many of these each student chose.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-16T23:04:47.963", "id": "4308", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-16T23:04:47.963", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4307", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4357", "answer_count": 5, "body": "Generally when you see romanization of Japanese it is in the Hepburn system;\nhowever, I recently came across the Nihon-shiki system which seems to be\npreferable. Why is it that the Hepburn system caught on as opposed to the\nNihon-shiki system?", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-17T17:56:50.167", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4312", "last_activity_date": "2021-06-06T11:27:57.623", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-18T17:12:36.880", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "post_type": "question", "score": 8, "tags": [ "rōmaji" ], "title": "Why is the Hepburn system of romanization generally used over the Nihon-shiki system?", "view_count": 12401 }

[ { "body": "You are looking at this from the perspective of someone with a reasonable\nknowledge of Japanese, but romaji is wider in application than that. It is\noften read by people who have no knowledge of the language, perhaps not even a\ndesire to learn it. In fact, those people may be the main readers of romaji.\n\nThe advantage of Hepburn over Nihon-shiki is largely that Hepburn is more\nconsistent and intuitive in how it maps letters to pronunciations,\nparticularly for English speakers. Someone with absolutely no knowledge of\nJapanese will be able to produce a closer approximation to the Japanese\noriginal when presented with Hepburn over Nihon-shiki, and it will take them\nless time to become familiar with the system. There are fewer pronunciation\nquirks.\n\nFor instance, take ち and つ.\n\nIn Nihon-shiki, this would be rendered \"ti\" and \"tu\". A person with no\nknowledge of Nihon-shiki or kana may well think that these are pronounced in\nthe same way as \"ta\", \"te\", and \"to\". On the other hand, Hepburn is very\nexplicit in pointing out that ち and つ use a different consonant sound, with\nits romanizations \"chi\" and \"tsu\".\n\nSimilarly, not many English speakers would think to produce anything like \"sh\"\nor \"ch\" from the spelling \"syatyô\".", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-17T19:14:28.540", "id": "4319", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-17T19:14:28.540", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "315", "parent_id": "4312", "post_type": "answer", "score": 20 }, { "body": "In answer to this question, I'll give my personal understanding, although I\ncan't fully substantiate it.\n\n**The kunrei-siki**\n\nSome consider Kunrei-siki to be a better system than Hepburn in representing\nJapanese. That is because Kunrei-siki preserves the regularity of the syllabic\nsystem more closely than Hepburn. This is noticeable in the さ row, the た row,\nthe は row, and those syllables using ゃ, ゅ, and ょ.\n\nさ し す せ そ \nsa si su se so (kunrei-siki) \nsa _shi_ su se so (Hepburn)\n\nた ち つ て と \nta ti tu te to (kunrei-siki) \nta _chi tsu_ te to (Hepburn)\n\nは ひ ふ へ ほ \nha hi hu he ho (kunrei-siki) \nha hi _fu_ he ho (Hepburn)\n\nじゃ じゅ じょ \nzya zyu zyo (kunrei-siki) \n_ja ju jo_ (Hepburn)\n\nHepburn obscures the regularity of the conjugation of 〜つ, kunrei-siki shows it\nquite clearly. This becomes particularly apparent in verb conjugations like:\n\nまつ まちます まてば \nmatu matimasu mateba (kunrei-siki) \nma _tsu_ ma _chi_ masu mateba (Hepburn)\n\nPeople who prize the regularity of kunrei-siki transliteration feel it's a\nmore elegant system than Hepburn.\n\n**Why Hepburn has largely supplanted kunrei-siki in most situations**\n\nHepburn is definitely the more popular system of romanisation (although you\nmight be surprised at how many Japanese mix systems in using romanisations). I\nwould suggest several reasons for the popularity of Hepburn.\n\nFirst, the two systems are rather different in their target audience. Kunrei-\nsiki is a system that could be perceived as a _plausible writing system for\nthe Japanese language_. The days when people seriously suggested abandoning\ncharacters and kana are probably long past, but if it came to writing Japanese\nin romanisation, this would probably be the logical choice.\n\nHepburn has no such pretensions. It is a system of spelling Japanese _for the\nbenefit of non-speakers_ and nothing more. It is meant to be convenient for\nforeigners to read, and it does that job well.\n\nGiven that Japanese does fine with characters and kana for most purposes, it\nis probably quite natural that romanisation now largely serves as a script for\nforeigners. There is little need for the Japanese to resort to _romaji_ in\ntheir own language.\n\nMy understanding is that this also represents the historical situation. Before\nWorld War II, use of kunrei-siki appears to have been more widespread. I\nbelieve that this was because it was an era of Japanese nationalism (thus,\nromanisation is for the Japanese, not for foreigners). (It was also a time\nwhen ideas about script reform (reform of characters and kana) were still\naround. People who proposed kunrei-siki did so because they felt it was a good\nsystem for writing Japanese. I should point out that nationalism and ideas of\nscript reform didn't necessarily go together!)\n\nAfter the war the situation changed completely. With the United States in\ncontrol of Japan, romanisation took on the role of showing foreigners how\nJapanese was pronounced. The kunrei-siki system did not come off very well for\nthis purpose. Jack Seward in his popular book _Japanese in Action_ described\nthe ludicrous results of using kunrei-siki in post-war Japan, when the 第一ホテル,\nwritten 'Dai-iti Hoteru', was inevitably mangled by American servicemen into\n'Dai Itty Hotel' and eventually 'Dai Itty-Bitty Hotel'. (I'm quoting this\nexample from memory; I don't have the actual book with me).\n\nThat is probably a very practical reason why Hepburn and not kunrei-siki\nbecame the most popular romanisation in Japan.\n\nA third reason, I would suggest, is the fact that English has come to be\nwidely studied in Japan and is regarded as a kind of international standard. A\nsystem of writing, like Hepburn, that follows English is thus probably\nregarded as more 'international' and more prestigious by Japanese speakers. I\nwould even suspect that kunrei-siki is regarded as a little ださい by the\nJapanese.\n\n**The kunrei-siki (revisited)**\n\nDuring the early 20th century, kunrei-siki could probably be described as a\nbetter fit for the Japanese language. Those, after all, were the days when\nwords like 'team' and 'diesel' were imported into Japanese as チーム and ヂーゼル.\n\nBut the language has moved on since then, and the phonology of Japanese has\nbeen penetrated by foreign sounds that didn't exist before. For instance, ヂーゼル\nis now usually written and pronounced ディーゼル. In other words, the sound 'di'\nhas now entered Japanese where once there was only 'ji'. ティ (as in パーティー) and\nトゥ (as in トゥトゥ) are now familiar to ordinary Japanese, alongside the old\nnative sounds ち and つ. Katakana struggles to accommodate these pronunciations,\ncoming up with devices like ティ, トォ, フィ, ヴィ etc. to represent them.\n\nWith these gradual changes in the sound system, it's now not quite so self-\nevident that kunrei-siki was the ideal system for representing Japanese.\nUnlike Hepburn, which can easily distinguish 'chi' and 'ti', kunrei-siki has\nno obvious way of distinguishing these two sounds.", "comment_count": 9, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-20T14:18:32.597", "id": "4357", "last_activity_date": "2021-06-06T11:27:57.623", "last_edit_date": "2021-06-06T11:27:57.623", "last_editor_user_id": "27424", "owner_user_id": "1038", "parent_id": "4312", "post_type": "answer", "score": 23 }, { "body": "Neither is superior than the other. They represent different stages of the\nphonological derivation. Any natural spoken language has a set of phonological\nrules. In case of Japanese, the rules include those that change /s/ into [sh],\n/t/ into [ch] or [ts], /p/ into [h], /h/ into [f], /h/ into [w], or delete /w/\nunder respective conditions. If you are interested in describing the\ninflection of a Japanese word, it is more convenient to describe the\n_underlying representation_ :\n\n> kaw-anai \n> kaw-u \n> kaw-(i)-mas-u \n> kaw-e\n>\n> tat-anai \n> tat-u \n> tat-(i)-mas-u \n> tat-e\n\nThis is close to the Japanese method (nihon-shiki), but has some differences:\nfor example, wu, wi, we would be described u, i, e in Japanese method. In this\nrespect, the Japanese method is actually less consistent/precise than the\nHepburn system (described below), contrary to what you wrote.\n\nWithin the derivation, these forms undergo phonological rules, which change\nthem to their _surface representation_ :\n\n> kawanai \n> kau \n> kaimasu \n> kae\n>\n> tatanai \n> tatsu \n> tachimasu \n> tate\n\nThis is the form that is pronounced, and if one wants to transcribe the\npronunciation, describing as above would be convenient. This is close to the\nHepburn system.\n\nDepending on your needs, you should chose the appropriate one. In the majority\nof cases when romanization is used, the pronunciation matters, and Hepburn\nsystem would be convenient.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-06-20T05:25:04.837", "id": "5920", "last_activity_date": "2018-02-21T01:03:36.057", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4312", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "I'm going to give a very simple answer: _convention_.\n\nKorean and Chinese had systems like Hepburn, based on foreign phonology, but\nSouth Korea and China more or less decreed that a system based on native\nphonology rather than English approximation was to be used, and it worked in\nthat case.\n\nThe Japanese government is softly pushing _Kunrei_ , but not putting it's foot\ndown in the same way the Chinese -, and Korean governments did and demanded\nit, so it never happened — most likely, if they had been just as aggressive\nwith demanding it diplomatically as the Chinese government was, we would be\nusing _Kunrei_ now everywhere; I don't really believe it has much to do with\nwhat is \"best\". _Pīnyīn_ has _x_ , _q_ , _j_ and a variety of consonants\nthat in no way indicate the pronunciation to English speakers, and it must be\nlearned, but it's still used everywhere, because it doesn't really matter: the\ntruth of the matter is that English speakers will, with no prior knowledge of\nJapanese, probably when reading out Hepburn still sound largely\nunintelligible, put the stress wrong, pronounce the vowels wrongly, and might\nread the \"y\" in things like \"kyo\" as a vowel, which is how \"Tokyo\" is\ngenerally pronounced in English. What matters is that it creates something\nthat can be recognized. \"毛泽东\" is not something easily recognizable for those\nunaccustomed to Han-characters, but \"Máo Zédōng\" is, even if the tones be\ncompletely ignored, even if the _z_ be mispronounced like an English /z/, even\nif it would be completely unintelligible to a speaker of Mandarin when read\nout loud.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2020-01-06T04:21:47.773", "id": "73753", "last_activity_date": "2020-01-06T04:21:47.773", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "35937", "parent_id": "4312", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "It's not. Kunrei-siki (the updated version of Nihon-siki) is still widely used\nin Japan, as are non-standard romanisations and mixtures of different systems.\nThey're taught in Japanese education systems and used by companies and\ngovernment institutions, you'll see them on signs a lot. It was designed in\nJapan to make logical sense for people already familiar with hiragana.\n\n(Revised) Hepburn romanisation is more widely used for international media,\nbeing almost completely the dominant system for learning Japanese and official\ntransliterations intended for foreign readers. They reason for this is that it\nleads to more faithful pronunciations by English speakers and other western\nreaders (learning hiragana and Japanese phonetics is still recommended). It\nwas designed by an American for this purpose and is based on how latin\ncharacters are read in English or Italian.\n\n\"si\", \"tu\" and \"ti\" are the same as \"shi\", \"tsu\", and \"chi\" for Japanese\nreaders (some even prefer other systems) but English speakers will pronounce\nthem differently. For example, if you tell a tourist to meet you at\n\"Shimbashi\", it will be more difficult for them to find it written on a map as\n\"Shinbasi\". It's to aid newcomers to Japan who cannot read Japanese. For this\nreason, Hepburn has become the dominant romanisation.\n\nHepburn is preferable for foreign readers and is more intuitive for them.\nOther systems were designed with Japanese readers in mind (although studying\nlatin alphabet and English is common so this is no longer as important).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2020-01-07T02:45:10.683", "id": "73775", "last_activity_date": "2020-01-07T02:51:54.237", "last_edit_date": "2020-01-07T02:51:54.237", "last_editor_user_id": "14608", "owner_user_id": "14608", "parent_id": "4312", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 3, "body": "I've read at other sites that \"don't work too hard\" isn't something that's\ngenerally said in Japanese. Is there any truth to this?\n\nAre there any alternatives if that is the case? In which circumstances would\n`無理（を）しないで（ください）` and `働きすぎない（で／ように）` be appropriate?", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-18T06:01:45.350", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4323", "last_activity_date": "2012-05-24T12:46:55.753", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-18T06:51:13.070", "last_editor_user_id": "796", "owner_user_id": "796", "post_type": "question", "score": 6, "tags": [ "word-choice", "culture", "phrase-requests" ], "title": "Expressing \"don't work too hard\"", "view_count": 11364 }

[ { "body": "Not really used, not because the language does not allow, but because of the\nmentality.\n\n無理しないで(ください)ね can fit most of the situations. Just meaning \"Don't push\nyourself too much\" 働きすぎないで／ように can be used as well. Nobody will correct you on\nthis one.\n\nAn other way would be something like (and this case, 'work' is for a job only,\nnot weight training or physical things) 働き過ぎには気をつけて（ください）ね that literally\nmeans: be careful not to work too hard.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-18T07:09:07.673", "id": "4324", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-18T07:09:07.673", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "4323", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "I can't add much to the way to translate it as explained by chocolate and\noldergod, but I can confirm that no, it's generally not said. Personally, I\nstill don't understand it myself, but the psychological significance of work\nover here is incredible. It becomes much more a part of your average Japanese\n(males, especially) identity than it does for Westerners. It becomes a core\nsource of self-esteem, much in the same way that friends and family do for us.\nTelling somebody not to work too hard in Japan is, in a way, like cautioning\nyou not to love your family too much. There perhaps exists in the individual\nconsciousness the concept that there is such a thing as too much work, but it\nhas no immediacy. Much in the same way that you and I know that hijackings and\ncancer exist, but give little thought to them until they strike close to home.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-18T08:37:06.343", "id": "4326", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-18T08:37:06.343", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1043", "parent_id": "4323", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "I agree with the other answers that you won't find a Japanese person say this\nwith the same nuance as English speakers, but I was watching TV with Japanese\nsubtitles \"Don't work too hard\" was translated as 頑張りすぎるなよ。\n\nThe man who said it is romantically involved with the person said to in the\nshow. If you were to say it to coworkers I'd go with a more polite like\n頑張りすぎないで。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-05-24T12:46:55.753", "id": "5611", "last_activity_date": "2012-05-24T12:46:55.753", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "630", "parent_id": "4323", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4463", "answer_count": 3, "body": "Consider:\n\n> [A] 猫 **が** 好きだ\n\nTo me this means [A']\"I like cats.\"\n\nContrast this to:\n\n> [B] 猫 **は** 好きだ\n\nTo me this means [B']\"I like cats (among other animals)\"\n\nI based my understanding of [B] from [Derek Schaab's answer to \"What is the\ndifference between “に” and\n“には”?\"](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/1130/542):\n\n> You'll see that while in the first sentence there is only one scope, the\n> second actually has two:\n>\n\n>> (私【わたし】は）彼【かれ】と会【あ】わなかった。\n\n>>\n\n>> * Scope (implied): I\n\n>> * Statement: Didn't meet with him.\n\n>>\n\n>>\n\n>> (私【わたし】は）彼【かれ】とは会【あ】わなかった。\n\n>>\n\n>> * Outer scope (implied): I\n\n>> * Inner scope (explicit): with him\n\n>> * Statement: Didn't meet.\n\n>>\n\n>\n> Now as for what effect this has, **the は often adds a hint of comparison or\n> contrast** , as repecmps mentioned. While both of the above sentences\n> translate to, \"I didn't meet with him,\" the second hints that although you\n> didn't meet with him, you may have met with someone else.\n\nSo I deduced that は in [B] can perform that disambiguative role.\n\n* * *\n\nNow [A] can be interpreted to mean \" **I** like cats\" because of the implicit\nfirst person as in `(私は)猫が好きだ`\n\nNow let's make 私 explicit:\n\n> [C]私は猫が好きだ - [C']\"I like cats\"\n\nNow it is explicit that I am doing the liking.\n\nNow reconsider [B]猫は好きだ:\n\nBased on [C], I have another way to interpret [B]:\n\nSo now 猫は好きだ can mean [B'']\"The cat likes (an unspecified object)\"\n\n* * *\n\n**(Questions)** What is going on? Who is doing the liking and who is being\nliked in each case? Are [B'] and [B''] both valid? What am I doing and\nunderstanding wrong? If there is indeed ambiguity, how can I resolve it?\n\n**EDIT:**\n\nCan I resolve it by introducing another は element? E.g.\n\n> 私は猫は好きです。 \"I(thematic) like cats(disambiguated/anaphoric)\"\n\nIs it acceptable to have two はs in a sentence as above?", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-18T10:52:39.483", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4327", "last_activity_date": "2019-11-03T05:27:39.043", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.740", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "542", "post_type": "question", "score": 11, "tags": [ "grammar", "particles", "particle-は", "particle-が", "は-and-が" ], "title": "Problems with は and が", "view_count": 1124 }

[ { "body": "Dave M G's comment is right, you should see the sentence as 私は[先生が猫が好きだ]と思います.\nSo if you remove と思います, you remove 私は as well. 私は先生が猫が好きだ is not a correct\nsentence.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-19T00:36:17.287", "id": "4337", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-19T00:36:17.287", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "4327", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "The phrase 〜は〜が好きだ is a little unusual, but it's not too hard to break down.\n\nFirst, 好く is a verb meaning \"to be fond of\". For whatever reason (probably\nbecause declaring your fondness for something is too direct in Japanese\nculture), you never say 〜を好く.\n\nInstead, we nominalize the verb by using the 〜い form: 好き (remember, nominalize\nmeans to turn into a noun). We might translate this as \"one that (I) like\".\n\nBecause 好き is a noun, it cannot take 〜を. In fact, it can't even appear alone\nat the end of a sentence. We need the copula, だ, meaning \"is\".\n\nSo, dropping the 〜は part, the phrase 〜が好きだ literally translates to \"~ is the\none (I) like\".\n\nThe full phrase is an example where the は particle introduces a topic that\nisn't actually the subject. It's just like in the sentence 今は眠い, \"As for now,\n(I) am tired\". 今 is not the subject. Similarly, when you have 私は猫がすきです, 私 is\nnot the subject. 猫 is, because it's doing the \"being\" in the sentence: As for\nme, cats are things (I) like.\n\ntl;dr,", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-19T15:24:24.960", "id": "4343", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-19T15:24:24.960", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "933", "parent_id": "4327", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "私は猫が好きだ means I like cats.\n\n私は猫は好きだ has the same meaning and it's absolutely possible.\n\nBut in the second case you are putting emphasis on what you like for whatever\nreason: maybe you are going to talk then about cats, or you want to remark\nthat you like a specific cat (私はこの猫は好きだ), or want to focus attention on cats,\netc.\n\nThe same emphasis can be put on other subjects marked with が.\n\n> ドアが開いています。 \n> このドアは開いています。\n\nDirect object can be marked with は instead of を for the same reason.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-27T20:14:07.080", "id": "4463", "last_activity_date": "2019-11-03T05:27:39.043", "last_edit_date": "2019-11-03T05:27:39.043", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "1103", "parent_id": "4327", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4330", "answer_count": 2, "body": "I was a little confused after reading this on Wikipedia article for\n[宇部港](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%AE%87%E9%83%A8%E6%B8%AF), a harbor in\nUbe, Yamaguchi:\n\n> 港湾法{こうわんほう}上の重要港湾...に指定されている。\n\nI'm really not used to reading very technical writing, so there is a (pretty\ngood) chance that I'm way off the mark, but I figured it means something like:\n\n> \"It is designated as an Important Port under the Harbor Act\" (or however the\n> legalese works out).\n\nWhat got me stuck was the use of the kanji `上` (which I, for lack of a clear\nreference, am reading as `じょう`). Is it saying that the `港湾法` is _above_ the\nUbe Harbor, or vice-versa? It may be how English has wired my brain, but I\nthink of things \"under a law\"? Is this simply the way it's said in Japanese?\nDoes it have another meaning?", "comment_count": 9, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-18T16:30:43.143", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4329", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-19T01:00:35.313", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-19T01:00:35.313", "last_editor_user_id": "921", "owner_user_id": "921", "post_type": "question", "score": 7, "tags": [ "definitions" ], "title": "What does it mean to be \"over a law\"?", "view_count": 357 }

[ { "body": "Without knowing the entire sentence, this looks like a `〜上` meaning \"from the\nviewpoint/standpoint of 〜\". I talked about the meaning of this [in this\nthread](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/3174/jlpt-n1-question-\nwhy-isnt-a-large-amount-of-money-a-good-enough-reason-to-kill), so I'll defer\nyou there for a more complete explanation.\n\nBasically sounds like \"From the viewpoint/In terms of the Harbour Act 〜\".\nActually, in this case, I think \"Under the Habour Act\" (as you mentioned)\nwould be correct English also.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-18T16:48:21.733", "id": "4330", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-19T00:06:37.940", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:48.447", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "4329", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "From [goo](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/srch/jn/%E4%B8%8A/m1u/):\n\n> ［接尾］名詞に付いて、…に関して、…の面で、…の上で、などの意を表す。\n>\n> * 「一身 **上** の都合」\n> * 「経済 **上** の理由」\n> * 「行きがかり **上** そうせざるを得なかった」\n>\n\nAs istrasci said, it has a meaning of \"from the viewpoint/standpoint of 〜\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-18T17:08:51.273", "id": "4331", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-18T17:08:51.273", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "903", "parent_id": "4329", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4334", "answer_count": 3, "body": "I've been looking around and I got that the three words can mean \"future\". Is\nthere a way to differentiate them? Can they be used the same way?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-18T20:56:13.370", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4332", "last_activity_date": "2014-10-28T09:28:19.483", "last_edit_date": "2014-10-28T09:28:05.710", "last_editor_user_id": "6840", "owner_user_id": "25", "post_type": "question", "score": 23, "tags": [ "word-choice", "usage", "synonyms" ], "title": "Difference between [行く末]{ゆくすえ}, 将来{しょうらい} and 未来{みらい}", "view_count": 9935 }

[ { "body": "I was always taught that `将来【しょうらい】` was a more \"tangible\" future (like 5\nyears in the future, 10 years in the future, etc.), whereas `未来【みらい】` was more\n\"intagible\", \"unknown\", and \"fantastical\" (like \"In the future, people will\ninhabit the moon\"; like how people of the 50's thought life in 2000 would be).\n\nI've never heard of `行【ゆ】く末【すえ】` until now, but it seems to correspond to my\nabove definition of `未来【みらい】`; more far-off and unknown.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-18T22:24:12.463", "id": "4333", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-18T22:24:12.463", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "4332", "post_type": "answer", "score": 16 }, { "body": "未来 and 将来 are pretty similar to each other. 大辞泉 breaks down the differences\n[under the 用法 section of 「将来」\nentry](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/110409/m0u/%E5%B0%86%E6%9D%A5/)\n(explanation translated):\n\n> 将来 and 未来 can both be used in situations where you're talking about the time\n> that will come after the present, e.g. 「将来（未来）への夢」 (\"dreams for the future\")\n> and 「明るい将来（未来）」 (\"a bright future\"). 「未来」 cannot be used instead of 「将来」 in\n> an expression like 「私は将来、弁護士になりたい」 (\"in the future, I want to be a lawyer\").\n> Also, it's awkward to use 「将来」 in an expression like 「二〇〇年後の未来を空想する」\n> (\"imagine a future 200 years ahead of now\"). If it was only 10 years later,\n> 「将来」 would be more common. 「未来」 has a strong sense of a more distinct,\n> intangible future. 「近い将来」 is a common expression, but 「近い未来」 is hardly ever\n> said. The term 「近未来（きんみらい）」 is a recently-coined expression.\n\nTo summarize: they're very similar, but when used as an adverb, it's almost\ninvariably 将来, not 未来, and 未来 by default has a farther-off, less tangible\nconnotation.\n\nAs for 行く末, it's less common and seems to me to be a more personal sort of\nfuture. But I'd stick with 将来 and 未来 for almost all contexts.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-18T22:31:46.130", "id": "4334", "last_activity_date": "2014-10-28T09:28:19.483", "last_edit_date": "2014-10-28T09:28:19.483", "last_editor_user_id": "6840", "owner_user_id": "1048", "parent_id": "4332", "post_type": "answer", "score": 25 }, { "body": "Literally they should roughly mean:\n\n**将** 来 - That which is **about to** come\n\n**未** 来 - That which has **not yet** come\n\nThis corresponds to the other answers here that indicates that `将来` is a more\n\"tangible\" future and `未来` being \"intangible\". Because for `将来` its path is\napproaching you. Compare with `未来` which isn't approaching you, in fact its\nkanji indicates that it will not yet come.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-19T01:32:11.563", "id": "4339", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-20T01:41:46.157", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-20T01:41:46.157", "last_editor_user_id": "542", "owner_user_id": "542", "parent_id": "4332", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4336", "answer_count": 1, "body": "What is the relationship between 左様なら and 左? I assume there's some idiomatic\nmeaning for \"left\" but how does it fit?", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-18T22:41:50.403", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4335", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-20T18:07:31.997", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-20T18:07:31.997", "last_editor_user_id": "921", "owner_user_id": "1067", "post_type": "question", "score": 18, "tags": [ "kanji", "greetings", "ateji" ], "title": "What does さようなら (左様なら) have to do with \"left\"?", "view_count": 1376 }

[ { "body": "According to [this okwave post](http://okwave.jp/qa/q6773033.html), `さよう` was\noriginally written as `然様{さよう}`. It says that `さよう` has the meaning of\n`そのよう`/`そう` and that the `左` in `左様{さよう}` is an\n[当{あ}て字{じ}](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ateji) (a Kanji used as a phonetic\nsymbol, rather than for it's meaning.)\n\nIn other words, the meaning doesn't have anything to do with `左`, it's uses\nthat character because of it's reading/pronunciation.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-18T22:59:32.450", "id": "4336", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-18T23:39:14.070", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-18T23:39:14.070", "last_editor_user_id": "796", "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "4335", "post_type": "answer", "score": 17 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4341", "answer_count": 2, "body": "I work in IT in Tokyo, so most of what I do doesn't require interaction with\nour Japanese customers, but every so often we get that one phone call where\nsomeone wants something explained, and I can always make it through, but never\nat the level that I want to. The problem usually comes in with regards to\ncomputer terminology. For example, when I'm on the spot and don't have any\ntime to look things up, if I want to say, \"if you hover over the icon, a\ntooltip will pop up,\" I just toss out something simple\nlike「アイコンの上にマウスを動かして、クリックせずに１～２秒程待ってください。そうしますと、ツールチップが表示されます。」. And it works\nand gets the point across as expected. But I'm consistently wanting to improve\nupon sentences like that, to something more natural in Japanese --- in this\nparticular example, what I want to know is, what is the most common and most\nnatural way to say \"hover the mouse over...\"? Problem is I don't have time to\ndo language research at work, and by the time I get home my brain is either\nfried or I just forget.\n\nI'm aware of stuff like <http://e-words.jp/> for pure dictionary lookups, but\nreally what I'm looking for is like a book that I can read during my train\ncommute, written for native English speakers learning Japanese, and focusing\nexclusively on technology/Windows/programming terminology.\n\nThanks!", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-19T02:53:01.883", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4340", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-02T14:05:14.623", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1070", "post_type": "question", "score": 11, "tags": [ "nuances", "words" ], "title": "Any books or websites dedicated to Japanese tech/IT language?", "view_count": 1832 }

[ { "body": "I work at a Japanese software company, and when I started there, I experienced\nmuch of the same feeling that you did--I knew all of these technical terms in\nEnglish, and I _thought_ that I spoke Japanese fluently, but I didn't know any\nof these terms in Japanese, so I felt very much at a loss when communicating\nabout technical topics.\n\nA lot of it I've just picked up as I've gotten more experienced, so I can't\nreally recommend any good books for non-native speakers; I read lots of\nresources written in Japanese for Japanese people, but very few if any helpful\nresources written in English. I think you may have to stick to native language\nresources for the majority of your learning. (Hopefully you've reached the\npoint in your Japanese where this isn't a problem for you to do.) Also, you\nshould know that while technical people in Japanese have a firm grasp of this\nsort of vocabulary, your average, non-technical speaker of Japanese might be a\nlot more comfortable with your roundabout rephrasings than they would be with\nthe more technical and efficient ways of stating things.\n\nDon't know if it helps, but a while back I made a short vocabulary list for a\nfriend of mine who was studying for a Japanese-speaking programming job. It's\nnot very complete, but if you'd like some vocabulary to study, here it is. The\nwords are pretty programming-specific.\n\n```\n\n 引数{ひきすう}: argument (i.e., to a function)\n 返り値{かえりち}: return value\n 関数{かんすう}: function\n 構造体{こうぞうたい}: data structure\n 保存{ほぞん}する： to save, to store\n 割り込み{わりこみ}: interrupt\n 状態{じょうたい}: status\n 画像{がぞう}: image\n 復元{ふくげん}する： to restore\n アルゴリズム： algorithm\n 処理{しょり}: processing (very common word)\n 終了{しゅうりょう}する: to end; to be finalized\n 書き換える{かきかえる}: to overwrite\n 呼び出す{よびだす}: to call (as in, calling a function)\n 実装{じっそう}する： to implement\n 自動的{じどうてき}: automatically\n プログラムを組む{くむ}: to write a program\n 明示的{めいじてき}に： explicitly\n 黙示的{もくしてき}に: implicitly\n ポインタ： pointer\n テーブル： table\n 変換{へんかん}する： to convert\n 割り込み{わりこみ}禁止{きんし}: interrupts prohibited\n 対応{たいおう}する： to support (as in \"this language supports dynamic memory allocation\") \n 概要{がいよう}: overview\n 値{あたい}: value\n 固定{こてい}: static, fixed\n 動的{どうてき}: dynamic\n 同期{どうき}関数{かんすう}: synchronous function\n 非同期{ひどうき}関数{かんすう}: asynchronous function\n 調節{ちょうせつ}する： to adjust\n 計算{けいさん}結果{けっか}: result of calculation \n 割り当て{わりあて}: allocation\n 設定{せってい}: settings\n 設定{せってい}する： to set, to configure\n 配列{はいれつ}: array\n 登録{とうろく}する： to register\n \n```\n\nFor reading, I recommend reading programming books directed towards Japanese\npeople, or if those are too tough, just introductory books and articles for\nJapanese people. There are so many older people in Japan who are still just\nnow getting into computers that there should be no end of introductory books\nat your local library or Book-Off.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-19T04:48:36.790", "id": "4341", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-19T04:48:36.790", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1048", "parent_id": "4340", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 }, { "body": "This might not be exactly what you're looking for, but I'll post it for what\nit's worth. I picked this one up at a second hand book store a couple of years\nago:\n\nEncyclopedic Dictionary of Computer Science:\n<http://www.amazon.co.jp/%E5%B2%A9%E6%B3%A2%E6%83%85%E5%A0%B1%E7%A7%91%E5%AD%A6%E8%BE%9E%E5%85%B8-%E9%95%B7%E5%B0%BE-%E7%9C%9F/dp/4000800744>\n\nIt has both English-Japanese and Japanese-English and has entries (including\nsmall articles in Japanese) for a lot of stuff from programming terminology to\ntheoretical computer science stuff. I looked up 'hover' and 'tooltip' and\nneither was there, though, so it might be a bit more scientifically oriented.\n(For example, it lists several different kinds of garbage collection.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-02T14:05:14.623", "id": "4532", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-02T14:05:14.623", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4340", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 2, "body": "What is the general rule for saying, for example, \"2 hours later\"?", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-19T16:09:15.120", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4344", "last_activity_date": "2015-06-15T04:37:26.063", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-20T05:35:40.013", "last_editor_user_id": "162", "owner_user_id": "1075", "post_type": "question", "score": 4, "tags": [ "translation" ], "title": "How do you say \"[amount of time] later\"?", "view_count": 23421 }

[ { "body": "As fefe wrote, you add the portion of time + 後 or you can write 後 + the\nportion of time.\n\n```\n\n 二時間後: 2 hours later (it is then read にじかんご)\n 後二時間: 2 hours \"left\" (it is here read あとにじかん)\n 一ヶ月後\n 一年後\n etc\n \n```", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-20T00:13:28.733", "id": "4345", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-20T00:13:28.733", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "4344", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "> 二週間後 （～～後（あと）or（ご））\n\nJust substitute ~~ with any unit of time.\n\n* * *\n\nExample:\n\n> 四年後", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2015-06-15T04:37:26.063", "id": "25029", "last_activity_date": "2015-06-15T04:37:26.063", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "10293", "parent_id": "4344", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 2, "body": "For example, plugging these into Google, I can find stuff like, 自信のない人 and\n自信がない人. Or, 愛のない生活 and 愛がない生活. I found a movie called 顔のないスパイ. How is this any\ndifferent from 顔がないスパイ?\n\nI've asked Japanese people this, and the only answer I've ever gotten is that\nthat's a hard one to explain, and that there really isn't much difference\nworth noting. I'd like to know the gritty details though, what little nuance\neach holds.\n\nI feel like I see this difference with \"ない\" more than anything, but that could\njust be me. I can't really recall ever hearing the opposite, like 自信のある人. Is\nthis significant? Am I wrong?\n\nThanks!", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-20T00:28:43.403", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4346", "last_activity_date": "2016-02-19T17:56:44.687", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1070", "post_type": "question", "score": 11, "tags": [ "nuances", "word-choice" ], "title": "Difference between 「～のない～」 and 「～がない~」?", "view_count": 1362 }

[ { "body": "The difference between this kind of case alternation mostly appears in the\npossibility of the logical scope.\n\n> 三人の学生の買った本 \n> '(three possibly different) book(s) that three students bought'\n>\n> 三人の学生が買った本 \n> 'a single book that three students bought'\n\nAnd indeed, negation is one environment where logical scope becomes relevant,\nso yes, there should be difference when you have negation.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-20T01:24:50.113", "id": "4347", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-20T01:24:50.113", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4346", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "顔がない男,,as the name suggest a spy who doesn't have a fixed look. Because of\nbeing into the spy profession, he has to change his look frequently according\nto the his safety and requirements of his profession.and the title indicating\nabout that thing and it in the intransitive form. So in the bcoz of\nIntransitive form Ga particle is more appropriately used in the title instead\nof No particle.(I thinks)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2016-02-19T17:56:44.687", "id": "32296", "last_activity_date": "2016-02-19T17:56:44.687", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "13617", "parent_id": "4346", "post_type": "answer", "score": -1 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4350", "answer_count": 1, "body": "I did a quick search on this site to see if I could find any answer to this\nand found this question: [Does the volitional form of a verb mean both \"let's\"\nand \"I want to\"?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/3452/does-the-\nvolitional-form-of-a-verb-mean-both-lets-and-i-want-to)\n\nBut unfortunately that didn't really clarify things enough for me.\n\nI know that the volitional form can be used to say \"Lets do ~\" or \"Shall we do\n~?\" but I wanted to know if it can be used for your own actions without\nincluding the meaning of \"Lets\".\n\nFor example could the volitional form be used to nominate yourself for\nsomething?\n\nI know that if you wanted to say something like \" ** _I_** will go\" you could\nprobably say \"私が行くよ\", or something to that effect.\n\nBut can I also use this to nominate myself to go? For example if a group of\npeople were together and it was decided that only one person needed to go\nsomewhere would it be correct to say \"私が行こう\"?\n\nI'm under the assumption that saying something like just \"行こう\" could be\ninterpreted as \"Lets go\" including everyone in the group, but by being\nspecific about yourself by saying \"私が行こう\" it sounds like you are nominating\nyourself.\n\nIs this correct or am I just making stuff up?\n\nI'm sorry if my explanation isn't sufficient enough, but if you need me to add\nany more detail please let me know and I will try the best I can.\n\nThank you.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-20T01:32:12.643", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4348", "last_activity_date": "2023-07-12T08:26:44.850", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.260", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1035", "post_type": "question", "score": 7, "tags": [ "syntax", "pronouns", "volitional-form" ], "title": "Can the volitional form be used to nominate yourself for something?", "view_count": 335 }

[ { "body": "Yes, it can be used to nominate yourself in specific situations.\n\nI see two main cases. \nCase 1: Do something for someone but in a question, as you tried to explain,\n\n> But can I also use this to nominate myself to go? For example if a group of\n> people were together and it was decided that only one person needed to go\n> somewhere would it be correct to say \"私が行こう\"?\n\nYou would say \"私が行こうか？\" You could even skip the 私が if the context allows it.\n\nAnother example: you see an old lady using stairs with big luggages and want\nto help her: You just need to say: \"手伝いましょうか？\"\n\nCase 2: if you add と思います, it means \"I want to\"\n\n休みをとろうと思ってます => I want to take holidays. (I'm thinking about taking holidays)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-20T02:34:15.977", "id": "4350", "last_activity_date": "2023-07-12T08:26:44.850", "last_edit_date": "2023-07-12T08:26:44.850", "last_editor_user_id": "50132", "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "4348", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4351", "answer_count": 1, "body": "What is the etymology of the term 仏様 ? I am interested because of all the\nmeanings this word can possess.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-20T01:54:13.963", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4349", "last_activity_date": "2012-03-15T05:32:17.807", "last_edit_date": "2012-03-15T05:32:17.807", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "706", "post_type": "question", "score": 7, "tags": [ "etymology" ], "title": "What is the etymology of the term [仏]{ほとけ}[様]{さま}?", "view_count": 437 }

[ { "body": "It comes from two words: 仏{ほとけ} (hotoke, Buddha) and 様{さま} (an honorific\nsuffix). さま is of course applied to many names towards which a large degree of\ndeference is to be shown (gods, royalty, etc.).\n\nBut perhaps you're wondering about the origin of 仏{ほとけ}? That's a bit more\ncomplicated. According to the [大辞泉\ndictionary](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&p=%E4%BB%8F&dtype=0&dname=0na&stype=1&index=17048900&pagenum=1),\nthe word ほとけ originally came from a phonetic shift of the word ぶつ (a word for\n\"Buddha\" in Japanese) into the word ほと.\n\nAfter this shift, the ending ～け was then applied, which means (loosely\ntranslated) \"looks like\" or \"seems like,\" to mean \"an image of Buddha.\" You\ncan also see this ～け in words like ありげ and よさげ.\n\nFrom this original meaning of \"an image of Buddha,\" the meaning then shifted a\nbit through history to mean \"Buddha,\" as well as \"a spirit of the deceased.\"\n\nI wouldn't say that 仏{ほとけ} really has many other meanings besides those above,\nalthough it's extremely versatile in idiomatic expressions, which can give it\nmany uses.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-20T02:54:49.717", "id": "4351", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-20T02:54:49.717", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1048", "parent_id": "4349", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4355", "answer_count": 1, "body": "In a recent email conversation, an acquaintance used the expression:\n\n> １対１で対応するそれは、大変だね。\n\nAlthough I can vaguely infer the meaning of the expression １対１で対応する\n(いちたいでたいおう), I am having a hard time finding a clear definition and\ndescription of it. All the hits in Japanese pages seem to have to do with\nmathematical terms (where it'd mean something like \"bijective\" or \"one-to-one\ncorrespondence\"), but our conversation had nothing to do with mathematics and\nthe person is not a particularly mathematically-inclined person, so I doubt\nhe'd be using it a math term for an everyday-idea... Furthermore, all the hits\nI got, were without that 'で' in the middle: １対１対応する\n\nMy questions:\n\n * what does this expression mean _in a general context_? Where does it come from? How common/familiar is it?\n\n * which of the two forms is the correct one? is the 'で' form a typo, or just a less common form?\n\n * is the spelling of '1' as roman numeral standard practice, or just e-mail shorthand, with 一対一対応 being the preferred way to write it?", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-20T09:00:12.687", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4354", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-20T15:00:31.890", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "290", "post_type": "question", "score": 5, "tags": [ "words", "expressions" ], "title": "Meaning and spelling of１対１で対応", "view_count": 389 }

[ { "body": "・[一対一]{いったいいち}で/[一対一]{いちたいいち}で＝二人きりで, one-to-one, person-to-person \n \n・で is not a typo. We say 「一対一で対応する。」not 「一対一対応する。」 \n \n・I think both 一対一 and １対１ are equally common, but probably the former is more\nformal. \n \n一対一で対応する＊＊（=仕事、役目、または「＊＊さん」等の人物名・・・？）は、大変だね。= I think ＊＊(kind of work,\nposition etc?) is such tough work, because you have to deal with someone\n(probably your guest, client, student etc.) person-to-person. / I guess ＊＊\nwould be tough, because you'd have to deal with your guest/client/student etc.\nperson-to-person.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-20T09:39:53.677", "id": "4355", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-20T15:00:31.890", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-20T15:00:31.890", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4354", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4359", "answer_count": 2, "body": "I've seen several of my Japanese friends use \"orz\" in various types of posts\non Facebook. What does \"orz\" mean? It's driving me nuts!", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-20T15:18:36.787", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4358", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-20T16:13:04.463", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "post_type": "question", "score": 9, "tags": [ "internet-slang" ], "title": "Internet speak - orz", "view_count": 5082 }

[ { "body": "Lol, sorry I often use it too... when I want to show that I'm shocked, sad or\ndepressed...it's like OMG or something similar to it I think... because\ndoesn't it look like someone throwing himself on the ground?", "comment_count": 10, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-20T15:31:54.737", "id": "4359", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-20T15:31:54.737", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4358", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "orz\n\n\"o\" is for head, \"r\" for arm and body, and \"z\" for body and legs. I couldn't\nfind any pictures of it, but found a picture of its variety \"OTL\".\n\n<http://hehehe.be/blog/2008/12/20/otl/>", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-20T16:13:04.463", "id": "4360", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-20T16:13:04.463", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1082", "parent_id": "4358", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 1, "body": "I came across `０３年度` and `０９年度`, and while the meaning is clear I didn't know\nthe actual way of reading it. My first reaction was `ゼロさんねんど`, but I have no\nway of checking if that's right. I thought it might also be simply, `さんねんど`,\nbut again I can't tell.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-20T21:59:19.910", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4361", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-20T23:17:39.097", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "921", "post_type": "question", "score": 10, "tags": [ "readings", "numbers" ], "title": "How do you read zeros in abbreviated years? (i.e. ０３年)", "view_count": 391 }

[ { "body": "I think we usually read them as さんねんど, きゅうねんど etc. I've never heard anyone say\nゼロさんねんど or ゼロきゅうねんど. I think we write that way to differentiate （西暦/A.D.）０３年度\nfrom （平成）３年度.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-20T23:12:02.397", "id": "4362", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-20T23:17:39.097", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-20T23:17:39.097", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4361", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 3, "body": "When I talked about a relative and his パートナー visiting for Christmas, the\nperson I was speaking to asked if his パートナー was male. Is this a common\ninterpretation of パートナー? Is there a better word than パートナー to talk about a\nlong-term opposite-sex partner who isn't married?\n\nガールフレンド was suggested, but in English, \"girlfriend\" wouldn't be a good choice\nof words as it tends to be used for short-term relationships, especially\ninvolving teenagers.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-21T09:48:29.247", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4363", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-21T18:19:25.197", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "91", "post_type": "question", "score": 14, "tags": [ "word-choice", "loanwords" ], "title": "Is パートナー likely to be interpreted as a same-sex partner?", "view_count": 897 }

[ { "body": "I don't think パートナー has an implication of sex. It refers to work partner or\npartner in dance, sports, etc.\n\nThe [goo\ndictionary](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/173089/m0u/%E3%83%91%E3%83%BC%E3%83%88%E3%83%8A%E3%83%BC/)\nhas the following explanation:\n\n> １ 共同で仕事をする相手。相棒。\n>\n> ２ ダンス・スポーツなどで二人一組になるときの相手。\n>\n> ３ つれあい。配偶者。\n\nI don't recall I see the use of the third meaning very often.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-21T12:01:53.850", "id": "4370", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-21T12:01:53.850", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "903", "parent_id": "4363", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "パートナー does not imply homosexual partner, but since there are a few other ways\nto express a heterosexual partner whereas パートナー is about the only way to\nexpress a homosexual partner, it may be more likely that, when パートナー is used\nin the context of a sexual relationship, it refers to a homosexual partner.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-21T12:09:11.263", "id": "4373", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-21T12:09:11.263", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4363", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "As for the second question, any reason not to use 彼氏・彼女？", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-21T18:19:25.197", "id": "4381", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-21T18:19:25.197", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4363", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4384", "answer_count": 2, "body": "Today in my JLPT text book, I came across the word `解{げ}す`.\n\nI know that the kanji `解` means \"unravel\", and it can be read `解{わか}る`, and\nwith that reading it's synonymous with `分{わ}かる`, \"to understand\".\n\nWhen I looked up `解{げ}す` in the dictionary, it also seems to just mean \"to\nunderstand\" when read this way.\n\nWhich made me wonder - why use this reading instead of the usual `解{わか}る`\nreading? Does it carry any extra or different nuance?\n\nIs this reading as rare as I think it is, or is it just me that hasn't come\nacross it very often?", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-21T10:14:04.837", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4364", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-21T19:42:29.003", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "119", "post_type": "question", "score": 6, "tags": [ "word-choice", "kanji", "readings", "definitions" ], "title": "What is the nuance of 解{げ}す？", "view_count": 307 }

[ { "body": "The only common usages I can think of are 解{げ}せない and 解熱{げねつ}.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-21T18:08:12.827", "id": "4379", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-21T18:08:12.827", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4364", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "Moved to answer from comments.\n\nI mainly encounter this in the potential-negative as 解{げ}せない. As opposed to\n解{わか}らない (\"don't understand\"), 解{げ}せない feels more like the speaker has tried\nand failed to unravel any kind of explanation, as if the situation seems to\ndefy all logic - \"can't fathom/comprehend\" feels like a close English\nequivalent.\n\nIt seems to come up a lot in the context of failure to understand people's\nmotivations.\n\n[研究社 新和英中辞典 @\nWeblio](http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E8%A7%A3%E3%81%9B%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84):\n\n> 彼女がなぜあんなことを言ったのか解せないよ. \n> We can't understand why she said such a thing.\n\n[英辞郎 @ Space\nAlc](http://eow.alc.co.jp/%E8%A7%A3%E3%81%9B%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84/UTF-8/):\n\n> What is beyond our comprehension is that \n> 解せないのは＜that以下＞です。 \n>", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-21T19:42:29.003", "id": "4384", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-21T19:42:29.003", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "315", "parent_id": "4364", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4367", "answer_count": 1, "body": "I'm reading a book on how to draw manga style characters, and I came across\nthis sentence. It is part of a larger block explaining how to make a character\nlook the same from all different angles.\n\n>\n> 同{おな}じ髪型{かみがた}といっても、どこから分けてあるか、どんな感{かん}じのカーブで、みけんならみけんのどこまでかかるのか、などに注意{ちゅうい}をはらって描{か}きます\n\nI think I understand the general meaning of the whole sentence, but the part\nwhere it says `みけんならみけん` puzzles me a bit. I get that it's talking about where\nto draw the brow of the face and how far across it goes (`「どこまでかかるのか」`).\n\nAs I understand it, なら is something like \"being the case that\", so I translate\n`みけんならみけん` as \"the brow _as the_ brow\", but that seems weird to me. How would\nthe brow act as anything other than the brow when drawing a face? My\ntranslation must be wrong because it would be redundant to talk about the brow\nas the brow.\n\nWhat is `なら` doing in this context?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-21T10:29:26.653", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4365", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-21T22:04:03.203", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "119", "post_type": "question", "score": 0, "tags": [ "grammar" ], "title": "What is the meaning of 「...みけんならみけん...」?", "view_count": 258 }

[ { "body": "\"Even if it's the same hairdo, you draw keeping close attention on where to\npart it from, what sort of feeling of the curves, and [for/in the case of] the\narea between the eyebrows how far across to go of that area, etc.\"\n\n> みけんなら \n> =[for/in the case of] the area between the eyebrows\n>\n> みけんのどこまでかかるのか \n> =how far across to go of the area between the eyebrows", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-21T10:42:18.517", "id": "4367", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-21T22:04:03.203", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-21T22:04:03.203", "last_editor_user_id": "796", "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "4365", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4369", "answer_count": 1, "body": "`払{はら}う` has a number of meanings, but to summarize, it means to chase away or\nbrush off. I often see it used in combinations like `追{お}い[払]{はら}う`, \"to chase\noff\", or \"to drive away\".\n\nI recently came across the term `はらって描{か}きます` in a book about drawing. The\nwhole sentence I saw it in can be read\n[here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/4365/what-is-the-meaning-\nof-%E3%80%8C-%E3%81%BF%E3%81%91%E3%82%93%E3%81%AA%E3%82%89%E3%81%BF%E3%81%91%E3%82%93-%E3%80%8D).\n\nI assume this `はらう` is `払う` and not `祓う`, \"to exorcise, to purify\". But what\nexactly does it mean? I'm pretty sure it isn't \"to chase away and draw\".\n\nI think it might mean \"to draw out\", in the sense of \"to flesh out\" - to fill\nthe drawing out by progressively adding detail and adjusting lines to achieve\na finished picture.\n\nBut I'm not totally confident in that because the dictionary doesn't include\nany definitions that support a \"to fill out\" or \"to flesh out\" definition.\n\nSo to confirm whether my guess is right or not, I'd simply like to ask, what\n_exactly_ does `はらって描{か}きます` mean?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-21T10:38:59.587", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4366", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-22T03:56:08.523", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.260", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "119", "post_type": "question", "score": 0, "tags": [ "definitions" ], "title": "Want to be sure I understand the nuance of 払{はら}う", "view_count": 199 }

[ { "body": "In your [original\nquestion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/4365/what-is-the-\nmeaning-\nof-%E3%80%8C-%E3%81%BF%E3%81%91%E3%82%93%E3%81%AA%E3%82%89%E3%81%BF%E3%81%91%E3%82%93-%E3%80%8D):\n\n> …などに注意{ちゅうい}をはらって描{か}きます。\n\nI'm pretty sure it was referring to\n[`～に注意を[払]{はら}う`](http://eow.alc.co.jp/%E3%81%AB%E6%B3%A8%E6%84%8F%E3%82%92%E6%89%95%E3%81%86/UTF-8/)\n\"pay attention to\" rather than `払って[描]{か}きます`.\n\nI think I could try to write more about `払{はら}う`, but that the [Yahoo JE\ndictionary](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&p=%E6%89%95%E3%81%86&dtype=3&dname=2na&stype=0&pagenum=1&index=03525400)\nprobably already does a better job of explaining than I would be able to.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-21T11:52:59.340", "id": "4369", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-21T12:18:26.643", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.207", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "4366", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4372", "answer_count": 2, "body": "When giving a talk on Japanese, [How to talk like a\nge1sha](http://www.slideshare.net/agrimm/how-to-talk-like-a-ge1sha), I made a\nterrible mistake: I invited someone who knew something about the language\nalong.\n\nThe only times he heckled me was when he reckoned the Japanese I was teaching\nwas too polite. (He also helped explain some concepts I was talking about)\nWhile I was aware that the teineigo form of verbs (-です and -ます) were somewhat\non the polite side, he said that こんばんは wouldn't be heard in everyday\nconversation, outside of work environments.\n\nIs this the case? Would this indicate that most textbooks and phrasebooks tend\nto err on the side of caution, i.e. politeness?\n\nBooks where I've seen こんばんは used include the Lonely Planet phrasebook\nJapanese, Japanese for Busy People (3rd edition), and\n[Mirai](http://www.cheng-tsui.com/store/products/mirai), a Japanese textbook\nfor children of ages 10 to 15, and wiktionary.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-21T11:05:56.717", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4368", "last_activity_date": "2014-07-16T03:09:56.583", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "91", "post_type": "question", "score": 4, "tags": [ "word-choice", "politeness", "greetings" ], "title": "Is こんばんは too formal for everyday conversation?", "view_count": 1787 }

[ { "body": "Is that person a native Japanese? I think he's not. `こんばんは` is used in normal\nconversation. By the way, there are several mistakes in your slide:\n\n * p2. `minna-san` → `minasan`\n * ibid. `minasan konnichiwa` is more natural than `konnichiwa minasan`\n * p3. `Biru` → `biiru`\n * p4. `Dozo` → `douzo`\n * p4. `Arrigato` → `arigatou`\n * p9. `biru no go-hon` → `go-hon no biiru`\n * p9. `puroguramaa no go-nin` → `go-nin no puroguramaa`\n * p9. `Five am` → `Five o'clock`\n * p19. `o-to-san` → `o-tou-san`\n\nSome are about inconsistency of romanization. Others are obvious grammatical\nmistakes.\n\n**Edit** To answer Andrew's question. The construction Andrew mentioned is\ncalled floating quantifier construction, and the noun `biiru` and the\nquantifier `go-hon` do not come together as one unit (technically called a\n_constituent_ ), but the quantifier here is something ike an adverb. That is\nwhy the order is entirely different from the normal order within a noun\nphrase. Floating quantifier is observed in various languages. In English, the\nnormal ordering will be:\n\n> I ate all of them.\n\nBut when you have a floating quantifier, you get:\n\n> I ate them all.\n\nYou get a completely different word order. A similar (not the same) thing is\nhappening in Japanese.", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-21T12:02:47.387", "id": "4371", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-22T00:40:36.783", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-22T00:40:36.783", "last_editor_user_id": "91", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4368", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "That guy who said that こんばんは _isn't_ heard in everyday conversation is flat\nout wrong. I really hate when people get up on their high horse about\nJapanese, especially when they're wrong. Golden rule is, never \"heckle\"\nsomeone over their foreign language ability, because yours will never be\nperfect either. I've been at this for 11 years and have lived here for 4, and\nI still learn stuff every single day, which is why I'm on here. People with\nattitudes like that really annoy me. Don't let those idiots get to you.\n(/rant)\n\nBack to the question though, こんばんは IS polite, but it is totally NOT\n\"unacceptable,\" \"unnatural,\" nor \"incorrect.\" I say it sometimes with some of\nmy best friends when we meet up, and I've seen my fiancee (Japanese) use it\nvery recently, when we met up with some of her friends (also Japanese).\n\nIf it's been awhile, you can say （お）久しぶり as your greeting. If you're really\ntight and it's super duper informal, you can say おす, which is probably closest\nto something like \"'sup\" in English. But when you greet someone that doesn't\nfall into one of those two categories, your best and safest bet is to actually\njust go with こんばんは --- there's absolutely no chance of screwing up the\nformality level of the relationship with that, and there's also no risk of\nsounding unnatural or incorrect.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-21T12:07:47.270", "id": "4372", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-21T12:07:47.270", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1070", "parent_id": "4368", "post_type": "answer", "score": 16 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4376", "answer_count": 2, "body": "What is the difference between 終止形 and 連体形 and which one is the correct term\nfor the dictionary form?\n\nThe [Japanese Grammar Wiki\nentry](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_grammar#Adjectives) says...\n\n> Terminal form (終止形 shūshikei) -u is used at the ends of clauses in predicate\n> positions. This form is also variously known as **plain form** (基本形\n> kihonkei) or **dictionary form** (辞書形 jishokei) – it is the form that verbs\n> are listed under in a dictionary.\n\nThis is backed up by my teacher who described it as the dictionary form,\n辞書形。The wiki describes the 連体形 form as practically identical (I don't quite\nunderstand the difference) and my teacher said the 連体形 form is 名詞にかかる形。\n\nHowever I've seen a number of\n[posts](http://forums.animesuki.com/showthread.php?t=180&page=22) describing\nthe 連体形 as the dictionary form omitting to refer to the 終止形 form at all.\n\nCan anyone clear this up for me? An explanation / example of the purpose of\nthe 連体形 form would greatly help.\n\nThanks.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-21T16:31:40.860", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4375", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-22T22:18:49.487", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-22T22:18:49.487", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "988", "post_type": "question", "score": 8, "tags": [ "verbs" ], "title": "Stem classification 終止形 vs 連体形（しゅうしけい vs れんたいけい）", "view_count": 3214 }

[ { "body": "In modern Japanese, the rentaikei and shuushikei of verbs are the same, but\nnot for e.g. na-adjectives, where rentaikei is e.g. 変な, but shuushikei is 変だ.\nEven for i-adjectives, the slightly archaic rentaikei e.g. 赤き is sometimes\nused instead of 赤い, mostly for stylistic reasons.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-21T16:54:05.467", "id": "4376", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-21T16:54:05.467", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4375", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "Adapted from my answer to [a previous\nquestion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/3672/542)\n\n`終止形` and `連体形`:\n\n> 手紙はペンで書く (Write a letter with a pen) \n> 書く is in 終止形 or \"sentence ending form\" or \"predicative form\"\n>\n> ペンで書く手紙 (A pen-written letter) \n> 書く is in 連体形 or \"attributive form\"\n\nWhat the attributive form does is it attributes **the action** to the noun.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-21T16:57:29.573", "id": "4377", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-21T18:03:19.490", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "542", "parent_id": "4375", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4438", "answer_count": 1, "body": "> \" こんな馬鹿みたいな帽子かぶせやがって！！”\n>\n> \" こんなくそみたいな帽子かぶせやがって！！”\n>\n> \" こんなくそみたいな帽子かぶせんじゃねーよ！！”\n\nI believe I'm looking at a conjugation and contraction of the verb かぶる. What\nis the original conjugation and what is taken out in the contraction?", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-21T17:58:01.237", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4378", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-25T04:33:15.087", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "706", "post_type": "question", "score": 2, "tags": [ "grammar", "verbs" ], "title": "How is this verb being conjugated and contracted?", "view_count": 604 }

[ { "body": "\"かぶせやがって\" is just the \"-te form\" of \"かぶせやがる\", which you accepted an answer to\n[here](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/4236/how-to-use-the-\ninflection-%E3%82%84%E3%81%8C%E3%82%8B) so I guess you know the basic meaning.\n\nThis use of the \"-te\" form is essentially an accusation. You often see it\ncombined with \"どうするつもりだ\" or something like that: \"(What do you mean by) +\nputting a stupid hat like this on me?!\". But even when the utterance ends at\nthe \"-te\" as in your example, the meaning is the same: the dolphin is not\nhappy about having had the hat put on him.\n\nIncidentally, \"かぶせる\", meaning \"put a hat (on someone)\", is related to the verb\n\"かぶる\", but it is not a \"conjugation\" of it in the sense that I think you mean.\nReason: in modern Japanese you make verbs causative by adding the affix\n\"-(a)seru\" to the stem, and that would give you \"kabur-(a)seru\" in this case,\nnot \"kabu-seru\". So although \"kabuseru\" is obviously related to \"kaburu\", and\nit even looks like the same \"-seru\" is used, it's better to consider\n\"kabuseru\" as a different word, and not just a \"conjugated form\" of \"kaburu\"\n-- at least in modern Japanese.\n\n(Note that the derived form \"kaburaseru\" is actually used sometimes. I'm not\nsure if it has different patterns of use from \"kabuseru\" or whether it should\njust be considered a variation that arose precisely because \"kabuseru\" can't\nbe derived from \"kaburu\" directly in modern Japanese.)\n\nIn your last example, ”かぶせん\" is a contracted version of \"かぶせるん\" (which\narguably is itself a contracted version of \"かぶせるの\"). る and るん turning into ん\nis pretty common in casual speech. \"何言ってるの\" -> \"何言ってんの\", \"だから言ってるんじゃん\" ->\n\"だから言ってんじゃん\".\n\n\"-n janee\" is a standard form way of creating an insulting negative\nimperative. Here the dolphin is saying something which we might translate into\nEnglish as \"Don't put stupid hats like this on me[, poop-face]!\" -- well,\nideally something more idiomatic, but I think you get the idea. See [this\nquestion](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/2652/what-is-the-\ndifference-\nbetween-%E8%A8%80%E3%81%86%E3%81%AA%EF%BC%81-and-%E8%A8%80%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6%E3%82%93%E3%81%98%E3%82%83%E3%81%AD%E3%81%87%E3%81%9E)\nfor some more on that part.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-25T04:33:15.087", "id": "4438", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-25T04:33:15.087", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.260", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "531", "parent_id": "4378", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4389", "answer_count": 3, "body": "My teacher always corrects me when I use 男 or 女 by themselves, without adding\nの人 to the end of it. But in various Japanese media (music, drama, anime,\netc.), I know for sure that I have heard them without の人.\n\nSo I'm assuming that adding の人 is a formality thing. Please correct me on this\nif I'm wrong.\n\nWhat kind of situations would it be more appropriate to add の人, and what kind\nof situations would it be more appropriate to not add it? Basically I am\nwondering just how formal adding の人 is or how informal not adding it is.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-21T18:15:34.980", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4380", "last_activity_date": "2022-06-19T05:49:14.167", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "575", "post_type": "question", "score": 16, "tags": [ "word-choice", "usage", "nuances", "politeness" ], "title": "When should 男の人/女の人 be used instead of 男/女?", "view_count": 2999 }

[ { "body": "I feel that 男 and 女 put more focus on the gender - or maybe even sexuality -\nand sound a bit いやらしい. 男の人, 女の人, 男性, 女性 are more matter-of-fact-ly.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-21T19:03:14.187", "id": "4382", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-21T19:03:14.187", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4380", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "1. 男{おとこ}/女{おんな} \n * As dainichi said, focused on gender/sexuality\n * it would sound kind of rude if you say something like 私の先生は女です.\n 2. 男性{だんせい}/女性{じょせい} or 男性{だんせい}の方{かた}/女性{じょせい}の方{かた} or 男{おとこ}の人{ひと}/女{おんな}の人{ひと} or 男{おとこ}の方{かた}/女{おんな}の方{かた} \n * Formal/Soften/Polite way of saying 男{おとこ}/女{おんな}\n * Used in business/normal conversation\n 3. 男{おとこ}の子{こ}/女{おんな}の子{こ} \n * When referring to child.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-21T19:32:38.773", "id": "4383", "last_activity_date": "2022-06-19T00:49:30.953", "last_edit_date": "2022-06-19T00:49:30.953", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "1082", "parent_id": "4380", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "`男` and `女` are neutral with politeness in formal contexts. In conversation or\ncolloquial style, they may be (but not necessarily) used to imply rudeness,\nand `男の人`, `女の人`, `男性`, `女性` are more polite.\n\nWhen you listen to Japanese news, you will hear both `男` and `女`, and `男の人`,\n`女の人`, `男性`, and `女性`. That is a very shameful aspect of Japanese culture, and\nit reveals that Japanese society is still immature. In these contexts, the\nannouncers are expected/pressured (by the society/broadcasting company) to\nexpress personal feelings against criminal suspects by the use of language.\n`男` and `女`are used for offenders (or suspects as well in earlier days) to\nexpress that the announcer is siding with the victim and is hence showing a\npersonal dislike to the offender/suspect. This kind of language use is\ngenerally subsumed under the notion of **呼び捨て**. Other examples include:\navoiding the polite affix `さん` when referring to criminals. This departs from\nthe nature of journalism being a neutral and factual information source, and\nits idea is to mete out non-official punishment to criminals/suspects in\naddition to the legal process.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-21T22:52:05.540", "id": "4389", "last_activity_date": "2022-06-19T05:49:14.167", "last_edit_date": "2022-06-19T05:49:14.167", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4380", "post_type": "answer", "score": 16 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4419", "answer_count": 3, "body": "If ”かぶせる” is a \"causative verb,\" what does it mean when a causative verb is\nconjugated in the causative form?\n\n> プランターに生えているカタバミの葉を用意し、アルミホイルをかぶせさせる。\n> <http://www.city.obama.fukui.jp/~edu/rika/school/hamatyu2/jugo16/school_hamatyu2_a_1.htm>\n>\n> ドルチェ・ガバーナのマネキンは、絞首刑になる人にかぶせさせる 目隠しがあった。\n> <http://perabita.seesaa.net/article/163983279.html>", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-21T21:25:52.847", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4385", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-23T06:15:55.777", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "706", "post_type": "question", "score": 4, "tags": [ "conjugations" ], "title": "what does it mean when a causative verb is conjugated in the causative form?", "view_count": 489 }

[ { "body": "Hmm, strange... These should be 「アルミホイルを[被]{かぶ}せる(=to cover\n=[覆]{おお}う)」/「絞首刑になる人に[被]{かぶ}らせる(=the causative form of [被]{かぶ}る)」, no...?", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-22T01:22:28.943", "id": "4392", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-22T04:05:25.667", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-22T04:05:25.667", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4385", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "In the first sentence, かぶせる is not a causative form of the verb; it's a normal\nverb, meaning \"to cover.\" (It's important to realize that not every verb that\nends in 〜せる is the causative form of another verb.) Hence, かぶせさせる is not\ndouble-causative; it's single-causative.\n\n> プランターに生えているカタバミの葉を用意し、アルミホイルをかぶせさせる。\n>\n> Have the children prepare leaves from the sorrel growing in the planter, and\n> cover them in foil.\n\nThe second かぶせさせる is the same; it's just a causative form of a regular,\ntransitive verb (かぶせ＋させる).\n\n> ドルチェ・ガバーナのマネキンは、絞首刑になる人にかぶせさせる 目隠しがあった。\n>\n> The Dolce and Gabbana mannequins had the sort of blindfolds that you put\n> onto people who are going to be hanged.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-22T02:34:12.020", "id": "4395", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-22T02:34:12.020", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1048", "parent_id": "4385", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "Let's break this down logically. To say\n\n> A makes B cover C with D\n\nyou would say\n\n> AがBに、CにDを被せさせる\n\nIn the first sentence mentioned in the question, not all of ABCD are\nimmediately evident, but if you follow the link, you'll see that this is about\n_what a teacher should instruct students to do_ , i.e.\n\n> 教師が生徒に、葉にホイルを被せさせる The teacher makes the students cover the leaves with\n> foil.\n\nNo problems using 被せさせる here.\n\nThe second example is trickier. We already have 絞首刑になる人に ending in に, but this\ncould be either B or C. Also, A is not explicit. So either:\n\n> 誰かが絞首刑囚に、誰かに目隠しを被せさせる Someone makes people who get hanged cover somebody's\n> eyes with blindfolds\n\nor\n\n> 誰かが誰かに、絞首刑囚に目隠しを被せさせる Someone makes someone cover the eyes of people who get\n> hanged with blindfolds\n\nThe first one hardly makes any sense, and in the second one, there doesn't\nseem to be any reason for the extra level of indirection.\n\nSurely what is meant is one of the following:\n\n> 絞首刑になる人にかぶせる目隠しがあった。 They had the blindfolds that you cover the eyes of\n> people who get hanged with.\n>\n> 絞首刑になる人のかぶる目隠しがあった。 They had the blindfolds that people who get hanged\n> wear/put on.\n>\n> 絞首刑になる人にかぶらせる目隠しがあった。 They had the blindfolds that you make people who get\n> hanged cover their eyes with.\n\nSo bottom line:\n\n**The first usage is correct, the second one is wrong.**", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-23T03:32:19.630", "id": "4419", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-23T06:15:55.777", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-23T06:15:55.777", "last_editor_user_id": "1073", "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4385", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 2, "body": "What is the difference in usage and meaning of:\n\n 1. 行ったらいいのに =V/conditional and\n 2. 行けたらいいのに = V/potential/conditional\n\nCan both be translated as \"If only I could go...\"? Thanks!", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-21T22:28:28.313", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4386", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-21T23:23:44.913", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1086", "post_type": "question", "score": 5, "tags": [ "grammar" ], "title": "2 versions of tara ii no ni", "view_count": 2636 }

[ { "body": "`行ったらいいのに` is a suggestion, translated as \"Why won't you ...\". `行けたらいいのに` is\ntranslated as \"If only I could go...\", as you said.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-21T22:44:30.677", "id": "4387", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-21T22:44:30.677", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1082", "parent_id": "4386", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "* `行ったらいいのに`: [I wish (someone) would go/You should go/You ought to go](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&p=%E3%81%AE%E3%81%AB&dtype=3&dname=2na&stype=0&pagenum=1&index=03358200)\n * `行けたらいいのに`: [I wish I could go/If only I could go](http://eow.alc.co.jp/%E8%A1%8C%E3%81%91%E3%81%9F%E3%82%89%E3%81%84%E3%81%84%E3%81%AE%E3%81%AB/UTF-8/)", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-21T22:48:55.797", "id": "4388", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-21T23:23:44.913", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-21T23:23:44.913", "last_editor_user_id": "796", "owner_user_id": "796", "parent_id": "4386", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4393", "answer_count": 2, "body": "I was told 眠たい was an adjective, and that it is an exceptional case. How does\nit work as an adjective and what is its relation to the verb 眠る?", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-22T01:16:22.640", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4391", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-22T06:06:55.393", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "706", "post_type": "question", "score": 4, "tags": [ "grammar", "adjectives" ], "title": "Is 眠たい an adjective?", "view_count": 1010 }

[ { "body": "Yes, 眠たい is an adjective. It's a synonym of 眠い, meaning \"sleepy.\" ([大辞泉 entry\nhere](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&p=%E7%9C%A0%E3%81%9F%E3%81%84&dtype=0&dname=0ss&stype=0&index=115203100000&pagenum=1).)\n\nFrom what I can find (specifically, [大辞林's\nexplanation)](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?p=%E3%81%AD%E3%81%B6%E3%81%9F%E3%81%84&stype=0&dtype=0&dname=0ss),\n眠たい is in fact related to 眠る, but the 「〜たい」 here is different from the\ndesiderative \"I want to\" 「〜たい」. This 「〜たい」 is a shortened form of 甚{いた}い (or\nいたし, in its original form in older Japanese), which is a 連用形 verb ending in\nclassical Japanese meaning \"extremely X, where X is the state related to the\nverb.\" Here, this \"state\" is sleepiness. Note that this 甚{いた}い can attach to\nverbs and give them an emphatic adjectival meaning, and does not attach to\nadjectives.\n\nめでたい (happy, fortunate) has a similar etymology: 愛{め}で (from the 連用形 of 愛{め}ず,\nthe old form of 愛する) ＋ 甚{いた}し.\n\nEdit: Just to clarify, the original form of 眠たい was 眠{ねぶ}り甚{いた}し, but a\ncombination of phonetic drift and other factors led it to eventually evolve\ninto its current form.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-22T02:20:01.323", "id": "4393", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-22T06:06:55.393", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-22T06:06:55.393", "last_editor_user_id": "903", "owner_user_id": "1048", "parent_id": "4391", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "It is an i-adjective because it conjugates as so.\n\n> 眠たい, 眠たかった, 眠たくない, ...\n\nIts relation to the verb `眠る` cannot be handled systematically within\nderivational morphology. The stem of `眠る` is `nemur-`, whereas `眠たい` only uses\na portion (`nemu-`) of it. So it has to be considered that this formation is\nidiosyncratic, not systematic. Note that the meaning is also idiosyncratic.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-22T02:25:14.020", "id": "4394", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-22T04:09:34.867", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-22T04:09:34.867", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4391", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 1, "body": "For example:\n\n> **自分** の名前が呼ばれたとき、私は自分の耳を疑った。 \n> I couldn't believe my ears when I heard my name called.\n\nWould it be appropriate if I said `私`? When is it appropriate to use `自分`?\nWhat is the difference?", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-22T04:50:50.203", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4396", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-26T01:14:35.923", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-26T01:14:35.923", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1087", "post_type": "question", "score": 7, "tags": [ "word-choice", "words", "first-person-pronouns", "pronouns" ], "title": "Why is 自分 used instead of 私?", "view_count": 6066 }

[ { "body": "While the pronoun `私` has its own referent, meaning `I`, `自分` (in the Tokyo\ndialect) does not have its own referent, and it means `self`. That is the\ndifference.\n\nIn this case, it will be somewhat redundant if you use `私` in place of `自分`\nbecause there will be two different instances of the pronoun `私` referring to\nthe same thing:\n\n> **私** の名前が呼ばれたとき、 **私** は自分の耳を疑った。\n\nIf you have `自分` in the adverbial-clause `自分の...とき`,\n\n> **自分** の名前が呼ばれたとき、 **私** は自分の耳を疑った。\n\nthen, there will be only one instance of `私`, and `自分` can anaphorically\nreceive the referent from `私`. That is more \"economical\" from a linguistic\npoint of view, and is preferrable.\n\nAn analogy in English (not be taken so strict, due to the difference between\nthe languages; in fact, there is a categorical difference) is the fact that\n\n> When **John's** name was called, **John** could not believe what he heard.\n\nsounds somewhat redundant, and\n\n> When **his** name was called, **John** could not believe what he heard.\n\nis preferrable.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-22T05:41:20.677", "id": "4402", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-22T05:41:20.677", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4396", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4398", "answer_count": 3, "body": "This question appears on my homework above an empty box instead of lines as\nwith previous questions:\n\n> 鉄道{てつどう} **関係{かんけい}の** 言葉{ことば}を書{か}きなさい\n\nAm I being asked to write \"words **about** railroads?\" I came into this class\nabout a week late, and am wondering if there's something here that I'm\nmissing, because that strikes me as a strange thing to be asked to do.\n\nWhat does 関係の mean here?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-22T05:00:11.080", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4397", "last_activity_date": "2014-10-10T13:32:51.580", "last_edit_date": "2014-10-10T13:30:03.457", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "260", "post_type": "question", "score": 1, "tags": [ "translation", "meaning" ], "title": "Meaning of 〜関係の〜 in the phrase 鉄道関係の言葉", "view_count": 162 }

[ { "body": "Here, 「〜関係の〜」 means \"related to,\" not really \"about.\" So a better translation\nwould be \"write words that are related to railroads.\" You know, like\n\"engineer,\" \"trainspotter,\" \"train station,\" etc.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-22T05:12:15.070", "id": "4398", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-22T05:12:15.070", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1048", "parent_id": "4397", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "It sounds to me like you're supposed to come up with a vocabulary list of\nwords, to prepare you for the next class. You might have to write a story, or\ndo some other activity (an impromptu skit, etc) with a railroad theme, and\nhaving railroad words in mind would be an advantage. Sure your teacher could\njust give them to you, but where is the fun in that?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-22T05:19:01.163", "id": "4400", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-22T05:19:01.163", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "921", "parent_id": "4397", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "Unless I'm mistaken, `言葉{ことば}` has a much broader meaning than just \"words\".\nIn daily usage I hear it used to cover concepts like \"speech\", \"phrase\", and\n\"remark\".\n\nSo I would translate the sentence as essentially:\n\n> Write phrases related to railroads.\n\nOr, to turn it into more natural English:\n\n> Write something to do with railroads.\n\nSo my assumption about the question is that they just want you to write stuff\nso they can check your ability to express yourself in Japanese. The topic\n\"railroads\" is just an arbitrary choice, so you have a page less blank to\nstart from.\n\nHope that helps.\n\nEdit: Seeing the answer selected above, I think one would have to factor in\nthe context of the level of the test. If they are just testing to see if you\nknow words, and a list as an answer is sufficient, then I guess \"words\" is a\nfair translation. \"Write words related to railroads\". I just assumed the\ncontext to be more general, so maybe my translation is less applicable.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-22T07:05:28.713", "id": "4403", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-22T09:09:16.013", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-22T09:09:16.013", "last_editor_user_id": "119", "owner_user_id": "119", "parent_id": "4397", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4407", "answer_count": 3, "body": "I think in all situations where either `一緒に` could be used, `二人で` can also be\nused, and vice versa. I suppose 三人、四人、五人、etc. can also be used here if that's\nthe number of people you are talking about.\n\nBut I'm curious as to the different connotations (if they exist) in these\nwords/phrases.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-22T05:32:18.770", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4401", "last_activity_date": "2012-05-08T19:00:50.277", "last_edit_date": "2012-05-08T19:00:50.277", "last_editor_user_id": "575", "owner_user_id": "575", "post_type": "question", "score": 10, "tags": [ "word-choice", "nuances" ], "title": "What is the difference between 一緒【いっしょ】に and 二人【ふたり】で?", "view_count": 1010 }

[ { "body": "One shows the quantity. The other expresses the \"togetherness\" of the action.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-22T11:20:28.043", "id": "4405", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-22T11:20:28.043", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "542", "parent_id": "4401", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "there is no trick, one is \"together\", the other is \"the both of us\". That's\nit.", "comment_count": 12, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-22T12:40:00.547", "id": "4406", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-22T12:40:00.547", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "4401", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "As for connotations:\n\n * 一緒に行きませんか Would you like to join me/us (no information about how many we are)\n * 二人で行きませんか Let's go just the two of us (sounds a bit like you're inviting someone on a date)\n\nI wouldn't use ○人で unless that exact number is important for some reason.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-22T12:44:06.910", "id": "4407", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-22T12:44:06.910", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4401", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4421", "answer_count": 4, "body": "According to [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kunoichi), one theory\nfor the etymology of くノ一 (female ninja) is that it's made up of the\n[strokes](http://tomoegozen.free.fr/bujinkan-tomoegozen-kunoichi.html) of the\nkanji 女 (woman).\n\nOther theories include that it means nine and one, talking about the number of\n[orifices](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%81%8F%E3%83%8E%E4%B8%80) men and\nwomen have, and yet another is that the term くノ一 is apocryphal. Finally, [this\npage](http://villages.likenaruto.com/space.php?uid=69&do=blog&id=284) suggests\nthat くノ一 might be \"real\", but is just a code word used by ninjas to mean\nwoman, rather than meaning female ninja.\n\nAre there any other words, historical or present, where the characters are\nmade up of strokes of a kanji, along the lines of the 女 etymology theory for\nくノ一?", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-22T08:10:43.700", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4404", "last_activity_date": "2013-01-26T05:25:43.717", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "91", "post_type": "question", "score": 21, "tags": [ "kanji", "etymology" ], "title": "Words made from strokes of a kanji like 女 toくノ一", "view_count": 1079 }

[ { "body": "ロハ. This word is colloquial and I think mostly extinct now, but it means \"free\n[as in beer]\" and derives from the kanji 只, which is one way to write the word\nただ, which means (among other things) \"free\".", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-23T07:18:03.553", "id": "4421", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-23T07:18:03.553", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "531", "parent_id": "4404", "post_type": "answer", "score": 16 }, { "body": "This is a slight divergence from what you're asking (a phrase that's a\nreference to a kanji rather than breaking up a single kanji into strokes), but\nI think another interesting word is 「川{かわ}の字{じ}」, a word to describe the state\nwhere three people are sleeping side by side (typically, where two parents are\nsleeping with their child between them). I think this word is even less common\nthan ロハ though.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-23T16:24:24.810", "id": "4424", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-23T16:24:24.810", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1048", "parent_id": "4404", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "Have you heard the saying 女三人寄れば姦しい (three women together make a terrible\nracket)?\n\nThe kanji for the word 姦【かしま】しい (noisy) is made up of three women...", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-01-24T13:48:28.753", "id": "11039", "last_activity_date": "2013-01-24T13:48:28.753", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3111", "parent_id": "4404", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "> Are there any other words, historical or present, where the characters are\n> made up of strokes of a kanji, along the lines of the 女 etymology theory for\n> くノ一?\n\nAn example from present-day usage is\n[タヒる](http://dic.nicovideo.jp/a/%E3%82%BF%E3%83%92%E3%82%8B) from 死ぬ.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-01-26T05:25:43.717", "id": "11052", "last_activity_date": "2013-01-26T05:25:43.717", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3116", "parent_id": "4404", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 2, "body": "Having been trying to write a \"sakubun\", I must say that I had some trouble to\nfind a reliable translation for the phrase \"as you all know\" such as:\n\n> **As you all know** , the education system in our country is not so good as\n> it's claimed to be.\n>\n> **As known by all of you** , the education system in our country is not so\n> good as it's claimed to be.\n\nI'd appreciate if you translated the whole sentence; however, it's not really\nnecessary.\n\nよろしくおねがいします！", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-22T14:46:40.813", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4408", "last_activity_date": "2016-02-07T08:23:20.767", "last_edit_date": "2016-02-07T08:23:20.767", "last_editor_user_id": "11849", "owner_user_id": "1089", "post_type": "question", "score": 3, "tags": [ "translation", "words" ], "title": "How do I convey \"As you all know\"?", "view_count": 2947 }

[ { "body": "What you're looking for should be `ご存じの通り` or `ご承知の通り`\n\n> ご存じの通り、我が国の教育制度は、（+実際には）、言われているほど（or 言われるほど）良いものではありません。", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-22T15:10:39.770", "id": "4409", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-27T11:47:15.867", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-27T11:47:15.867", "last_editor_user_id": "542", "owner_user_id": "542", "parent_id": "4408", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 }, { "body": "Supplement: You also could use `知っている通り（に）` toward a more familiar crowd.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-22T18:59:42.693", "id": "4412", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-23T16:58:41.270", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-23T16:58:41.270", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "4408", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 2, "body": "A handheld video game device E.g. PSP, DS", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-22T17:37:24.777", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4410", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-22T19:08:15.333", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1090", "post_type": "question", "score": 0, "tags": [ "words" ], "title": "What is the word used for 'handheld'?", "view_count": 295 }

[ { "body": "「ポータブル」(because... 'PSP' = 'Play Station Portable')", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-22T18:03:35.390", "id": "4411", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-22T18:03:35.390", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4410", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "I know you specified for a video game device, but `携帯【けいたい】` actually means\n\"portable\" or \"handheld\". It's just that in this era of technology, it's\nbecome synonymous with \"cell phone\". Some examples:\n\n * 携帯型【けいたいがた】 → portable (style)\n * 携帯品【けいたいひん】 → hand baggage\n * 携帯【けいたい】カメラ → hand camera", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-22T19:08:15.333", "id": "4414", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-22T19:08:15.333", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "4410", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 2, "body": "I consider myself at a lower intermediate level. I want to improve my Japanese\nvocabulary and grammar in order to expand my reading and speaking skills. I\nknow enough Japanese to get around and have a small conversation. However,\nreading grammar books is not cutting it and I dont feel like making flash\ncards from index cards with vocabulary to memorize (though if it's necessary,\nI will).\n\nEventually, I would love to take the JLPT. For now, the only thing that is\nhelping me a little bit is listening to music in Japanese and looking over the\nlyrics. I came to the point to replace the lyrics from romaji to kana and\nkanji. I sometimes try to read news articles in Japanese as well. \"Thinking\"\nin Japanese grammar certainly helps a lot. Somehow, if I listen to music and\nrepeat the lyrics over and over again to myself, I begin to know their\nmeaning. When I was a kid, I know realize the meaning of Japanese children's\nsongs I've been singing.\n\nWhat do you suggest?\n\nPS: as a funny note, upon waking up one morning, I was thinking of this person\nI really like(ed) and somehow, my mind said 「I miss your 事」because I could not\nfind any other way to express this feeling in English (or my native language).\n\nThank you!!", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-22T18:59:59.200", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4413", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-23T02:17:09.830", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1087", "post_type": "question", "score": 5, "tags": [ "grammar", "words", "learning" ], "title": "How can I improve my Japanese vocabulary, grammar, and listening skills?", "view_count": 6253 }

[ { "body": "**Practice!**\n\n * Active vocabulary - conversation\n * Passive vocabulary - books\n * Listening skill - listening\n * Grammar - goes along the way of previously stated. Means you'll find grammar you don't know in the process. Then you'll look into grammar books, ask here, ... whatever \n\nI think those are pretty much language independent.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-22T22:20:56.920", "id": "4415", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-22T22:20:56.920", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "976", "parent_id": "4413", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "To get better at Japanese as a whole, you need to practice every aspect of the\nlanguage on a regular basis. That means reading, writing, listening, speaking,\nAND knowing under what situations/conditions certain things are appropriate\nand inappropriate (this often gets left out of study guides). No point in\nsystematically learniing keigo if you aren't also taught that it can actually\nbe inappropriate to use at certain times, for instance. For example, overusing\nkeigo with people that are on your \"inside\" circle of people (family, friends)\ncan actually come across as patronizing or insulting. Anyway, I'll go ahead\nand tell you what I do, and you can maybe see if it works for you.\n\nFirst thing to know is that Japan loooooves qualification tests. There are\nqualification tests for pretty much every aspect of life, professional and\npersonal. I totally would not be surprised if there is a test for measuring\nhow well you can wash dishes or do laundry. I personally really like this\nsystem, and I focus my overall goals around qualification tests. I don't\nbelieve, however, that the JLPT is an accurate measure of skill, which is why\nI think it's also a mistake to solely study just for one qualification test. I\njust use qualification tests as an overall goal marker. One thing to know as\nwell is that you need at least JLPT Level 2 before any serious Japanese\ncompany with a Japanese environment will consider you, if your goal is\nemployment in Japan that isn't English teaching.\n\nThere are three Japanese language tests that are very relative and very\nimportant:\n\n * Japanese Language Proficiency Test (JLPT), which you already mentioned\n * Kanji Proficiency Test\n * Business Japanese Proficiency Test (BJT)\n\nWhat you choose as a goal marker should depend on what your overall goals are.\nIf you just want to get a job in Japan, you can safely focus on just JLPT and\nBJT, skipping the kanji test all together (that doesn't mean you can skip\nstudying kanji, though!). If you want to study the language as a whole for\npersonal enrichment/knowledge, you can focus on the JLPT and the kanji test,\nskipping the BJT all together (that doesn't mean you can skip keigo, though!).\n\nMy personal method of study is pretty lifeless, but it works for me.\nBasically, I just pick one qualification test (say, Kanji Level 4, or JLPT\nLevel 1), I pick up a book or two on JUST that topic, and work through it,\ncover to cover, no excuses, no burning out.\n\nThen to supplement that as I'm going through it, I read one Japanese news\narticle per day. But as I read it, I also copy it by hand into a notebook,\neven the stuff that I understand. This is particularly helpful in just keeping\nwriting skill up, since you rarely need to actually write kanji by hand\nanymore. I also go through the article, and without any self-deception or\ncutting myself any slack, ask myself, \"do I understand this sentence 100%,\nincluding all grammar, vocabulary, and kanji?\" The answer is quite often,\n\"no.\" Even if I \"get the idea\" or understand it 99%, there's most often at\nleast some kanji that I know the on-yomi for, but not the kun-yomi, for\nexample. So I ruthlessly then make flash cards for every single element that I\ndidn't know, whether it be a grammar point, or just one kanji.\n\nFor me, flash cards are key. Primarily because by MAKING the cards myself, I\nend up researching and writing out the content I didn't know, and by just\ndoing that, I pretty much memorize it before I even have to actually use the\nflash card.\n\nListening and speaking with Japanese people is the best way to get your\nlistening and speaking practice in. The key that most people screw up, is they\ndon't stop a conversation when the other person says something they don't\nunderstand. Nodding your head and smiling is a huge mistake. If the other\nperson says something you don't get, don't make an assumption that \"it\nprobably means this or that,\" stop the person right there and say, \"sorry,\nwhat does that word mean?\" I've never met any Japanese person who isn't happy\nto help out.\n\nHowever, if there's not always a Japanese person around to practice with,\nJapanese TV is your best friend. Not only is it super entertaining because\nit's so whacky, most TV shows are like an hour or less, so you can watch the\nsame thing several times to fill in the blanks without burning out. The key is\nto watch the same thing more than once, and to imitate what you hear, keeping\nthe inflections and tones intact. Works best if you're alone, so you don't get\nembarrassed.\n\nSo I do the above, consistently, every day, mixing things up until I finish\nthe book for the test that I'm aiming to pass. By that point, I can pass the\ntest with flying colors, and I learned a whole bunch of other stuff along the\nway including new speech patterns and new vocabulary.\n\nLike I said, this all totally depends on personal preference and how you\nlearn. The key to any method of learning though I think, that I see time and\ntime again, and that I'm sometimes guilty of as well, is self-deception. Don't\nstudy for the sake of getting to the end of a chapter so you can stop\nstudying. You have to really want to be studying. You also can't use excuses\nto not study, like \"oh I have a cold today, I'm just going to take it easy\ntoday,\" because then you start doing stuff like that, and eventually you find\nexcuses to work yourself down to like one or two days a week, and then\neventually you just stop, saying you'll come back to it soon, but never do.\nThe key is consistency, not letting up, and being hard on yourself.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-23T02:17:09.830", "id": "4416", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-23T02:17:09.830", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1070", "parent_id": "4413", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 3, "body": "[Here](http://oshiete.goo.ne.jp/qa/4953486.html?order=desc) is a discussion\nabout whether to use ご返事 and お返事, but there seems to be diverging opinions:\n\nご返事:\n\n * ご返事 is 謙譲語 (according to No.1)\n * ご返事 is seldom used for 尊敬語 (according to No.5)\n * ご返事 is for 謙譲語 AND 尊敬語 (according to No.4)\n\nお返事:\n\n * お返事 implies intimacy (according to No.1)\n * お返事 is 美化語 (according to No.4)\n\nGiven that I always write in the context of business (sometimes about my\nreply, sometimes about my client's reply), can I stick to always using ご返事 ?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-23T02:53:41.660", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4417", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-07T22:56:33.413", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "107", "post_type": "question", "score": 5, "tags": [ "word-choice", "politeness", "email" ], "title": "When to use ご返事 and お返事?", "view_count": 3546 }

[ { "body": "`ご返事` sounds ungrammatical to me. If it is in use, then that may be an\nidiolect/dialect. But I suspect that, for the majority of people, the\ngrammatical form is `お返事`. As I read your link, I feel that `ご返事` arose as\nhypercorrection. Some people believe that the choice between `お` vs. `ご`\nprefixes is strictly correlated to whether the word is a native Japanese word\nor a Chinese origin word. This holds as a tendency, but to say that it\nstrictly holds is wrong. Nevertheless, people who believe this tries to put\n`ご` to `返事` because it is onyomi.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-23T03:03:49.833", "id": "4418", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-23T03:09:41.557", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-23T03:09:41.557", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4417", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "First, we need to make a distinction between 返事 as a noun, and 返事する as a verb\n\n1.\n\nWhen it's a noun, as in\n\n> お／ご返事をお待ちしております\n\nthe お or ご create 美化語.\n\n2.\n\nWhen it's a verb, as in\n\n> お／ご返事いたします （humble, 謙譲語）\n>\n> お／ご返事下さい （respectful, 尊敬語）\n\nthe お or ご create 謙譲語 or 尊敬語.\n\nAs for the question of whether to use お or ご, I think it's a matter of\npersonal preference, but I think there is a general concensus that ご sounds a\nbit more formal than お. For example, in non-敬語 speech, ご返事 (as 美化語) sounds\nawkward\n\n> ? ご返事待ってるね ← not wrong, but quite awkward\n>\n> ○ お返事待ってるね ← natural\n\nI cannot imagine that anyone would be offended by お返事, so if I had to choose,\nI would stick to お返事.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-23T05:53:58.747", "id": "4420", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-24T23:28:43.183", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4417", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "The correct answer is that both お and ご are correct.\n\nThis is a very rare case. The reason is that in the past 返事 was not always\nread as へんじ.\n\nIt was at one time かえりごと.\n\nSo conforming to the normal patｔern you had お[返事]{かえりごと}.\n\nHowever over time it became more and more common for it to be read as へんじ so\nyou had the normal pattern of ご[返事]{へんじ} also.\n\nToday 返事 is always read as へんじ however the use of both お and ご still persists.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-02-07T22:56:33.413", "id": "4600", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-07T22:56:33.413", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1129", "parent_id": "4417", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4427", "answer_count": 1, "body": "I was reading the introduction page for [Kirara Memorial\nPark](http://www.kirara-memorial-park.jp/introduce.html) (a public sports\npark) in Japan, and one of the features they listed was a `「月{つき}の海{うみ}」`. As\nfar as I can tell, in both [English](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_mare)\nand [Japanese](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%9C%88%E3%81%AE%E6%B5%B7) this\nphrase only really has the meaning of \"Lunar mare\" or \"Lunar seas\" (the dark\nsections we can see on the moon). However, clearly this park's `月の海` is just a\nnice relaxing beach: [see here](http://www.kirara-memorial-\npark.jp/introduce/moon_sun.html#moon).\n\nNext to their `月の海`, there is a `「太陽の丘」`. If I had seen this by itself I would\nhave just assumed it was the name of their hill...Google seems to confirm that\nit's just a cool name to give a hill. This makes me think they're going with a\nsun/moon naming theme, but I can't say that with authority.\n\nWhat my question is, is there an apparent reason why they're calling their\nbeach `月の海`? By that I mean is there something I'm missing (a play on words or\nwhatnot) that a Japanese person would catch and understand? Or is it just (as\nfar as anyone can tell) a name they gave their beach (which, by the way, I\nthink is an awesome name!).", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-24T02:33:02.503", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4426", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-24T08:00:25.343", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "921", "post_type": "question", "score": 3, "tags": [ "meaning" ], "title": "Lunar Seas and Sun Hills at a sports park?", "view_count": 115 }

[ { "body": "No reason in particular. Things get named like that, even/especially obscenely\nmundane things, to market them and make them seem special. You will see a lot\nof noncontroversial (often borderline propagandistic-sounding) \"good things\"\nin names like these. i.e. \"Happiness,\" \"Lovely,\" \"Bright,\" and things that\nchildren like, like stars, the moon and the sun. There is no underlying\nmeaning.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-24T08:00:25.343", "id": "4427", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-24T08:00:25.343", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1043", "parent_id": "4426", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4430", "answer_count": 1, "body": "持ちつ持たれつ (meaning approximately \"supporting eachother\") is commonly heard, but\nseems to be formed from some archaic grammar.\n\n * I'm assuming it's an archaic form of 持って持たれて or something like that, but can somebody confirm/dismiss/elaborate on that? \n * When was this kind of grammar in active use? \n * Are these archaic forms used in any other common modern expressions?", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-24T09:34:20.320", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4428", "last_activity_date": "2014-10-01T04:07:26.760", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "post_type": "question", "score": 8, "tags": [ "grammar", "history" ], "title": "What's the grammar of 持ちつ持たれつ?", "view_count": 721 }

[ { "body": "This `〜つ〜つ` form means `〜たり〜たりしながら`. It is followed by how or why those\nactions occurred. The two verbs are usually \"opposite\" or \"contradictory\"\nactions. I think it is a more formal construct, but not necessarily archaic.\n\nHere are some example sentences from [my\nbook](http://www.amazon.co.jp/%E3%81%A9%E3%82%93%E3%81%AA%E6%99%82%E3%81%A9%E3%81%86%E4%BD%BF%E3%81%86-%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AC%E8%AA%9E%E8%A1%A8%E7%8F%BE%E6%96%87%E5%9E%8B500%E2%80%95%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AC%E8%AA%9E%E8%83%BD%E5%8A%9B%E8%A9%A6%E9%A8%931%E3%83%BB2%E7%B4%9A%E5%AF%BE%E5%BF%9C-%E3%82%A2%E3%83%AB%E3%82%AF%E3%81%AE%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AC%E8%AA%9E%E3%83%86%E3%82%AD%E3%82%B9%E3%83%88-%E5%8F%8B%E6%9D%BE-%E6%82%A6%E5%AD%90/dp/4872345894):\n\n> * マラソンの最後の500メートルで二人の選手は **抜きつ抜かれつ** の接戦になった → The last 500 meters of the\n> marathon become a close battle between the two runners as they kept trading\n> out for first place.\n> * 風に吹き飛ばされた赤い帽子は木【こ】（こ）の葉のように **浮きつ沈みつ** 川を流れて行った → A red hat that was\n> blown about by the wind kept rising and falling (sinking) like a (tree) leaf\n> as it went on down the river.\n> * 変な男の人がうちの前を **行【ゆ】（ゆ）きつ戻りつ** している。何をしているんだろう。 → There is a strange man\n> going back and forth (going and coming) in front of our house. I wonder what\n> the heck he's doing!?\n>\n\nAs far as your example `持ちつ持たれつ`, a whole sentence and/or more context would\nbe easier to really decipher the meaning.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-24T15:26:29.903", "id": "4430", "last_activity_date": "2014-10-01T04:07:26.760", "last_edit_date": "2014-10-01T04:07:26.760", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "4428", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4439", "answer_count": 4, "body": "I am confused by the use of `なんか`, especially after the て-form of a verb. What\ndo: `あきらめてなんかない`, `消えてなんかない` mean? How do they differ from simply saying\n`あきらめていない`, `消えていない`? What is the purpose of `なんか`？", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-24T23:40:33.193", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4431", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-31T17:44:25.813", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-31T17:44:25.813", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "869", "post_type": "question", "score": 14, "tags": [ "grammar" ], "title": "なんか after て- form of a verb", "view_count": 1851 }

[ { "body": "Not really different from\n[this](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/421/usage-\nof-%E3%81%AA%E3%82%93%E3%81%A6-and-%E3%81%AA%E3%82%93%E3%81%8B-as-emphasis).\nBasically a weak `は`.\n\nFor your examples, they're essentially the same as `あきらめては(い)ない` and\n`消えては(い)ない` with the added nuance of `なんか` that the other post explains.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-25T00:04:20.263", "id": "4432", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-25T00:04:20.263", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.157", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "4431", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "For me なんか keeps his meaning whatever its position. In this case, it's often\nto make your point. It can express surprise, anger etc...\n\n> あきらめてなんかない => I did not give up \"and it's not close\".\n>\n> あきらめていない => I did not give up.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-25T00:17:08.620", "id": "4433", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-25T00:17:08.620", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "1065", "parent_id": "4431", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "なんか (何か）means \"something\" so in this case it can be taken as \"or anything of\nthe sort\", \"...it's nothing like that\", or \"in any way\". It gives emphasis\nagainst an assumption or statement by others and is used only in negative\nstatements.\n\nI would always include the い (...なんかいない rather than ...なんかない).", "comment_count": 15, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-25T00:59:51.683", "id": "4434", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-25T00:59:51.683", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1059", "parent_id": "4431", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "Paul Richter's answer is partially right in the sense that `なんか` adds\n\"emphasis against an assumption or statement by others and is used only in\nnegative statements\", but more accurately, `なんか` used here is not the same as\n`何か`, and it means `such thing as`.\n\n> あきらめていない \n> 'I have not given up.'\n>\n> あきらめて **なんか** (い)ない \n> 'I haven't done **such thing as** giving up.'", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-25T08:15:36.273", "id": "4439", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-25T08:15:36.273", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "4431", "post_type": "answer", "score": 15 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4437", "answer_count": 3, "body": "素人 means beginner. ド素人 means total beginner.\n\n`ド` means \"very\", \"total\". Any idea where does this word come from\netymologically? It is sometimes also written in hiragana.\n\nAre there other current expressions that use `ド` in a similar way?", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-25T02:04:42.233", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4435", "last_activity_date": "2016-08-05T06:25:19.793", "last_edit_date": "2016-08-03T21:01:36.313", "last_editor_user_id": "16361", "owner_user_id": "107", "post_type": "question", "score": 8, "tags": [ "etymology" ], "title": "Where does the ド in ド素人 come from?", "view_count": 1066 }

[ { "body": "どぎつい, ど真ん中 and ド変態{へんたい} come to mind as similar expressions.\n\nI don't know where this use of ド came from. Maybe from the phrase 度{ど}が過ぎる.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-25T02:19:50.437", "id": "4436", "last_activity_date": "2016-08-05T06:25:19.793", "last_edit_date": "2016-08-05T06:25:19.793", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "1082", "parent_id": "4435", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "ど突く, ドスケベ, どあほ, ドM, ドS, どえらい, どぶす, ど近眼... sure there are many more\n\nPlease note that some of these are quite rude and offensive. Please use with\ncaution.\n\nNot sure about the etymology, but I have the impression that they tend to be\nused more in Kansai-ben.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-25T04:14:37.293", "id": "4437", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-25T04:14:37.293", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1073", "parent_id": "4435", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "This is not \"etymology\" per se, but the Tokyo dialect has borrowed \"ど\" from\nKansai-ben. I don't have a solid reference to back up this claim, but I\nremember reading that in books written by scholars. Also there is a Wikipedia\nentry about Kansai-ben (cited below) and its vocabulary section includes this\nvery \"ど\".\n\n\"ど\" is still informal in the Tokyo dialect and tends to be avoided in formal\nspeech and writing in my experience (living in the Tokyo area for a long\ntime). Some traditionalists disdain it as vulgar because there are good\ntraditional alternatives. For example, Tokyoites used to say まん真ん中 instead of\nど真ん中 (dead center, right in the middle, etc.) but the latter is becoming more\nand more common now. To Tokyoites' ear today, まん真ん中 sounds perfectly fine and\na bit more elegant than ど真ん中, but it lacks the forcefulness and vividness of\nthe latter. You can say the same for other words qualified by \"ど\".\n\n[近畿方言 from\nWikipedia](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%BF%91%E7%95%BF%E6%96%B9%E8%A8%80)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2016-08-05T04:57:49.863", "id": "38222", "last_activity_date": "2016-08-05T04:57:49.863", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "9983", "parent_id": "4435", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "4442", "answer_count": 3, "body": "Consider these sentences:\n\n> * だれ{が・に}これが出来るか\n>\n> * だれ{が・に}日本語が分からないか\n>\n>\n\nWhen both が and に are acceptable, what is their difference in meaning and\npractical usage?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-25T15:09:28.717", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4440", "last_activity_date": "2021-04-08T06:01:54.807", "last_edit_date": "2021-04-08T06:01:54.807", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "542", "post_type": "question", "score": 22, "tags": [ "meaning", "nuances", "particle-に", "particle-が", "dative-subject-constructions" ], "title": "が and に interchangeability and difference in meaning", "view_count": 3467 }

[ { "body": "This is a great question, and one of which I'm not sure I fully understand the\nnuances. But here goes:\n\nWhat I learned in my first Japanese class was the `は／が` for basic things like\nthis:\n\n> * あの人は日本語がわかる → That guy understands Japanese.\n> * 友達は子供が３人います → My friend has 3 children.\n> * だれがこれが出来るか → Who can do this?\n>\n\nThen I heard some people start using `に` and I was like WTH? But after hearing\n`に` for a while, it seems to translate like \"unto 〜\" or \"by 〜\". It's not how\nwe'd naturally say it in English (at least most people, I'd imagine), so it\nseems a little strange.\n\n> * あの人に日本語がわかる → \"Japanese is understood by that guy,\" or \"Japanese is\n> understandable unto him.\"\n> * 友達に子供が３人います → \"3 children exist unto my friend,\" or \"My friend has 3\n> children (unto himself).\"\n> * だれにこれが出来るか？ → For/To whom is it possible?\n>\n\nMy understanding is that with the `は／が` the emphasis is more on the\nperson/subject, whereas with the `に` version, it seems to be more on the\n\"other part\" (Japanese being understood, 3 children, the thing able to be\ndone) for lack of a better term.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-25T15:42:31.847", "id": "4442", "last_activity_date": "2016-03-09T21:07:55.250", "last_edit_date": "2016-03-09T21:07:55.250", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "4440", "post_type": "answer", "score": 13 }, { "body": "As for your question, both が and に are equally common for だれ{が・に}これが出来るか while\nが is more common for だれ{が・に}日本語が分からないか.\n\nBecause できる or わかる were originally intransitive verbs that meant 'appear' or\n'split' respectively, they take a structure below.\n\n私にこれができること = that this appears to me → that I can do this\n\n私に日本語がわかること= that Japanese splits (itself) to me → that I can understand\nJapanese\n\n(Since the likes of 私にこれが出来る is not a valid sentence without conditions, I use\nclauses instead)\n\nHowever, as these verbs started to be used as a kind of transitive verbs,\nparticle が started to be used as a marker for the agent of possible action. As\na result, 私がこれができること or 私が日本語がわかること has been accepted.\n\nWhen は is attatched to 私が, it changes to 私は and 私に changes to 私には. Through\nthose manipulations, you can get sentences like 私はこれが出来る or 私にはこれが出来る.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-11T14:03:36.743", "id": "15389", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-11T14:03:36.743", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4092", "parent_id": "4440", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "There are a number of situations in which the subject can be followed by に.\n\n 1. When the predicate consists of potential verbs like わかる、読める、見える etc.\n 2. When the predicate consists of verbs or adjectives expressing a request/demand, such as 要る、欲しい.\n 3. When the predicate consists of adjectives expressing emotions/feelings, such as 嬉しい、悲しい、懐かしい.\n 4. When the predicate is a 敬語動詞.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2020-09-01T12:16:16.827", "id": "80448", "last_activity_date": "2020-09-01T12:16:16.827", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "38770", "parent_id": "4440", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 1, "body": "I'm trying to understand the grammar behind `当て`, and after a bit of\ninvestigation I still don't quite understand a could of points.\n\nThe definition that I found for it is `(n) depend on, expectations, aim`\n(various sources including\n[goo](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/srch/all/%E5%BD%93%E3%81%A6/m0u/))\n\nAt first I thought it was derived from `当てる`, but I'm not so sure because the\nmeanings aren't exactly the same, and the te-form of `当てる` is `当てて`.\n\nI found these two verbs that use `当て`:\n\n * 当てはまる: to apply a rule\n * 当てにする: to count on someone =/= 当てにならない: not to be relied upon\n * 当て込む: to count on\n\nMy first questions is whether the `は` in `はまる` is the particle or part of a\nverb.\n\nTo make this even more fun and confusing for me there are the nouns that use\n`当て`:\n\n * 当て字: phonetic kanji\n * 当て身: strike, blow\n * 当て[擦]{こす}り: snide remark\n * 当て[推]{すい}[量]{りょう}: guesswork\n * 当て逃げ: hit-and-run\n\nThese seem to use both the meanings of \"expectations\" and \"hit, strike\", but\nmore of the latter, which seems to me that it means `当てる` in te-form, but\nwithout the second `て`.\n\nI'm just looking for some kind of clarification...is there some kind of\npattern here that I'm missing, or am I over complicating this? Is there less\nof a difference between the \"expectation\" meaning and the \"strike\" meaning\nthen there seems to me to be? It may not be important in the long run, but I'd\nlike to know when `当て` and `当てる` are being used. Do I just have to memorize\nall the variants of `当て` and `当てる` on a case-by-case basis?", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-25T22:53:35.767", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "4443", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-26T01:13:06.300", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "921", "post_type": "question", "score": 6, "tags": [ "grammar", "meaning" ], "title": "Understanding the grammar of 当て", "view_count": 1338 }

[ { "body": "In `当てはまる` `は` is part of the the verb `はまる`; it is pronounced \"atehamaru\",\nnot \"atewamaru\".\n\nAs for the general meaning, if you think of `当` as _\"hit a target\"_ and learn\nall the expressions in terms of that, you should get by.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-26T01:13:06.300", "id": "4446", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-26T01:13:06.300", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1059", "parent_id": "4443", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]