Datasets:

p1atdev

/

japanese-stackexchange

like 2

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1682", "answer_count": 4, "body": "I'm translating a song which can be seen\n[here](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUQV5g9QoUA). At the end of the song is\nthis:\n\n> 傷つけてしまう夜もあるだろう 分かち合えない想いもあるだろう\n\nWhat is the subject of 傷つけてしまう夜もあるだろう? Is the singer saying, \"there may be\nnights where we'll end up hurting each other,\" or is he saying, \"there may be\nnights where I'll end up hurting you?\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-01T16:41:32.423", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1680", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-02T16:50:03.280", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-02T04:28:10.923", "last_editor_user_id": "290", "owner_user_id": "69", "post_type": "question", "score": 4, "tags": [ "translation", "song-lyrics" ], "title": "What is the subject of this sentence?", "view_count": 240 }

[ { "body": "It seems to be the former. If it were \"each other\", it would need to be an 〜合う\nverb (like the latter), like 傷つけ合う夜 (or with しまう, 傷つけ合ってしまう).", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-01T16:50:15.897", "id": "1681", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-01T16:50:15.897", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "1680", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "After reviewing the song, I've completely flipped on my answer. The whole song\nis definitely from his perspective, and this part is definitely him saying he\nmight hurt her feelings.\n\nOriginal Answer:\n\nI definitely feel it's the 'each other' one. It's just saying that there are\ndays they will hurt each other's feelings, and days they won't think the same\nway. I expect the rest of the song talks about how good they usually are\ntogether, or how much they love each other and it's okay, etc.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-01T17:08:31.680", "id": "1682", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-01T17:54:47.897", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-01T17:54:47.897", "last_editor_user_id": "393", "owner_user_id": "393", "parent_id": "1680", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "Seems rather vague to me. \"There are nights that hurting will be done\". By\nwho, and to whom seems opened ended.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-01T21:49:24.377", "id": "1683", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-01T21:49:24.377", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "456", "parent_id": "1680", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "There is no subject to this sentence just as its English counterpart `There\nmight be nights that we will hurt each other` doesn't. But if you rather\nwanted to know the subject of the relative clause `傷つけてしまう`, then its subject\nis `we`.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-02T16:00:44.243", "id": "1696", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-02T16:50:03.280", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-02T16:50:03.280", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1680", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 8, "body": "Does anyone know any online Japanese dictionary which provides audio reading?", "comment_count": 9, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-02T04:57:24.870", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1684", "last_activity_date": "2015-06-03T01:22:05.077", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-24T11:08:14.500", "last_editor_user_id": "112", "owner_user_id": "359", "post_type": "question", "score": 8, "tags": [ "pronunciation", "resources", "dictionary" ], "title": "I am looking for an online Japanese dictionary with audio pronunciations", "view_count": 23276 }

[ { "body": "Pretty much every online Japanese dictionary that I know of provides reading,\nunless you mean something out of the ordinary by \"reading.\" Take the following\nentry from [WWWJDIC](http://wwwjdic.mygengo.com/cgi-data/wwwjdic?1C) for\nreference:\n\n> 結論 【けつろん】 (n,vs,adj-no) conclusion; (P)\n\n**Edit:** [WWWJDIC](http://wwwjdic.mygengo.com/cgi-data/wwwjdic?1C) also\ncontains audio examples for many common words, as Lukman points out in [his\nanswer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/1684/i-am-looking-for-an-\nonline-japanese-dictionary-with-audio-pronunciations/2099#2099).", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-02T05:14:09.153", "id": "1685", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-21T10:31:07.360", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:43.857", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "384", "parent_id": "1684", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "I've yet to see a dictionary that didn't provide the reading. Plus, if you did\nmanage to find one, you could just install RikaiChan or RikaiKun (depending on\nyour browser) and it would give you the reading.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-02T10:32:27.883", "id": "1688", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-02T10:32:27.883", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "393", "parent_id": "1684", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "UmaiKanji has an [audio library](http://umaikanji.com/Library). It doesn't\nhave anywhere near as many words as a dictionary, so don't expect to get a\nresult for every word you look up. It's not a dictionary actually, but with\nRikaikun/chan its useful.\n\nI've seen dictionaries on the iPhone that use software to synthesize the\nreadings.\n\nApple and Microsoft do this decently (for words more than sentences), in\nEnglish at least. So, desktop software in combination with the OS's text-to-\nspeech, or some dictionary that can take advantage of their frameworks is a\npossible lead for you.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-02T14:35:42.597", "id": "1692", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-02T14:35:42.597", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "54", "parent_id": "1684", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "I use <http://nihongoresources.com> which includes a lot grammar and\npronunciation as well as a dictionary.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-02T16:00:17.663", "id": "1695", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-02T16:00:17.663", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "459", "parent_id": "1684", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "It's strange that no one mentioned that\n[WWWJDIC](http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jwb/cgi-bin/wwwjdic.cgi?1C) provides\nthe audio clips for the reading for all the entries (rintaun only mentioned\nabout the pronunciation hiragana).\n\nIn case anyone misses it (I didn't realize the blue button is a play sound\nbutton until later), here is where:\n\n", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-21T09:00:46.090", "id": "2099", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-21T09:00:46.090", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "112", "parent_id": "1684", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "I use Nihongo de Care-navi for Japanese pronunciation with audio. It is\nactually not a dictionary, but it is for nurses and doctors in Japan to learn\nEnglish. It however contains a large enough vocabulary that most of the\neveryday Japanese words are included. It also includes variations of a same\nword.\n\n[http://eng.nihongodecarenavi.jp/jpn/search-\nlist.php?cmd=search&q=%E8%A8%AA%E5%95%8F](http://eng.nihongodecarenavi.jp/jpn/search-\nlist.php?cmd=search&q=%E8%A8%AA%E5%95%8F)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-01-19T04:03:06.897", "id": "14245", "last_activity_date": "2014-01-19T04:03:06.897", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "4524", "parent_id": "1684", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "I run Jlearn which is a fairly comprehensive Online Japanese dictionary and\nhas audio for all words and readings for kanji.\n\n<http://jlearn.net>", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-08T01:35:14.170", "id": "15295", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-08T04:00:24.333", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-08T04:00:24.333", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5101", "parent_id": "1684", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "Throughout my searches I find the some of the best audio practice to Japanese\nyoutube video's with subtitles - though, of course, they may not always be\nright.\n\nAlso free online TTS systems could work but their syntax is often strange. I\nlike <https://acapela-box.com/AcaBox/index.php> the best.\n\nOr for those who are pretty beginner then of course you could use the audio\nflashcards I just developed on my site. (Sorry for the shameless plug, it fit\nlol)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2015-06-03T01:22:05.077", "id": "24737", "last_activity_date": "2015-06-03T01:22:05.077", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "9513", "parent_id": "1684", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1689", "answer_count": 2, "body": "I read this expression in a text. It seems to be an old proverb about monkeys.\nBut I am not sure about its meaning. Why 筋, for instance? Does it mean muscle?\nreasoning faculty? Why would they be lacking?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-02T08:50:04.303", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1687", "last_activity_date": "2016-04-17T08:28:00.997", "last_edit_date": "2016-04-17T08:28:00.997", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "126", "post_type": "question", "score": 5, "tags": [ "set-phrases", "classical-japanese", "auxiliary-ず" ], "title": "Help for this expression: 猿は人間に毛が[三筋]{みすじ}足らぬ", "view_count": 240 }

[ { "body": "It means: \"Monkeys are less clever than humans\" or literally: \"Monkeys have 3\nhair less than people\"\n\n足らぬ being used for 足りない\n\nand 筋 being the counter for hair\n\nTo add a bit of history/legend:\n\n毛 doesn't stand for \"hair\" but for apparel, appearance or skill...etc.\n\nThe legend states that during the creation of the world, Kamis (god(s))\nthought human and monkeys were too similar and removed 3 details (毛) from\nthem.\n\nA monkey asked to \"god\" (kami) why they could not become human. God answered,\nbecause you lack the following 3 points (毛):\n\n> ＜見分け＞物事の分別、理性が無い\n>\n> ＜情け＞ 情愛、恋愛、思いやり、雅な心\n>\n> ＜やりとげ＞最後までやり抜くこと、成し遂げること\n\n(reason, compassion and sense of accomplishment)\n\n<http://iwasironokuni.cocolog-nifty.com/komiti/2011/07/post-6d0c.html>", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-02T11:09:51.297", "id": "1689", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-02T13:02:43.950", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-02T13:02:43.950", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1687", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "猿は人間に毛が三筋足りぬ、is also said 毛が三本足りぬ. I think 三本足りぬ is more popular than 三筋足りぬ as\na saying today.\n\nBoth '三筋' and '三本' mean three pieces (or threads) of hair. It means monkeys\nresemble men, but they have three pieces short of hair as compared with men,\nmeaning monkeys are inferior to men.\n\nIt is an interesting concept and simile that not the size of brain or the\nlevel of intelligence but the number of hair makes a decisive distinction\nbetween men and monkeys.\n\nWhen we say 'あいつは毛が三本足らぬ,' it means he is stupid like a monkey. We used to say\nthis for abusing our boss and colleagues over drink after five. Sorry for a\nclever monkey.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2016-04-17T04:40:35.127", "id": "33616", "last_activity_date": "2016-04-17T07:04:52.797", "last_edit_date": "2016-04-17T07:04:52.797", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "12056", "parent_id": "1687", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1691", "answer_count": 5, "body": "Can すみません always be used in place of ありがとう? What's the difference?\n\nWhen using すみません to express thanks, what other words are used with it?\n\nCould you show me some examples?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-02T13:06:31.727", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1690", "last_activity_date": "2017-02-20T11:15:30.560", "last_edit_date": "2016-02-08T12:36:28.020", "last_editor_user_id": "11849", "owner_user_id": "69", "post_type": "question", "score": 9, "tags": [ "usage", "meaning" ], "title": "Using すみません instead of ありがとう", "view_count": 2418 }

[ { "body": "すみません is used to express thanks when you want so express gratitude for someone\ngoing out of their way for you, or you that you feel like you inconvenienced\nthem by receiving their effort. Another part is someone doing something\nunexpectedly for you. Of course ありがとうございます also fits in the same situations,\ntoo.\n\nSimple clear examples would be someone pouring you a glass of drink at a\nparty; someone in the office bringing you a document you asked about the other\nday. I learned this use of すみません in these kinds of situations.\n\nTo say that you can _always_ use すみません instead of ありがとう would be incorrect I\nfeel. For example, during my language learning time I have received ongoing\ninstruction from an older friend. He explained when saying expressing deep\nappreciation, I should unhurriedly say ありがとうございました with a bow. In these\nsituations, すみません would be too short and wouldn't carry the same feeling.\n\nAlso, to make it even more interesting, it is fine to say \"すみません。ありがとうございます。\"\nin the same sentence but I don't believe there are many other words one would\n_usually_ use with すみません though.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-02T13:56:16.407", "id": "1691", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-02T13:56:16.407", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "276", "parent_id": "1690", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 }, { "body": "すみません carries more a feeling of \"you have done something for me, and I am in\ndebt\" than ありがとう, which is more like \"you have done something for me, and so I\nthank you\".\n\nI would say it is always safe to use ありがとう, but perhaps not すみません as it can be\na little weaker in gratitude. Also elongating ありがとう->ありがとうございます/ありがとうございました\ncarries more of a deeper feeling to it.\n\nFor example, imagine while out and about someone holds a door open for you. A\nquick little bow and a すみません or ありがとう is appropriate. However, if someone just\nhad to do a lot of work for you, and they are on your social level or higher,\nyou must thank profusely. Simply saying すみません or ありがとう is fairly offensive, as\nit does not show the proper level of gratitude you should be showing. Only\nありがとうございます/ありがとうございました is appropriate here.\n\nFurthermore, when detailing what you are thanking the person for, ありがとう forms\na better sentence with something like: くれてありがとう. くれて,すみません doesn't really work\nas well.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-02T15:56:01.257", "id": "1694", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-02T15:56:01.257", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "459", "parent_id": "1690", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 }, { "body": "Here is one example. You are taking the elevator to the 8th floor. Usually\nthere will be one person holding the \"open the doors\" button. In this\nparticular case, you will most often hear people say すみません to express\ngratitude. Using ありがとうございます in this case is kind of uncommon, though is not\nwrong to say it.\n\nOn the other hand, if you buy something on a store, the clerk will no doubt\nsay to you ありがとうございます/ありがとうございました。In this case, saying すみません would be\nincorrect, since the level of gratitude when buying something is higher than\nthe level of gratitude to someone holding the button on the elevator for you.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-02T16:48:47.217", "id": "1698", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-02T16:48:47.217", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "79", "parent_id": "1690", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "A philosophist would say \"if you get choose between saying ありがとう and すみません,\npick ありがとう, as it has a positive feeling, while the latter is more towards\nnegative\".\n\nNot that I agree with that philosophy.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-04T04:14:10.553", "id": "1722", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-04T04:14:10.553", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "154", "parent_id": "1690", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "As a side note, even Japanese sometimes argue about when it is appropriate to\nuse すみません or ありがとう. And there is perhaps dialectal gradation.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/xOvag.jpg)\n(see [here](http://www2.ninjal.ac.jp/hogen/dp/gaj-pdf/gaj-map-\nlegend/vol5/GAJ5-270.pdf) for full data)\n\nGreen markers on the map indicate they use \"sorry\" word to tell gratitude in\nthe local dialect. You can see them distributed in wide area, intermixed with\nother expressions.\n\nUltimately you'll notice how few Japanese dialects actually have the word\nliterally translated \"thank you\" (ありがとう, which means \"preciously\", is no\nexception). Each color on the map stands for:\n\n * **Red** : \"kind, generous of you\"\n * **Brown** : \"it's precious, valuable\" (ありがとう goes here)\n * **Yellow** : \"I'm not worth it; I don't dare\"\n * **Green** : \"I'm sorry; I troubled you\" (すみません goes here)\n * **Cyan** : \"you treated, catered me\"\n * **Blue** : \"I thank you; I'm thankful\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2017-02-20T11:09:37.943", "id": "43712", "last_activity_date": "2017-02-20T11:15:30.560", "last_edit_date": "2017-02-20T11:15:30.560", "last_editor_user_id": "7810", "owner_user_id": "7810", "parent_id": "1690", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1714", "answer_count": 4, "body": "For example, while having lunch with your coworkers and you have to attend\nsome matter soon, what would be a natural way to leave the table? I think that\nin this case saying お先に失礼します would be wrong.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-02T17:02:59.403", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1699", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-03T16:17:01.137", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "79", "post_type": "question", "score": 10, "tags": [ "politeness", "business-japanese" ], "title": "What to say when leaving the table before everybody else?", "view_count": 1463 }

[ { "body": "`お先に失礼します` may not be ideal for this situation, as it is what you say when you\nleave work before others (see: [When is it appropriate to use お疲れ様\n(otsukaresama)?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/1158/when-is-it-\nappropriate-to-use-otsukaresama)).\n\nごちそうさま[でした] is the closest you could get to a meal-closing expression. It can\nbe \"dangerous\", in that it has the implied sense of being treated by whoever\nyou are saying this to (and would therefore be extraordinarily rude, if that\nis not the case, like saying \"thanks for inviting me\" when the bill comes, and\nyou were _not_ invited). However, it is perfectly fine in a casual context\nwhere it is clear nobody's treating anybody else, such as a work cafeteria\nlunch.\n\nIn your particular case, perhaps a simple short excuse (\"会議がありますので...\") while\ngetting up might do.\n\nIt is also very common (particularly for younger people and women) to do a\n_very_ small bow-with-praying-hands at the end of a meal (usually while saying\nごちそうさま[でした]), similar to the way you open with (bow-with-hands-together,\nsaying \"いただきます\"): this is the way children are taught to behave at a table,\nbut I think it's still perfectly OK as an adult (albeit played down a little\nnot to sound too childish) and does send the message you are getting up from\nthe table.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-03T01:47:22.013", "id": "1705", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-03T04:11:07.963", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.157", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "290", "parent_id": "1699", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "お先に失礼します is appropriate. You can drop the お if there's something before\n先に失礼します:\n\n-(今日は仕事が忙しいので or any other reason)先に失礼します\n\n-Or you have the obvious ごちそうさまでした\n\nIn any case, both sentences are a little abrupt. Saying 皆さんゆっくり食べて（ください）ね\nworks well.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-03T02:53:20.943", "id": "1706", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-03T03:10:37.747", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-03T03:10:37.747", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1699", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "I usually say something like \"あ、すみません、あのう…少し用事があるのですが…\". When I get visual\nacknowledgement, I stand up, bow and go away saying, \"あ、では、失礼します。\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-03T04:05:15.877", "id": "1707", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-03T04:05:15.877", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "356", "parent_id": "1699", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "I won't say お先に失礼します is completely out of place, but you should at least\nmention why you're leaving, so as to assure that you're not offended or\nanything:\n\n> すみません、片付けたい仕事がありますので、先に失礼します。\n\nAbruptly announcing お先に失礼します is probably too closely tied to the idiomatic\nusage (when leaving work).\n\n先に戻ります or 先に行きます can also work as a substitution for 先に失礼します.\n\n> すみません、やってしまいたいことがあるので、先に戻ります。\n\nIf you're unsure about which verb to use, just [cut it\nshort](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/391/about-cutting-the-\nsentences-short) with a trailing ellipsis (see Axioplase's and Dave's answer):\n\n> すみません、ちょっと用事があるので...\n\nIf your colleagues already know you have something to attend to, or your KY\nradar is all clear, you can get as brief as:\n\n> じゃ、お先です。\n\nSome people may think it's too informal for work, but you'll be ok as long as\nother people around you are using it.\n\nごちそうさまでした works best when you're eating your\n[bentos](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bento) together. See Dave's answer for a\ncomplete explanation.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-03T16:17:01.137", "id": "1714", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-03T16:17:01.137", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.157", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "128", "parent_id": "1699", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1704", "answer_count": 3, "body": "So there are several ways to express something is \"seemingly not ～\":\n\n> * ～なさそう\n> * ～そうにない\n> * ～そうもない\n> * ～そうにもない (is this one even real?)\n>\n\nI was always taught ～なさそう in my Japanese classes, and it was not until I heard\none of the other ones that I ever become confused about them.\n\nAfter doing a little research on this, it seems that adjectives can only take\n～なさそう. ex.\n\n> ○ 料理がおいしくなさそう \n> ？／× 料理がおいしそうにない\n\nbut that verbs can take any of the forms\n\n> ○ 雨が 降らなさそう／降りそう（に・も・にも？）ない\n\nSo, my questions are a) is the above reasoning correct, and b) what are the\ndifferences/nuances of the latter three forms? Someone please set me straight\non this; it's been bugging me for a couple years.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-02T18:09:24.993", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1701", "last_activity_date": "2015-11-17T02:34:35.840", "last_edit_date": "2014-07-13T17:47:27.113", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "78", "post_type": "question", "score": 24, "tags": [ "usage", "grammar", "nuances" ], "title": "Confusion about \"Seemingly not ～\"", "view_count": 4052 }

[ { "body": "Looks like you have done your research well. You are correct with verbs only\ntaking そうに/もない。Although そうにもない is not grammatical.\n\n> * 雨が降らなさそう you make an assumption based on current state of the sky.\n> * 雨が降りそうにない you have confidence that it wont rain (due to some extra\n> information maybe).\n> * 雨が降りそうもない you want it to rain but it seems like it wont (from extra\n> information or from appearances)\n>\n\nThere is another common way to express the same idea, ～みたいです。only used in the\naffirmative. (ie, 「～みたいじゃない」ってだめです）\n\n> * あの男の人は学生じゃないみたいです on campus you plainly state that guy over there\n> doesn't seem like a student.\n> * 雨が降らないみたいですよ when you heard a broadcast or checked the web. よ shows your\n> confidence here. But...\n> * 雨が降らないみたいですね is similar to 降らなさそう because you are looking for agreement\n> with ね\n>", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-03T01:14:21.343", "id": "1704", "last_activity_date": "2015-11-17T02:34:35.840", "last_edit_date": "2015-11-17T02:34:35.840", "last_editor_user_id": "11104", "owner_user_id": "276", "parent_id": "1701", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 }, { "body": "I just realized I didn't know the difference so I asked a native Japanese.\n\nHere is the explation\n\n> 降らなさそう\n\nnormal straigh meaning: \"it doesn't seem to rain\"\n\n> 降りそうにない\n\nthis sounds like: \"I though it would rain, but now it doesn't seem so\"\n\n> 降りそうもない\n\nthis is like the previous but も makes it more strong, like put an \"absolutely\"\nin front.\n\n> 降りそうにもない\n\nthis is correct (same meaning that 降りそうもない) but a bit too complex for casual\nconversation. It's かきことば.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-03T16:09:20.680", "id": "1713", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-03T16:09:20.680", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "60", "parent_id": "1701", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "## Different types of ～そう\n\nI think it's best to consider adjective + そう and verb + そう separately, because\nthey have slightly different meanings. In particular, with verbs, そう has the\nsense of something close to happening or about to happen in the near future,\nbut with adjectives... not really.\n\n```\n\n 雨が降りそうだ。\n It looks like it's about to rain. (near future)\n \n 彼女がうれしそうに手をふった。\n She waved happily. (not the future)\n \n あの料理は（まだ食べていないけど、）おいしそうだ。\n (I haven't eaten that food yet, but) it looks tasty. (kind of maybe the future?)\n \n```\n\n## Negative form of ～そう with verbs\n\nOther answers have already mentioned that the さ in 降りなさそう is not the\nofficially correct form, and I found [an authoritative-looking answer on\nOshiete! goo](http://oshiete.goo.ne.jp/qa/2750489.html) which agrees.\n\nI believe that\n\n * 雨が降りそうにない\n * 雨が降りそうもない\n * 雨が降りそうにもない\n\nall mean the same thing, and [I found a link for that\none](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1122304346) too.\n\n## Difference between ～そうにない and ～なそう (verbs only)\n\n「雨が降らなそう」is the normal negative, which just means \"it doesn't look like it's\ngoing to rain. I think ～そうにない (and そうもない and そうにもない) not only add emphasis,\nbut also imply \"I wish it would happen, but it looks hopeless.\" Your earlier\nexample 「僕にもわかりそうにない」, \"It looks like there's no way I'm going to be able to\nunderstand it either\" also fits this pattern. However, it's more difficult to\nback this idea up. [I did find a link where someone wrote that 「授業に遅れそうにない」\nseemed\nunnatural](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q10103755895),\nbut they couldn't explain why.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-07-13T20:26:35.640", "id": "17788", "last_activity_date": "2014-07-13T22:55:05.170", "last_edit_date": "2014-07-13T22:55:05.170", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "6799", "parent_id": "1701", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1709", "answer_count": 3, "body": "[WWWJDIC](http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jwb/cgi-\nbin/wwwjdic.cgi?1MUE%E3%81%99%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A8) says すっと means \"quickly / all\nof a sudden\" yet it can also mean \"quietly / gently / softly\"\n\nSo basically I was wondering how do we tell if すっと means \"quickly / all of a\nsudden\" or \"quietly / gently / softly\"?\n\nE.g. in this sentence: カタツムリがすっと角を出した。\n\nDoes it mean:\n\n1) Gently, the snail shot out its horns.\n\n2) All of a sudden, the snail shot out its horns.\n\n3) both 1) and 2) ?", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-03T04:58:30.033", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1708", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-04T03:55:45.023", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-03T06:16:25.543", "last_editor_user_id": "264", "owner_user_id": "264", "post_type": "question", "score": 6, "tags": [ "usage", "vocabulary", "words" ], "title": "ambiguity with すっと", "view_count": 677 }

[ { "body": "My dictionary defines すっと with these _four_ meanings:\n\n 1. 真っすぐ，ほっそりと (straight or slender)\n 2. 素早く (quickly)\n 3. 滞りなく (without delay/obstacle)\n 4. 気分がさっぱりと (refreshed/neat/plain feelings)\n\nSo what do all these have in common? All of them vaguely mean _smooth_. I'd\ndescribe すっと as pretty much an onomatopoeia (though I don't think it's\nofficially classified as such). In English you may say _zzzzzzip_.\n\n> すっと伸びた枝 - a branch growing out _straight_\n\n\"The branch grows out like _zzzzzzzip_.\" (smooth and straight)\n\n> すっと立って老人に席を譲った - He _immediately stood up_ and gave his seat to the elderly\n\n\"He stood up like _zzzzzzip_.\" (in a flash, smoothly, without delay)\n\n> 彼はすっと大学に入った - He was admitted to college _straight_ out of high school\n\n\"He was admitted like _zzzzzzzip_.\" (smoothly, without delay)\n\n> よく寝たので頭がすっとした - As I had a good sleep, I _feel refreshed_.\n\n\"My head feels like _zzzzzzzip_.\" (fresh, clear)\n\nFor your case, I think neither _quickly_ nor _gently_ translate very well:\n\n> カタツムリがすっと角を出した。\n\n\"The snail extended her horns like _zzzzzzzzzip_.\"\n\nIn the case of a snail, that probably means both smooth and fast (as far as\nsnails go). The horns just extended like _すっと_.\n\nI hope this gives you more of a feel of how this is used. When used in speech,\naccompanied by a hand motion, it's pretty much self-explanatory. :)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-03T08:27:05.527", "id": "1709", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-03T08:27:05.527", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "88", "parent_id": "1708", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "Answer to your question is \"3) both\".\n\n`すっと` is an onomatopea-derived adverb, and keep in mind that Japanese\nonomatopea has non-voiced vs. voiced pairs pretty much systematically. In\ngeneral, there is a following contrast:\n\n```\n\n Non-voiced: quiet, gentle, soft, small, light, etc.\n Voiced: noisy, rough, hard, large, heavy, etc.\n \n```\n\nSo, the voiced counterpart to `すっと` will be `ずっと`, which means a heavy large\nthing moved with sound. Other examples will be:\n\n```\n\n カリカリ scratching　: ガリガリ scraping\n トントン knocking : ドンドン banging\n パーン firecracker bursting : バーン bomb bursting\n etc.\n \n```", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-04T00:26:11.070", "id": "1719", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-04T01:24:57.523", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-04T01:24:57.523", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1708", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "Deceze gave the most decent interpretation of すっと that I know of. On the other\nhand, the meaning \"quietly / gently / softly\" is more appropriately attributed\nto `そっと`. You can refer to Goo's [Dictionary (Digital\nDaijisen)](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/130854/m0u/%E3%81%9D%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A8/)\nand [Thesaurus (Ruigo Reikai\nJiten)](http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/thsrs/14476/m0u/) for usage examples.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-04T03:55:45.023", "id": "1721", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-04T03:55:45.023", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "154", "parent_id": "1708", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 1, "body": "I like to read children literature in foreign languages I am learning. I\nusually do not have troubles picking them in european language, but I would\nneed recommendation for Japanese.\n\nI would like a book\n\n * with a small vocabulary (and eventually a glossary)\n\n * explaining tales of ancient Japan or little zen stories or a few proverbs.\n\n * easy to read aloud (with an audio CD would be perfect)\n\n * a series of self-contained short stories instead of a longer one.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-03T11:26:03.060", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1710", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-03T11:55:14.893", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "126", "post_type": "question", "score": 9, "tags": [ "learning", "culture" ], "title": "A tales and stories children book suitable for adult learners?", "view_count": 631 }

[ { "body": "Check out some [graded readers](http://www.thejapanshop.com/Readers-and-More-\nJapanese-Bookstore-Products/b/2359251011?ie=UTF8&title=Readers%20and%20More).\nThey're perfect for everything you've asked for, and sorted by reading ability\nso you can some that are perfect.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-03T11:55:14.893", "id": "1711", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-03T11:55:14.893", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "393", "parent_id": "1710", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 1, "body": "In [another question](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/1505/is-\njapanese-really-an-agglutinative-language) we established that Japanese is an\n[agglutinating language](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agglutinative_language)\n([more here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agglutination)), if only in its verb\nsystem.\n\nSince it is not traditional in Japanese grammar or teaching to go into this\naspect of the language most of the information must be in scholarly\nlinguistics publications somewhere.\n\nMy question is what are the \"slots\" used in the Japanese verb? This means in\nwhich specific rigid order can the various types of suffixes be built up?\n\nIf the answer for Japanese is complex a pointer to a website or publication is\nalso a good answer.\n\n([This article on another language](http://www.ne.jp/asahi/kaneko-\ntohru/languages-nowar/newpage32.htm) includes a small example comparing to\nJapanese for those who are not used to looking at Japanese this way. It\nanalyses the Japanese word \"tabesaserareta\")", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-03T13:52:07.727", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1712", "last_activity_date": "2011-12-27T01:20:13.533", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.260", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "125", "post_type": "question", "score": 5, "tags": [ "grammar", "verbs", "conjugations" ], "title": "What are the \"slots\" in the Japanese agglutinative verb system?", "view_count": 1466 }

[ { "body": "The example you point to is not analyzing `tabe-sase-rare-ta`. It is analyzing\n`tabe-sase-rare-takatta`. In traditional grammar, `takatta` is considered the\npast form of the adjectival affix `tai` 'want', and the link you point to\nanalyzes it as such. But if you look at it in more detail, it is actually the\ncontracted form of:\n\n```\n\n (1) tabe-sase-rare-ta-ku at-ta\n `wanted to be forced to eat'\n \n```\n\nIn actual usage, you will not see the string (1) as is because contraction is\nobligatory. However, once contraction is blocked by some phrase, you will\nnotice that the structure seen in (1) is actually there:\n\n```\n\n (2) tabe-sase-rare-ta-ku sae/mo at-ta\n \n```\n\nIn Japanese, the affixational morphological slots on verbs, if any, are not as\nelaborated as you see in Chuckchee mentioned in the link. All you can see in\n(2) is that particular morphemes select particular category to attach to.\n\n```\n\n tabe- A verbal stem\n -sase- A verbal affix to a verb\n -rare- A verbal affix to a verb\n -ta- An adjectival affixal root to a verb\n -ku An infinitival affix to an adjective root\n ar- A verbal stem selecting an infinitive (Turns into at- by gemination)\n -ta The past tense affix to a verb\n \n```\n\nFrom these selectional properties, the ordering of these morphemes is pretty\nmuch limited. Further notice that, in this case, the following alternative\nordering, if possible at all, will have a different meaning.\n\n```\n\n (3) tabe-rare-sase-takat-ta\n `wanted to be forced into being eaten'\n \n```\n\nIn this case, syntax is playing an important role.\n\nThe general topic you are asking is much more complicated than what can be\nexplained in a webpage or two.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-04T00:10:20.350", "id": "1718", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-04T15:30:54.637", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-04T15:30:54.637", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1712", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1717", "answer_count": 1, "body": "Can \"みたい\" mean \"want to see\", or does it always mean \"looks like\"/\"seems\nlike\"? If not, how would \"want to see\" be expressed?\n\nSpecifically, assuming it has both uses, it would seem ambiguous to me here:\nなんだか違う映画みたいだなあ\n\nWould that be \"I want to see a somewhat different movie\", or \"That seems like\na somewhat different movie\"?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-03T21:35:17.933", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1716", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-03T21:44:33.760", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "80", "post_type": "question", "score": 13, "tags": [ "definitions" ], "title": "Can \"みたい\" mean \"want to see\"?", "view_count": 17154 }

[ { "body": "\"That seems like a somewhat different movie\" would be\n\n> なんだか違う映画みたいだなあ\n\nWhereas \"I want to see a different movie\" would be\n\n> なんだか違う映画をみたいなあ\n\nSo to answer your question directly, yes, \"を見たい\" means \"want to see\" -- and\nyou'd use the kanji \"見たい\", in most general cases. (There's no だ after みたい in\nthis case.)\n\nWhen you want to say \"is like\", you'd say \"みたい\" without a particle in front,\nand without kanji.\n\nThough \"見たい\" is the most general kanji for \"want to see/look\", you can use\nmore specific ones:\n\n\"診たい\" -- want to examine, as in examine a patient.\n\n\"観たい\" -- want to watch, as in sightseeing or watching a movie.\n\n\"看たい\" -- want to look after, as in looking after a patient, from 看病 （かんびょう） --\nnot too common.", "comment_count": 10, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-03T21:44:33.760", "id": "1717", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-03T21:44:33.760", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "243", "parent_id": "1716", "post_type": "answer", "score": 13 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1728", "answer_count": 9, "body": "What would be appropriate expressions or idioms to convey the typical English\nresponse:\n\n> What's it to you?\n\n(in a sense that goes somewhere between \"None of your business\" and \"This is\nnot your problem\")\n\nThe best I can think of is `あなたには関係ない`. I am looking for other possibly\n**softer, more polite** ways of expressing the same idea.\n\n(as an aside, if you have _less_ polite, more direct, I am also curious)\n\nPS: Before anybody comments: I realise that any variation on this _will_ sound\ntoo direct and potentially rude for many situations in Japan, however softly\nit is formulated. But the general idea _is_ to be trenchant, in situations\nwhich might call for it... so no need to dwell on the rudeness aspect too\nmuch.\n\n**Edit:** tough to pick from many overlapping (quality) answers, but in the\nend, I think Rey's encompassed exactly the nuance(s) I was interested in.\nThanks everybody for the great suggestions!", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-04T06:43:13.320", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1724", "last_activity_date": "2020-07-01T18:36:23.660", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-05T01:27:41.053", "last_editor_user_id": "290", "owner_user_id": "290", "post_type": "question", "score": 13, "tags": [ "translation", "colloquial-language", "expressions" ], "title": "How to say \"What's it to you?\" in Japanese?", "view_count": 2393 }

[ { "body": "How about something along the lines of:\n\n> なぜそんなの知りたいの？\n\nDepending on how you deliver it and who you're talking to, it can be pretty\naggressive or just a somewhat innocent question.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-04T07:18:17.287", "id": "1725", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-04T07:18:17.287", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "88", "parent_id": "1724", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "What about a classically rude \"none of your business\"? Something along\nあんたに用はない！ おっら！ (with scottish r's).", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-04T08:34:40.360", "id": "1727", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-04T08:34:40.360", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "356", "parent_id": "1724", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "I honestly don't think there's any way to answer this given the condition that\nit should be polite, even with Japanese's overgrown arsenal of euphemisms and\nniceties.\n\nI can't think of one in English either; probably because any insinuation of\nthe sentiment \"get lost\" is universally obvious.\n\nBut depending on the situation, you might be able to get away with something\nlike:\n\n> ご心配なさらないでください。 (Please do not worry about me.)\n\nOr:\n\n> ほっといてください。 (Leave me be.)\n\nBeing the Canadian-raised cynic with juvenile tendencies that I am, I'd\nprobably say:\n\n> だったら何だっての？ (So what?)\n\nWhich in cleanest clothes might be:\n\n> だとしたらどうだというんですか？", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-04T08:37:21.480", "id": "1728", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-04T08:37:21.480", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "243", "parent_id": "1724", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 }, { "body": "Maybe a question that should become community wiki as there is no definite\nanswer.\n\nAll these expressions can show different levels of annoyance depending on your\ntone.\n\n**１－** 関係ない\n\n> あなたには関係がないでしょうが\n>\n> オメーにかんけぃねぇー\n\n**２－** せんさく\n\nIntrusive / nosy, same as above, you can play with different variations\n\n> せんさく。。。\n>\n> 人のことをせんさくするな\n>\n> よけいなせんさくはやめてくれ\n>\n> せんさく好きな人だな\n\n**３－** せっかい\n\n> あまりおせっかいしないで\n>\n> よけいなお節介だ\n\n**４－** 知る\n\n> お前の知ったことではない\n\n**５－** 首を突っ込む\n\n> 私のことに首を突っ込まないでくれ\n\n**６－** 聞く\n\n> そんなこと聞かれても困るよ\n\n**７－** Return the question\n\n> あんたはどうだ？", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-04T08:42:36.790", "id": "1729", "last_activity_date": "2017-06-26T09:30:03.753", "last_edit_date": "2017-06-26T09:30:03.753", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1724", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "> Less aggressive / forceful and more matter-of-factly way of saying \"What's\n> it to you?\", \"None of your business\"\n\nThere are several strategies for countering an invasion of your private\nmatters, as you can see from this conceptual diagram:\n\n```\n\n my idea of \"private matters\"\n ------------------> A\n me | you\n |<------------------- are invading it \n B\n \n```\n\n * (a) Declare that line B is inappropriate\n * (b) Plead the other person to back off from line B\n * (c) Indicate that you're uncomfortable with the divergence of line A and line B\n * (d) Make clear that line A is your last line\n\nあなたには関係ない and other variants (余計なお世話、筋合いはない、知ったことじゃない) all fall under strategy\n(a) and, more or less equal in terms of forcefulness.\n\nWhile (c) is the least aggressive and also very Japanese for being vague, (b)\nor (d) better meets the requirement of explicitly expressing the acceptable\nboundary of privacy. Examples:\n\n> 昨日薬局にいるのを見かけたんだけど、何買ってたの? I saw you in the chemist yesterday, what did you\n> buy? (from [wiktionary:what's it to\n> you](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/what%27s_it_to_you))\n>\n> (c) いや、ちょっとね...それよりさあ、 Well, you know...uh, anyway...\n>\n> (d) 秘密。 It's a secret.\n>\n> \\--\n>\n> サムと何を話してたんですか? What were you talking with Sam? (adapted from\n> [wiktionary:none of your\n> business](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/none_of_your_business))\n>\n> いや、 (d) こっちの話ですから、 (b) お気になさらず。 It's _our_ business, so please don't trouble\n> yourself.\n>\n> \\--\n>\n> どうも納得できません。 I'm still not convinced.\n>\n> (d) 私の問題ですから、 (b) もう何も言わないでください。 It's my own problem, so please don't say no\n> more.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-05T17:16:29.580", "id": "1757", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-05T17:16:29.580", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "128", "parent_id": "1724", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "I was just now idly browsing through saiga-jp.com and stumbled upon:\n\n```\n\n 大きなお世話だ（おおきなおせわだ） / This is none of your business., Never you mind.\n \n```", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-08-19T07:46:25.547", "id": "2748", "last_activity_date": "2011-08-19T07:46:25.547", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "627", "parent_id": "1724", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "```\n\n なぜ「あなたは」それを心配している？\n \n```\n\nSaying basically, \"why are you so worried about it?\"", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-29T19:55:29.263", "id": "15646", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-29T19:55:29.263", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "769", "parent_id": "1724", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "> こっちの{問題 / 話}です。かまわなくていい。\n\nThis translates basically into:\n\n> \"This is my {problem / issue}, you don't have to get involved.\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-04-30T04:25:25.657", "id": "15648", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-30T04:25:25.657", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5255", "parent_id": "1724", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "This would be a little on the polite side, as if it's an actual question as\nmuch as a warning-off:\n\nどうして気になりますか？", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2017-06-26T03:20:22.750", "id": "48751", "last_activity_date": "2017-06-26T03:20:22.750", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "22711", "parent_id": "1724", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1731", "answer_count": 2, "body": "I was wondering what is the difference in the nuances / usage of 気に病む and 心配する\n?\n\n(E.g. If I want to tell my friend not to worry about a test (albeit an\nimportant test), is it more appropriate to use 気に病むな or 心配するな ?)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-04T09:42:24.713", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1730", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-04T13:21:59.367", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "264", "post_type": "question", "score": 9, "tags": [ "usage", "vocabulary", "nuances", "words", "synonyms" ], "title": "what is the difference in the nuances / usage of 気に病む and 心配する ?", "view_count": 319 }

[ { "body": "It's simply a difference of image just like \"Don't worry\" and \"don't make\nyourself sick over it\"\n\nIt depends on the level of anxiety of your friend (気に病むな being stronger)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-04T10:23:32.583", "id": "1731", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-04T10:23:32.583", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1730", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "心配しないでね is the common saying, trying to get them from not worrying about it. I\ndont recall anyone ever saying 気に病まないで to me.\n\nI would avoid using 心配するな because it is the command to \"Dont worry!\" as in\n\"Dont touch or ill call the teacher!\" kinda thing.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-04T13:21:59.367", "id": "1734", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-04T13:21:59.367", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "276", "parent_id": "1730", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1739", "answer_count": 2, "body": "How are the following verbs which are related to learning different to each\nother?\n\n * 勉強する\n * 習う\n * 学ぶ", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-04T11:10:40.283", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1732", "last_activity_date": "2021-09-01T00:37:16.913", "last_edit_date": "2018-05-04T23:10:18.820", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "112", "post_type": "question", "score": 19, "tags": [ "word-choice", "verbs", "wago-and-kango" ], "title": "The verbs of learning: 勉強する, 習う and 学ぶ", "view_count": 10522 }

[ { "body": "勉強する is 'study' and is usually applied to school/literature.\n\n習う is 'learn' and is usually applied to things like learning instruments or\nskills.\n\n学ぶ carries a more 'in depth' meaning to it, and is usually applied to things\nlike a vocation or 'years of study in XYZ'.\n\n勉強する is the most common and is fairly good at being used in place of the\nothers.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-04T14:39:18.020", "id": "1738", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-04T14:39:18.020", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "459", "parent_id": "1732", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "**学ぶ**\n\nThe original character is: 學\n\nMeaning 2 hands writing characters and teaching a child\n\n学ぶ is to imitate (or assimilate and repeat) what the teacher says. Study a\nsubject from a teacher.\n\nMost meaningful examples:\n\n> 私たちは学ぶために学校に行く (We go to school to learn.)\n>\n> 私は日本語を学びはじめてから４０年になる (It is forty years since I began the study of\n> Japanese.)\n>\n> 英語を学び始めた (I started to learn English)\n\n**習う**\n\nThis character is composed of 羽 (wings) and 白 (clear/understand)\n\nIt shows how to learn by repeated practice like a small bird learning to fly.\n\nMost meaningful examples:\n\n> バイクの乗り方を習う (learning to ride a bike)\n>\n> 車の運転を習っていない (I haven't learned to drive - I can't drive)\n>\n> 書道を習うのは楽しい (Learning calligraphy is fun.)\n\n**勉強する**\n\n勉 = make an effort \n強 = powerful\n\nIt came to be used for \"to study\" but outside the class. Nobody teaches you,\nyou \"force\" yourself to study something, do your homework, assimilate a\nlesson...etc.\n\nMost meaningful examples:\n\n> 先生は私にもっと勉強するようにと言った (The teacher told me to study harder.)\n>\n> これからもっと勉強します (I'll study harder in future)\n\n_Examples taken from EDICT and organized for this answer in the correct\ncategories._", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-04T14:40:36.157", "id": "1739", "last_activity_date": "2021-09-01T00:37:16.913", "last_edit_date": "2021-09-01T00:37:16.913", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1732", "post_type": "answer", "score": 19 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1759", "answer_count": 6, "body": "What is the difference between the two kanji variants for 「けいさんき」, the other\nword for 「コンピューター」?\n\n * 計算器\n * 計算機", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-04T13:06:23.300", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1733", "last_activity_date": "2012-08-06T22:26:11.150", "last_edit_date": "2012-08-06T22:26:11.150", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "112", "post_type": "question", "score": 11, "tags": [ "kanji", "homophonic-kanji" ], "title": "Computer: 計算機 or 計算器?", "view_count": 1932 }

[ { "body": "機 usually refers to a somewhat large(-scale) \"machine\" (機械), while 器 usually\nrefers to a small(-scale) \"tool\" (器具). So I think the latter would be closer\nto a computer (back when they were huge, beastly machines) and the former\nwould be closer to a calculator (電卓). But the 機 or 器 definitely implies scale.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-04T13:58:03.000", "id": "1736", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-04T13:58:03.000", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "1733", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "Japanese Law related to computers use as\n[電子計算機](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%B3%E3%83%B3%E3%83%94%E3%83%A5%E3%83%BC%E3%82%BF#.E8.A1.A8.E8.A8.98)【でんしけいさんき】", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-04T15:14:42.210", "id": "1740", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-04T15:14:42.210", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "100", "parent_id": "1733", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "`計算機` means `computer`, while `計算器` means `calculator`.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-04T15:17:19.413", "id": "1741", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-04T15:17:19.413", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "464", "parent_id": "1733", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "The rough difference (with possible exceptions) are as follows:\n\n```\n\n `器` mechanical, has direct contact with human, not motored, often human powered, handy\n `機` not necessarily mechanical, large, motored\n \n```\n\nNowadays, most computers are electronically driven, with no mechanical parts\nplaying a crucial role (fans, disks are not used for computing). In addition,\nit is electrically powered, (E.g., without necessity for a human turning a\ncrank). So to mention the present computers, `機` is appropriate. If you want\nto mention a physically driven human powered calculator/computer, like\nPascal's calculator, then `器` is appropriate.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-04T15:19:51.637", "id": "1742", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-04T15:26:29.757", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-04T15:26:29.757", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1733", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "For what it is worth, パソコン and コンピュータ are also very valid words for computer,\nused in IT and CS contexts. I don't think we use 計算機 except to express the\nwording \"a machine that does computations\".\n\nEdit: I just asked around me: 計算機 is a technical word. You will be understood\nby specialists (like computer scientists, who were likely to be the only ones\nto have access to computers initially when the word was coined), but the\naverage person will think of a pocket calculator instead. パソコン、 コンピュータ、 PC、and\nマック are used by the non specialists.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-05T02:11:31.827", "id": "1749", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-05T08:44:57.203", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-05T08:44:57.203", "last_editor_user_id": "356", "owner_user_id": "356", "parent_id": "1733", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "計算機 usually means a calculator, although it can also mean a computer in\nacademic contexts and legal contexts as YOU, Axioplase, and Rei stated. For\nexample, the [Information Processing Society of\nJapan](http://www.ipsj.or.jp/english/index.html) has a special interest group\ncalled [計算機アーキテクチャ研究会](http://sigarc.hpcc.jp/) (the Special Interest Group for\nComputer Architecture). The usual word for a computer is コンピューター or パソコン (for\nパーソナルコンピューター (personal computer)), as Axioplase and Rei noted.\n\nThe notation 計算器 is rare. According to web search, the notation 計算器 seems to\nmean either:\n\n * a [slide rule](http://www.concise.co.jp/products/rule/generalrule.html#08), although 計算尺 (けいさんじゃく) seems to be a more common word for a slide rule, or\n * a [mechanical calculator](http://www.tiger-inc.co.jp/temawashi/temawashi.html) (as sawa observed), although 計算機 is also valid for a mechanical calculator.\n\nI think that in general, using 器 instead of 機 implies simplicity, which\nsometimes refers to mechanical nature but not always. As an evidence that 器\ndoes not always mean a mechanical construction, the Japanese word for an\n[adder](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adder_%28electronics%29), an electronic\ncircuit for addition, is usually written as\n[加算器](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8A%A0%E7%AE%97%E5%99%A8), although the\nnotation 加算機 is also sometimes used.\n\n_Edit in revision 2_ : Added that 計算器 can mean a slide rule.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-05T21:16:15.017", "id": "1759", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-07T16:57:40.480", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-07T16:57:40.480", "last_editor_user_id": "15", "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "1733", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1737", "answer_count": 1, "body": "Do Japanese writers use underline to emphasize a point, or other techniques?\nWikipedia mentions the use of katakana in its article on\n[Emphasis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emphasis_%28typography%29) and in its\narticle on [Katakana](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katakana#Usage), but I'm\nnot sure whether it's appropriate.\n\n**Background:** I’m incorporating [XKCD 386](https://xkcd.com/386/) (with the\ntext modified) into a talk given in English with Japanese subtitles. I'm doing\nthe cartoons side by side, and I'm wondering what the equivalent of\nunderlining \"wrong\" in a western cartoon would be.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-04T13:43:14.620", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1735", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-19T17:35:22.207", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-19T17:35:22.207", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "91", "post_type": "question", "score": 29, "tags": [ "orthography", "publishing" ], "title": "Do Japanese writers use underline for emphasis?", "view_count": 4726 }

[ { "body": "The Japanese equivalent of underlining for emphasis would probably be using\n[傍点【ぼうてん】](http://www.unicode.org/cgi-bin/GetUnihanData.pl?codepoint=2022) or\n[脇点【わきてん】](http://www.unicode.org/cgi-bin/GetUnihanData.pl?codepoint=25E6):\n\nDots added over (if writing horizontally) or to the right (if vertically) of\neach character.\n\nWikipedia Japan has a [page detailing their\nuse](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%9C%8F%E7%82%B9#.E6.AD.B4.E5.8F.B2), as\nwell as their variants:\n\n> 文字種としては、縦書きの場合は主に黒ゴマあるいは白ゴマが使用され、横書きの場合はビュレット（黒丸および白丸）が使用される。\n> 上記以外にも二重丸や蛇の目などが使用されることもある。 傍点はゴマ、圏点は丸と区別することもあるが、区別しない場合も多い。\n\nIn substance:\n\n> If writing vertically, people mainly use the \"black sesame (goma)\":﹅ or\n> \"white sesame\":﹆.\n>\n> If writing horizontally, the round black (●) or white (○) dots are\n> preferred.\n>\n> The \"good work\" double-circle (◎) and bull's eye circle (◉) are also used.\n>\n> While some people differentiate between \"sesame\" ( _goma_ ) and round signs,\n> many people don't and use them indifferently.\n\n(there are a couple other particular cases, such as when reporting an erratum,\nbut I don't think you are particularly interested).\n\nTo conclude, you probably want to use the simple round black marker, like such\n(with slightly less distance between the lines, typically where the furigana\nwould be):\n\n```\n\n ・・\n よく聞いてくれ\n \n```\n\n> Listen _really_ well", "comment_count": 11, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-04T13:59:09.070", "id": "1737", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-05T01:19:43.933", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "290", "parent_id": "1735", "post_type": "answer", "score": 32 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1745", "answer_count": 3, "body": "This is probably a bit of a silly question, but what do you say in Japanese\nwhen you're asking for the bill in a restaurant? Or is it unusual to say\nanything at all?\n\nWhen I was in Japan I could never really catch any particular phrases and when\nI was at Kaitenzushi places I just stood up until the staff noticed I was\nready to leave and then they counted my plates.\n\nWould it be something to the effect of 付けをください? Or is it like in America where\nyou usually don't really ask for the bill but just wait for it to come?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-04T16:56:49.570", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1743", "last_activity_date": "2023-02-25T11:44:48.863", "last_edit_date": "2015-06-30T14:55:37.143", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "433", "post_type": "question", "score": 17, "tags": [ "word-choice", "words", "set-phrases", "phrase-requests" ], "title": "How do you ask for \"the bill\" at a restaurant?", "view_count": 14852 }

[ { "body": "I got by pretty well with お勘定ください (かんじょう), お勘定を and お勘定をお願いします. Looking around\nthough perhaps I was supposed to say お勘定してください, because 勘定's definition is to\ncalculate.\n\nAn American friend told me that I could also cross my two index fingers if I\ndidn't feel like yelling すみまーせん！ to get attention. I never tried this though.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-04T17:16:24.797", "id": "1744", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-04T17:16:24.797", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "54", "parent_id": "1743", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "Beside 勘定 (or 勘定書) mentioned by Louis, お会計【かいけい】 is also a very common way to\nrefer to the bill:\n\n> お会計をください\n>\n> お会計お願いします\n\nI believe 会計 has a more general nuance than 勘定 (\"bill\", rather than \"check\"),\nmeaning it can be used in some instances where 勘定 would not fit. For\nrestaurants, they are essentially interchangeable.\n\nThe gesture described by Louis (making a × sign with your index fingers) is\nindeed a universal Japanese gesture to indicate you are done: while it is not\nparticularly rude, you should probably still avoid it in a very fancy place\n(and doing it appropriately might require a bit of practice, so I'd recommend\nholding off on it until you've seen it done a few times).\n\nNote that all of the above will not always get you the check (at your table),\nsince the vast majority of restaurants expect you to pay at a counter by the\ndoor and many will ring your total there. It can however indicate that you\nwill be paying and signal the waiter to prepare your check.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-04T17:44:12.880", "id": "1745", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-25T19:47:57.787", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "290", "parent_id": "1743", "post_type": "answer", "score": 16 }, { "body": "Aside from @Louis' and @Dave's answers, another one commonly used is お愛想\n{あい・そ(う)}. Again, for politeness, it's usually\n\n> お愛想、お願いします！\n\nThis is often heard in sushi restaurants. Actually, I've heard it's limited to\nbeing used _only_ in sushi restaurants, but I don't know how much truth there\nis to that. But if you throw that in at a sushi place, you might receive some\nimpressed looks by the locals.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-04T18:04:12.410", "id": "1746", "last_activity_date": "2015-05-25T02:16:35.880", "last_edit_date": "2015-05-25T02:16:35.880", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "1743", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1891", "answer_count": 3, "body": "I've seen several translations of the following song lyrics from Lady Gaga's\n\"Edge of Glory\" online, and none of them look quite right.\n\n```\n\n I'm on the edge, the edge, \n the edge, the edge, \n the edge, the edge, \n the edge,\n I'm on the edge of glory, \n and I'm hanging on a moment with you \n I'm on the edge with you. \n \n```\n\nHere's an example\n\n```\n\n 果てに私が果てに\n 果てに、果てに\n 果てに、果てに\n 果てに\n 栄光の果てに私がいるの\n あなたといる瞬間にしがみついてる\n 果てにあなたと私が一緒にいるの\n \n```\n\nAfter thinking about it, I realized that different Japanese words for words\nfor \"edge\" have implications that don't exist in English.\n\nI think that 果て with regards to \"glory\", implies that glory has already been\nachieved. The above translation would be wrong then, since \"edge of glory\"\nmeans the same thing as \"about to achieve glory.\"\n\nAre my observations correct? What is the correct Japanese word for \"edge\" in\nthis case?", "comment_count": 10, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-04T23:47:59.490", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1748", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-14T18:28:49.790", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-06T10:46:11.293", "last_editor_user_id": "69", "owner_user_id": "69", "post_type": "question", "score": 2, "tags": [ "translation", "song-lyrics" ], "title": "How to translate \"edge\" into Japanese", "view_count": 1402 }

[ { "body": "What is \"the edge of glory\" ?\n\nThe edge seems like a cliff since she's saying later \"I'm hanging\". So she's\n_hanging_ between \"glory\" and \"a person\". She's keeping a theme here. Edge,\nhanging, a moment, falling.\n\nNow in a translation you need to think whether you want to keep images+meaning\nor only the meaning. (for songs you should probably go for the images)\n\nSo if you'd like to make a translation as close as possible you would use:\n崖っぷち(に立っている) or 端 (はし)\n\nIn the other translation that you deleted I saw: もう少しで\n\nIt looks like a good translation of the meaning. (though losing the 'hanging,\nfalling' kind of feeling)\n\nThe problem with \"edge\" is we don't know if she's going to fall **from**\n'glory' (in which case 果て is good) or fall **into** 'glory'.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-06T15:09:21.933", "id": "1769", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-06T15:09:21.933", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1748", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "After investigating this, it appears that the \"glory\" referenced by Lady Gaga\nin this song is referring to \"death,\" and was written shortly after her\nuncle's death.\n\nTaking this information into consideration, I agree that 果て -- which seems to\nhave an implication of the _far_ edge, rather than the nearest -- isn't the\nright word for it. In reality, a 1:1 translation (especially of poetry and\nlyrics) isn't often possible, which appears to be true in this case as well.\n\nFor this reason song translations (for the purpose of being sung) often resort\nto changing the meaning of the song -- or at least its form. In this case, 果て\nmay be acceptable; while it doesn't match the original meaning as well, it may\nmatch the music better than alternatives.\n\nTranslations which aim to preserve the _meaning_ of the song are very rarely\n\"singable\". In this case, a better translation would be もう少しで as suggested by\n@repecmps, or simply 近い.\n\nTo summarize the answer to your questions: **yes** , your observations appear\nto be correct: 果て does not match the meaning of \"edge\" in this case. However,\nwhat word _does match it_ is very subjective and can vary greatly depending on\nwhat type of translation you are performing. The closest 1:1 translations of\nthis \"edge\" are probably 詰め【づめ】 or 境【さかい】 -- but I would probably go for a\ndifferent metaphor, personally.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-13T01:48:51.147", "id": "1891", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-13T01:48:51.147", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "384", "parent_id": "1748", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "One way of translating is to employ several expressions to convey the meaning\nof \"edge\", when you can't find a word-for-word solution. Here's my attempt at\nit:\n\n```\n\n もう すぐそこまできてる It's almost there,\n あと一歩、あと一歩、 only a step away,\n あと一歩、あと一歩、 a step, a step,\n あと一歩、 a step,\n もう 光輝きはじめてる I'm already seeing the shining light\n 君といる この一瞬にすがりながら I'm with you, hanging on to this moment\n 君といる この境目に。 I'm with you, at the edge.\n \n```\n\n * 一歩 (いっぽ) \"a step\" - sometimes used to express the smallest action or difference in state towards something, as in \"step by step\".\n * 境目 (さかいめ) \"borderline\" - can be physical or abstract, as in \"国の境目が生死の境目であってはならない\" (National borders shall not be the line between life and death).\n\n(I confess I didn't even try to make it singable =)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-14T18:28:49.790", "id": "1936", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-14T18:28:49.790", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "128", "parent_id": "1748", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1794", "answer_count": 4, "body": "In two conjunctions 「ところで」 and 「ところが」 that mean \"by the way / incidentally\"\nand \"however / nevertheless\" respectively, what is the significance of the\nword 「ところ」?\n\nHow does ところ + で give the nuance of \"this is an extra information\", while ところ\n+ が give the nuance of \"this is contrary to the fact\"?\n\nWhat is the place referred by ところ in both conjunctions?", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-05T10:03:17.620", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1751", "last_activity_date": "2018-01-20T12:02:34.513", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-05T16:22:59.627", "last_editor_user_id": "112", "owner_user_id": "112", "post_type": "question", "score": 9, "tags": [ "set-phrases", "conjunctions" ], "title": "Significance of ところ in set phrases ところで and ところが", "view_count": 1620 }

[ { "body": "Just like in English, 'here' and 'place' don't always mean a physical location\nin Japanese. Sometimes they mean the current situation, etc.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-05T10:38:58.033", "id": "1753", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-05T10:38:58.033", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "393", "parent_id": "1751", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "`所` in these usages are originally a formal noun modified by a relative\nclause, which happens to be omitted. `所` itself does not have much meaning,\njust like the English words `situation`, `state`. Similar usages of `所` were\npopular in word-by-word translation of European languages after the Meiji\nRestoration:\n\n```\n\n ... ところのもの\n \n```\n\nIn present day Japanese, the expressions have become fixed, and have become\none conjunction. Hence it is not appropriate to write them using kanji any\nmore. It is officially stated by the Japanese government that functional words\n(particles, conjunctions, case markers, etc.), as opposed to lexical words\n(nouns, verbs, adjectcives, adverbs, etc.), should be written solely in\nhiragana.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-05T15:50:21.580", "id": "1756", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-05T15:50:21.580", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1751", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "As others have stated, the reasons why there's a ところ in ところが and ところで are\nentirely historical. It probably had a more literal meaning in the past, but\nnow its became part of a frozen expression, where the lexical value (the\nmeaning) is assigned to the entire expression, and its parts don't matter much\nanymore. The situation here is really no different than \"by the way\" which\nDave gave out as an example.\n\nBut if you do want to delve into the historical explanation (and I guess you\ndo), it's probably something along these lines: ところ has already gotten a\ngeneric meaning by the time of the earliest written Japanese, and when it was\nused with a particle, these meanings combined into something new.\n\nNow I'll try to give more specific details for each expression. Note that\neverything here is my theorizing, mostly based on what I've found in my Kokugo\ndictionaries (especially Kōjien, which lists the senses for each entry in\ntheir historical order, and attempts to provide the earliest examples for each\nsense).\n\n## ところが\n\nThis is one seems easier to explain on the surface level: it's just ところ in its\ngeneric meaning, referring to what was previously said, and then we have the\nconjunctive particle が, which may be used in the meaning of the English \"but\".\nThere truth is probably quite more complex, however.\n\nIt seems like ～ところが was originally used only after full clauses, especially\nverbs conjugated in the past form (～したところが). The meaning of が here was not\nonly contrastive (\"but\") - it could equally be used as a connective (\"and\"),\njust like が is used today in both capacity. This whole expression translated\nmore or less to: \"did ~ and\" or \"did ~ but\". The more literal meaning was\nsomething like \"this is the point that X was done. And/but then ...\". But this\nis quite a cumbersome translation of a very faint shade of meaning that\neventually faded away. :)\n\n## ところで\n\nSince ところ with a verb in the past tense already has the grammatical meaning of\n\"the point when the action is completed\", ところで may have been used first in the\nmeaning of \"with that having been done, ...\", and Kōjien indeed list this\nusage. Eventually, this usage was specialized to mean \"with that having been\nsaid, let's move to something else\".", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-07T17:12:55.223", "id": "1794", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-07T17:12:55.223", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "153", "parent_id": "1751", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "On my Japanese book I wrote that **ところが** is like しかし、けれども and でも。\n\nI think that ところが is used to introduce **surprise**. For example, we though it\nwill happen A and then it happen B. So, we didn't expect that something would\nhappen (but it happened!). I know that my English is terrible, so I tried to\nexplain the meaning of ところが with an example:\n\n 1. 私は父が留学に反対すると思った。 **ところが** 、簡単に許してくれたので、驚いた。\n\nI thought my father would have been against my decision to study abroad.\n**Anyway** , I was surprised that he decided to let me go.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2018-01-20T12:02:34.513", "id": "56068", "last_activity_date": "2018-01-20T12:02:34.513", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "27329", "parent_id": "1751", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1762", "answer_count": 1, "body": "I saw an colleague's email asking for a few days of vacation, and I was\nsurprised by the ultra-polite level. This colleague is usually on relatively\ncasual terms with the boss, so it was quite unexpected. Selected extracts:\n\n```\n\n 以下の日程で有給休暇を取得したく申請いたします。\n PMのXXXさんに許可をいただいております。\n 以上、よろしくお願いいたします。\n \n```\n\nIs it usual for Japanese people to add an extra level of politeness when\nasking for holidays?\n\nI feel I will sound hypocrite if I do the same.\n\n_Japanese company, I am the only foreigner._", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-05T10:32:18.093", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1752", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-06T01:55:57.893", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "107", "post_type": "question", "score": 9, "tags": [ "politeness", "business-japanese" ], "title": "When asking for holidays, should I be more polite than usual?", "view_count": 4327 }

[ { "body": "Asking for anything in Japanese requires you to consider two things:\n\n```\n\n 1. Relationship to the listener\n 2. Nature of the subject matter\n \n```\n\nThe Japanese concept of 迷惑 (meiwaku) as mentioned above by @MarkHosang is a\nconstant theme in Japanese communication. When the train is late by one minute\nor neighbors don't separate their trash, this concept of 'causing trouble to\nothers' comes up.\n\n**Manners When Taking Leave - 休暇を取るときのマナー**\n\nI found this interesting yet brief outline of \"[the correct] manner when\ntaking leave.\" <http://www.tisyk.com/cat0201/037/>\n\nBasically the page mentions a 休暇届け (きゅうかとどけ) or Leave Request Form. Still used\nin some old fashioned companies, and perhaps outmoded by email, it is a formal\nrequest to your 上司 (じょうし) or boss to \"consider across the entirety of the\nworkplace [the effect of your leave] on the progress of work\".\n\nThe site suggests preparing for your leave by getting your work in order and\npassing responsibilities to colleagues in advance of your absence, as well as\nnotifying suppliers/vendor companies of your absence.\n\nBasically nothing you wouldn't do in a non-Japanese company, but like most\nthings Japanese, the importance placed on these actions is higher than in most\nother countries.\n\n**The Usually Casual Staff Member**\n\nAs you might guess from seeing this website, most Japanese people feel like\nthey're burdening their colleagues when taking leave, and so are causing them\n**迷惑**. Even if you don't particularly care, you know that it's costing you\nbrownie points!\n\nIn the case of your fellow employee who is usually very casual, might it be\nfair to extrapolate and say s/he is casual AND less careful with how much\n**迷惑** s/he causes to other staff members? I don't know.\n\nBut if this is the case, then perhaps s/he's being \"extra sweet\" in asking\nbecause s/he is trying to smooth it over. The most まじめ (majime) or serious\nworkers aren't always polite, but it often goes hand in hand.\n\n_SIDE NOTE:_ Although most Japanese companies give 2 weeks of summer holidays\nper annum, actually taking holidays is at the company's discretion. Friends of\nmine have had leave requests turned down, even when it meant they didn't get\nto take the bulk of their leave days. That's reason why it's often nicer to\nwork in 外資系 (gaishikei) or foreign owned companies in Japan: because they\nusually DO let you take all your leave days.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-06T01:42:50.747", "id": "1762", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-06T01:55:57.893", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-06T01:55:57.893", "last_editor_user_id": "168", "owner_user_id": "168", "parent_id": "1752", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1795", "answer_count": 5, "body": "How do we tell whether 2 hiragana should fit in 1 \"mora\" or 2?\n\nFor example, why is it that [四季](http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jwb/cgi-\nbin/wwwjdic.cgi?1MUE%E5%9B%9B%E5%AD%A3) and\n[士気](http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jwb/cgi-\nbin/wwwjdic.cgi?1MUE%E5%A3%AB%E6%B0%97) are pronounced as \"Shiki\" 1 mora,\nwhereas [式](http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jwb/cgi-\nbin/wwwjdic.cgi?1MUE%E5%BC%8F) and\n[指揮](http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jwb/cgi-\nbin/wwwjdic.cgi?1MUE%E6%8C%87%E6%8F%AE) are pronounced as \"Shi Ki\" 2 morae?\n**N.B.** _Links bring to a dictionary_.\n\nWhat I meant is that according to the audio files I've linked to in the\nquestion, there is a significant difference in the \"gap\" between the two\nhiragana.\n\nWhy is it that although 式 and 四季 have the same hiragana (しき), 式 has both the\nclear sounds of \"shi\" and \"ki\" (2 distinct \"sounds\") whereas in 四季 the し and き\nare slurred to form a single \"sound\" ?", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-05T14:26:28.120", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1754", "last_activity_date": "2014-07-10T14:23:34.693", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-25T10:57:50.500", "last_editor_user_id": "125", "owner_user_id": "264", "post_type": "question", "score": 5, "tags": [ "pronunciation", "morae" ], "title": "How do we tell whether two hiragana should fit in one mora or two?", "view_count": 1517 }

[ { "body": "I think that's still 2 mora. The only time multiple kana will be a single mora\nis when the second one is smaller, like しゃ (sha) and きょ (kyo).\n\nI think your real questions is about the difference in stresses, and I think\nyou just have to learn by experience for that.\n\nThe little つ is an exception to this 'rule', as sawa pointed out below. (I\nwasn't aware of this.)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-05T15:13:55.847", "id": "1755", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-05T16:31:05.000", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-05T16:31:05.000", "last_editor_user_id": "393", "owner_user_id": "393", "parent_id": "1754", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "I think you are confusing the morae count with syllables with silenced vowel.\nIn spoken Japanese, there are some syllables, for example く し す etc, that are\npronounced with silent vowel in some particular conditions. For example, in\nはじめまして the し is pronounced as 'sh' with the 'i' silenced, as in \"ha-ji-me-ma-\nsh-te\".\n\nOn top of that, there is also pitch accent. Different words that are formed by\nthe exact same syllable sequences may be pronounced with different pitch\naccent; the famous example being はし for chopsticks vs bridge.\n\nThis is purely my hypothesis, but I think pitch accent is one of the\nconditions for the silenced vowel syllables to be silenced. Here is sort of\nprove: open [this particular\nwebsite](http://sp.cis.iwate-u.ac.jp/sp/lesson/j/doc/accentl.html). Plug in\nyour headphones. Then try comparing three accents for はしが (edge, chopstick and\nbridge). You'll notice that the し for chopstick is vowel-silenced (\"ha-sh-\nga\"). Now trace through that second column and try listening to あきが (autumn)\nand かきが (oyster), and compare them with their other accents. You'll notice\nthat the き in 'autumn' and 'oyster' is also vowel-silenced. So I think that\npitch accent does influence whether the vowel is silenced or not.\n\nBack to your しき, here are the pitch accents that I hear:\n\n> 四季 : LL : sh-ki \n> 士気 : LL : sh-ki \n> 式 : HL : shi-ki \n> 指揮 : HL : shi-ki", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-07T04:46:09.403", "id": "1787", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-07T04:46:09.403", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "112", "parent_id": "1754", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "You seem to be confusing morae and syllables. Syllables are units that have a\nnucleus which is typically either a vowel (which may be both a\n[monophthong](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monophthong) or a\n[diphthong](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diphtong)) or a\n[sonorant](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonorant), such as /l/, /m/, /n/ or\n/r/. The English words \"ski\" [ski:] and \"sick\" [sɪk] have just one syllable,\nwhile the word button [bʌ·tn] has two, with \"n\" being the nucleus of the\nsecond syllable.\n\nIt's important to note that syllables may vary greatly in length, depending on\nhow many consonant they have, whether they are stressed, whether they have a\ndiphthong or a monophthong and whether they have a long, short or elided\nvowel. The second syllable in \"button\" ([tn]), for instance, is very short\nsince it is unstressed and it doesn't have any vowel at all, but rather the\nsonorant \"n\" that isn't really pronounced for a long time in English (in other\nlanguages it may behave differently). Syllables with diphthongs or long\nvowels, on the other hand are quite longer (this difference is more pronounced\nin some English accents than in other).\n\nMorae, on the other hand, are quite different from syllable. These are\nrhythmical units of (relatively) fixed length, and they only count time - not\nthe existence or absence of a nucleus and not even the existence of sound (the\nJapanese _small tsu_ , っ, may count as a mora even in the cases where it ends\nup being just a silent pause). You can imagine a mora as the beat of an\ninaudible metronome that goes inside the speaker's head and represents the\ntempo of his or her speech: when you speak very fast, a single mora may take\nas little as a tenth of a second, and when you dictate something in an\nexaggerated manner it can take as much as two seconds.\n\nSince mora is entirely a unit of length and not a standard structure for how\nphonemes may be joined together, you can see that long vowels and geminated\n(doubled) consonants take two morae, and the consonant 'n', when it comes\nwithout a vowel, takes a whole mora for itself. This means that even when\nthere's a muted vowel (such as the /i/ in 士気), the consonant still takes an\nentire mora on its own. I believe that if you'd count the length of the audio\nsamples on WWWJDIC you'll notice that they actually have roughly the same\nlength (despite some of them having a muted vowel and some of them not).\n\nWhat confused you, of course, was interpreting the Japanese examples as the\nEnglish syllables you've heard and trying to count morae according that. But\njust as the concept of mora is not really useful for understanding when\napplied to English (at least when it is not sung or solemnly recited), the\nconcept of syllable is quite alien to Japanese. You can divide Japanese to\nsyllables if you want, but then you'd be dividing it by English (or German or\nChinese or whatever) standards. Japanese phonology per se (and I'm not talking\nabout unprovable universal phonology models here) has no internal concept of a\nsyllable. Only the morae count.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-07T18:01:00.300", "id": "1795", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-07T18:01:00.300", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "153", "parent_id": "1754", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "First, you probably misunderstood the meaning of \"mora\". Morae are essentially\nsyllables, except that ん and double consonants also constitute morae.\n\nSecond, I think you were mislead by the different pronunciations on the\nwebsite. They should sound exactly the same -- or, to be precise, all the\npronunciations you hear can represent all of the words you mention.\n\nPitch is not an issue here as all these words have the same pitch, namely HL.\n(You can confirm the pitch in the [dictionary page for\nしき](http://dic.search.yahoo.co.jp///dsearch?p=%E3%81%97%E3%81%8D&stype=prefix&dic_id=ss_dic_jj&oq=&ei=UTF-8&xargs=0&pstart=1&b=1%29).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-10-21T18:24:19.830", "id": "3527", "last_activity_date": "2011-10-21T20:38:55.360", "last_edit_date": "2011-10-21T20:38:55.360", "last_editor_user_id": "37", "owner_user_id": "801", "parent_id": "1754", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "The recordings for the words you linked were made at different times. They are\nnot different for phonological reasons, but simply because they were made\nseparately -- in other words, they are interchangeable, and there is no\ndistinctive feature that you are missing out on.\n\nTest it out on a native speaker and see if they can correctly and consistently\nidentify the 3 different recordings as the header words. They won't.\n\nOtherwise, as others have pointed out, both words (or realizations) are 2\nmorae (or syllables). The fact that the first vowel is more or less voiceless\nis irrelevant. Pitch is also the same in the recordings and is irrelevant\nhere.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-07-10T14:23:34.693", "id": "17755", "last_activity_date": "2014-07-10T14:23:34.693", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "801", "parent_id": "1754", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1761", "answer_count": 1, "body": "I always read 降る as ふる but for a particular sentence I noticed that the\nreading was written as くだる. Are there any tips to help figure out which\nreading to use?\n\n~~Examples: \n\n> たとえ雨が降ろうとサイクリングにいくぞ。 \n> I will go cycling even if it rains. [M] \n> \n> 目が覚めてみると、雪が降っていた。 \n> I awoke to find it snowing.\n\nI'm not sure if this is user-error. When I click on listen, the woman reads it\nusing ふる, but the software wants me to use くだる. Maybe I should change the\nquestion to ask what I should say in my bug report? ☺~~", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-05T22:34:30.503", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1760", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-08T21:37:49.063", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-06T00:09:38.410", "last_editor_user_id": "54", "owner_user_id": "54", "post_type": "question", "score": 7, "tags": [ "readings" ], "title": "How to choose a reading for 降る? ふる & くだる", "view_count": 361 }

[ { "body": "広辞苑 lists both 【下】and【降】in the entry for 【くだる】. It says that【降】is often used\nwhen くだる means \"going/coming down from a high place to a lower place all at\nonce (as opposed to a gradual descent)\" or when it means like \"surrendering to\nan enemy\" (降参).\n\nSince the former definition is quite a common occurrence, you might see the\n【降】 in written and/or a more 改まった context.\n\nHere is a Bible verse demonstrating the former. As I posted in the comment to\nthe OP, I was a little concerned about posting this, but feel it is directly\ngrammatically related to the question.\n\n> 「イエスは洗礼を受けると、すぐ水の中から上がられた。そのとき、天がイエスに向かって開いた。イエスは、神の霊が鳩【はと】のように御自分の上に\n> **降って** 来るのを御覧になった。」 マタイによる福音書 3:16", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-06T00:55:22.050", "id": "1761", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-08T21:37:49.063", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-08T21:37:49.063", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "1760", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 2, "body": "Let's have some fun with particles! Create a sentence using as many particles\nas you can. Rules:\n\n 1. The sentence can combine any number of clauses or ideas but it must be meaningful (i.e. no gibberish) and should be using standard Japanese (i.e. no slang).\n 2. Each entry will be given a score based on how many unique usages of particles; 1 point per particle. No point is given to repeated particles unless they are used for different roles, for example using one から for denoting reason and another for denoting origin of movement give 2 points. Please count the score and include it in your entry (also recommended if you can bold/highlight the particles that you count).\n 3. Compound particles (では, でも, のに etc) are considered different particles from their atomic particles as long as their roles are clearly distinct from the latter. A counter-example would be something like \"X からの Y\" where the からの is simply から + の particles.\n 4. Sentences that simply list down all the particles do not qualify as \"meaningful\".\n 5. One entry per answer, please.\n\nNB: Dear moderators, please make this into CW. On whether this kind of\nquestion is allowable or not, please discuss in [this meta\ndiscussion](https://japanese.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/373/should-for-\nfun-game-trivia-questions-be-allowed). To all, let's refrain from voting\nup/down in here until this becomes CW, just to not disturb the rep points ;)", "comment_count": 12, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-06T03:48:54.837", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1763", "last_activity_date": "2011-12-27T17:13:06.180", "last_edit_date": "2017-03-16T15:48:25.793", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "112", "post_type": "question", "score": 5, "tags": [ "particles", "puns" ], "title": "Fun with particles - making a sentence that uses as many as 'em", "view_count": 888 }

[ { "body": "\"「よ、ね、な、で、に、へ、が、は、と、から、の、では、でも、のに、ので」は助詞です。\" That could be even longer, but\nyou get the point that it's going to be difficult to beat the concept :)", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-06T04:45:45.053", "id": "1764", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-06T04:45:45.053", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "356", "parent_id": "1763", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "**25**\n\n(Some repeated particles have different roles.)\n\nI added some unnecessary 「、」 to make the sentence a little more readable.\n\n> 猫 **や** 犬 **などと** 言う **のは** 「ペット」と英語 **で** 呼ばれる **けど** 、僕 **の** 家 **に**\n> はそんな動物 **が** いない **ので** 、 **なんか** 寂しい感じがする **が** 、お父さんは僕 **に** 「毎日家 **から**\n> 出て、学校 **へ** 行く **なら** 、友達 **と** 遊べることができる **のさ** 」と言われて、キャンディー **を** もらう\n> **と** 、すぐ嬉しくなる **わよね** 。\n\nや, など, と, の, は, で, けど, の, に, が, ので, なんか, が, に, から, へ, なら, と, の、 さ, を, と, わ, よ,\nね\n\nObviously this can be longer but my imagination is limited.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-07T04:42:15.883", "id": "1785", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-07T07:10:01.770", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-07T07:10:01.770", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1763", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1766", "answer_count": 3, "body": "I was having a discussion with a colleague and we couldn't recall how they\nboth worked. Does 一人以上 mean a) 1 or more persons or b) more than one person?", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-06T05:02:19.583", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1765", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-07T01:25:36.317", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "168", "post_type": "question", "score": 35, "tags": [ "word-choice", "usage" ], "title": "Do 以上 and 以下 include the number preceding them?", "view_count": 4947 }

[ { "body": "According to the [Wikipedia article on these\ntwo](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%BB%A5%E4%B8%8A%E3%83%BB%E4%BB%A5%E4%B8%8B),\n以下 and 以上 _include_ the number that precedes them.\n\n> ５０以上 => 50 or more\n>\n> ５０以下 => 50 or less\n\nIf you want to exclude the number on the upper end (instead of 以下) use\n未満(みまん).\n\n> １０００円未満 (less than 1,000 yen, not including 1,000)\n\nI had a few different discussions (and taking Ito-san's point below as well)\nabout this - 超 seems to be used (?) but I've never really heard it. In this\ncase we would probably go back to standard grammar using a verb instead:\n\n> １０００円を超える（こえる)\n\nIf there was really a need to exclude a certain number in the case of 以上, you\ncould always add 1 to it -- e.g.\n\n> １００１円以上\n\nAlthough that seems strange too. Maybe there's not much of a use for that kind\nof term?", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-06T05:04:37.040", "id": "1766", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-06T12:45:31.337", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "87", "parent_id": "1765", "post_type": "answer", "score": 21 }, { "body": "I think 以上 and 以下 are inclusive above and below. 超 and 未満 are exclusive.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-06T05:06:04.770", "id": "1767", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-07T01:25:36.317", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-07T01:25:36.317", "last_editor_user_id": "356", "owner_user_id": "356", "parent_id": "1765", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "As makdad and Axioplase stated in their answers, the “correct” usage is that\nX以上 and X以下 (where X is a number) include X. However, the “incorrect” usage\nwith X excluded is not rare, and therefore it is better to be aware of this\npossibility, too. For example, when talking about a [ski\nlift](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ski_lift), some people may well say:\n\n> このリフトには一人以上乗ることはできません。 This lift cannot carry one or more persons. (What?!)\n\nwhen they really mean “This lift cannot carry more than one person.”", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-06T14:02:36.330", "id": "1768", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-06T14:02:36.330", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "1765", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1772", "answer_count": 5, "body": "I can see that someone got mad or someone made someone else mad. The things\nthat make it difficult are `に` and the `られる` form of `怒る`. What does this\nmean? How do you figure out who did what in these types of sentences?", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-06T17:24:01.207", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1770", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-03T20:16:45.847", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-03T20:16:45.847", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "69", "post_type": "question", "score": 12, "tags": [ "grammar", "meaning" ], "title": "Who scolded whom in Aに怒られる?", "view_count": 4096 }

[ { "body": "Maybe the fact that `に` is used in both active and passive sentences with `怒る`\nis making it difficult for you. `に` can be used either as a dative case marker\nor as an element leading the agentive-phrase in passive. In English, you can\nsee that the dative is `to`, whereas the agentive-phrase is headed by `by`, so\nan active sentence with dative case and its passive counterpart look pretty\nmuch different:\n\n> A gave a present to B (`to` as dative case)\n>\n> B was given a present by A (`by` heading an agentive phrase in passive)\n\nBut in Japanese, they are both expressed as `に`. So an active sentence with\ndative case and its passive counterpart may look confusing:\n\n> AがBに怒った (`に` as dative case)\n>\n> BがAに怒られた (`に` heading an agentive phrase in passive)\n\nThe two examples above describe (roughly) the same event; in both sentences, A\nis who scolded, and B is who was scolded. But in the first sentence, it is B\nthat appears with `に`, and in the second sentence, it is A. I think that was\nwhere you were confused. But you should be able to distinguish the two\nsentences by looking at whether the verb is in active or passive form. If you\nsee that it is in active form `怒る`, then the phrase that comes with `に` is\n**the one who is being scolded**. If it is in passive form `怒られる`, then the\nphrase that comes with `に` is **the one who is scolding**.\n\n* * *\n\n**Advanced part**\n\nLanguage hacker raised an interesting point in the comment, so I will add\nsomething. You can also see the difference between the two usages of `に` when\nyou topicalize the relevant phrase. The dative `に` becomes optional in front\nof `は`, but the agentive `に` is obligatory:\n\n> Aは、Bには怒ったが、Cには怒らなかった (dative case `に` preceding `は`)\n>\n> Aは、Bは怒ったが、Cは怒らなかった (dative case `に` omitted before `は`)\n>\n> Bは、Aには怒られたが、Dには怒られなかった (agentive `に` preceding `は`)\n>\n> * Bは、Aは怒られたが、Dは怒られなかった (Ungrammatical to omit agentive `に` preceding `は`)\n>\n> (* indicates ungrammatical sentence.)", "comment_count": 13, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-06T17:46:29.833", "id": "1771", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-08T03:22:31.307", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-08T03:22:31.307", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1770", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "It may first bear mentioning that 怒られる is usually used specifically to mean\n\"got scolded by\", rather than \"to became the focus of someone's anger\".\n\nThis may make it easier to understand.\n\n * Aは怒った : A got angry \n * AはBに怒った : A got angry at B (in this usage, B is usually not a person, but rather an event or state of affairs). \n * AはBを怒った : A scolded B (B is a person) \n * BはAに怒られた : B got scolded by A.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-06T18:17:18.963", "id": "1772", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-03T17:26:10.143", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-03T17:26:10.143", "last_editor_user_id": "448", "owner_user_id": "448", "parent_id": "1770", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "This is one of those cases where the Japanese られる doesn't quite line up nicely\nwith the English passive:\n\n> Aが怒った。 A got mad.\n>\n> （私が）A **に** 怒られた。 (I) was gotten mad at **by** A. (More naturally in the\n> active: A got mad at me.)\n>\n> 雨が降った。 The rain fell.\n>\n> （私が）雨 **に** 降られた。 (I) was fallen on **by** the rain. (More naturally: I got\n> rained on.)\n\nWith the passive られる, the subject of the sentence (usually 私 if it's omitted)\nis the \"target\" (on the receiving end) of the action. In other words,\nsomething is done _to_ the subject rather than _by_ the subject. (The _by_\npart is marked by に, as sawa mentioned.)\n\nTo address your comment about the たい construction, then:\n\n> 彼女に怒られたい I want to be gotten mad at by her. (More naturally in the active: I\n> want her to get mad at me.)\n\nAlso, when に is used not with 怒られる, but with 怒る, it marks the cause of anger:\n\n> 環境破壊 **に** 怒る become angry **over** destruction of the environment\n>\n> 入場できないこと **に** 怒る become angry **over** not being able to enter", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-06T18:30:15.647", "id": "1773", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-06T18:48:22.777", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "94", "parent_id": "1770", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "_**Note:** Edited after some consultation with native speakers._\n\nI feel your pain. These used to confuse the heck out of me for a long time, so\nI know where you are coming from.\n\nI'm assuming you are in a situation where you're reading something, and\ncontext can be spread out over pages. You find a sentence fragment like\n「ボブに怒られた」 and you're wondering if someone is angry at Bob, or Bob is angry at\nsomeone. The subject was maybe established three pages ago, and you could\nmaybe go back and check, but you want to be able to keep trucking like a\nnative speaker would, sure in your knowledge of which way the action is\nflowing.\n\nFirst, for the purpose of sorting this out, think of に in terms of being a\npointer. It says that something is going toward the thing that it is connected\nto. Anger doesn't really move around like a ball, but just imagine it does.\n\nSo we have two cases:\n\n> ボブに怒った。\n>\n> ボブに怒られた。\n\nBoth sentences have \"Bob\" and \"anger\" in them, but, if your confusion is like\nmine was, you're not sure which of them means Bob is angry, and which means\nsomeone is angry at Bob. Or, at least, how to reliably and systematically\ndetermine the difference.\n\nIn both cases, に points _at_ Bob, so to figure out who is angry, we need to be\nmore precise about what _exactly_ is coming _at_ him. There's a ball of anger\ncoming at him, the type of ball is different because of the different verb\nform.\n\nIn the first case, ボブに怒った, it's just plain anger coming at Bob. The anger ball\nis being thrown at his head by someone. He just receives someone's anger.\nThus, someone is angry at him.\n\nIn the second case, ボブに怒られた, what is coming at Bob is the _potential to be\nangry_. He is being _endowed_ with anger. This time, because of the verb form,\nthe anger ball is absorbed into Bob, so this time it's Bob that is angry.\nSomething or someone _made_ him angry.\n\nYou can at this point, be sure about the direction of the action, without\nbeing thrown by the use of に. However, there is more to the story.\n\nYou could also translate ボブに怒られた as \"Bob scolded [someone]\". It's a fragment,\nso we don't know who Bob is angry at, but the thing is, Bob has been endowed\nwith anger, and anger as a concept is usually directed at someone or\nsomething. So Bob is angry, most likely, at the person who threw the anger\nball at him. He has still been endowed with anger, so it's still okay to think\nof it as \"Bob was made angry\". It's just that the focus is on Bob, and and his\nanger is probably going somewhere now that he has it.\n\nWhat if you want to put the focus on the person who made Bob angry? Then you\ncould do this:\n\n> ボブに怒らせた\n\nThis also says \"Bob was made angry\" or \"Bob scolded [someone]\" but because of\nthe ~らせる form, the emphasis is on the fact that _someone_ (or something) made\nBob angry.\n\nLet's say Taro made Bob angry. If we say 太郎がボブに怒らせた, we are saying that Taro\nis definitely responsible for Bob's anger, even though Taro might not have\ndone anything deliberately. The point is that focus is on Taro's action.\n\nIf we say 太郎がボブに怒られた, we're saying Bob got angry at Taro, even though Taro\nmight not have done a thing to deserve it. The focus is on Bob's reaction.\n\nIn short, the point is that に always directs action onto something. But when\nyou use られる, or らせる, you are directing an endowment onto the target. The\ntarget then takes on that quality instead of just receiving it.\n\nHope that helps.", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-06T18:31:04.050", "id": "1774", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-07T09:43:59.463", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-07T09:43:59.463", "last_editor_user_id": "119", "owner_user_id": "119", "parent_id": "1770", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "What none of the other answers pointed out is that the `rare` passive\nconstruction in Japanese actually has two distinct usages, one of which is\nonly tangentially related to English passives but usually clamped together\nunder that terminology when taught. I was originally taught it as the\n\"sufferer passive\" (which sounds better in my native language), I've seen it\nin Japanese as 迷惑の受け身 and one linguistics presentation I've been to called it\nan Affected Experiencer Construction. Sometimes, a sentence is ambiguous\nsyntactically between the two usages, sometimes it is not.\n\nUnlike regular passives, which take a transitive verb and move the object so\nit becomes the subject, the 迷惑の受け身 also works with intransitives and can make\nsentence patterns you wouldn't find with regular passives even when working\nwith transitives. In general, the constuction means that something was done,\nand someone was affected by experiencing that action - almost always\nnegatively. That `雨に降られた` example Derek's answer is exactly this construction,\nbut here are some more examples:\n\n> （母は）赤ちゃんに泣かれた。 The baby cried, and that troubled his mother.\n>\n> パパに死なれた。 Dad died, and that upsets me (a very self-centered thing to say!)\n>\n> 誰かに足を踏まれた。 Someone stepped on my foot, and I don't like that. Note that 足\n> gets the object particle even though it would have been the subject if this\n> was a normal passive.\n>\n> 太郎が花子に花瓶を壊された。 Hanako broke Taro's vase, and that upset him. Again, 花瓶 is\n> not treated as it would have been in a normal passive sentence. Made even\n> more complicated by something like:\n>\n> 太郎が花子に次郎の花瓶を壊された。 Hanako broke Jiro's vase, and that didn't please Taro\n> (maybe because he would be blamed for breaking it, or for any other\n> contextually available reason)\n\n(To give credit, the last two sentences are derived from that linguistics\npresentation I mentioned)\n\nWhat does all that have to do with 怒られた? I think it can be interpreted as an\nexample of this pattern in addition to the classic passive. Someone was mad\nand I was in trouble because of that (hence, he was mad at me). In addition,\nsince 怒る is listed in my dictionary as an intransitive verb, this syntactic\ninterpretation makes even more sense to me.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-06T19:46:56.217", "id": "1777", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-07T02:42:18.280", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-07T02:42:18.280", "last_editor_user_id": "318", "owner_user_id": "318", "parent_id": "1770", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1776", "answer_count": 2, "body": "`絶対{ぜったい}領域{りょういき}` is a slang term that refers to the visible bare skin from\nthe bottom of a woman's skirt to the top of her thigh high stockings. Or,\nshort pants and thigh high boots... pick your preferred style. The point is\nthat it's the exposed part of the thigh.\n\nThat's the meaning, but where did it come from?\n\nDirectly translated, it means \"absolute territory\". The territory part I get -\nit's an area on the body. But \"absolute\"? I find that hard to parse. Other\nmeanings for `絶対{ぜったい}` are \"unconditional\" or \"unmistakable\", but regardless\nof the translation choice, I find them all odd choices. Why `絶対{ぜったい}`?\n\n\"Absolutely\" sexy or \"unmistakably\" sexy perhaps?\n\nLastly, is this term regulated to otaku types who are into anime, or is it in\ncommon use?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-06T18:40:52.077", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1775", "last_activity_date": "2017-04-04T08:35:33.943", "last_edit_date": "2011-11-10T00:24:18.767", "last_editor_user_id": "119", "owner_user_id": "119", "post_type": "question", "score": 7, "tags": [ "word-choice", "slang", "definitions" ], "title": "What is the origin of, and how do I parse 絶対{ぜったい}領域{りょういき}?", "view_count": 468 }

[ { "body": "As with many odd slang words and phrases, it came from a quote in a particular\nsituation.\n\n\"The distance between kneesocks and mini skirt is invicible! I can even say\nthat it's the God's Absolute Territory...\"\n\nFrom: <http://en.dic.pixiv.net/a/Absolute+Territory>", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-06T18:54:28.883", "id": "1776", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-07T13:57:57.757", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-07T13:57:57.757", "last_editor_user_id": "393", "owner_user_id": "393", "parent_id": "1775", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "The origin has been explained but I wanted to mention why \"absolute\" in the\ntranslation.\n\n[\"Absolute Terror Field\"](http://wiki.evageeks.org/A.T._Field) is the official\nand widely accepted translation of `絶対恐怖領域` from Evangelion, so it's natural\nthat \"absolute\" remains. \"Absolute Field\" would sound pretty weird though, so\n\"territory\" is a good compromise IMO.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2017-04-04T08:35:33.943", "id": "45217", "last_activity_date": "2017-04-04T08:35:33.943", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3295", "parent_id": "1775", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1783", "answer_count": 2, "body": "I can't find this defined anywhere.\n\nHere's an example:\n\nタオルケットをちょちょいかけにきてくれる。\n\nI am also interested in what this whole sentence says.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-06T20:07:56.963", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1778", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-08T04:30:31.073", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-07T09:48:29.907", "last_editor_user_id": "69", "owner_user_id": "69", "post_type": "question", "score": 3, "tags": [ "slang", "definitions", "meaning" ], "title": "What does ちょちょい mean?", "view_count": 1658 }

[ { "body": "It's a variation of ちょっと, but usually in reference to an action. Just like\nちょっと in that context, it's meant to indicate that the action will be quick and\neasy. It's more casual (and therefore more emphatically quick and easy) than\nちょっと.\n\nNot that it's rude, but I wouldn't use it outside of casual company.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-06T23:25:46.607", "id": "1783", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-06T23:25:46.607", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "448", "parent_id": "1778", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "**EDIT** : My theory was wrong, as pointed out by SuperElectric.\n\n* * *\n\nMaybe it means the same as ちょいちょい ?\n\nThat is a Kansai dialect word, translates to: sometimes/often\n\nExample: \nサッカーは最近ちょいちょいやってる。 \n= Recently I have been playing soccer relatively often.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-07T04:44:03.513", "id": "1786", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-08T04:30:31.073", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-08T04:30:31.073", "last_editor_user_id": "107", "owner_user_id": "107", "parent_id": "1778", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1782", "answer_count": 1, "body": "I came across a sentence using もあれば where there wasn't a conditional. あれば got\ntranslated as sometimes:\n\n> 名詞から動詞が派生していること **もあれば** 、その逆のこと **もある** 。 \n> Sometimes a verb is derived from a noun and sometimes it is the other way\n> around.\n\nLooking for more examples, I saw some more sentences with this \"sometimes\nthis, sometimes that\" pattern. I basically understand how to construct a\nsentence with this pattern, but I also found some where I couldn't' tell what\nもあれば was doing:\n\n> 京都から高野山までは、3時間もあれば行ける距離です。 \n> Kyoto is about 3 hours distance from Mt. Koya \n> \n> 10分もあれば支度できます。 \n> It only takes me 10 minutes to get ready\n\nWhat is もあれば's function in the last two examples?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-06T22:19:01.843", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1779", "last_activity_date": "2011-08-04T15:47:59.027", "last_edit_date": "2011-08-04T15:47:59.027", "last_editor_user_id": "54", "owner_user_id": "54", "post_type": "question", "score": 9, "tags": [ "set-phrases" ], "title": "Does もあれば have set phrases?", "view_count": 332 }

[ { "body": "`ば` is conditional just as in the first example. `も` in these cases means\nsomething like 'as less as'. The literal translations are respectively (Don't\nexpect that they are grammatical or natural in English):\n\n> (The distance) from Kyoto to Koyasan is such that, if you have as less as\n> three hours, you can get there.\n>\n> If I have as less as ten minutes, I can get ready.\n\nBy the way, although I know that it is not only the responsibility of the\nEnglish speaking people, I feel it unnatural when people write something like\n`Mt. Koyasan`. It is as strange as saying `Mt. Mont Blanc`, `salsa sauce`,\n`Volkswagen car`, etc.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-06T23:24:36.920", "id": "1782", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-07T15:31:08.123", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-07T15:31:08.123", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1779", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1790", "answer_count": 2, "body": "I see 情弱乙 being used (as an interjection?) on many websites, but I can't find\nit in any dictionary, even online dictionaries. I guess the pronunciation is\nじょうじゃくおつ. What does it mean?\n\nExamples:\n\n```\n\n 情弱乙！\n \n ガラケーｗｗｗ情弱乙ｗｗｗ\n \n 情弱乙と呼ばれないために\n \n```", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-07T05:44:42.743", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1788", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-07T14:04:17.650", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-07T06:32:38.113", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "107", "post_type": "question", "score": 17, "tags": [ "meaning", "internet-slang" ], "title": "Meaning of 情弱乙 ?", "view_count": 6225 }

[ { "body": "[Chiebukuro\nsays](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1344455238)\nthat 情弱乙（じょうじゃくおつ）is short for 情報弱者.\n\nWhat is a 情報弱者?\n\n[Chiebukuro has you covered\nagain](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1022125000);\nit refers to a person on the wrong side of the [digital\ndivide](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_divide), someone whose access to\nthe internet is severely limited or nonexistent. It can also refer to someone\nwho is out of touch with current events, or as an insult to someone who has\nasked a question they should know the answer to, or without doing basic\nresearch--like we might say in English, \"What, you don't have access to Google\nor something?\"", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-07T06:04:28.323", "id": "1789", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-07T06:23:56.060", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-07T06:23:56.060", "last_editor_user_id": "28", "owner_user_id": "28", "parent_id": "1788", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "It is an internet slang, not a standard Japanese word.\n\n> `情弱` (joojyaku) is short for [情報弱者 (joohoojyakusha) 'information\n> shortfall'](http://e-words.jp/w/E68385E5A0B1E5BCB1E88085.html), people who\n> are left behind by the advancement of information technology.\n>\n> `乙` (otsu) comes from `お疲れさま` (otsukaresama) literaly '(you are) tired\n> (after the hard work)', in this case ironically and looking down. Close to\n> the English phrase 'nice try' used ironically. `乙` is totally unrelated to\n> `お疲れさま` but is used because of the similarity of pronouncitation.\n\nAnyway, this term is a slang that probably originated from the notorious\ninternet BBS 2ch, and is used offensively to look down on people who are left\nbehind from the internet trend. It is not an appreciated word.\n\nIt may be comparable to another slang from 2ch: `ググレカス` (gugurekasu) 'google\nit, you shit!', which derives from `ググれ かす` (imperative form of `ググる` (guguru)\n'to google' + garbage).\n\nBy the way, the character `w` in `www` stands for `笑い` (warai) 'laughter',\nwhose English counterpart is 'lol', and is enforcing the magnitude of looking\ndown on the person.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-07T06:05:47.140", "id": "1790", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-07T14:04:17.650", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1788", "post_type": "answer", "score": 15 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1793", "answer_count": 2, "body": "Today, while looking up random words in WWWJDIC, I stumbled upon an example\nsentence for the word [いとしい](http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jwb/cgi-\nbin/wwwjdic.cgi?1MUE%E3%81%84%E3%81%A8%E3%81%97%E3%81%84) as below:\n\n> 少女は人形を **いとしげに** 抱き締めた。 The girl squeezed her doll affectionately.\n\nThe sentence uses ~げに adjective suffix that I have never seen before. Based\nfrom the above translation, it seems to convert the adjective into adverb,\njust like what ~く does. Also, a quick check with Google showed that can also\nfollow a noun, e.g. 自慢げに.\n\nWhat is this suffix actually and how is it different from ~く form? As I\nmentioned in previous paragraph this is the first time I've seen it so I am\nnot even sure is it standard Japanese or a slang or whatnot.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-07T07:14:18.640", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1791", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-07T13:13:10.180", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-07T07:47:18.893", "last_editor_user_id": "112", "owner_user_id": "112", "post_type": "question", "score": 17, "tags": [ "adjectives", "suffixes" ], "title": "What is ~げに suffix actually?", "view_count": 1897 }

[ { "body": "**Adjectives**\n\n> Does such conjugation exist (or is it actually something else)?\n\nIt's a way to make an adverb from a い-adjective\n\n> And if so, how is it different from ~く form?\n\nUnlike 〜く, it is very empathetic, it shows that the subject of the proposition\n_visibly_ expresses its emotions. You can almost see that girl's eyes being\nhumidified by that extraordinary amount of affection.\n\nYou emphasize the behaviour of the acting subject, instead of just coldly\nmodifying the verb.\n\n楽しく踊った。 \nI danced and enjoyed it.\n\n楽しげに踊った。 \nI danced, and I was sooooo happy! I kept jumping, twirling and bouncing! Oh\nman! That was so much fun! _You should've seen me!_\n\n**Nouns**\n\nFirst, what kind of nouns? \nI doubt one says \"車げに\". \nHowever, \"自慢げに\" is different, as 自慢 is a state, a description… somehow, an\nadjective! When one says 自慢です one means \"I'm satisfied\". So 自慢げに would be\n\"with visible satisfaction\".\n\nEasy as pie!", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-07T07:46:57.940", "id": "1792", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-07T08:38:30.220", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-07T08:38:30.220", "last_editor_user_id": "356", "owner_user_id": "356", "parent_id": "1791", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "The most important thing about げ is that it describes an _observed quality_.\nThat is, you cannot use げ to refer to yourself:\n\n> ○ 毎週楽し **く** 聴かせていただいています。 I enjoy listening every week.\n>\n> × 毎週楽し **げに** 聴かせていただいています。 (incorrect)\n\nThe reason for this is that げ (which in kanji would be 気, but it's never\nwritten in kanji) is defined as そうだ or らしいようす, [according to\nDaijisen](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&p=%E3%81%92&dtype=0&dname=0na&stype=1&index=05403700&pagenum=1).\n([Daijirin also lists 気配 as a\ndefinition](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&p=%E3%81%92&dtype=0&dname=0ss&stype=1&index=105770000000&pagenum=1),\nand you can see [my answer to this question about\n気配](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/980/what-is-the-sense-of-\nversus/994#994) to get a sense for that word.) Since そう is for describing\nsomething based on observation, it would be odd to use it to describe\nsomething about yourself. But you can easily use it to describe someone else:\n\n> ○ 少女はうれし **げに** プレゼントをあけた。 The girl happily opened the present.\n>\n> ○ 少女はうれし **そうに** プレゼントをあけた。 (equivalent)\n\nWhy not just use the normal adverbial form of うれしい (うれしく) here? Because うれしく\nwould presume that you have accurate knowledge of someone else's emotional\nstate, which you don't (unless you're writing a book and talking about one of\nyour characters). All you have are observations, and so you have to show that\nyour judgment of うれしい comes from observation by using either そう or げ.\n\nAlthough you could technically use げ with any word fit for describing\nbehavior, not every such construction is common. For instance:\n\n> ○ みんなはケーキをおいし **そうに** 食べている。 Everyone looks like they're enjoying the cake.\n>\n> ？みんなはケーキをおいし **げに** 食べている。 (same meaning, but far less common)\n\nWhen you can freely substitute げ for そう (as with the うれしい example above), I\ndon't personally feel any difference in emphasis, but a native speaker or\nsomeone with a solid reference on this may weigh in with a different opinion.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-07T13:13:10.180", "id": "1793", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-07T13:13:10.180", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "94", "parent_id": "1791", "post_type": "answer", "score": 18 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1798", "answer_count": 1, "body": "It might be hard to read because of the image resolution, but on the cover of\n[this\nbook,](http://www.amazon.co.jp./gp/product/images/4469221686/ref=dp_image_0?ie=UTF8&n=465392&s=books)\non the bottom left side, it says:\n\n> へんな日本語にも理由がある。\n\nWhich means something like:\n\n> \"Even strange Japanese has a reason.\"\n\nThe thing is, 理由 has [furigana](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Furigana) above\nit that says it should be read わけ.\n\nわけ is not a reading for 理由. 理由 is only read りゆう, and it means \"reason\".\n\nNow, I already know that sometimes furigana is used to differentiate between\nwhat is said and what is meant. For example, recently in a manga I saw the\nkanji 妻 with the furigana ワイフ above it. I believe this is done when the author\nis telling us that the character said \"wife\", but the kanji 妻 is provided so\nif the reader doesn't know what the katakana-ized English word means, they\nhave the kanji to help.\n\nSo, in a way, when the furigana and the kanji differ, it's so that the kanji\nprovides meaning to the furigana, as opposed to furigana's usual job of\nproviding readability to the kanji.\n\nOkay, fine... but, why わけ for 理由? Doesn't わけ also mean \"meaning\", \"cause\", and\neven \"conclusion based on reasoning\"?\n\nThe difference seems so subtle to me that I can't see the point of it. Yet,\ngiven that the book is all about Japanese usage, I imagine the author is quite\nparticular about words, so surely there's a purpose.\n\nWhat is that purpose?\n\n_(Side note: I intend to buy the book, so maybe an explanation is within its\ncovers. But I hope this still merits some discussion.)_", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-07T18:07:59.083", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1796", "last_activity_date": "2016-11-24T14:00:33.347", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-07T18:37:34.853", "last_editor_user_id": "94", "owner_user_id": "119", "post_type": "question", "score": 11, "tags": [ "word-choice", "definitions", "furigana" ], "title": "Why is this 理由 【りゆう】 given the furigana わけ?", "view_count": 1796 }

[ { "body": "Your statement\n\n> わけ is not a reading for 理由. 理由 is only read りゆう\n\nis too strong. `りゆう` is the most natural reading, but it can also be read as\n`わけ`. Although, it is true that, as with your example `妻` with `ワイフ`, furigana\nsometimes departs from its established reading under expectation of some\nrhetorical effects.\n\n> why わけ for 理由?\n\nBecause `りゆう` and `わけ` both mean 'reason', and the reason for having furigana\nis because it is not the most salient one.\n\nHere are some links, to give you just a few, following your request:\n\n * [http://www.amazon.co.jp./理由-わけ-あって冬に出る-創元推理文庫-似鳥/dp/4488473016](http://www.amazon.co.jp./%E7%90%86%E7%94%B1-%E3%82%8F%E3%81%91-%E3%81%82%E3%81%A3%E3%81%A6%E5%86%AC%E3%81%AB%E5%87%BA%E3%82%8B-%E5%89%B5%E5%85%83%E6%8E%A8%E7%90%86%E6%96%87%E5%BA%AB-%E4%BC%BC%E9%B3%A5/dp/4488473016)\n * [http://www.amazon.co.jp./理由-わけ-保阪-尚希/dp/4838718268](http://www.amazon.co.jp./%E7%90%86%E7%94%B1-%E3%82%8F%E3%81%91-%E4%BF%9D%E9%98%AA-%E5%B0%9A%E5%B8%8C/dp/4838718268)\n * <http://ameblo.jp/higashi-blog/entry-10594999317.html>\n * <http://news.2chblog.jp/archives/51610022.html>\n * <http://blogs.yahoo.co.jp/reasons_hm>\n * <http://d.hatena.ne.jp/kamiyakenkyujo/20110115/1295017300>\n * <http://kirei.mainichi.jp/beautiful/index.html>\n * <http://kuma-kire.com/>\n * <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLLrRFMeSOM>\n\n> why bother at all to make the effort to use one over the other\n\nThat is a good point. Even with the same meaning, there is almost always a\ndifferent connotation. In this case, reading `理由` as `わけ` would sound fancier\nperhaps because of the shorter pronunciation and because it is a yamatokotoba\nor wago 'native Japanese word, i.e., not Chinese origin'. In general, onyomi\n'Chinese originated reading' gives a rigid, academic impression, whereas\nnative Japanese words give an elegant literary impression from the Heian era\nor earlier. These kinds of readings are not traditional ones, and are usually\nproposed in some lyrics or literature, and get accepted to the general after a\nwhile.\n\n> what does the kanji bring to the party that makes it better than just having\n> the hiragana?\n\nIt has some kind of literary effect. It looks cool to read the kanji in that\nway as compared to just reading the hiragana. Think of James Joyce. Why did he\nwrite his novel using unusual spelling and his original words and some strange\nmarkings?---For some kind of literary effect.\n\n> All my dictionaries only say りゆう\n\nYou should not have dictionaries as the only source. Especially, Japanese\ndictionaries written in Japanese are highly\n[prescriptive](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_prescription) (you may\nnot like this term, but look at the link for the meaning); they try to\ndescribe what they think should be correct, and do not necessarily reflect the\nreality of the language. In short, they are not much reliable. From my\nexperience, 広辞苑 is the worst in this respect.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-07T18:24:50.907", "id": "1798", "last_activity_date": "2016-11-24T14:00:33.347", "last_edit_date": "2016-11-24T14:00:33.347", "last_editor_user_id": "11104", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1796", "post_type": "answer", "score": 13 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1800", "answer_count": 1, "body": "A Japanese person told me that they have ブラコン。I looked it up on Wikipedia and\nit said something like an emotional attachment to one's brother. But they said\nthat it meant something like someone who likes rap music. I couldn't find a\ndefinition like this. Is this what it means?", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-07T23:04:44.227", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1799", "last_activity_date": "2013-01-11T13:19:28.253", "last_edit_date": "2013-01-11T13:19:28.253", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "69", "post_type": "question", "score": 6, "tags": [ "meaning", "definitions", "slang", "music" ], "title": "Definition of ブラコン when discussing musical preferences", "view_count": 274 }

[ { "body": "R&B, not rap. Straight from\n[Wikipedia](http://ja.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%E3%83%96%E3%83%A9%E3%82%B3%E3%83%B3&oldid=15934234)\n(\"black contemporary\").", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-07T23:11:59.500", "id": "1800", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-08T01:27:10.763", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-08T01:27:10.763", "last_editor_user_id": "54", "owner_user_id": "22", "parent_id": "1799", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1803", "answer_count": 2, "body": "What may be the difference between the usage of チャンス and 機会 ?\n\nFor example:\n\n1) これは機会だぜ！\n\n2) これはチャンスだぜ！", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-08T07:11:39.750", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1802", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-17T16:36:25.360", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "264", "post_type": "question", "score": 8, "tags": [ "word-choice", "vocabulary", "nuances", "synonyms" ], "title": "What may be the difference between the usage of チャンス and 機会 ?", "view_count": 934 }

[ { "body": "Do really people say \"これは機会だぜ！\"? I doubt it…\n\nWhile you do say \"これはチャンスだ\" to mean \"it's now or never\", \"just do it!\", \"go\nfor it!\" and other once-in-a-life-time opportunities, I think that \"機会\" is a\nmuch more usual opportunity, less outstanding situations. You would use 機会 to\nsay \"Since everyone is here, this is the opportunity to discuss the\nfrobnication of frobnickers\", or \"I had the opportunity to meet her mother at\nthe local supermarket.\" Nothing to write home about, just a simple description\nof the situation.\n\nAlso, by チャンス being a word of foreign roots, and 機会 a compound word, it is\nlikely that the former is more colloquial than the latter. I also wonder\nwhether 機会 isn't, statistically speaking, used to refer about an event in the\npast, while チャンス would be used to talk about some opportunity still to take.\n\n(If you say \"これはアタックチャンスだ！\" do not forget to clench your fist and wave it\ndoing circular motions in front of you)", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-08T07:26:20.923", "id": "1803", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-08T16:07:45.313", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-08T16:07:45.313", "last_editor_user_id": "94", "owner_user_id": "356", "parent_id": "1802", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "As pointed out, for your examples チャンス would be more suitable. Although it\nseems more natural to me to use 「が」or even 「こそ」.\n\n> これ が／こそ チャンスだ！ → _This_ is your chance!\n\nAlso, 機会 has nothing to do with past or present.\n\nIf you want to expand your vocabulary, there are lots of other options to use\nfor \"chance/opportunity\", although the context may vary somewhat.\n\n * [好機]{こう・き}: a good opportunity; [好機到来]{こう・き・とう・らい}: when a good opportunity comes around / presents itself.\n\n> 好機を[逃]{のが}す → Miss a good chance\n\n * きっかけ／[契機]{けい・き}: a chance, opportunity; a starting/turning point.\n\n> テレビの故障をきっかけに、読書を趣味にした → When the TV broke (turning point), she took up\n> reading as a hobby.\n\n * [折]{おり}: a chance, opportunity\n\n> こちらにお出掛けの折には，お立ち寄りください → If you have a chance to come this way / When you\n> are in the area, please drop by.\n\n * [千載一遇]{せん・ざい・いち・ぐう}: a golden opportunity; chance of a lifetime; 「千年に一度しかめぐりあえないほどまれな機会」: often used in conjunction with チャンス or 好機 (千載一遇の好機)\n\n> この役はその女優にとって千載一遇のチャンスである → This role is a golden opportunity / the chance of\n> a lifetime for the actress.\n\n * [一期一会]{いち・ご・いち・え}: a once-in-a-lifetime chance; a special occasion\n\n> 彼女は何事にも一期一会の心で[臨]{のぞ}む → She does everything as if it were a once-in-a-\n> lifetime chance / a special occasion.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-08T15:35:29.837", "id": "1811", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-17T16:36:25.360", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-17T16:36:25.360", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "1802", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1806", "answer_count": 3, "body": "What honorifics, if any, are used with nicknames?\n\nFor example, would Matz-san (for [Yukihiro\nMatsumoto](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yukihiro_Matsumoto)) make sense (at\nleast coming from someone new to Japanese), or would the mixture of the\nslightly formal \"-san\" and an informal nickname seem strange?", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-08T10:58:33.147", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1804", "last_activity_date": "2015-07-31T23:33:46.877", "last_edit_date": "2015-07-31T23:33:46.877", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "91", "post_type": "question", "score": 9, "tags": [ "honorifics", "names" ], "title": "What honorifics are used with nicknames?", "view_count": 1878 }

[ { "body": "It is OK.\n\nEven though it mixes formal and informal, colleagues often call me ニコさん.\n\nちゃん and くん is used with nicknames more often.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-08T12:06:08.677", "id": "1805", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-08T12:06:08.677", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "107", "parent_id": "1804", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "Basically, you can use all honorifics with nicknames.\n\nOf course, it is _unlikely_ that you call Robert \"ボビー*様*\" (except as joke or\nif it's part of the nickname), but if you meet a guy and he says \"My name is\nDaisuke, but you can call me Dai!\", you'll probably end calling him \"ダイ君\". And\nTomoko will be \"トモちゃん\". And if you're not that close to the other person, ダイさん\nand トモさん will be ok too. Similarly, if you're a red-haired teacher, your\nfriends may call you Ginger先生, and so on…", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-08T12:07:06.633", "id": "1806", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-08T12:07:06.633", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "356", "parent_id": "1804", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "There really are no hard and fast rules with nicknames plus honorifics when\nactually speaking. Usually something will end up sticking even though it may\nbe \"wrong\". For someone new to Japanese, go with -san (for older or business)\nand -chan (for younger or girlfriends) and then follow the lead of the\nJapanese people you are with.\n\nFor example, one friend of mine is よちゃん. This is what everyone calls him,\nincluding younger people and people the same age, he even introduces himself\nthis way in friendly groups. This would be wrong according to the rules, but\nis what the native Japanese call him.\n\nI've been called ロスちゃん among friends as well as ロスピン, though the ピン is\nreserved for girlfriend and boyfriend in my experience. In more formal\nsituations, I am generally called ロスさん, even though my last name would be more\n\"correct\". When I am the customer, though, it is always last name + さま.\n\nSo, really just follow the lead of those around you, this is an area where the\nrules often give way to whatever feels right.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-08T23:53:33.353", "id": "1812", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-08T23:53:33.353", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "117", "parent_id": "1804", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1810", "answer_count": 2, "body": "I am organizing an event and posted a flyer on a famous SNS.\n\nSomeone commented on it saying: `イベント立てちゃいなよ`\n\nFrom the context I guess it is advising me to create an event (SNS feature),\nam I mistaken?\n\n**QUESTION:** What are the different grammatical parts in `立てちゃいなよ` ?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-08T12:15:36.530", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1807", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-11T03:17:54.250", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "107", "post_type": "question", "score": 8, "tags": [ "conjugations", "meaning" ], "title": "Meaning of ...立てちゃいなよ", "view_count": 1021 }

[ { "body": "Slightly less informally, we have:\n\n> イベント **を** 立てちゃ **ってね** 。\n\nThe 立てちゃって of course comes from 立てちゃう, a spoken version of 立ててしまう, so I'm\nguessing the な in 立てちゃいな is what's confusing. Unlike the prohibition な, which\nattaches to the dictionary form of the verb (するな, 食べるな), this な attaches to\nthe ます stem to form an informal command. It's friendlier than the blunt しろ-\ntype of command (食べろ, 行け, etc), but it's only appropriate for informal\nsituations (which is why I substituted with the ～てね command form). You often\nfind it with the emphatic よ tacked onto the end. Some more examples:\n\n> 早く行きなよ（≈行きなさい／行ってね）。 Hurry up and go!\n>\n> 旅行を楽しみなよ（≈楽しんでね）。 Enjoy your trip, OK?\n>\n> しおり、文句を言わないでご飯をさっさと食べなよ（≈食べなさい）。 Shiori, stop complaining and finish your\n> food!\n\nI seem to recall reading somewhere that this is primarily a feminine\nexpression, but I can't locate that particular statement at the moment, so\nI'll wait for someone else to clarify that.", "comment_count": 13, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-08T12:49:09.837", "id": "1808", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-08T13:31:50.987", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "94", "parent_id": "1807", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "`立てちゃいなよ` is the contracted form of `立ててしまいなよ`. Another, mascline, contraction\nis `立てちまいなよ`. The components of `立ててしまいなよ` are:\n\n> tate-te (verb in a certain form) simaw- (another verb) -i- (epenthetic\n> vowel) na (affix) yo (sentence-final particle)\n\n * 'Tate-' usually means 'to stand something up' or 'establish', but is used slangishly in this context 'to initiate'.\n\n * 'Simaw-' as a main verb means 'to pack something up and put it away', but here, it is used with an auxiliary meaning that derives from that, namely 'to have something done', often, but not necessarily, with the connotation of 'without much consideration' or 'with a negative result'.\n\n> ケーキを食べた 'I ate the cake.'\n>\n> ケーキを食べてしまった 'I ate up the cake without much consideration.'\n\n * 'I' is a vowel that is inserted by default in order to avoid consecutive consonants that are not allowed in Japanese phonology.\n\n * This usage of 'na' means suggestion, and unlike imperatives, it is suggested from the viewpoint of the sake of the addressee. To take some forms that Derek mentions for comparison:\n\n> ケーキを食べろ/食べなさい 'Eat the cake!' [Neutral about for whose sake or what reason]\n>\n> ケーキを食べな 'I suggest you eat the cake (for your own sake)'\n>\n> ケーキを食べて(ほしい) 'I want you to eat the cake (for my sake)'\n\n * 'Yo' is called a sentence-final partical, often contrasted with 'ne'.\n\n> 'Yo' is used to tell/suggest something that the addressee is not expected to\n> have in mind.\n>\n> 'Ne' is used to say something that the addressee is expected to know and\n> agree with the addressor.\n>\n> ケーキを食べたよ 'You know what? I ate the cake.'\n>\n> ケーキを食べたね 'You ate the cake, didn't you?'\n\n* * *\n\nSo the sentence `イベント立てちゃいなよ` means, 'I suggest that you just start out an\nevent without worrying much about its outcomes'.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-08T14:22:34.457", "id": "1810", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-11T03:17:54.250", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1807", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1819", "answer_count": 2, "body": "What is the conceptual difference, or difference in nuance between these two\nconstructions when used to mean 'and'? I realize there are some syntactic\ndifferences, such as や not appearing after the final item being enumerated,\nbut as far as general nuance is concerned, is there any significant\ndifference? For example, here's a couple sentences:\n\n1a. 怪我 **やら** インフルエンザ **やら** で、試合に出られない選手が多い。\n\n1b. 怪我 **や** インフルエンザで、試合に出られない選手が多い。\n\n2a. 今日は会議 **やら** 新人研参会 **やら** があって無理。明日なら大丈夫だけど。\n\n2b. 今日は会議 **や** 新人研参会があって無理。明日なら大丈夫だけど。\n\nIs there any difference in meaning in these (or perhaps other) examples of\nusage?", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-09T05:02:47.540", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1817", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-11T20:17:38.020", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-11T20:17:38.020", "last_editor_user_id": "94", "owner_user_id": "483", "post_type": "question", "score": 15, "tags": [ "word-choice", "particles" ], "title": "Usage of ～やら～やら vs ～や～や", "view_count": 1404 }

[ { "body": "や is often taught as a non-exhaustive connective. When you say AやB, you mean\nthat there may be a C, but you didn't mention it (for example, you could say\n\"ロックのCDやジャズのCDを買いました\" because maybe you bought doughnuts too (but who cares?);\nbut you wouldn't say \"部屋には男性や女性がいます\" since there is not other choice.)\n\nAs far as I remember, やら expresses some kind of disorder in your listing. It\nis also non-exhaustive, but it puts emphasis on the variety of elements. You'd\nuse it to say \"hipsters, bums, rockstars and politicians, everyone wanted to\ngo to my sweet 16.\"\n\nExamples of usage will be found it the great google corpus :)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-09T07:48:56.533", "id": "1819", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-09T07:48:56.533", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "356", "parent_id": "1817", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "や indicates that a connection exists between two or more nouns that form a\nlist of items. The list is a partial list and the speaker can add items if the\nspeaker wishes to. Close connection with と、も..も usage.\n\nEnglish probably : and .. and .. and such\n\nやら connects nouns, **adjectives and verbs** in a partial list. The list used\nis somewhat confused or **disorganized**. Close connection to とか usage.\n\nEnglish probably : and .. and who knows what, and ... and stuff", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-09T07:55:17.703", "id": "1820", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-09T07:55:17.703", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "484", "parent_id": "1817", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1826", "answer_count": 3, "body": "According to my references, both of these are used in situations where one\nthing happens immediately after another. Here are some example sentences:\n\n 1. （火事を見た人の話）ドーンという音がして、１分たつかたたないかのうちに火が出てきました。\n 2. 彼は、５時のベルが鳴るか鳴らないかのうちに手を止め、工場を飛び出した。\n 3. （ニュース） 先ほど、関東地方で地震がありました。詳しい情報が入り次第、お伝えいたします。\n 4. すみません、もう少しお待ちください。分かり次第、お知らせしますので。\n\nIn all four cases, could you simply switch to the alternate construct with no\nchange in meaning? Are there some examples where one or the other doesn't\nwork, or perhaps a slightly different nuance between the two?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-09T05:09:02.137", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1818", "last_activity_date": "2018-03-01T00:47:47.053", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-09T05:15:48.383", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "483", "post_type": "question", "score": 6, "tags": [ "word-choice" ], "title": "～か～ないかのうちに vs. 次第", "view_count": 1967 }

[ { "body": "Aか〜ないかB means what it does: you're in a situation where you don't even know\nwhether A is or isn't, that already B. Definitely a favourite of amateurs of\nquantum mechanics. It's almost instantaneous, and often unrelated.\n\n> \"No sooner had he passed the doorstep that it started to rain\" \n> 彼は家を出るか出ないかのうちに、雨が降り出した。\n\n次第 has an implication cause, and is very formal compared to the other above.\nThe most obvious example of implication is the famous:\n\n> It's up-to A. \n> A次第です。\n\nIt means that once A is done (if it's a thing) or has made a decision (if it's\na person¹), then the rest will follow. Example situations: \"What university\nwill you attend? It depends on the results of the exams\"; \"Where shall we\ndrink tonight? It's up to the boss.\" More complex uses should follow a similar\nimplication pattern.\n\n¹: I have a doubt. Maybe there is in this situation an ellipsis of the thing.\n\"Aさん次第\" would be \"Aさんの判断次第\". Hopefully, other replies or comments will clarify\nthis :)", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-09T08:01:07.063", "id": "1821", "last_activity_date": "2018-03-01T00:47:47.053", "last_edit_date": "2018-03-01T00:47:47.053", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "356", "parent_id": "1818", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "With `次第`, the latter event that is to happen has to be done with volition. It\ncannot be a natural event. It has the nuance of 'having waited for the former\nevent to end'. Your first example cannot be used with '次第' because fire is a\nnatural event. The second one can be, because leaving the factory is a\nvolitional event.\n\n> * ドーンという音がして、１分たち次第、火が出てきました。 [Ungrammatical]\n>\n> 彼は、５時のベルが鳴り次第手を止め、工場を飛び出した。\n\n`A か A ないかのうちに` literary means 'within the time span where it is not even\nclear whether A had happened or not', or 'at around the moment that A is/was\nto happen'. It does not necessary mean that A has happened yet. Your examples\n3 and 4 thus cannot be turned into this construction without the meaning being\nchanged.\n\n> # 詳しい情報が入るか否かのうちに、お伝えいたします。\n>\n> 'We will let you know about it at around the moment we receive detailed\n> information.' [It is strange. You cannot tell anything before knowing about\n> it.]\n>\n> # 分かるか否かのうちに、お知らせしますので。\n\nBy the way, as I gave in the examples above, `A か A ないかのうちに` is usually\nshortened to `A か否かのうちに`. `否` (ina) means negation. This construction is\ncomparable to the English `whether or not` construction. In English, suppose\nyou have the following example:\n\n> whether **A** or not **A**\n\nYou can avoid repeating the redundant `A` by putting the negation, the\ndisjunct `or` and `whether` altogether, and omitting one of the **A** s:\n\n> = whether or not **A**\n\nSimilarly, in Japanese, instead of repeating **A** as in:\n\n> **A** か **A** ないか\n\nyou can put the disjunct `か`, negation and `か` 'whether' altogether. The only\ndifference being that you have to use the negation `否` (ina) instead of the\nnegation `ない`:\n\n> **A** かないか ==> **A** か **否** か\n\nIf you acknowledge the difference of word order between Japanese and English,\nyou can see that this precisely corresponds to the English phrase word-by-\nword:\n\n> **A** か **否** か\n>\n> A or not whether", "comment_count": 13, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-09T13:51:27.023", "id": "1826", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-10T07:36:00.583", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-10T07:36:00.583", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1818", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "次第 straightforwardly corresponds to \"as soon as\": it implies that some action\nshould be taken as soon as some condition becomes true.\n\nAs you'll notice from your examples, the idiom かないかのうちに is often used to\nhighlight that the action came earlier than expected. As in, some precondition\nwas expected before the action, but the action happened before it was even\nclear that the precondition had completed.\n\n 1. （火事を見た人の話）ドーンという音がして、１分たつかたたないかのうちに火が出てきました。 The observer heard an explosion, and flames came bursting out no more than a minute later, maybe even less.\n 2. 彼は、５時のベルが鳴るか鳴らないかのうちに手を止め、工場を飛び出した。 The worker left his post at the factory as soon as the 5-o'clock bell rang; perhaps even a bit before.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-09T21:06:25.763", "id": "1830", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-09T21:06:25.763", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "448", "parent_id": "1818", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1824", "answer_count": 7, "body": "Hi all I understand that つもり means \"intention\" like say 夏休みにはゆっくり休むつもりです。 = I\nintend to rest during the summer vacation.\n\nBut what does 分かっているつもりだ。 means?\n\nWell if I translate directly, it seems to be \"I intend to be in the know\" ?\n\nHowever the translation (not by me) was \"I know that.\"\n\nI'm just wondering how did it work out to be that way? What is the\nsignificance of that つもり in that question?", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-09T08:44:28.863", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1822", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-08T00:31:09.917", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-08T00:31:09.917", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "264", "post_type": "question", "score": 27, "tags": [ "grammar", "words", "formal-nouns" ], "title": "the different usages of つもり?", "view_count": 8801 }

[ { "body": "The translation 'intention' is not that bad, but maybe, 'have in mind' will\nwork more generally.\n\n> 夏休みにはゆっくり休むつもりです。\n>\n> I have in mind to take a full rest during the summer vacation.\n\nIn `分かっているつもりだ`, `つもり` is one way of making your statement accurate, and in\nmany cases polite. In linguistic terms, this is called a _hedge_. In this\nparticular case, everyone might think herself/himself is right, but they can\nactually never be sure about their knowledge. If you simply say\n\n> I understand that ...,\n\nthen it might later, for some reason, turn out that you actually haven't\nunderstood it. In that case, you would be lying. But if, instead, you have\nsaid\n\n> I think I understand that ...,\n\nthen your statement remains true. The latter statement is more accurate. And\nit is also polite in not saying a lie, and for being careful about your words.\nIt is the same thing for Japanese sentences\n\n> 分かっている 'I know that'\n\nvs.\n\n> 分かっているつもりだ 'What I have in mind is I know that' or 'I think I know that'", "comment_count": 13, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-09T13:19:43.073", "id": "1824", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-10T14:14:31.847", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1822", "post_type": "answer", "score": 20 }, { "body": "To the gentlemen above - it won't let me leave a comment because rep is too\nlow, but...\n\nMy understanding is that 思う means 'to think', where as つもり means 'to intend'.\nSo, you could say\n\nりんごのほうがすしよりおいしいとおもいます。\n\n= I think that apples are more delicious than sushi.\n\n(my japanese is a little rough now actually.. somebody feel free to correct\nthe grammar there.)", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-09T20:16:35.113", "id": "1828", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-09T23:39:05.447", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-09T23:39:05.447", "last_editor_user_id": "15", "owner_user_id": "489", "parent_id": "1822", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "つもり also marks conviction/belief\n\n> つもり 《積もり(P); 積り》 (n) (1) (uk) intention; plan; (2) conviction; belief; (P)\n\nI would say: \"I perfectly know that\" or \"that's what I figured\" are good\ntranslations for the following context:\n\n\"someone needs to restore order to the hierarchy in the village (because the\ncurrent leader is not available)\". The character answers \"分かっているつもりだ\". He is\nperfectly aware of the situation with the current leader and he knows he is\nthe favorite for the place of leader.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-10T01:27:49.707", "id": "1831", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-10T01:27:49.707", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1822", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "As repecmps said, つもり can also indicate conviction or belief. So in your\nexample, 分かっているつもりだ means \"I think I understand (but I could be wrong, or my\nunderstanding could be incomplete),\" rather than \"I intend to be in the know.\"", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-11T17:33:48.823", "id": "1862", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-11T17:33:48.823", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "28", "parent_id": "1822", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "I am a Japanese woman living in Osaka.\n\nThe phrase \"分かっているつもりだ\" implies a situation like \"no matter how you say that I\ndon't know about it, I believe that I know it very well\".\n\nSee? If your girl friend said \"hey, you don't know how I feel when you come\nhome late!\", then you can say \"I have to work! But I know your feelings\n(分かっているつもりだ）\".\n\nNot only in a bad situations.\n\nIf you were a president of the US, you know the significance of your\ninfluence. Then you can say \"As for the significance of my speeches, I think I\nknow that very well(分かっているつもりだ）.\"\n\nSee?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-11-21T13:04:16.567", "id": "3777", "last_activity_date": "2011-11-21T13:04:16.567", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "873", "parent_id": "1822", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "OK, as a Japanese native, let me explain more about it.\n\nAs repecmps mentioned, つもり has several meanings and usage depending on the\nsituation. I would like to give you examples of usage of つもり, to show you the\ndifference of nuance.\n\n 1. 明日学校に行くつもりだ。 \nI will (intend to) go to school tomorrow.\n\n 2. a） あなたの気持ちはわかっているつもりだ。 \nI believe I know your feelings well enough.\n\nb）この会社の経営状況はわかっているつもりだ。 \nI believe I know the business performance and financial situations of this\ncompany.\n\nc) 科学については、あなたより私のほうがわかっているつもりだ。 \nI am confident that I know about science more than you do.\n\n1) is a simple statement of a fact or intention. In case of 2-a, b and c, the\ncharacter is somehow explaining him/herself, therefore often involve some kind\nof emotion, like the phrases below.\n\nFor example:\n\n2a:\n\n> 1. あなたの気持ちはわかっているつもりだ。だから私を信頼してほしい。 I believe I know your feelings well\n> enough, so please trust me.\n>\n> 2. あなたの気持ちはわかっているつもりだ。でも私達は別れるしかない。 I believe I know your feelings well\n> enough. But we have no choice other than breaking up.\n>\n>\n\n2b:\n\n> 1. この会社の経営状況はわかっているつもりだ。だから私が次のCEOにふさわしい。 I believe I know the business\n> performance and financial situations of this company, so I think I am\n> suitable for the next CEO of this company.\n>\n> 2. この会社の経営状況はわかっているつもりだ。だからこの投資は絶対利益になると確信している。 I believe I know the\n> business performance and financial situations of this company, so I am\n> perfectly positive that this investment will make an enormous benefit for\n> us.\n>\n>\n\n2c:\n\n> 1. 科学については、あなたより私のほうがわかっているつもりだ。だから知ったかぶりはしないほうがいい。 I am confident that I\n> know about science more than you do, so you'd better stop the know-it-all\n> attitude.\n>\n> 2. 科学については、あなたより私のほうがわかっているつもりだ。でも日本の文化に関する知識については、あなたにはとてもかなわない。 I am\n> confident that I know about science more than you do. But as for the\n> knowledge of Japanese culture, I am no match to you.\n>\n>\n\nPlease forgive my poor English. I hope this will answer your question.\n\nSincerely,", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-04T15:33:16.103", "id": "4182", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-04T23:20:09.727", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-04T23:20:09.727", "last_editor_user_id": "796", "owner_user_id": "1021", "parent_id": "1822", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "Another example of ways of using つもり：\n\n 1. 天気についてはよく分かっている。だから明日は雪が降ると彼女に言うつもりだ。 I know about weather very well (so I can tell it will snow tomorrow), and I intend to tell her about it.\n\n 2. 天気についてはよく分かっているつもりだ。だから明日は雪が降ると彼女に言う。 I am confident that I know about weather well enough (so I can tell it will snow tomorrow), and I will tell her about it.\n\nI hope this can help you as well.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-01-05T10:02:58.170", "id": "4191", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-05T11:55:53.460", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-05T11:55:53.460", "last_editor_user_id": "1021", "owner_user_id": "1021", "parent_id": "1822", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 4, "body": "I think a graded anthology of haiku or tanka might make an excellent\nchrestomathy for learning kanji and japanese.\n\nAre there any appropriately-licensed (e.g. creative commons / public domain)\nhaiku or tanka anthologies in electronic form that could be used as the basis\nfor this?\n\n**EDIT** : (in response to sawa's comments, I've added \"and tanka\" to this\nquestion.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-09T20:22:19.807", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1829", "last_activity_date": "2011-12-27T01:12:52.737", "last_edit_date": "2011-12-27T01:12:52.737", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "256", "post_type": "question", "score": 5, "tags": [ "resources", "poetry" ], "title": "Redistributable Anthology of Haiku or Tanka in Electronic Form", "view_count": 1482 }

[ { "body": "If you want to learn Japanese, you don't need to be reading Tanka. That would\nbe like learning English by reading Beowulf. If you want a \"learning curve is\nalmost 90 degrees\" tough-love approach to learning the Japanese writing system\nand its vocabulary, I recommend [Japanese Newspaper\nCompounds](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0804809194). It's kanji\nboot camp.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-16T04:02:03.150", "id": "1968", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-16T04:02:03.150", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "511", "parent_id": "1829", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "One such resource for haiku is [Wikisource's collection of Matsuo Basho's\nHaiku](http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Complete_Basho_Haiku_in_Japanese). There\nare also quite a few [pre-modern poetry\nanthologies](http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/japanese/texts/chronology_hor-\npremodern.html) transcribed at the [University of Virginia's Japanese Text\nInitiative](http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/japanese/hyakunin/hyakua.html),\nincluding a transcription of the [Ogura Hyakunin\nIsshu](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyakunin_Isshu) (a collection of 100 waka\npoems by 100 different authors).\n\nThe original Japanese poetry is all in the public domain and as such should be\nredistributable without any issue; any translations, however, are likely under\ncopyright and more restrictive licenses than you will find desirable.\n\nThe University of Virginia also has a selection of [modern\nselections](http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/japanese/texts/chronology_hor-\nmodern.html) with which you may need to exercise more care, as some of them\nmay still be under copyright.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-20T18:16:04.257", "id": "2087", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-22T02:24:09.670", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-22T02:24:09.670", "last_editor_user_id": "384", "owner_user_id": "384", "parent_id": "1829", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "I agree with Mike that haiku and tanka are by far too difficult for learning\nJapanese. Native japanese needs dictionaries and explations to understand them\ntoo.\n\nI found very useful when studing Japanese alone the Tanaka corpus. About\n200000 sentences translated in Japanese-English.\n\n<http://www.edrdg.org/wiki/index.php/Tanaka_Corpus#Tatoeba_Project>\n\nNow it's hosted on the tatoeba project where you can browse it:\n\n<http://tatoeba.org/eng/>\n\nIt's also used by jwb online dictionary:\n\n<http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jwb/cgi-\nbin/wwwjdic.cgi?1Q%C2%E7%B3%D8%C0%B8_1_>", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-21T16:30:21.923", "id": "2107", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-21T16:30:21.923", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "60", "parent_id": "1829", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "## pmana.jp\n\nHere is a website specializing in \"easy haiku\" testing:\n<http://pmana.jp/pm32.html>\n\nWhen they say \"easy\", it means easy for Japanese people, though...\n\nUnfortunately, the content is not open and they are talking about 525円 per\nmonth. There is a free sign up but I haven't tried, it might give you access\nto some of the content.\n\nThe website designed for cellphones, so it might behave strange sometimes.\n\n## wikisource.org\n\nI also like to work with open resources, so that I can transform and share\nthem. Wikisource has some Japanese poetry (mostly seems to contains the Matsuo\nBasho pointed out by rintaun, actually):\n\n<http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Category:Japanese_poetry>", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-22T01:52:52.837", "id": "2109", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-22T02:09:19.577", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-22T02:09:19.577", "last_editor_user_id": "107", "owner_user_id": "107", "parent_id": "1829", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1835", "answer_count": 3, "body": "While studying for JLPT N2 I came across this expression `の折に`. It appears to\nbe _almost identical_ to `の時に`. My reference suggests that it's basically the\nsame, but simply less polite.\n\nWhat I find suspicious is that I've been studying Japanese for quite a number\nof years, and I have never seen or heard of this until now, and dictionaries\nsuch as [アルク](http://eow.alc.co.jp/%E3%81%AE%E6%8A%98%E3%81%AB/UTF-8/) suggest\nthat it is not very common.\n\nIs there a difference in meaning / nuance? Is it actually common and I've just\nbeen blind all this time? (I wonder why it's not taught in any normal textbook\n/ Japanese course in that case). Should I avoid it?\n\nI would appreciate if anyone can shed some light onto the usage.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-10T07:38:16.457", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1833", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-11T11:54:08.280", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-11T04:29:49.567", "last_editor_user_id": "97", "owner_user_id": "483", "post_type": "question", "score": 7, "tags": [ "word-choice", "grammar" ], "title": "difference between ～の折に and ～の時に", "view_count": 1814 }

[ { "body": "`A の折に B` 'B on the occasion of A' may have the nuance that A is some special\noccation and is not that frequent. `A の時に B` 'B when A' is neutral in this\nrespect. Depending on the context, this may make some difference.\n\nI had thought that `折に` is rather the polite one. `折に` is slightly archaic or\nformal, and you do not see it in casual conversation so often. That's probably\nwhy you hadn't seen it; there was a reason for it.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-10T08:06:34.053", "id": "1835", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-10T08:06:34.053", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1833", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "My dictionary, A Dictionary of Advanced Japanese Grammar, says that the\ndifference between ori (折) and toki (時) is\n\nS1 折に S2\n\n> Toki \"when\" can be used in place of ori in most situations but without the\n> nuance of \"taking advantage of a good opportunity\" or \"doing something on a\n> special occasion\". Unlike ori, toki can be used in the following situations\n>\n> When S1 represents an undesirable occasion\n>\n> When the action in S2 is routine\n>\n> When the actions/events in S1 and S2 are not related\n>\n> When S1 represents a brief moment\n\nOri is also only used in formal writing and formal speeches. Ori is also\nsimilar to Sai and Setsu.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-10T14:02:09.363", "id": "1840", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-11T04:28:00.067", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "97", "parent_id": "1833", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "Sample sentences with 折. This seems to be used in greetings, and definitely\nformal written communications:\n\n * ご多忙の折、恐縮ですが平成２２年３月１６日（火）までにご提出頂けますようお願いいたします。\n * 寒さの折から、お風邪など召しませぬよう\n * 暑さの折からくれぐれもお体をお大事に\n\nThe first example is from an email I received, the two others from a list of\n\"season greetings\".\n\nSo the difference seems to be (1) use 折 in formal greetings, (2) use 折 in\nformal communications as an \"abstract\" time, not to express something like\n\"during lunch\". All the rest with 時, and you'll be good.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-11T11:54:08.280", "id": "1855", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-11T11:54:08.280", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "356", "parent_id": "1833", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1837", "answer_count": 4, "body": "Generally, in all Japanese language classes, the rule you're taught is that です\ndoes not follow い adjectives. Instead, い adjectives can act like stative\nverbs, and as such terminate a sentence by themselves. However, I have heard\nthis usage frequently. I don't necessarily have a specific example in mind\nthat I've heard, because it doesn't seem all that rare.\n\nHowever, recently I got into a discussion with someone who suggested that い\nadjective + です is dangerous, and has the potential to be offensive and/or rude\nwhen used incorrectly so foreigners should avoid it. One specific example\ngiven was `美しいです` sounding vulgar. They also said that い adjective + だ is flat\nout ungrammatical in all situations. When I've posed this same question to\nother Japanese speakers, they take no issue with 美しいです and they say it sounds\nfine.\n\nMy question is, there seems to be some disagreement. Does anyone have a\ndefinitive answer about why such a disagreement might exist, and how I should\ngo about knowing whether or not it's safe to use い adjective + です in normal\nusage? Or maybe people here also have no issue with it, and think that the\noriginal person I spoke to was perhaps mistaken.\n\nIf it's not safe, then what do I do if I want to end a sentence with an い\nadjective politely? Follow it with ～のです perhaps?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-10T08:00:25.143", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1834", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-24T14:46:44.523", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-10T11:00:08.310", "last_editor_user_id": "125", "owner_user_id": "483", "post_type": "question", "score": 17, "tags": [ "usage", "grammar", "politeness", "i-adjectives", "copula" ], "title": "correctness of い adjective + です", "view_count": 6590 }

[ { "body": "'です' does follow i-adjectives. It's purpose is to add politeness. I see no\nproblem with it, but maybe I am missing something. Was there a particular\nexample that was discussed when the person said it is dangerous? The only\nthing I can think of is that the expression can be made milder by adding the\nsentence final particle `ね`, which indicates addresser's expectation of the\naddressee's agreement.\n\n> 美しいです 'It is beautiful.'\n>\n> 美しいですね 'It is beautiful, isn't it?'\n\n'のです' will change the meaning. It implies that it is an explanation to or\nexpansion on something mentioned in the previous context.\n\n> 美しいのです 'It is the case that it is beautiful' (Perhaps following a context:\n> 'I like this place'. Then, it would be imply: 'The reason for it is\n> because')\n\n`i-adjective + だ` is ungrammatical in standard Japanese, but it may be used in\nsome Tohoku dialects.", "comment_count": 12, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-10T08:27:05.780", "id": "1836", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-10T08:56:18.643", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1834", "post_type": "answer", "score": 16 }, { "body": "Following an い-adjective with です is perfectly acceptable, as in the following\nexamples:\n\n> * あの人はひどいです。\n> * 昨日は楽しかったです。\n>\n\nI don't see any vulgar aspect to 美しいです failing contextual clues that could\nmake nearly _any_ description vulgar.\n\nSomething that may be getting confused in all of this is that while the\n_polite_ form of an い-adjective is followed by です -- e.g. さむいです -- the _plain_\nform is **not** followed by だ. So the plain form of さむい is just さむい. The\nexamples above would be, in plain form, as follow:\n\n> * あの人はひどい。\n> * 昨日は楽しかった。\n>\n\nのです is different again, and while polite, adds an air of explaining something.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-10T08:28:31.693", "id": "1837", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-10T08:28:31.693", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "384", "parent_id": "1834", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 }, { "body": "Err, I don't agree with your initial statement. I think that generally you are\ntaught that い adjectives _are_ followed by です.\n\nI think that it is _never_ dangerous to say \"美しいです\" and that you _should_ put\na です all the time, until you reach enough confidence to know when you may drop\nit, and just say 美しい.\n\nHowever, い-adj + だ is basically just wrong. There are situations where this\ncan be heard, but it's mostly when talking to farmer in a deserted rural area\n(to express how harsh and uneducated it may sound).", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-10T08:32:29.453", "id": "1838", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-10T10:22:30.503", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-10T10:22:30.503", "last_editor_user_id": "356", "owner_user_id": "356", "parent_id": "1834", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "い adjective + です was originally a slang used by people who were not familiar\nwith standard Japanese and only recently (1952) officially accepted. Still\nnow, it's not considered really sophisticated, in my oppinion. Only\n[おいしゅうございます](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/765/78) etc were correct\nuntil then.\n\nAnd there is a comment that says it's standard in Tohoku dialect, but that is\nnot true at all. That's actually a common misconception that many speakers of\nother regions hold. He obviously is mixing it with dialects of north-east\nKanto. (Note that Miyagi is linguistically not Tohoku but north-east Kanto)\nOr, he may have misheard sentence-ending particle でゃ of Tohoku dialects.\nあと、吉幾三の「おら東京さ行ぐだ」はいわゆるネタですから。", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-10-24T07:30:06.653", "id": "13240", "last_activity_date": "2013-10-24T14:46:44.523", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:48.447", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "4092", "parent_id": "1834", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1848", "answer_count": 4, "body": "This one stumped my Japanese friend that I was having dinner with earlier\ntonight. We were talking about the fact that tomorrow is Monday and I had a\ntough work week ahead. She said `ガンバレ`, I paused, and asked what was the\ndifference between that and `頑張{がんば}って` . She paused, then said I should ask\nsomeone else. Like a lot of native speakers, some word choices just come\nnaturally and she's never examined the hows and whys.\n\nI notice just now that when I type them in, my IME's first suggestion for\n`がんばって` is in kanji, and the first suggestion for `がんばれ` is in katakana. Is\nthat indicative of a difference in meaning and usage, or merely convention in\nwriting?\n\nAlso, I do know that `がんばって` can be followed by `ください`, and I think `がんばれ`\ncan't. So perhaps it's just a matter of the form of the verb? Still, even if\nthat's the case, I'm wondering if there are different implications for\nchoosing one or the other.\n\nAnyone know what the difference is?\n\n_Please note: In accordance with[the discussion on meta regarding linguistic\nterminology](https://japanese.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/378/is-this-\nforum-for-japanese-learners-or-language-learners), I'm going to request that\nanswers be in plain English (and Japanese) so that everyone can understand.\nOr, at least, please know that I wouldn't mark an answer as correct if it only\ncontained technical linguistic terms. Thanks for your understanding._", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-10T13:49:02.383", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1839", "last_activity_date": "2013-06-27T22:40:22.357", "last_edit_date": "2017-03-16T15:48:25.793", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "119", "post_type": "question", "score": 17, "tags": [ "word-choice" ], "title": "What's the difference between がんばれ and 頑張って 【がんばって】?", "view_count": 32880 }

[ { "body": "> がんばれ is the imperative form of がんばる\n\nFor most verbs of action it is clearly used to give an order and can be\nperceived as rude or very familiar in most cases. (You might have often heard\n死ね in movies. This is the imperative form of 死ぬ.)\n\nがんばれ, of course is not rude. It's familiar and encouraging. With the use of\nkatakana it can be viewed as a slogan or propaganda.\n\n> がんばって is the request form of the same verb.\n\nMost people think this form is a more polite way to order someone to do\nsomething. But technically it is not correct. You make a request but you can\nexpect it to be refused.\n\nYou can make it a polite request by adding ください\n\nIn brief:\n\n * がんばれ\n\nUse with close friends and family. Is often accompanied by a movement of the\nfist and gives an idea of strength.\n\n * がんばって\n\nIs used with people with whom you would use the neutral form of speech but not\nnecessarily very close people. This is the simple \"good luck\" or \"hold on\"\n(etc...) without much involvement from the speaker.\n\n * がんばってください\n\nis the polite for of the above. Implies more 'distance' between the\ninterlocutors.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-10T14:55:50.363", "id": "1843", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-10T14:55:50.363", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1839", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 }, { "body": "「がんばって」 and 「ガンバレ」 from my experience are used rather interchangeably.\n\nThey do stem from the same verb 「頑張る」: So, 「がんばって」 = 「頑張って」 while 「ガンバレ」 =\n「頑張れ」.\n\nStrictly speaking, 「頑張って」 is a request, while 「頑張れ」 is a command. Hence, 「頑張れ」\ncarries a slightly heavier tone as well as a bit more casual. However, it is a\nvery small difference. As well, the differences have been blurred by the\nextensive over-use of the phrase.\n\nThe reason for 「ガンバレ」 to be typeset in katakana is because it is an emphasis\nof the characters. Say you were sitting at a sports day, cheering on your\nfriend, this is where 「ガンバレ」 might be slightly more appropriate.\n\nOverall, there is not a big difference between the two words. It is more of a\nword choice depending on your speaking style.", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-10T22:16:43.257", "id": "1848", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-10T22:16:43.257", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "481", "parent_id": "1839", "post_type": "answer", "score": 19 }, { "body": "I think they are pretty interchangeable as expressions of support.\n\nAs far as nuances are concerned, がんばれ seems a little bit stronger to me. When\nsomeone is having a hard time, or working for something out of the ordinary\n(university exam, sport tournament), family and supporters would shout \"がんばれ\".\nIt sounds (a bit) harsher, it's more direct than がんばって.\n\nAlso, you probably wouldn't say \"がんばれ\" to someone you don't know or just met;\nyou'd have to say がんばって(ください).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-11T01:28:31.360", "id": "1849", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-11T01:28:31.360", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "356", "parent_id": "1839", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "The first difference is that \"がんばれ\" is more informal, while \"がんばって(ください)\" Is a\nlittle more formal. If you understand the whole in-group/out-group thing, plus\nacknowledging whether the person to which you are saying this is \"above\" or\n\"below\" (or \"equal\") to you in standing (based on age, etc...), that would be\nthe main criteria for choosing one over the other. If the person you are\nsaying that to is an equal or \"inferior\" (not in reality, just in the way the\nJapanese order their relationship hierarchies), \"がんばれ\" would be a more likely\nchoice, especially if familiarity is also an ingredient. The higher someone is\nabove you, the more politely you would want to say this (or anything), also\nkeeping in consideration how well you know them and whether they would\nconsider you to be \"in-\" or \"out-group\" with regard to the context of saying\nit.\n\nLittle of this translates well into English. Having been around Japanese\nculture for 25 years, I can tell you that the Japanese take these things very\nseriously, but they expect that \"foreigners\" are not able to understand the\nnuances, and they therefore tend to give \"us\" a great leeway with our\ninadequate use of their language. Because much of my experience in Japan was\nin more formal settings, I learned to err on the side of formality, and this\nhas paid off for me greatly with many Japanese I had relationships with coming\nto respect me for my respect of their culture.\n\nTherefore, my advice is, when in doubt, use \"がんばってください\" to show your respect\nfor the Japanese people and their culture. I believe it will go a long way to\nendear you to them.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2013-06-27T22:40:22.357", "id": "12245", "last_activity_date": "2013-06-27T22:40:22.357", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "3646", "parent_id": "1839", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1847", "answer_count": 2, "body": "Can someone explain the usage of a _na_ -adjective with the を particle?\n\nI cannot understand why we can say\n\n> ほうれん草を嫌いな人もいる。\n\nbecause I'd thought that it had to be a が or の particle instead of an を.\n\nAlso, why can we say\n\n> きみがなぜジャズを嫌いか私にはわからない。\n\nShouldn't it be きみがなぜジャズが嫌いか私にはわからない?\n\n(Source:\n[tatoeba.org](http://tatoeba.org/eng/sentences/search?query=%E3%82%92%E5%AB%8C%E3%81%84&from=und&to=und))", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-10T14:16:58.297", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1841", "last_activity_date": "2015-07-29T21:05:09.017", "last_edit_date": "2015-07-29T21:05:09.017", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "264", "post_type": "question", "score": 10, "tags": [ "grammar", "particles", "particle-を", "na-adjectives" ], "title": "Why are we allowed to use を particle with na-adjectives?", "view_count": 1495 }

[ { "body": "I think it's just a nuance (which I don't understand very well) and that in\nsome situations, having を (at least for 好き and 嫌い) instead of の or が helps\nreading the sentence which may have already too many other の's and が's and be\ntoo ambiguous.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-10T15:04:15.767", "id": "1845", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-10T15:04:15.767", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "356", "parent_id": "1841", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "The answer to this is that generally speaking, **you can't use を with na-\nadjectives**. This is not standard usage for most na-adjectives. Additionally,\nalthough Google searches also attest this kind usage for 嫌い (at least), the\nTanaka Corpus is [known to have\nerrors](http://www.edrdg.org/wiki/index.php/Tanaka_Corpus#Compilation), so\nit's best to be careful.\n\n[A google search for\n\"を嫌い\"](http://www.google.com/search?q=%22%E3%82%92%E5%AB%8C%E3%81%84%22) shows\nthat the _large_ majority of results, the を is clearly being used with some\nother verb, e.g. Xを嫌いになった。 However, in some, it is used in the way you noted,\nas in the following example:\n\n> * Yを嫌いなワケについて語られていた。\n>\n\nThis を is clearly attached to 嫌い, _not_ 語る. So, back to your question:\n**why?** As [@Axioplase's\nanswer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/1841/why-are-we-allowed-\nto-use-particle-with-na-adjectives/1845#1845) suggests, this is primarily seen\nwith 好き and 嫌い, and so I argue that the reason you see を with these \"na-\nadjectives\" is that they are derived from the _verbs_ 好く and 嫌う, respectively.\nThey are both transitive verbs, and as such, accept objects readily. As such,\nusing を with them in certain circumstances is not odd at all, though it may\nseem so when considered primarily as na-adjectives rather than verbs. I\nhypothesize that this usage is common with verb-derived na-adjectives, but\n_not_ other na-adjectives.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-10T17:58:23.167", "id": "1847", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-10T17:58:23.167", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:43.857", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "384", "parent_id": "1841", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1844", "answer_count": 2, "body": "Well if I'm not wrong, usually when a word has multiple kanjis one of them is\nselected as the \"main\" or more commonly used one.\n\nBut is it true that 才 and 歳 are both the \"main\" kanji for さい?", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-10T14:33:50.357", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1842", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-26T01:10:09.590", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-25T03:58:32.687", "last_editor_user_id": "3437", "owner_user_id": "264", "post_type": "question", "score": 18, "tags": [ "words", "kanji", "orthography", "kanji-choice" ], "title": "Which is the \"official\" kanji for さい, 歳 or 才?", "view_count": 9892 }

[ { "body": "It seems that 歳 is the \"official\"character for the age, even though both it\nand 才 are reglementary (常用漢字). However, it is too difficult for the pupils\n(小学生) who are supposed to learn it since it's a very common word. Therefore,\nthe different (but _not_ simplified) character 才 is taught instead so that\nthey can learn a necessary character until they see the \"hard\" one a few years\nlater.\n\nSo, the \"official\" one would be 歳. Same goes for 令 instead of 齢", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-10T14:58:00.027", "id": "1844", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-10T14:58:00.027", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "356", "parent_id": "1842", "post_type": "answer", "score": 21 }, { "body": "I agree with Axioplase, but `歳` is also `とし`, which is also the same reading\nfor `年`.\n\nIf I say, \"Because I'm getting old,\" I will use `歳{とし}だから`。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-25T08:32:52.483", "id": "17566", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-26T01:10:09.590", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-26T01:10:09.590", "last_editor_user_id": "119", "owner_user_id": "6662", "parent_id": "1842", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1877", "answer_count": 6, "body": "ユーザ or ユーザー, which is more in use or is there no difference?\n\nI see both of them in use, but is there one that is more correct than the\nother or is at least the prevailing standard?\n\na similar word is サーバ and サーバー.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-11T08:39:41.867", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1850", "last_activity_date": "2016-12-27T11:06:44.020", "last_edit_date": "2016-12-27T10:57:59.200", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "97", "post_type": "question", "score": 13, "tags": [ "word-choice", "loanwords", "katakana" ], "title": "ユーザ or ユーザー, which is more in use or is there no difference?", "view_count": 313 }

[ { "body": "Well, a quick google search gives basically 500 million ユーザー and 100 million\nユーザ. Wikipedia says both spellings exist. I conjecture the same conclusion for\nサーバー and many English words that finish in \"er\" in English and are used in\nJapanese.\n\nI would go for the \"アー\" version.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-11T08:53:59.010", "id": "1851", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-11T08:53:59.010", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "356", "parent_id": "1850", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "Take whichever you want, but be consistent in your whole\nsoftware/document/website.\n\nMy company often localizes Open Source applications to Japanese, and our rule\nis to not add ー if not necessary.\n\nAlso, [Gentoo has its rule](http://www.gentoo.gr.jp/jpmain/project-gwn.xml)\nwritten like this:\n\n>\n> GWN翻訳プロジェクトでは、ユーザやユーザー、コンピュータやコンピューターなど伸ばす、伸ばさない表記どちらもある場合については伸ばさない表記に統一することにしています\n\nTranslation: If both variations are in use, then do not add the final ー", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-11T09:10:56.157", "id": "1852", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-12T02:16:19.737", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-12T02:16:19.737", "last_editor_user_id": "107", "owner_user_id": "107", "parent_id": "1850", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "I work in IT in Tokyo and we use [Salesforce](http://www.salesforce.com/jp/)\nand [Netsuite](http://www.netsuite..co.jp/portal/jp/index.html), both are\nlocalised not translated. They use ユーザ、ユーザログイン、ユーザ名、ユーザパスワード etc.\n\n[Microsoft](http://www.microsoft.com/japan/athome/club/default.aspx) uses ユーザー\nand also [サーバー](http://www.microsoft.com/ja-jp/default.aspx).\n\nYes, it does look like consistency and style because I have read and used both\nユーザ and ユーザー.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-11T14:48:20.460", "id": "1857", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-11T14:48:20.460", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "276", "parent_id": "1850", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "From the point of view of the pronunciation, `ユーザー` is closer to the original\nEnglish word, and that is the generally accepted form in ordinary life,\nespecially among people who are not particularly related to information\ntechnology. However, limited to the information technology context, `ユーザ` is\nthe form that is officially stated as the correct form, and official documents\nare recommended to be written as such. If you are interested in the detail,\nyou may want to take a look at **Japanese Industrial Standard Z8301 Amendment\nG Article 6.2c** and **Table G3**. You can see a copy [here: (logical pages 58\nand 59)](http://www.neca.or.jp/pdf/NECA0202_2006.pdf).", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-12T14:04:30.507", "id": "1877", "last_activity_date": "2016-11-24T22:20:41.287", "last_edit_date": "2016-11-24T22:20:41.287", "last_editor_user_id": "11104", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1850", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "[Wikipedia\n(ja)](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%95%B7%E9%9F%B3%E7%AC%A6#.E9.95.B7.E9.9F.B3.E7.AC.A6.E3.81.AE.E7.9C.81.E7.95.A5)\nhas a nice summary about omission of chōonpu ('─') character in general:\n\n * In the industrial sector, it used to be customary to omit the last chōonpu of loanwords, and it still is followed by some specific fields and companies.\n * Japanese Industrial Standard used to omit chōonpus by a certain rule, but it recently relaxed the rule to allow both omission or inclusion.\n * Even today, there is no nation wide standard on this matter.\n\n(abridged translation by me)\n\nFrom my personal impression, a person who uses ユーザ consistently sounds like\nhe's been knee-deep in the industry for more than a decade, while ユーザー users\nbelong to the generation Y who grew up living in the web.\n\nHowever, this is an overgeneralization which I'll avoid until I'm pressed to\nmake a judgment. In my own writing, I've used both depending on my mood, if it\nweren't specified by a prescribed manual of style.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-12T18:04:19.663", "id": "1886", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-12T18:04:19.663", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "128", "parent_id": "1850", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "Since nobody has given any hard data on the question of which of ユーザー and ユーザ\nis \"more in use\", here is the result of the Balanced Corpus of Contemporary\nWritten Japanese (accessed via <http://nlb.ninjal.ac.jp/search/>)\n\n```\n\n ユーザー 2566 results (84%)\n ユーザ　 487 results (16%)\n \n```\n\nFor サーバー and サーバ the bias is less prevalent\n\n```\n\n サーバー 1011 results (55%)\n サーバ　 813 results (45%)\n \n```", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2016-12-27T11:06:44.020", "id": "42032", "last_activity_date": "2016-12-27T11:06:44.020", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1628", "parent_id": "1850", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "9610", "answer_count": 6, "body": "There are at the very least several i-adjectives can be used as na-adjectives\nby dropping the final い and adding な in its place. The most common examples of\nthis, as far as I am aware, are 大きい and 小さい, which become 大きな and 小さな,\nrespectively. For quite a while, these were the only examples I was aware of,\nand so I was able to accept them as just \"an exception to the rule.\" However,\nas I was just watching an anime, I came across おかしな, which I'd not heard\npreviously.\n\n_Update._ Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams pointed out in a comment that 暖かい can also be\nused in this way (i.e. 暖かな). I guess that means I have to take back my claim\nthat only the three above can be used as na-adjectives. I will continue to\nsearch.\n\n* * *\n\n_Update 3._ It's been quite a while since I originally asked this question,\nand it appears that in the interim, dainichi has found two more instances of\nwhere this is possible. Specifically, やわらかい → やわらかな and 細【こま】かい → 細【こま】かな. So\nmaybe there are some criteria to determine which adjectives can be used in\nthis way, after all.\n\nIn the interest of getting a definitive answer, I've decided to offer a bounty\non this question. The best answer will address the following points fully,\nwith sources cited where possible (academic research or dictionary entries /\ngrammar resources are preferred):\n\n 1. It has been suggested that the ～な usage adds a higher level of subjectivity; **is confirmation of this assertion available?**\n\n 2. We have determined a list currently of six adjectives which can be used in this way, outlined below. **Are there any other i-adjectives which can be used as na-adjectives in this manner?**\n\n 3. **Is there a system or set of criteria which can be used to identify adjectives which can be used in this way?**\n\na. If YES, **what is that system or set of criteria?**\n\nb. If NO, **why can this set of adjectives be used in this way?**\n\nIf you would like the question to be clarified further, please leave a comment\nand I will be more than willing to do so if possible.\n\n* * *\n\n> **Currently Identified i→na Adjectives**\n>\n> * 大【おお】きい ⇒ 大【おお】きな\n> * 小【ちい】さい ⇒ 小【ちい】さな\n> * おかしい ⇒ おかしな\n> * 暖【あたた】かい ⇒ 暖【あたた】かな\n> * やわらかい ⇒ やわらかな\n> * 細【こま】かい ⇒ 細【こま】かな\n>\n\n* * *\n\nRelated question: [Why does Japanese have two kinds of adjectives? (-i\nadjectives and -na\nadjectives)](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/1008/why-does-\njapanese-have-two-kinds-of-adjectives-i-adjectives-and-na-adjectives)", "comment_count": 10, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-11T09:21:22.497", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1853", "last_activity_date": "2019-03-29T20:44:48.267", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.863", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "384", "post_type": "question", "score": 57, "tags": [ "grammar", "nuances", "adjectives" ], "title": "i-adjectives used as na-adjectives: is there a difference? (e.g. 大きい versus 大きな)", "view_count": 12487 }

[ { "body": "> And finally, is there any difference in nuance or feeling when these are\n> used as na-adjectives versus i-adjectives?\n\nShort answer: Consensus is \"using the な version makes the adjective more\nsubjective\".", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-11T10:33:17.587", "id": "1854", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-11T10:33:17.587", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "356", "parent_id": "1853", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "The method foreigners learn Japanese and Japanese learn Japanese is different.\nThe concept of い形容詞 and な形容詞 doesn't exist to natives.\n\n**Native Grammar 形容詞**\n\n* Your い Adjectives.\n* Ex: 大きいもの\n* Ends in い so follow your rules you know\n\n**Native Grammar 形容動詞**\n\n* Your な Adjectives.\n* Ex: きれいな、きれいだ、きれいに\n* Has に、だ following\n\n**Native Grammar: 連体詞**\n\n* _Some_ are your な Adjectives. (some of your exceptions in your listing)\n* Ex: 大きな、この、あの、その\n* Never followed by に、だ（you never say 大きいだ）\n\nEntire books are written on this subject alone, however, I recommend you\neither (a) continue how you're learning and learn the situational uses, or (b)\nspend several months studying Japanese from Japanese books themselves\n(requires advanced level). The terms I listed should help you further in your\nstudies.\n\nI was fortunate to have both opportunities, the latter at a Japanese\nuniversity. Japanese, like most modern languages, is a mess, really, so don't\nalways worry so much about the logic behind it.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-27T08:06:13.113", "id": "9593", "last_activity_date": "2012-11-27T08:06:13.113", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1808", "parent_id": "1853", "post_type": "answer", "score": -4 }, { "body": "This is what I have concluded:\n\n［大き・な, 小さ・な, [可笑]{おか}し・な］\n\nForm a class of \"[連体詞]{れんたいし}\" (\"adnominals\") that are either な-adjectives\nthat are either restricted to 連体形 (\"modifying form\") only or pseudo\nな-adjectives that only have a 連体形. However, because the restrictions of these\nthree are not exactly the same as other 連体詞 (like for instance この/その/あの) they\nare often listed as な-adjectives, usually with a note saying that their usage\nis limited.\n\nAll other 連体詞 are actually verbs/adjectives/nouns/phrases that follow\nclassical grammar rules that have been restricted for modern use, or rather\nmost aspects of their original forms have been deprecated. (いわゆる is a great\nexample of this, as it is 言ふ conjugated with the Heian auxiliary verb ゆ).\n\nAs for addressing the other adjectives mentioned (and also 大きい/小さい):\n\n暖かい→暖かな \nやわらかい→やわらかな \n細かい→細かな\n\nIf you trace them etymologically they are just two separate forms of\nadjectives that branched from the same source. Theoretically, there should be\nno difference between them, though they may naturally have gained some\nnuances. I've never heard of the \"subjective\" argument though.\n\nEtymology chains for those curious: \n_many of these motions are based on not 100% accepted theory_\n\n**あたたか・い／あたたか・な**\n\nあつ(v)→あたつ(v)→あたた(n)→あたたか(n/n-adj)→あたたか・し(adj)\n\n**やわらか・い／やわらか・な**\n\nやわ(n)→やわらか(n/n-adj)→やわらか・し(adj)\n\n**細か・い／細か・な**\n\nこむ(v)→こま(n)→こまか(n/n-adj)→こまか・し(adj)\n\n**大きい／大き・な**\n\nおお(n)→おお・し(adj)→おお・き(adj's 連体形)→おおき・し(adj)→おおき(n-adj)\n\n**小さい／小さ・な**\n\nちす(v)→ちさ(n)→ちいさ(sound change)→ちいさ・し(adj)→ちいさ(n-adj)\n\nWhile some of the end bits of that probably occurred in a 1→2 fashion, some of\nthem may have evolved concurrently, so it would be hard to make a set rule or\nassumption based on how the word was derived. However, if anything, it seems\nclear that all of the na-adjectives that have regular adjective counterparts\nthat are not strange 連体詞 anomalies were na-adjectives **before** they were\nadjectives. I wouldn't say the reverse is valid right away because 小さな／小さい\ndoesn't have any indication that 小さい came before 小さな, but 可笑し・な was clearly an\nしく adjective before they it was a (pseudo) な adjective.\n\nThat's my two cents.\n\nIf we could find any more examples of those sort of dual/form adjectives to\ngive merit to the above assumption/theory that would be awesome, but I doubt\nit'd be enough to make it substantial.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-27T20:18:56.543", "id": "9607", "last_activity_date": "2019-03-29T14:15:45.607", "last_edit_date": "2019-03-29T14:15:45.607", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "433", "parent_id": "1853", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 }, { "body": "## Some Preliminaries\n\nI first think it's necessary to clear up something that has been confusing me\nfrom the start: **we are actually talking about two different classes of\nwords.** The first is the original set of three: 大【おお】きい、小【ちい】さい、可笑【おか】しい. The\nrest of the words we're talking about are all different than these three.\n\n## The Special Three... And All The Rest\n\nWhy are these three special? To answer that, we have to take a look at the\ngrammar of Japanese adjectival forms, what we commonly know as\n**i-adjectives** (形容詞【けいようし】) and **na-adjectives** (形容動詞【けいようどうし】). It's a\nbit more complicated than that in reality, but those are the biggest two sets\nand the most relevant to our discussion.\n\nOne thing that makes these three words special is that **they are i-adjectives\nwith a na-adjective form.** That is also true of the rest of our examples,\nwhich I will come back to shortly. What is extra special about these three\nwords, _and no others_ 1 is that they are _incomplete_ na-adjectives that can\nonly be used to modify a noun; they are like, _broken_.\n\nAll the other words that have been suggested, and indeed all those that\n_could_ be suggested, have fully-fledged na-adjective forms that can be used\nin any situation a normal na-adjective can.\n\n## The Nitty Gritty & Some Examples\n\nConjugable words in Japanese (用言【ようげん】, essentially verbs and adjectives) have\nsix different **stem forms** (活用形【かつようけい】). I'm going to talk about three of\nthem, because they're pretty common with both types of adjective:\n**continuative form** (連用形【れんようけい】), **terminal form** (終止形【しゅうしけい】), and\n**attributive form** (連体形【れんたいけい】).\n\nWith normal adjectives, we can use all of these forms:\n\n> * ○ ゲームを **安【やす】く** 買【か】えるお店【みせ】 (continuative form)\n> * ○ ゲームが **安【やす】い** (terminal form)\n> * ○ **安【やす】い** ゲーム (attributive form)\n>\n\nThat's true of na-adjectives as well:\n\n> * ○ **幸【しあわ】せで** いられる人【ひと】 (continuative form)\n> * ○ **静【しず】かに** 読【よ】む (continuative form)\n> * ○ その人【ひと】が **幸【しあわ】せだ** (terminal form)\n> * ○ **幸【しあわ】せな** 人 (attributive form)\n>\n\nThere are a couple other ways to make some of these forms, but these are the\nprototypical examples. Now, here's the deal: the three words in the \"special\"\nclass I discussed above (大【おお】きい、小【ちい】さい、可笑【おか】しい) **can _only_ be used in the\nattributive form**. So we end up with something like this:\n\n> * × **可笑【おか】しで** 描【か】く (bad, continuative form)\n> * × 絵【え】が **可笑【おか】しだ** (bad, terminal form)\n> * ○ **可笑【おか】しな** 絵【え】 (good, attributive form)\n>\n\nThis pattern is true for all three of these adjectives, and not for any other\ni-adjective. The difference is that with any of the other examples, all of the\nother stem forms are possible, for example:\n\n> * ○ **柔【やわ】らかに** 焼【や】く\n> * ○ パンが **柔【やわ】らかだ**\n> * ○ **柔【やわ】らかな** パン\n>\n\n## Conclusions\n\nSo, let me get back to the questions at hand.\n\n### Does the ～な usage really add a higher level of subjectivity?\n\nHonestly, I don't know. Most of my research was on the usage and\nclassification, not actually on the resulting meanings. It was suggested that\nthe [n] sound in Japanese tends to add a softer feeling to words2, and that\nmay influence the meaning here.\n\n### Are there any other i-adjectives which can be used as na-adjectives in\nthis manner?\n\nYes and no... other than our Special Three, there are no i-adjectives that can\nbe used as na-adjectives in only a limited capacity. There are, however, a\nnumber of other i-adjectives that also function as na-adjectives, for example,\nthose [suggested in a\ncomment](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/1853/384#comment20081_1853) by\n[@user1205935](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/users/1628/user1205935) (and\nI imagine there are any number more):\n\n> * 四角【しかく】い ⇒ 四角【しかく】な\n> * 真【ま】っ白【しろ】い ⇒ 真【ま】っ白【しろ】な\n> * 真【ま】っ黒【くろ】い ⇒ 真【ま】っ黒【くろ】な\n>\n\n### Is there a system or set of criteria which can be used to identify\nadjectives which can be used in this way?\n\nSince I've divided the words up into two groups, this warrants two answers. A\nresearch paper I found1 suggests that words which are both i-adjectives and\nfully-functional na-adjectives generally fall into one of several categories,\nincluding **color** , [edit this].\n\nOn the other hand, our Special Three seem to be unique, so there isn't much of\na system, per se. And finally...\n\n### What makes the Special Three special?\n\nThat's a difficult one. I have yet to find a satisfactory answer; I suspect\nthat no one knows, exactly. There are a number of theories (for example, that\nexplained in [@Kafka\nFuura](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/users/433/kafka-fuura)'s\n[answer](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/a/9607/384)) but there isn't\nanything approaching a real consensus. Unfortunately, this one is probably\ngoing to remain a mystery for now.\n\n## Side Notes\n\nNow, there is actually a class of words which encompasses our Special Three:\nattributive words (連体詞【れんたいし】). There are actually quite a few of these words\nthat can only be used in front of a noun, and they fall into several smaller\nsubcategories: attributives ending in ～の (e.g. あの、この、その); attributives ending\nin ～る (e.g. いわゆる); and attributives ending in ～た (e.g. たいした).\n\nOf course, our Special Three (the only attributives ending in ～な) function a\nbit differently than all of the others.\n\nSo for that reason, I don't much care for the classification of \"attributive\nwords\" -- it combines a lot of words which work in very different ways\ntogether into one category, ignoring the underlying nuances. And the Special\nThree, which are even more special.\n\nBut you should probably know that category does exist. Technically.\n\n## References\n\n1 Backhouse, A. E. (1984). _Have all the adjectives gone?_. Lingua, 62(3),\n169-186. \n2 Makino, S., & Tsutsui, M. (1989). _A dictionary of basic Japanese grammar:\nNihongo kihon bunpō jiten (Vol. 1)_. Japan Times (Tokyo, Japan).\n\n_Note: I can provide a copy of the Backhouse article if you're interested in\nreading it._", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-28T01:15:40.567", "id": "9610", "last_activity_date": "2016-06-16T20:20:18.947", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.740", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "384", "parent_id": "1853", "post_type": "answer", "score": 33 }, { "body": "Very interesting question as it is mixing a few different concepts.\n\n * い adjective 形容詞【けいようし】 (e.g.: 大きい、小さい)\n * だ adjective-verb 形容動詞【けいようどうし】 (e.g.: 便利だ、綺麗だ)\n * 〜な (大きな) 連体詞【れんたいし】 (e.g.: 大きな、小さな)\n\nThe main confusion comes from the fact that the adjective-verb 連体形【れんたいけい】\nlooks like a 連体詞【れんたいし】. Consider the following examples:\n\n> 綺麗な指輪。 A beautiful ring \n> 大きな丘。 A big hill\n\nOne could be easily tempted to say this is a similar grammatical construction,\nbut it is not. \nIn the first sentence it is a adjective-verb (形容動詞) 連体形 form, and in the\nsecond sentence, it is a 連体詞.\n\nOne way to know if 大きな is a 形容動詞 or not is to try to conjugate it as a 形容動詞\nwould, eg: 大きだった, that should feel totally unnatural.\n\nSo the previous example conjugated will be:\n\n> 綺麗だった指輪。 (still a 形容動詞) \n> 大き **かった** 丘。 (switched to a 形容詞)\n\nA rule of thumb in this case is that any い adjective you see with a な ending\nis not used as an adjective-verb, but as a 連体詞 and thus cannot be conjugated\nin the same fashion of an adjective-verb.\n\n連体詞 are a very unique grammatical structure, and even native speakers\nsometimes conceptually mix them with 形容詞 or 形容動詞。\n\nA few links in case you want more information:\n\n * [link](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1035619725)\n * [link2](http://katsujuku8317061.ti-da.net/e2993390.html)\n * [link3](http://ameblo.jp/kokugo-doushi/entry-10912024943.html)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-11-28T01:17:39.910", "id": "9611", "last_activity_date": "2015-01-15T21:01:50.093", "last_edit_date": "2015-01-15T21:01:50.093", "last_editor_user_id": "3437", "owner_user_id": "1868", "parent_id": "1853", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "### Addendum\n\nAs others have explained, most of these are pairs of ～い and ～な adjectives that\nboth arose in parallel from single roots.\n\nThe oddballs are 大きな・小さな・可笑しな, which exist **only** as adnominals -- they must\nbe followed by nouns, and cannot be used predicatively (at the end of a\nsentence) -- and which have no corresponding に adverbial forms.\n\n**However** , one of these three is not quite as odd. 可笑【をか】し existed as the\nwell-known terminal form of modern adjective 可笑【おか】しい, _but_ it also existed\nas the noun 可笑【をか】し・可笑【をかし】. Definitions and quotes, excerpted from\nShōgakukan's 国語大辞典 (emphasis, furigana, and dates added by me):\n\n> **1** 笑【わら】うべきこと。滑稽【こっけい】。戯【たわむ】れ。＊史記抄【しきしょう】 (1477)‐一七「 **をかし**\n> をすれども道【みち】に合【あ】ふぞ」 \n> **2**\n> 猿楽【さるがく】、間【あい】狂言【きょうげん】などの滑稽【こっけい】な劇【げき】。また、それを演【えん】ずる人【ひと】。＊看聞【かんもん】御記【ぎょき】‐永享四年\n> (1432) 一〇月一〇日「​ **拍子咲（ヲカシ）** ​などは男也」\n\nThis root is probably derived in turn from now-archaic verb 招【を】く as appears\nin the 古事記【こじき】 and the 万葉集【まんようしゅう】, and as suggested at [Gogen-\nAllguide](http://gogen-allguide.com/o/okashii.html), from the sense of\n\"something that causes one to draw near (because it's funny and interesting)\".\nI believe the な conjugation derives from the noun form.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2019-03-29T20:44:48.267", "id": "66324", "last_activity_date": "2019-03-29T20:44:48.267", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5229", "parent_id": "1853", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1858", "answer_count": 2, "body": "Every now and then I hear 待ちに待った, as in:\n\n> 待ちに待ったライブ a long-awaited concert\n\nI started wondering if this pattern can apply to other verbs, and it certainly\nseems to, if Google is any indication. I found instances of 望みに望んだ, 祈りに祈った,\nand even things like 飲みに飲んだ.\n\n**Question A** : Can I use this pattern with any verb showing intent? Is there\na particular nuance behind it, or does it simply mean \"to [verb] and then\n[verb] some more\"?\n\n**Question B** : For the linguists in the room (y'all know who you are), how\nis the に classified in this pattern? Is it the same に as in 買いに行く?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-11T13:54:21.533", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1856", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-13T14:03:17.367", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "94", "post_type": "question", "score": 11, "tags": [ "grammar", "usage", "particles", "verbs", "particle-に" ], "title": "How does one use the \"[V ます stem] に [Vタ]\" pattern (as in 待ちに待った)?", "view_count": 648 }

[ { "body": "It seems to just be for emphasis, as this sort of \"emphasis-repetition\" is\ncommon in other languages as well. I've only heard it a handful of times, in\nregards to foods:\n\n> のど渇きに渇いています → I am extremely thirsty \n> お腹すきにすいた → I was really hungry\n\n**Question A:** Not sure of any nuances of it or in which situations it is\nappropriate (either grammatically or otherwise).\n\n**Question B:** Seems to be the same に. As talked about in [this\npost](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/1320/correct-usage-of-verb-\nstem-another-verb), this form (X連用形＋に＋Y) means \"do Y for the purpose of X\";\n'Go' for the purpose of 'buying', etc. So this would seem to be in line with\nthe emphasis; 'wait for the purpose of waiting', 'hope for the purpose of\nhoping', etc.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-11T14:53:01.467", "id": "1858", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-11T14:53:01.467", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.207", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "1856", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "I agree with istarsci's answer. But there may be a little bit to add.\n\nThere seems to be a phonological restriction. That is, this construction does\nnot seem to be allowed with verbs whose stem is only one mora. The following\nexamples are ungrammatical:\n\n> * ×得に得る\n> * ×来に来る\n> * ×しにする\n> * ×寝に寝る\n> * ×見に見る\n>\n\nThere is also a fixed expression used with negation:\n\n> 泣くに泣けない 'so sad/bad that one cannot even cry/crying will not help'", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-12T13:25:24.287", "id": "1876", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-13T14:03:17.367", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-13T14:03:17.367", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1856", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 3, "body": "Specifically, in the expression\n\n> 好き **なんだ** (I love you)\n\nwhy not just say\n\n> 好きだ\n\nor\n\n> 好きです\n\n?", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-11T15:28:14.053", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1859", "last_activity_date": "2021-10-30T21:27:55.650", "last_edit_date": "2020-12-24T17:09:14.750", "last_editor_user_id": "37097", "owner_user_id": "495", "post_type": "question", "score": 34, "tags": [ "nuances", "contractions", "formal-nouns", "no-da" ], "title": "What connotation does なんだ add?", "view_count": 20498 }

[ { "body": "なんだ is a pattern that is sometimes called the \"extended predicate\". The exact\nbest way to express this in English is subject to debate.\n\nUsually the usage follows a pattern of explanation of some question that\neither has been asked explicitly or could be asked implicitly. For example, if\nA-san is telling B-san that s/he wants to go with B-san to Tokyo, \"好きなんだ\"\nprovides an explanation of why A-san wants to go.\n\nMy personal choice of translating this is to use the form \"It's that...\" or\nthe longer form \"It is the case that...\". Although this is not a precise\ntranslation, but in some contexts it provides a workable distinction from the\ntranslation of the more direct \"好きだ\".", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-11T15:41:20.583", "id": "1860", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-11T15:41:20.583", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "29", "parent_id": "1859", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 }, { "body": "It's hard to answer this specific question without getting into the more\ngeneral topic of the ～のだ construction, which, as jkerian mentioned, can mark\nan explanation for a certain context, which may be either explicit or\nimplicit. Put succinctly, ～のだ provides supporting information. This\ninformation is often a reason, but it may be a cause, basis, conclusion,\nrestatement, or confession. Because it is supporting, ～のだ tends to shift the\nfocus away from the information it marks. (This is in contrast to ～から, which\noften draws more focus toward the information it follows.)\n\n(Bill Nye voice) Consider the following:\n\n> A: (1) You weren't in the office last week, were you? (2) Did you go\n> somewhere?\n>\n> B: (3) Yeah, I traveled with my family to Nagoya.\n>\n> A: (1) 先週、会社にいなかったね。 (2) どこかに行った **のか** 。\n>\n> B: (3) うん、家族で名古屋に旅行してきた **んだ** 。\n\nIn sentence (2), A asks a question with ～のか, the question form of ～のだ. This\nconnects the question to sentence (1) and shows that the answer to the\nquestion will provide a basis for the fact that B wasn't in the office last\nweek. (Sentence (2) could actually be left out entirely. In this case, B may\nanticipate sentence (2) as an unspoken question and answer with the exact same\nsentence (3) as above.) In sentence (3), B provides the supporting information\nthat A is looking for, and since it is supporting information, it is marked\nwith ～のだ (～んだ in speech).\n\nFrom an English perspective, a sentence without ～のだ looks exactly like one\nwith ～のだ, because in English we tend to leave these inter-sentence connections\nunspoken. This is part of why the ～のだ construction is difficult to grasp. You\ncould theoretically force an English rendition, but at the expense of\nnaturalness:\n\n> A: (1) You weren't in the office last week, were you? (2) **[Is this]\n> because** you went somewhere?\n>\n> B: (3) Yeah, **[I wasn't in the office] because** I traveled with my family\n> to Nagoya.\n\nNow from general to specific. In your question, it's difficult to say why the\nspeaker would use 好きなんだ over 好きだ, since we have no context. But ～のだ is often\nused in confessing something the listener would have a hard time knowing.\n(This also counts as supporting information, since its purpose is to fill in a\ngap in the listener's understanding.) So 好きなんだ would be preferable to 好きだ in\nthat context:\n\n> ずっと前に気づいたけど、今まで言えなくてごめん……実は、○○くんのことが好きなんだ… （胸キュン！）\n\n好きなんだ is better here because the first half raises a question in the\nlistener's mind (What hasn't she been able to say until now?). Since the\nsecond half is designed to anticipate and answer that question, it's marked\nwith ～んだ. 好きだ would technically convey the same information, but without の/ん\nyou lose that connection between thoughts and the sentence doesn't flow as\nwell in Japanese.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-11T19:31:11.213", "id": "1863", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-11T19:31:11.213", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "94", "parent_id": "1859", "post_type": "answer", "score": 37 }, { "body": "I also would like to add my information gained from my teacher at college. He\nsays while the above explanation describes in great details in what context we\nuse 「んだ」 or 「のだ」, basically it cannot be translated as the expression of\ncause, basis, conclusion, restatement, or confession. According to his\nacademic research on Japanese language 「んだ」 or 「のだ」only accidentally\nexplainable with these meanings, since 'cause, basis, restatemen and\nconfession' aren't expressed by them, but by the actual questions and answer\npairs. He says the real function of 「んだ」 or 「のだ」 regards the style of speech\nrather than the content. The grammar in question is like the use of arms in\nmartial arts when we fall to the ground to blunt the power of the drop.\nAccording to his findings, these sentence ending structures have the same\nfunction, to blunt the edge of the question - for example - if we accidentally\nconjugate the sentence ending verb into a short form.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2016-08-01T08:54:19.633", "id": "37104", "last_activity_date": "2016-08-01T08:54:19.633", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5392", "parent_id": "1859", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1892", "answer_count": 3, "body": "Just wondering If choosing a reading is as simple as whether 得る is a suffix.\n\nThis is from tatoeba.org, a wiki-like sentence mine, so I'm not sure if える,\nthe reading entered is correct.\n\n> 彼はとてもよく訓練された役者だけが本当に成功し得ると思っている。 He thinks that only very well trained\n> actors can be really successful.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-11T16:32:09.253", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1861", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-13T09:08:24.930", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-13T09:08:24.930", "last_editor_user_id": "125", "owner_user_id": "54", "post_type": "question", "score": 9, "tags": [ "readings", "suffixes" ], "title": "Is the only time 得る read as うる when it's a suffix?", "view_count": 627 }

[ { "body": "Both readings can be suffixes and both can be used in many of the common\nconstructions of 得る:\n\n> 当を得る (to be in order):【とうをうる】or 【とうをえる】\n>\n> あり得る (to be probable): 【ありえる】or 【ありうる】\n>\n> etc. etc.\n\n[Yahoo dict\nsays](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&p=%E3%81%88%E3%82%8B&dtype=0&stype=1&dname=0na&pagenum=1&index=01948700):\n\n> ◆[...] また、終止するときは文語形の「うる」となることがあり、特に5の終止形・連体形は「うる」を用いることが多い。→う（得）る", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-12T00:17:34.140", "id": "1864", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-12T00:17:34.140", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "290", "parent_id": "1861", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "得る is usually read as える. This is the \"modern\" verb-form of 得（う） (shimo-\nnidan).\n\nConjugation (MZK/RYK/SSK/RTK/IZK/MRK)\n\nModern: え/え/える/える/えれ/えよ \nClassic: え/え/う/うる/うれ/えよ\n\nOne thing to note is that for MZK and RTK, either conjugation is え, so you\nwill never-ever read 得ない as \"unai\" etc, and because you never really see\nclassical SSK in regular text (since SSK and RTK are read the same in modern\nJapanese) you'll probably never have to read it as 得(う). The only time you\nread it as うる is if it's a sentence ending or directly modifying something.\nBut again, the うる reading itself is pretty rare. The only thing I tend to see\nis an occasional あり得る(ありうる), but you can read that as (ありえる) anyway.\n\nFor that particular sentence: 彼はとてもよく訓練された役者だけが本当に成功し得ると思っている\n\n^I would guess 'しえる', just because える is more common. し得る on my IME comes up\nas a candidate for both しえる and しうる.\n\n**Edit:**\n\n```\n\n MZK=未然形=Mizenkei (ex: ない attaches)\n RYK=連用形=Renyoukei (ex: て/た/ます attach)\n SSK=終止形=Shuushikei (ex: end of sentence when NOT a question)\n RTK=連体形=Rentaikei (ex: declarative, bound ending, question ending)\n IZK=已然形=Izenkei (ex: ば (conditional in modern/\"when\"-only in classical))\n MRK=命令形=Meireikei (ex: imperative \"commands\") \n \n```", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-13T01:53:21.287", "id": "1892", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-13T07:22:20.883", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-13T07:22:20.883", "last_editor_user_id": "290", "owner_user_id": "433", "parent_id": "1861", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "Just to add some (hopefully useful to you too) info on this subject:\n<http://www.guidetojapanese.org/learn/grammar/potential>:\n\n> You can say that something has a possibility of existing by combining 「ある」\n> and the verb 「得る」 to produce 「あり得る」. This essentially means 「あることができる」\n> except that nobody actually says that, they just use 「あり得る」. This verb is\n> very curious in that it can be read as either 「ありうる」 or 「ありえる」, however; all\n> the other conjugations such as 「ありえない」、「ありえた」、and 「ありえなかった」 only have one\n> possible reading using 「え」.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-13T08:41:10.853", "id": "1899", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-13T08:41:10.853", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "264", "parent_id": "1861", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1869", "answer_count": 3, "body": "Recently I learned of a new way to express potential form. Here's a few\nexample sentences:\n\n * 今回は予測し得ないことが起きたけど、皆、落ち着いていた。\n * 自分の意見を自由に言えないなんて、普通の国ではあり得ない。\n\nThe second example I put for contrast, because it illustrates one obvious\ndifference which is that I don't think potential forms of ある and いる exist.\n\nIn the first example, however, it's not so clear. Instinctually, from looking\nat these and a few other examples, I think perhaps there is a sense of\nimpossibility here that is not present in simple できる or ～られる form, but I have\ntrouble articulating it, and it may be a red herring anyway.\n\nFor example, change the first sentence to this:\n\n * 今回は予測できないことが起きたけど、皆、落ち着いていた。\n\nDoes it have a different nuance now?\n\nCan someone elaborate on the differences between these two constructs?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-12T04:14:52.080", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1865", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-12T05:56:47.530", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-12T04:36:55.023", "last_editor_user_id": "483", "owner_user_id": "483", "post_type": "question", "score": 8, "tags": [ "word-choice", "nuances" ], "title": "得る vs ～られる potential form", "view_count": 1108 }

[ { "body": "Japanese here. The two \"得ない\" are same to me at least. The first example talks\nabout \"some thing that couldn't possibly be anticipated happened\", and the\nsecond example talks about that \"there is no way that this happens in a normal\ncountry\". \nThey both simply express impossibility. Only the proceeding verb\n(predict/exist) is different.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-12T04:32:01.590", "id": "1867", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-12T04:32:01.590", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "1865", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "* 今回は予測し得ないことが起きたけど、皆、落ち着いていた。\n * 今回は予測できないことが起きたけど、皆、落ち着いていた。\n\nWhen you compare the two, the first one is just stronger than the later. In\nthe first one, there is an emphasis on the impossibility. It kind of stands\nout. So you have 50% emphasis on the impossibility part, and another 50% on\nthe 落ち着いていた part. \nIn the latter, perhaps the speaker has already talked about the impossibility\nand is not intending to place focus here. The emphasis is much more on the\n落ち着いていた part now.\n\n得ない would translate to something like \"totally impossible\", while できない would\ntranslate to \"cannot\" or something.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-12T04:47:48.467", "id": "1868", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-12T05:56:47.530", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-12T05:56:47.530", "last_editor_user_id": "28", "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "1865", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "First, I think that 連用形+得る is more formal than the classical potential forms.\nThen, I feel a slight nuance: the 得ない form dissociates the speaker from the\nimpossibility. Overstating, it's like When you say できない, it means _you_ cannot\ndo it; when you say し得ない, it means that it cannot be done.\n\nSecond, potential form of いる exists: I'm pretty sure I already heard: \n\"ここにいられません。すぐ出てください！\" (You can't be here, go away right now!)\n\nFor ある, there is あられる, but it's some 敬語, and no more a potential indeed.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-12T05:00:57.290", "id": "1869", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-12T05:00:57.290", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "356", "parent_id": "1865", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 1, "body": "When using `あまり` in the sense of \"too much\" (as opposed to \"not very\"), until\nrecently I had always seen it as `あまりにもA`, with A being the thing that there\nwas too much of. I never really tried to relate the meaning of individual\nparticles `に` and `も` to the word `あまり` and try to understand how it takes on\nthe meaning of \"too much\", I just accept it as a set expression. Here is an\nexample of this usage:\n\n> * あの本はあまりにも面白かったので、読むのに夢中になっていたら、いつの間にか夜が明けていた。\n>\n\nRecently I saw it used as `<N>のあまり` and `<V-dict>あまり` with seemingly identical\nmeaning. Examples:\n\n> * 母は、私を心配するあまり、体調を崩したようです。\n> * その犬が死んだ時、先生は悲しみのあまり、しばらく仕事を休んでいました。\n>\n\nIs this the same usage of あまり? Could I simply switch to the other pattern in\nall 3 of the above examples?\n\n> * あの本は面白かったあまり、読むのに夢中になっていたら、いつの間にか夜が明けていた。\n> * 母は、私をあまりにも心配して、体調を崩したようです。\n> * その犬が死んだ時、先生はあまりにも悲しみ、しばらく仕事を休んでいました。\n>\n\nIs there any difference in nuance here, or perhaps is something flat out\nwrong? Also, is there any context in which あまり can be used with に or は such as\n`あまりに` or `あまりは`? If so, what is the meaning in this case? Maybe someone could\nconstruct an example sentence with translation using `あまりに` and/or `あまりは`, if\nit makes sense.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-12T04:30:14.640", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1866", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-12T06:40:56.413", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-12T06:40:56.413", "last_editor_user_id": "483", "owner_user_id": "483", "post_type": "question", "score": 11, "tags": [ "grammar", "usage", "nuances" ], "title": "あまり meaning \"too much\"", "view_count": 2925 }

[ { "body": "Yes, the meaning is the same, but the usage is not necessarily\ninterchangeable. According to my book, in the form `～のあまり`, the 「～」 part is\nsupposed to be something that expresses emotion or feeling. (感情を表す言葉)\n\n> 例： 驚きのあまり、心配のあまり、感激のあまり、懐かしさのあまり、などなど\n\nThere is also one form that you didn't mention is `あまりの～に`. The ～ here is\noften the さ-noun form of an adjective (形容詞に「さ」がついた名詞が来ることが多い).\n\n> 例： あまりの暑さに、あまりのやさしさに、など\n\nI'm not quite sure about the formation or usage of `あまりにもA`, as it is one of\nthose patterns that's somehow slipped through the cracks of all my years of\nstudying. But it seems that they all have the same connotations behind them.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-12T05:49:17.640", "id": "1871", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-12T05:49:17.640", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "1866", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1882", "answer_count": 5, "body": "When I learnt this grammar point a while ago, my teachers told me not to use\nit with \"から\". There reasoning for this was that のだ already implies a reason or\nsupporting information for a conclusion.\n\nEven reading through the answers for \"[What connotation does なんだ\nadd?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/1859/what-connotation-does-\nadd)\", it appears のだ is contrasted with から.\n\nHowever, I see and hear this construction (んだから）all the time. It doesn't seem\nvery rare at all, which leaves me confused as to why my native Japanese\nteachers told me that it was incorrect in the first place.\n\nI'll use the first result from Google as the example.\n\n> お兄ちゃんのことがぜんぜんすきじゃないんだからねっ！！\n\nThis is a title for a movie. However, how would this be different if the title\nhad have been:\n\n> お兄ちゃんのことがぜんぜんすきじゃないんだっ！！\n\nIf のだ is used as a way to indicate reason, then why is から also included? When\nwould it be correct to use のだから instead of のだ?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-12T05:32:57.403", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1870", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-30T19:00:43.743", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-30T19:00:43.743", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "108", "post_type": "question", "score": 18, "tags": [ "grammar", "formal-nouns", "contractions", "copula" ], "title": "のだから vs のだ (んだから vs んだ）", "view_count": 11567 }

[ { "body": "> お兄ちゃんのことがぜんぜんすきじゃないんだからねっ！！ \n> This is a title for a movie. However, how would this be different if the\n> title had have been: \n> お兄ちゃんのことがぜんぜんすきじゃないんだっ！！\n\n1) That's because I really don't like him! \n2) I really don't like him!\n\n> If のだ is used as a way to indicate reason, then why is から also included?\n> When would it be correct to use のだから instead of のだ?\n\nWith のだ, you _may_ say there is a reason. You may implicitly make a\ncause/consequence relation or a correlation. You were maybe not directly asked\nthe reason to which you reply. \nA: Doesn't he sing well? \nB: I don't care, I don't like him anyway!\n\nWith のだから, you emphasise that THIS IS the reason. \nA: Why don't you marry him? \nB: Because I dislike him! Are you stupid or what?", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-12T06:13:17.137", "id": "1872", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-12T17:06:28.033", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-12T17:06:28.033", "last_editor_user_id": "28", "owner_user_id": "356", "parent_id": "1870", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "Perhaps your teachers told you ～のだから (～んだから) is incorrect not because it is\nnever used (you already know it's very common) but because you can't simply\ndrop it into any sentence.\n\nWhile digging around on Google, I came across [a very nice\nPDF](https://web.archive.org/web/20130120054607/https://www.jpf.go.jp/j/japanese/survey/tsushin/grammar/pdf/grammar201009.pdf)\npublished by the Japan Foundation which explains the use of ～のだから. You can\nread it on your own (it's even got 読み仮名!), but I'll summarize the main points\nhere.\n\n### Rules for ～のだから\n\n 1. Used when _both the speaker and listener know some fact_ , but expresses a strong feeling on the part of the speaker that the listener, although conscious of said fact, _does not fully appreciate its implications_. (I have also seen this expressed as a _mismatch between the speaker's and listener's perception of some matter_.)\n 2. The clause following ～のだから often expresses the speaker's judgment, intent, wish, or request.\n\n### Example 1\n\nA mother tells her children, 「10時半のバスに乗る **から** 、早く支度しなさい。」 (\"We're taking the\n10:30 bus, so hurry up and get ready to go.\"). The children, however, are\noccupied with other things and don't do much in the way of getting ready. So\nthe mother comes back and says, 「10時半のバスに乗る **んだから** 、早く支度しなさい。」 (\"[Hey, I\nknow you know] we're taking the 10:30 bus, so hurry up and get ready to go.\").\n～から is used in the first sentence because it's new information and simply\nprovides a reason for the latter clause. But ～のだから is used in the second\nbecause the children are aware of the fact that they're taking the 10:30 bus,\nyet their failure to get ready to leave shows that they don't fully appreciate\nits importance. ～のだから adds emphasis and serves to pull the listener's point of\nview around to the same side as the speaker's.\n\n### Example 2\n\nA student comes up to a teacher and says, 「用事がある **んですから** 、早めに帰りたいんですが。」 (\"I\nhave a prior obligation, so I'd like to leave early [if I could]….\"). The\nteacher feels offended by this, because the use of ～のだから implies that the\nteacher should be aware of the fact that the student has something scheduled,\nwhen in fact the teacher has no such knowledge. (A better sentence would be\n「用事があります **ので** 、早めに帰りたいんですが。」 because ～ので does not presume that the listener\nalready knows whatever precedes ～ので.)\n\nThere's a four-problem quiz in the linked PDF which is left as an exercise to\nthe reader.\n\n### お兄ちゃんのことがぜんぜんすきじゃないんだからねっ！！\n\nContext would help a bit here, but just as a guess, this is best filed under\nthe \"mismatch between perceptions\" category of ～のだから: お兄ちゃん sees his 妹's\nactions as signs that she might actually like him, but in reality that's not\nthe case, so 妹 decides to set the record straight and make sure she and お兄ちゃん\nare on the same page with ～のだから (the implication being that お兄ちゃん should be\nwell aware of this fact, but from 妹's perspective, he doesn't seem to be fully\nappreciative of it).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-12T15:13:51.973", "id": "1882", "last_activity_date": "2021-11-30T18:59:45.430", "last_edit_date": "2021-11-30T18:59:45.430", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "94", "parent_id": "1870", "post_type": "answer", "score": 20 }, { "body": "Here `だから` is more for implying that the speaker does not want the listener to\nmisunderstand. A full sentence could be:\n\n> あなたのこと好きじゃないんだから、勘違いしないでね。 \n> I don't like you, so don't misunderstand it. \n> あなたのこと好きじゃないんだから、まるで私が好きかのようにふるまわないでください。 \n> I don't like you, so don't act as if I like you.\n\nWhether you should use `のだから` or not depends on what kind of sentence you're\nbuilding. `のだ` could be for **explanation** ,\n\n> 妹は私のことが嫌い **なのだ** 。だって、このあいだ「お兄ちゃんのこと(ry」って言ってたもの。 \n> My sister hates me. After all, a while ago she said \"I don't li(skipped for\n> brevity)\"\n\nor it could be for **emphasis** on a stand,\n\n> 可愛いは正義なのだ! \n> Cuteness is justice!\n\nor when used with an interrogative, to express **wonder** or to ask for\nexplanation against somebody\n\n> 妹のどこがいいのだ。うるさいし、かわいくないし、(ry \n> What's so good about little sisters? They're rowdy, not cute, (skipped for\n> brevity).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-15T17:44:22.893", "id": "1960", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-15T17:44:22.893", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "154", "parent_id": "1870", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "Derek’s answer gives a very accurate description of what のだから means, but let\nme add a secondary point that is specific to your example: in this case, the\ntitle _implies_ that in fact, the speaker likes her brother although the title\n_states_ the opposite.\n\nFrom Derek’s answer:\n\n> お兄ちゃん sees his 妹's actions as signs that she might actually like him, but in\n> reality that's not the case, so 妹 decides to set the record straight and\n> make sure she and お兄ちゃん are on the same page with ～のだから (the implication\n> being that お兄ちゃん should be well aware of this fact, but from 妹's\n> perspective, he doesn't seem to be fully appreciative of it).\n\nAll of this is from the sister’s perspective. But the very need of setting the\nrecord straight and making sure that she does not particularly like him _is_ a\nsign that she actually likes him. Otherwise why would the brother think that\nhis sister likes him in the first place?\n\nDenying explicitly and strongly that the speaker likes the addressee while the\nspeaker actually likes the addressee is such a stereotypical situation\n(probably mainly in comics) that there is a slang which describes the very\nsituation: ツンデレ.\n\n(By the way, the correct title is [お兄ちゃんのこと **なんか**\nぜんぜん好きじゃないんだからねっ!!](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%81%8A%E5%85%84%E3%81%A1%E3%82%83%E3%82%93%E3%81%AE%E3%81%93%E3%81%A8%E3%81%AA%E3%82%93%E3%81%8B%E3%81%9C%E3%82%93%E3%81%9C%E3%82%93%E5%A5%BD%E3%81%8D%E3%81%98%E3%82%83%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84%E3%82%93%E3%81%A0%E3%81%8B%E3%82%89%E3%81%AD%E3%81%A3!!)\nThis なんか means that the speaker does not think お兄ちゃんのこと as an important thing,\nwhich strengthens the speaker’s denial of the fact that she likes her brother,\nand again strengthens the actual implication that she actually likes him.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-16T15:20:51.870", "id": "1986", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-16T15:20:51.870", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "1870", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "Well my teacher taught us that there is not much meaning to 「んです」 then making\nthe short form lighter in style. According to his researches on an academic\nlevel there is no explanation to it more than a stylistic one.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2017-11-16T06:12:06.923", "id": "54531", "last_activity_date": "2017-11-16T06:12:06.923", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "26504", "parent_id": "1870", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1874", "answer_count": 2, "body": "This sentence was in a grammar textbook:\n\n> 彼{かれ}は同僚{どうりょう}にライバル意識{いしき}、ひいては殺意{さつい}すら **抱** いていた\n\n... it means:\n\n> \"He regarded his colleague as a rival, even to the point of considering\n> murder.\"\n\nMy question is about the last kanji, 抱. It seems to have three readings,\n`だ・く`, `いだ・く`, and `うだ・く`, though I think the last one might be rare.\n\nSo far as I can tell, they all carry exactly the same definition, which is \"to\nhold, to embrace, to carry\", which can be meant both in the physical sense of\nactually holding something, as well as the metaphorical sense of holding onto\na feeling, like a grudge. (So I would assume the translation above, which\nisn't mine, took the liberty of changing \"harbouring intentions of murder\"\ninto \"considering murder\".)\n\nIs there a way I can determine which reading is the right one? Unless I'm\nmistaken, they all conjugate with the same\n[okurigana](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okurigana), so I can't use the\ntrailing hiragana as any kind of indicator.\n\nIs there any difference in implied meaning or usage between the readings?\n\nAlso, slight bonus question... My understanding is that the `だ・く` reading can\nbe used as a slang way of saying sex (I saw it used that way in a TV show\nonce). Is that true, what would be the nuances it carries, and is it also true\nfor the other readings?\n\n_Lastly: As is always my preference, please keep answers readable for all,\nwith either no technical linguistic terminology, or with linguistic terms in a\nseparate section for those who want it. Thanks!_", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-12T08:23:27.567", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1873", "last_activity_date": "2022-03-21T22:25:20.870", "last_edit_date": "2013-09-13T16:33:55.907", "last_editor_user_id": "119", "owner_user_id": "119", "post_type": "question", "score": 17, "tags": [ "word-choice", "verbs", "definitions", "readings", "okurigana" ], "title": "How do I know when to read the kanji 抱 as 「だ・く」, and when to read it as 「いだ・く」, or even 「うだ・く」?", "view_count": 842 }

[ { "body": "Well, first, I think that うだく is archaic, as I read it:\n\n> 〔上代語「むだく」の転で、「だく」の古形。平安鎌倉時代の漢文訓読にだけ見える語〕\n\nThen, だく seems to be use for concrete situations, when you really use your\nhands.\n\nいだく seems to be\n\n * a more literary reading, or\n * used in abstract situations, like 「理想を―・く」「不安を―・く」. This is exactly your sentence, isn't it?\n\nSources: on-line dictionaries and websites for Japanese people having the same\nquestions :)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-12T08:42:32.370", "id": "1874", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-12T08:42:32.370", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "356", "parent_id": "1873", "post_type": "answer", "score": 16 }, { "body": "First, concurring with Axioplase: だく is for tangible things; いだく is for\nabstract things. Daijisen has a usage note under 抱える that deals with this\ndistinction.)\n\nWith regard to your second question, yes, だく can have the connotation of\n\"sleep with\" (second sense in the Daijisen definition for 抱く). It's a somewhat\n\"nicer\" way to say \"sleep with\" in the sense that it doesn't have the same\nbluntness as the loanword セックス or the crude やる, probably because the more\ncommon interpretation is that of embracing, as in 抱きしめる. Whether you can use\nit in conversation still depends on the setting you're in, but it's not all\nthat uncommon to hear of magazine surveys listing which famous people readers\nmost want to だきたい or だかれたい.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-12T12:32:49.383", "id": "1875", "last_activity_date": "2022-03-21T22:25:20.870", "last_edit_date": "2022-03-21T22:25:20.870", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "94", "parent_id": "1873", "post_type": "answer", "score": 18 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1879", "answer_count": 3, "body": "Why is it that the っけ suffix / け particle (indicating that the speaker is\ntrying to recall some information) can only be attached to a sentence when the\nsentence itself is a question-sentence?\n\nBecause all 10 example usages i see in\n[WWWJDIC](http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jwb/cgi-\nbin/wwwjdic.cgi?1MUE%E3%81%A3%E3%81%91) does that, hence the question.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-12T14:32:16.723", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1878", "last_activity_date": "2012-09-12T01:13:20.577", "last_edit_date": "2012-09-12T01:13:20.577", "last_editor_user_id": "501", "owner_user_id": "264", "post_type": "question", "score": 6, "tags": [ "particles", "questions", "sentence-final-particles" ], "title": "Why is it that the っけ suffix can only be attached to a question-sentence", "view_count": 378 }

[ { "body": "Although these sentences are nearly always _translated_ as questions, the\n(admittedly informal and possibly colloquial) usage of っけ followed by か\nsuggests that there is a difference at least on some level. In my experience,\n\"questions\" formed via the っけ particle are often rhetorical -- but just as\noften, they are interpreted as a request for information.\n\nBasically though, the answer is **yes, use of っけ to indicate an attempt to\nrecall information pretty much always turns the sentence into a question.**\n\n**Edit:** Although I believe that this is implicit in my original answer\nabove, I though I would more explicitly answer your question post-edit.\n\nIt is not so much that っけ can _only be used_ with questions, but rather that\nit _turns sentences it **is** used with **into** a question._ For example,\nconsider the following:\n\n> * あなたの名前は何ですか。\n> * あなたの名前は何でしたっけ。 (warning: this is probably a _bit_ rude.)\n>\n\nThis is an example of っけ being used on a sentence that is a question-form\n(i.e. it uses an interrogative, in this case 何); but it doesn't **have** to\nbe, as in the following examples.\n\n> * ここはオハイオ州です。\n> * ここはオハイオ州でしたっけ。\n>\n\nIn these sentences, っけ is indicating that the speaker cannot recall what state\nhe or she is in; by saying this, he or she is **implicitly** requesting the\nlistener supply that information, which is to say that っけ is _turning the\nsentence **into** a question_", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-12T14:48:39.453", "id": "1879", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-13T01:22:05.493", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-13T01:22:05.493", "last_editor_user_id": "384", "owner_user_id": "384", "parent_id": "1878", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "だっけ denotes a question of the form \"(proposed fact) ... is this so?\", where\n(proposed fact) is a fact that the questioner once knew but has since\nforgotten. It is not rhetorical, at least not in the sense that the questioner\n(now) knows the answer. The questioner is no longer sure of the answer, and is\nseeking confirmation.\n\n> 外国のレストランでのチップって 10% だっけ？ : I forget; is the tip at foreign restaurants 10%?\n>\n> 10% はショボいだろ。 : 10 % is a bit stingy.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-12T16:23:05.680", "id": "1884", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-12T20:02:01.323", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "448", "parent_id": "1878", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "Since nobody has offered what I consider to be the most straightforward\ntranslation for 'っけ', here I go:\n\nWhen added at the end of a question (usually a rhetoric one), the closest\nequivalent in English would be to add \"... again?\" at the end. E.g:\n\n> なんですか？ → What is it?\n>\n> なんだっけ → What is it again?\n>\n> どこですか？ → Where is it?\n>\n> どこだっけ → Where is it again?\n>\n> etc. etc.\n\n(indeed, marking that you are trying to recall something you once knew or were\nsupposed to know)\n\nJust like this \"again\" in English, 'っけ' is rather colloquial (but not rude).\n\n**Update:** I thought the connection would be obvious enough, but apparently\nnot for everybody. So let me spell it out: just like saying \"where is it\nagain?\" or \"is it here again?\" (with proper raising intonation in both case),\nyou usually need to be asking a question (rhetoric or otherwise) for 'っけ' to\nmake sense.", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-12T23:58:38.110", "id": "1890", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-14T00:04:14.490", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-14T00:04:14.490", "last_editor_user_id": "290", "owner_user_id": "290", "parent_id": "1878", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1883", "answer_count": 1, "body": "This question has 2 parts.\n\nWhy is it that ああ has so many different kanji 嗚呼; 於乎; 於戯; 嗟乎; 嗟夫; 吁; 嗟; 噫; 鳴呼\n[(source)](http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jwb/cgi-\nbin/wwwjdic.cgi?1MUE%E3%82%A2%E3%83%BC)\n\nand is the average japanese (16 yr old and above) able to recognize them all?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-12T14:54:45.830", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1880", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-12T15:26:34.773", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "264", "post_type": "question", "score": 6, "tags": [ "kanji", "etymology", "words" ], "title": "regarding the kanjis 嗚呼; 於乎; 於戯; 嗟乎; 嗟夫; 吁; 嗟; 噫; 鳴呼", "view_count": 555 }

[ { "body": "These seem to mostly be cases of 義訓【ぎくん】, where it the kanji are only used for\ntheir meaning. The most common of the kanji compounds (鳴呼) for example is\ncomprised of kanji which carry the meanings of the sound of crying and \"to\ncall out.\"\n\nAs for why there are so many, I would say that it is because there are _so\nmany ways_ in which one can cry out. Judging from the meaning of the kanji, 於戯\nfor example would likely mean ああ either during or after playing sports, while\n嗟夫 seems to have a slightly racier meaning. However, in my experience, very\nfew of these are used commonly.\n\nAt the very least, the average 16-year-old will very likely know at least 鳴呼,\nas it is used in manga and novels aimed at teens not infrequently. It seems\nunlikely that they would know them all, however, as many of those kanji are\nnot generally used.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-12T15:26:34.773", "id": "1883", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-12T15:26:34.773", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "384", "parent_id": "1880", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1889", "answer_count": 1, "body": "Last summer my family hosted a Japanese exchange student for two weeks, and\nwe've kept in touch with her a lot. Unfortunately, about 2 months ago I found\nout she had Leukemia. She said she'll recover...but it'll take a long time (6\nmonths according to her)\n\nI know Japanese at an intermediate level, so it strikes me as odd I've never\npicked up the phrase \"Get well soon\". We're sending her a bunch of gifts and a\ncard (and my family knows I'm the only one with any knowledge of Japanese), so\nthey put it on me to write what goes inside of it.\n\nPlease help me not screw this up =x She's 16 turning 17 soon if that makes a\nbig difference.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-12T23:25:59.727", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1888", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-13T23:31:51.040", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "503", "post_type": "question", "score": 20, "tags": [ "usage", "politeness" ], "title": "How would I say \"Get well soon\"?", "view_count": 56911 }

[ { "body": "There are a couple of ways to say this.\n\n> 体に気をつけてください → Please look after yourself \n> 体をお大事に → Take care of yourself\n\nHowever, given the severity of her illness, these sound casual, a little\n\"flaky\", and somewhat insincere. Here are a few that are better.\n\n> ご自愛を祈ります → Please take good care of yourself / your health. \n> ご全快の一日も早いことをお祈りいたします → I hope you will get well soon. / I hope you will\n> soon be restored to health.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-12T23:48:55.263", "id": "1889", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-13T23:31:51.040", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-13T23:31:51.040", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "1888", "post_type": "answer", "score": 14 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1894", "answer_count": 4, "body": "Is there any rules that govern when to use 不 and 非 and 無 and 未 in regards to\nthe meaning of \"not\" or \"un-\"\n\nfor instance 非表示, 不満", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-13T03:16:18.947", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1893", "last_activity_date": "2015-04-03T02:51:34.037", "last_edit_date": "2011-12-27T00:42:53.040", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "97", "post_type": "question", "score": 31, "tags": [ "word-choice", "kanji" ], "title": "不 and 非 and 無 and 未 usage difference/rule", "view_count": 6743 }

[ { "body": "It's not that there are rules, it's that the different kanji have different\nmeanings which can help determine which one is the right choice. You can use\nthe following definitions as guidelines, but please be aware that there will\nbe exceptions and differences depending on specific words.\n\n`無【む】` Means \"absence\" (as in: it was never there).\n\n`未【み】` Means \"incomplete\" in the sense of not having achieved something (as\nin: we still have further to go before we get to the end point).\n\n`不【ふ】` Means \"incomplete\" in the sense of not yet having reached capacity (as\nin: the container is not yet full).\n\n`非【ひ】` Means \"error\", but when used as a prefix it's more helpful to think of\nit as meaning \"opposite\" (as in: it reverses the meaning of the word).\n\nHope that helps.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-13T03:34:20.673", "id": "1894", "last_activity_date": "2015-04-03T02:51:34.037", "last_edit_date": "2015-04-03T02:51:34.037", "last_editor_user_id": "119", "owner_user_id": "119", "parent_id": "1893", "post_type": "answer", "score": 30 }, { "body": "I have a partial answer for 不 and 無.\n\nFor a na-adjective, 不～ can be interpreted as ～ではない\n\nFor a suru-verb, 不～ is ～しない\n\nFor either a noun or a suru-verb, 無～ can be interpreted as ～がない\n\n(Source: Bojinsha's Intermediate Kanji Book, Vol 1, chapter 2)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-13T06:14:46.697", "id": "1897", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-13T06:14:46.697", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "29", "parent_id": "1893", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "My answer is almost the same as Dave's in principle. I hope it brings\nsomething new to the table by introducing the notion of \"transcribing\" Kanji\nwords into Japanese:\n\nWhen I studied 漢文【かんぶん】 in my high school days, I learned that transcribing\nkanji words into full Japanese phrases can help understand them better. Kanbun\nis \"a Japanese method of reading annotated Classical Chinese in translation\"\n([Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanbun)).\n\nIf we combine 表示 with each of the four characters 不・非・無・未, and skip the\ndetails, they get transcribed as:\n\n**不** 表示 → 表示せ不 (ず)\n\n * isn't, doesn't - mostly negates verbs and adjectives\n * may add unfavorable connotation\n * 「ページ不表示について」 When pages don't get displayed. - [source](http://www.mitsubishielectric.co.jp/mypage/about_ssl_b.html)\n\n**非** 表示 → 表示に非ず (あらず)\n\n * doesn't equal ..., doesn't belong to ... - mostly negates nouns\n * 「広告を非表示にするプラグイン。」 Add-on that turns off ads.\n\n**無** 表示 → 表示無し (なし)\n\n * doesn't exist - negates existence = absence\n * may add unfavorable connotation\n * 「カロリー無表示のおにぎりを売っている。」 They sell onigiris with no calorie display. (emphasis is on the absence of display)\n\n**未** 表示 → 未だ (いまだ) 表示せず\n\n * doesn't/isn't ... yet - negates completeness\n * 「未表示のリンクの色は青にしてください。」 Please set the color of unvisited links to blue.\n\nIn theory, if you reverse this process - by finding the right phrase using\neither of the four Kanjis that matches your intention - you should be able to\nget the correct Kanji compound word.\n\nNote: Definitions are taken from [wikibooks on\nKanbun](http://ja.wikibooks.org/wiki/%E9%AB%98%E7%AD%89%E5%AD%A6%E6%A0%A1%E5%8F%A4%E6%96%87/%E6%BC%A2%E6%96%87%E3%81%AE%E5%8F%A5%E6%B3%95#.E5.8D.98.E7.B4.94.E3.81.AA.E5.90.A6.E5.AE.9A)\nand [a study material by a Kanbun\nenthusiast](http://www.seiwatei.net/kanbun/hitei.htm).\n\nNote 2: In case of 表示, \"不表示\" and \"非表示\" don't have much difference in meaning,\nalthough 非表示 is the prevalent one. My guess is that 非表示 is more neutral, and\ntherefore more versatile and widely used.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-13T14:40:10.377", "id": "1900", "last_activity_date": "2015-01-12T05:56:33.150", "last_edit_date": "2015-01-12T05:56:33.150", "last_editor_user_id": "3437", "owner_user_id": "128", "parent_id": "1893", "post_type": "answer", "score": 15 }, { "body": "_Despite the question seems to have reached its own solution, I'd like to make\na new answer, for I find the existing explanations would not lead to a correct\nunderstanding on this topic._\n\n* * *\n\nEach of these words has their own meaning, which usually cannot be directly\ntranslated to English affixes like \"non-\", \"in-\", \"un-\", or \"-less\", so I'm\ngoing to explain these terms descriptively.\n\nWhat they have in common is negative meaning and ability to attach to 漢語\n([Sino-Japanese](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Japanese_vocabulary))\nwords. \n(I didn't consider much about two-character compounds like 不安, 非道, 無常, 未婚 etc.\nbecause these words are better memorized en bloc.)\n\n### In principle\n\n * `不～` (read ふ) \n\n 1. makes **state** from **action** , the outcome is usually a **noun** \n\"not to _action_ \", or \"no _action_ -ing\"\n\n> 不使用【ふしよう】 \"disuse\", 不変化【ふへんか】 \"invariable(ness)\", 不合格【ふごうかく】\n> \"rejectable(ness)\"\n\nIn this usage it's _tenseless_ negation, that is, `保存料【ほぞんりょう】不使用` \"No\npreservative used\" doesn't only mean \"unused\" but \"never be used\". Some\nspeakers may also treat this as a formal way of saying `～しない（こと）`.\n\n 2. makes **state** from **state** , the outcome is usually an **adjective noun** (形容動詞) \n\"not being _state_ \", \"being low on _state_ \"\n\n> 不誠実【ふせいじつ】 \"insincere\", 不人気【ふにんき】 \"unpopular\", 不健康【ふけんこう】 \"unhealthy\"\n\nAlmost limited to subjectively undesirable state.\n\nCan also attach to native words.\n\n> 不まじめ \"lazy\", 不[行]{ゆ}き届{とど}き \"mismanagement\", 不ぞろい \"uneven\"\n\n * `非～` (read ひ) \nmakes **identity** or its **holder** from **state** , the outcome is usually a\n**noun** \n\"not belonging to _state_ \" or \"being other than _state_ \" or \"non- _state_ \"\n\n> 非公開【ひこうかい】 \"non-disclosed\", 非会員【ひかいいん】 \"non-member\", 非現実【ひげんじつ】 \"irreality\"\n\nMaybe better explained as [logical\nNOT](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_connective). If only two options\nare in question, it's equal to \"un-\".\n\nCan attach to any kind of words.\n\n> 非ユークリッド \"non-Euclid(ean)\", 非[割]【わ】り込【こ】み \"non-interrupting\"\n\n * `無～` (read む) \nmakes **state** from **thing** or **action** , the outcome is usually a\n**noun** \n\"without _something_ \" or \" _something_ -less\"\n\n> 無重力【むじゅうりょく】 \"weightless(ness)\", 無公害【むこうがい】 \"pollution-free(ness)\",\n> 無所属【むしょぞく】 \"independent (of a candidate)\"\n\nCan attach to any kind of words by theory, but other means are preferred\noutside 漢語: `底{そこ}無{な}し` \"bottomless\", `バリアフリー` \"barrier-free\"\n\n * `未～` (read み) \nmakes **state** from **action** , the outcome is usually a **noun** \n\"not yet _action_ -en\"\n\n> 未確認【みかくにん】 \"unconfirmed(ness)\", 未成熟【みせいじゅく】 \"unripe(ness)\", 未解決【みかいけつ】\n> \"unsolved(ness)\"\n\nThis one is preferred when the action is considered\n[telic](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telicity) (i.e. has a goal), even if you\ndo _not_ really have intention to achieve it.\n\n**Extra**\n\n * `不/無～` (read ぶ) \nmakes **state** from **anything** , the outcome is usually an **adjective\nnoun** \n\"ill- _something_ \" or \"mis- _something_ \"\n\n> 不器用【ぶきよう】 \"clumsy\", 不細工【ぶさいく】 \"ugly\", 無愛想【ぶあいそう】 \"unamiable\"\n\nThough of high frequency it may be seen in, it's no more productive (i.e. able\nto make new words using it), and technically it's less related to those ones\nabove, for attaching only to those almost-nativized 漢語 words.\n\n### Actual usage\n\nHowever, existing words with these prefixes often betray your expectation on\nhow it works, mainly because:\n\n * Bare 漢語 words are by nature flexible in grammatical status, as like in original Chinese, as well as some English words (round (n), round (v), round (adj), ...). You should fill in implicit participlization. That's why I avoid to use \"verb\" or \"noun\" etc. in the list above. \ne.g. `非表示【ひひょうじ】` → \"being-other-than display **ed** \" = \"undisplayed(ness)\"\n\n * In general, established nouns that mean qualities easily turn into adjective(-noun)s in Japanese. Many common words which should be \"noun\" according to my list, are actually adjective nouns.\n\n * Modern Japanese (Meiji-WWII) embraced many words in different word classes than today's. Besides, words themselves could have undergone changes regardless to its original meaning. \ne.g. `不経済【ふけいざい】` → \"diseconomy\" or \"being-not econom **ical** \" < `經濟` _ModJ_\n\"economize\" \n`非常識【ひじょうしき】` → \"non-common-sense\" → \"lacking in common sense\"\n\nSamuel Martin's _A Reference Grammar of Japanese_ has [a good summary and\ndiscussion](http://books.google.com/books?id=SszxbMtHbs8C&pg=PA388#v=onepage&q&f=false)\non those prefixes, but note that he has erroneous analysis on some words\nregarding the said matters.\n\n### Quick chart\n\n`会員` as an identity (to be a thing), `現実` as a thing as well as state, `健康` as\na state (adjective), `表示` as a state as well as action, and `使用` as a pure\naction.\n\n```\n\n 　　　　不　　　　非　　　　無　　　　未\n 会員　　×　　　　○　　　　○　　　　×\n 現実　　×　　　　○　　　　△　　　　？\n 健康　　○　　　　○　　　　×　　　　？\n 表示　　○　　　　○　　　　○　　　　○\n 使用　　○　　　　△　　　　○　　　　○\n \n```\n\n**Acknowledgement** : Thanks to @snailboat for references and advice.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2015-01-11T12:24:36.583", "id": "21255", "last_activity_date": "2015-01-15T16:57:57.887", "last_edit_date": "2015-01-15T16:57:57.887", "last_editor_user_id": "7810", "owner_user_id": "7810", "parent_id": "1893", "post_type": "answer", "score": 13 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1902", "answer_count": 3, "body": "When is it appropriate to put さ at the end of a sentence? Do women say this\nalso? I think I remember seeing a female character say it in an anime.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-13T04:36:27.843", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1895", "last_activity_date": "2020-03-26T23:48:59.537", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "69", "post_type": "question", "score": 20, "tags": [ "usage", "particles" ], "title": "Ending a sentence with さ", "view_count": 16019 }

[ { "body": "さ can be used by both males and females. Though my dictionary says mainly\nmasculine and used for assertion.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-13T05:39:08.793", "id": "1896", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-13T05:39:08.793", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "97", "parent_id": "1895", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "In standard Japanese, ending with a さ is a colloquial way to make a statement\nmore playfully assertive. After a Hanshin victory over the Tokyo Giants, a\nHanshin fan might say:\n\n> まあ阪神のほうが強いからな。\n\nor\n\n> まあ阪神の方が強いのさ。\n\nTo preserve the tone, I might translate the first version as a flat statement\nof opinion, as in:\n\n> Well, Hanshin _is_ the stronger team.\n\nwhile the second version might be more of a playful burn, like\n\n> Well, Hanshin is the stronger team: fact!\n\nIt's not rude, but it is assertive, and colloquial, so I wouldn't use it with\na superior. It's gender-neutral. If it seems to be employed slightly more by\nJapanese men than by Japanese women, that's just true of assertiveness in\ngeneral.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-13T20:31:18.700", "id": "1902", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-13T22:59:07.690", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-13T22:59:07.690", "last_editor_user_id": "448", "owner_user_id": "448", "parent_id": "1895", "post_type": "answer", "score": 17 }, { "body": "Jisho.org has the following definition:\n\n**さ**\n\n_Suffix_\n\n 1. _-ness_ ​nominalizing suffix indicating degree or condition \nそして、どうすることも出来ない物憂 **さ** に、ふっとため息をつく。 \nAnd then I breathe a sigh from melancholy in being unable to do anything about\nit.\n\n_Particle_\n\n 2. _indicates assertion_ ​sentence end, mainly masc. \nベストをつくしたら後はくよくよ考えないこと **さ** 。 \nDo your best and don't worry.\n\n 3. _come; come now_ ​ See also さあ \nでも **さ** 、母を連れて行かなくてはいけないんだ。 \nBut, I have to take my mother.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2020-03-26T23:48:59.537", "id": "75226", "last_activity_date": "2020-03-26T23:48:59.537", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "37296", "parent_id": "1895", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 2, "body": "Do you keep a list of set phrases that you use often, or phrases that you'd\nuse someday? I do. [Here's\nmine](https://www.evernote.com/shard/s1/sh/7ad0a989-2ddd-4593-8408-06383d761f29/a30ae5b90c085089ae3e665cbdc31685),\na list of phrases I've collected from work emails since three years ago.\n\nSuch a list, while seldom shared, can help us learn useful phrases from real\nworld examples.\n\nIf you care to share, great! Please post your list as an answer, or a link to\nyour list if it's more than a few. Also please add a word or two about its\nusage context. Something along the line of:\n\n* * *\n\nExample >\n\nMy list of conversation openers (childcare industry)\n\nMost used:\n\n * おはようさぎ... - Morning rabbit\n * こんばんわに... - G'night alligator\n\n* * *\n\nNote to future readers: those lists should tend to be void of actual context.\nIf you're unsure about its usage, it's a good idea to post a question about\nit!\n\nSuggestions welcome if this question itself needs reframing.", "comment_count": 10, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-13T15:25:35.877", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1901", "last_activity_date": "2015-12-15T14:20:09.373", "last_edit_date": "2015-12-15T14:20:09.373", "last_editor_user_id": "11830", "owner_user_id": "128", "post_type": "question", "score": 2, "tags": [ "set-phrases" ], "title": "Share your list of stock phrases / phrase templates", "view_count": 837 }

[ { "body": "Here is my list (please ignore the French translations lol). \nSuggestions/corrections welcome!\n\nそれでは、水曜日の3時にお邪魔させて頂いても宜しいでしょうか？ OK, alors je viens chez vous mercredi a 3h ?\n\n電話でお話していた件、 添付ファイルでお送り致します。 Comme convenu au telephone, je vous envoie le\nfichier\n\n前回、必要であれば、あと一回伺うことになっておりましたが、いかがでしょうか？ もし必要があれば、ご都合の良い時間をご指定ください。 si\nnecessaire, je peux venir chez vous encore une fois. si necessaire, dites-moi\nle temps qui vous convient.\n\n昨日、XX様からメールいただきAlfrescoの開発サポートに関する訪問は必要ないとのことでしたが、 必要であればActive\nDirectoryの調査のために伺うことも可能です。 こちらについては必要があれば、ご都合の良い時間をご指定ください。 Hier, XX m'a dit\nque le support dev n'est pas necessaire mais, si necessaire je peux faire du\nsupport Active Directory. si necessaire, dites-moi le temps qui vous convient.\n\n金曜日に御社にてコードレビューをさせていただけますでしょうか。 Je peux faire une revue de code dans vos\nlocaux vendredi ?\n\nよろしければ、ご都合の良い時間をご指定ください。 Si OK, dites-moi quel creneau horaire vous convient.\n\nこれで全ての成果物をお送り致しましたので、問題がないかご確認下さい。 Je vous envoie le fichier avec tous les\ndeliverables, donc verifiez si c'est OK.\n\n皆様（Bccで失礼します。） Mesdames messieurs, desole pour le BCC\n\n本日の17:00に御社にお伺いいたします。 je viendrai a 17h\n\n最後まで完了せず、2.2.7までのアップグレードのみが完了となっております。 Sans aller jusqu'au bout, j'ai\nseulement upgradé à 2.2.7\n\n問題を調査し、改めてご連絡いたします。 je vais investiguer le problème et vous recontacter\n\nもし都合が悪い方がいらっしゃいましたら、ニコラまでご連絡ください。 si des personnes pensent que ca ne va pas,\nme contacter SVP\n\nmerci d'être venu chez nous 本日は弊社までお越しいただきありがとうございました。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-14T02:48:20.800", "id": "1913", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-14T02:48:20.800", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "107", "parent_id": "1901", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "My favourite is \"あ？そうですか？ごめんね！韓国人だと思ったんです！\". I'm pretty sure you'll find the\noccasion to use it (at your own risks) too :)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-14T09:55:11.893", "id": "1927", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-14T09:55:11.893", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "356", "parent_id": "1901", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1962", "answer_count": 2, "body": "I often see adverbs used in one of three ways:\n\n1) Adverb appears in isolation in a sentence:\n\n> **あまり** 好きじゃないんですが。\n\n2) Adverb is followed by に\n\n> **別々に** お願いします。\n>\n> 1970年代後半、多くの罪もない日本の一般市民が **次々に** 失踪した。\n\n3) Adverb is followed by と\n\n> 鮮明な花火が夜空に **次々と** 揚がった。\n\nNotice that in 2b), and 3), it's even the same adverb and the meaning appears\nidentical. So suppose for a minute we wrote sentence 3) in each of the three\ndifferent ways:\n\n> 鮮明な花火が夜空に **次々** 揚がった。\n>\n> 鮮明な花火が夜空に **次々に** 揚がった。\n>\n> 鮮明な花火が夜空に **次々と** 揚がった。\n\nIs there any difference between these?\n\nI suspect that the first one is wrong, but the second two are identical and\nboth correct. But I don't know what rule governs this. And I think (although I\ndon't have an example handy) that the first ( adv only) and second ( adv + に)\npatterns can also be used interchangeably in certain situations, which would\nsuggest that maybe all 3 can be used interchangeably in some situations, but\nnot others.\n\nCan anyone explain how this works?", "comment_count": 9, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-13T22:09:41.017", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1903", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-16T08:33:19.160", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-16T08:33:19.160", "last_editor_user_id": "125", "owner_user_id": "483", "post_type": "question", "score": 26, "tags": [ "grammar", "nuances", "particle-に", "adverbs", "particle-と" ], "title": "<adv> versus <adv>+と versus <adv>+に", "view_count": 5507 }

[ { "body": "From what I gather at\n[Chiebukuro](http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1321351983),\nall three are the same, though the one who answered (dendenko123, a master in\nJapanese category of Chiebukuro) said that `と` has a slightly formal feeling.\n\nOf course, there are fukushi(`副詞`)-class adverbs that is so popularly used one\nway, that usage in the other two is almost unheard of, except in idiomatic\nusage. For example, `あまりに` and `あまりと` is almost unheard of, except for cases\nlike `あまりにも悲惨なできごと` for `あまりに`. There's also `あまりといえば` but the `と` here is not\na particle for the adverb.\n\nBut `別々` does not belong here. It is a な-adjective (`形容動詞`). Therefore\n`別々とお願いします` would sound odd.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-15T17:16:03.323", "id": "1959", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-15T17:16:03.323", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "154", "parent_id": "1903", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "I think what's really going on here can be traced back to the two different\nways 形容動詞 (けいようどうし: adjectival nouns or \"な-adjectives\") were inflected. If we\nlook under the 連用形 (れんようけい: the \"adverbial inflection\", for lack of a better\nterm) column under the first table on [this Wikibooks page detailing Classical\nJapanese inflection\npatterns](http://ja.wikibooks.org/wiki/%E5%8F%A4%E8%AA%9E%E6%B4%BB%E7%94%A8%E8%A1%A8),\nwe find the following two patterns:\n\n> ナリ活用 (the ナリ inflection), such as with 静か【しずか】: 静かなり or 静かに\n>\n> タリ活用 (the タリ inflection), such as with 堂々【どうどう】: 堂々たり or 堂々と\n\n(The [Wikipedia page on\n形容動詞](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%BD%A2%E5%AE%B9%E5%8B%95%E8%A9%9E)\nmentions that these inflections were derived from the ～にあり and ～とあり forms,\nrespectively, in Classical Japanese.) For the most part the old styles of\ninflection have fallen out of use, but there are many examples fossilized in\nModern Japanese:\n\n> 聖なる夜 holy night (also used as the Japanese title of \"Silent Night\")\n>\n> 暗澹【あんたん】たる時期 a dark period\n\nSo without getting into the entire class of words that is used as adverbs\nwithout any special と or に appendages, we can see that from early on 形容動詞 were\nsplit in that some took なり／に to become adverbs, while some took たり／と.\n\nGenerally speaking:\n\n * If a word is more commonly used as a な-adjective (that is, if its 連体形 (れんたいけい), the form by which it connects to a noun, is な), the adverbial form will have に.\n * If a word typically does not connect to nouns or is more commonly used as an adverb, the adverbial form will usually have と or nothing at all (excepting common forms such as ～になる or ～にする).\n\nThese are general rules (and not very good rules at that), and so exceptions,\nsuch as 次々, aren't hard to find.\n\n> 静か｛○に／×と／×∅｝話す speak quietly\n>\n> きれい｛○に／×と／×∅｝整える arrange neatly\n>\n> ゆっくり｛△に／○と／○∅｝歩く walk slowly\n>\n> きっぱり｛△に／○と／○∅｝言う say flatly\n>\n> はっきり｛△に／○と／○∅｝見える [be able to] see clearly\n\nUnfortunately there are no pretty dividing lines between に and と here. This is\nprobably because に and と have both retained their role of \"adverbializer\"\nthroughout the evolution of Japanese, and neither form succeeded in displacing\nthe other. Boaz Yaniv mentions this phenomenon in his [answer for why some\nadjectives use な and some use\nの](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/920/925#925).", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-15T19:20:26.197", "id": "1962", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-15T19:20:26.197", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "94", "parent_id": "1903", "post_type": "answer", "score": 16 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "6155", "answer_count": 3, "body": "Descriptions of Japanese phonology (such as\n[Wikipedia's](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_phonology#Devoicing))\nusually describe high vowels between voiceless consonants (or word-finally) as\n\"devoiced\". For example, the pronunciation of ⟨圧⟩ 'pressure' and ⟨悲観⟩\n'pessimism' are described as:\n\n> /aꜜtu/ → [átsu̥]\n>\n> /hikaɴ/ → [çi̥kãɴ́]\n\nBut it often sounds to me like the supposedly devoiced vowel is actually\ndropped, with the preceding consonant expanding to fill 1 mora's time.\nSimilarly, I have seen word-final devoiced vowels dropped in written\npronunciations, such as \"/desu/ → [des]\" rather than \"→ [desu̥]\". In this\nanalysis, the pronunciations would be\n\n> /aꜜtu/ → [áts] or [áts̩] or [átsː]\n>\n> /hikaɴ/ → [ç̩kãɴ́] or [çːkãɴ́]\n\nWhich of these better describes the actual contemporary Japanese\npronunciation? (Further, does this vary by dialect or speech register?)\n\n(Related to [What are the rules regarding \"mute vowels\" (\"u\" after \"s\" and \"i\"\nafter \"sh\")?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/1095/what-are-the-\nrules-regarding-mute-vowels-u-after-s-and-i-after-sh).)", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-13T22:22:19.807", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1904", "last_activity_date": "2019-02-12T00:19:28.067", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.207", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "501", "post_type": "question", "score": 17, "tags": [ "pronunciation", "phonology", "linguistics", "phonetics", "vowels" ], "title": "Actual phonetic realization of \"devoiced\" vowels", "view_count": 3940 }

[ { "body": "> such as \"/desu/ → [des]\" rather than \"→ [desu̥]\".\n\nAs far as I know, it really depends on who is talking… Some linguists I met\nsaid that it _should_ be pronounced since there is no way to write \"s-without-\na-vowel\" in the language…", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-14T10:28:48.770", "id": "1928", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-14T10:28:48.770", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "356", "parent_id": "1904", "post_type": "answer", "score": -2 }, { "body": "I guess that it depends on dialects, but when vowels /i/ and /ɯ/ are\n“devoiced” in the Tokyo dialect, these vowels are actually dropped and the\npreceding consonant fills the mora. Moreover, if the vowel is /i/, the\nconsonant is palatalized.\n\n[This blog article](http://ameblo.jp/nirenoya/entry-10596656979.html) (in\nJapanese) gives a fairly detailed description of “devoiced vowels” in the\nTokyo dialect.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-14T15:09:05.940", "id": "1934", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-14T15:09:05.940", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "1904", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "I've got an old PDF folder full of papers on Japanese, and I managed to pull\nup two which might be helpful. (I've been on the search for a full detailed\nphonetic study of Japanese. Add a comment if you know of some other technical\nresources!). The first, the open paper [Processing missing vowels: Allophonic\nprocessing in Japanese (Ogasawara and Warner,\n2009)](https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/2775/445b385a59e2e6f7784728bf0578db4fc6fc.pdf)\n(from the journal Language and Cognitive Processes) and the second, which I\nthink needs to be purchased, Vowel devoicing and the perception of spoken\nJapanese words (Cutler & Otake & McQueen, 2008). If you can take a look at\nthose papers, they have spectrogram of the voiced/voiceless sounds and they\nare quite informative.\n\nOgasawara has a very informative diagram at the beginning of his paper which\ndisplays an oscillogram and spectrogram of two phonetic variants of the non-\nword /hokita/; one in which the speaker obeys the devoicing (reduction)\nconvention, and the other in which the speaker diligently avoids the devoicing\ntendency. So, two phonetic forms [hokʲi̥ta] and [hokʲita]. The observation\nmade is that the reduced vowel has no periodic wave or frequency mass\nresembling a formant, so that the vowel [i̥] appears to be virtually deleted.\nWhat is found after the [kʲ] in [hokʲi̥ta] then is \"frication noise following\nthe plosive burst of /k/, so that the vowel [i̥] consists of only low\namplitude palatalized voiceless noise.\"\n\nThe paper is free, so take a look two spectrograms corresponding to the\n[-voiced] and [+voiced] forms at the bottom of the figure. The characteristic\nvoice bar which indicates frequency mass at low frequencies (characteristic of\nphonation) are absent in the devoiced vowel. So, clearly there is some\nveracity to the term \"devoicing\". For the [-voiced] vowel, I can't even see\nany noise in the waveform, so it appears as if [kʲ] is just an extra prolonged\nstop. Which seems in agreement with Ogasawara's opinion that \"phonetically,\nso-called devoiced vowels are often deleted (Vance, 1987, in press; Yuen,\n2000), or a short, low-amplitude vowel may remain (Yuen, 2000).\"\n\nIt seems that some some authors (Ogasawara, Vance) call it reduced instead of\ndevoiced to skirt the debate between devoicing vs. deletion. However, that is\nnot the end of the phonetic story for the unvoiced vowel, as it has a\ncoarticulatory impact:\n\n> Japanese vowels, both unreduced and reduced, cause coarticulation in the\n> preceding consonant, which allows identification of the /i/ or /u/ even if\n> the vowel itself is deleted (Ostreicher & Sharf, 1976).\n\nThis suggests that the best way to recognize a devoiced vowel is to look for\nconsonants bearing the acoustic cue of this coarticulation as opposed to\nmeasuring and comparing for \"low amplitude palatalized voiceless noise\".\nImportantly, Ogasawara points out the simple reason why on phonological\ngrounds a vowel must be there in the underlying form:\n\n> The reduced vowels are considered to be present at least in the underlying\n> form, because they cause coarticulation, and because, if they were not\n> present at all, this would leave consonant clusters (e.g., /kt/ in [k(i)ta]\n> ‘North’) that are otherwise phonotactically impossible in Japanese.\n\nAnd other interesting ideas/observations:\n\n> Cutler et al. (in press) find that listeners do not restore reduced vowels\n> at an early, automatic stage of processing. Furthermore, they find that the\n> number of words in the lexicon containing a given string with a reduced\n> vowel affects how likely listeners are to assume a reduced vowel is present.\n> They conclude that Japanese listeners’ restoration of reduced vowels happens\n> during lexical, rather than prelexical, processing.\n\n> Reduced vowels are acoustically weak, which might make them harder to\n> process. However, phonotactic knowledge (which indicates that a vowel must\n> be present because of the consonant cluster) should facilitate the\n> recognition even of reduced vowels. Moreover, language-specific knowledge of\n> the allophonic alternation should facilitate recognition of reduced and\n> unreduced vowels in their appropriate environments (e.g., [(i)] in [k(i)ta]\n> ‘North’ and [i] in [itRigo] ‘strawberry’).\n\n> Although devoicing is not obligatory, analyses of the Corpus of Spontaneous\n> Japanese ͑Maekawa, 2003 show that it is highly probable ͑over 98% in some\n> environments; Kondo, 2005; Maekawa and Kikuchi, 2005.\n\nAnd on the perceptibility of the devoiced vowel, Cutler says:\n\n> The effect of this devoicing is the creation of sequences of consonants not\n> separated by the periodic articulation normally associated with vowels. In\n> contrast, insertion of a vowel into a consonant cluster ͑e.g., fillum for\n> film͒ makes recognition easier, in part because the consonants in the clus-\n> ter indeed become easier to identify if separated.\n\nSo, this might not have been all the information you were looking for, but\nbeyond this you start to get into statistical analysis of signals and\ntechniques from experimental design, which I don't fully understand.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2012-07-16T16:51:09.437", "id": "6155", "last_activity_date": "2019-02-12T00:19:28.067", "last_edit_date": "2019-02-12T00:19:28.067", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "1454", "parent_id": "1904", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1907", "answer_count": 3, "body": "When learning Japanese everyone's taught いる is for a living thing and ある is\nfor non-living things. However, I recently saw the following sentence ...\n\n> あと、サッカー選手でもあります。\n\n... which ends in ある / あります for a living subject, assuming were not talking\nabout a dead soccer player!\n\nNow the following make uses of ある sense to me:\n\n> 〜である \n> 〜がある \n> 〜にある\n\nBut in my mind these adhere to the living/dead rule learned in those first\nNihongo classes all those years ago.\n\nSo where does もあります fit in? How should I think of this in English (equivalent\nphrase)?", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-13T23:19:36.387", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1905", "last_activity_date": "2022-02-23T11:19:07.767", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-10T19:44:13.233", "last_editor_user_id": "37", "owner_user_id": "168", "post_type": "question", "score": 19, "tags": [ "grammar", "particles" ], "title": "When is it okay to use あります with a living subject?", "view_count": 1710 }

[ { "body": "`で（は）あります` is the expanded form of `です`. So when you say 「XはYです」, it is really\n「XはYで（は）あります」. From this, you can easily see the negative form (ではありません). And\nalso でもあります as in your example. `でもあります` means \"is also\".\n\n> あの人はサラリーマンです。あと、サッカー選手でもあります。 → That guy is a business worker (salary man).\n> He is also a soccer player.\n\nThat's the reasoning as to why it's あります in this situation. As to why です is a\ncontraction of `で（は）あります` and not `で（は）います`, I'm not sure.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-13T23:31:03.787", "id": "1907", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-13T23:31:03.787", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "1905", "post_type": "answer", "score": 19 }, { "body": "でもあります is actually derived from である (basically a written-Japanese way of\nsaying です) and basically means \"... is ... as well\". For example:\n\n> * AはBでもあります。 → A is B as well (in addition to something previously\n> mentioned or understood).\n>\n\nOr the following:\n\n> * 彼は大学生であり、サッカー選手でもある。 → He is a university student, and he is also a\n> soccer player.\n>", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-13T23:31:23.773", "id": "1908", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-13T23:31:23.773", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "384", "parent_id": "1905", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "As istrasci and rintaun correctly point out, `サッカー選手でもあります` has a similar\nmeaning to `サッカー選手です`. But it is also true that `ある` is not the same word as\n`です`. One important thing that hasn't been pointed out is that the `ある` used\nhere is not a predicate. It is comparable to the English `be`.\n\n> * A is a soccer player\n> * A is smart\n>\n\nIn the sentences above, you can tell that the predicate is the noun/adjective\nphrase following `be` but is not `be` itself (in other words, `be` is not\ncontributing to the meaning) from the fact that they can be used retaining\ntheir meaning, without `be`:\n\n> * I consider A a soccer player\n> * I consider A smart\n>\n\nOn the other hand, `be` in the following examples is used to express\nexistence, and is a predicate.\n\n> * I think, therefore I am\n> * There is a soccer player\n>\n\nThe animacy restriction on Japanese `ある` and `いる` only concerns the predicate\nusage (the usage meaning existence or possession). While the following `ある`\nand `いる` are in the predicate usage,\n\n> * A の書いた本がある\n> * サッカー選手がいる\n>\n\nthe following `ある` is not.\n\n> * A はサッカー選手である\n> * 昨日のうちに買い物をしてある\n>\n\nTherefore, your example is a case where the animacy distinction is irrelevant.\n\nFurthermore, as is well known, even the predicate `ある` can be used with\nanimate subjects.\n\n> * 昔、ある所におじいさんとおばあさんがあった\n> * A には子供がある\n>\n\nThe distinction between `ある` and `いる` is actually much more complicated than\nmere animacy opposition.", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-14T02:58:32.923", "id": "1914", "last_activity_date": "2022-02-22T19:50:40.077", "last_edit_date": "2022-02-22T19:50:40.077", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1905", "post_type": "answer", "score": 13 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1911", "answer_count": 2, "body": "I have seen many ways of saying 'food'. I am wondering if there is ever a\ndifference in appropriateness.\n\n食品、食べ物、～物(type+物)、飯、ご飯、etc.\n\nMost commonly, I think, is 食べ物, but I thought I'd use 食品 for an assignment\ninvolving 敬語（けいご）since it sounded more formal to me.\n\nThoughts?", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-14T01:09:28.820", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1909", "last_activity_date": "2019-03-21T06:15:59.040", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "459", "post_type": "question", "score": 21, "tags": [ "word-choice", "food" ], "title": "Most appropriate word for 'food'", "view_count": 2542 }

[ { "body": "食べ物 - appropriate as written or spoken language, a basic word, commonly used\nin speech\n\n食品 - food product, think of a packaged food product on a shelf in the store\n\nご飯 - literally rice (polite), used to refer to \"a meal\" as in breakfast, lunch\nor dinner\n\n食事 - a meal, frequently used in hotels and restaurants as 「お[食事]{しょくじ}」\n\n〜物 - assuming you mean 揚げ物 (fried food), 煮物 (boiled food), 干物 (dried food),\netc... these are self explanatory, just more specific.\n\n**Also don't forget:**\n\n[食物]{しょくもつ} - Mostly in written language, \"food stuffs\" is a good English\nequivalent\n\nAnd just to whet your appetite (pun definitely intended) here is a breakdown\nof common food categories.\n\n**Animal Food Products (動物性食品)**\n\n[肉類]{にくるい} (meat, incl. poultry), [魚介類]{ぎょかいるい} (seafood), [卵類]{らんるい} (eggs),\n[乳製品]{にゅうせいひん} (dairy)\n\n**Plant Food Products (植物性食品)**\n\n[穀物]{こくもつ} (cereals), [豆類]{まめるい} (pulses), [芋類]{いもるい} (tubers), [野菜]{やさい}\n(vegetables), [山菜]{さんさい} (mountain vegetables), [海藻]{かいそう} (sea vegetation,\nseaweed), [種実類]{しゅじつるい} (aw nuts), [果物]{くだもの} (fruits), ハーブ (herbs)\n\n(ref: <http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%A3%9F%E5%93%81>)", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-14T01:49:51.373", "id": "1911", "last_activity_date": "2019-03-21T06:15:59.040", "last_edit_date": "2019-03-21T06:15:59.040", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "168", "parent_id": "1909", "post_type": "answer", "score": 14 }, { "body": "For different contexts, here are a few more:\n\n> * [料理]{りょう・り} → food/cuisine → 日本料理、料理を作る、など\n> * [食料]{しょく・りょう} → food, groceries → 食料品 (foodstuffs/groceries)、食料費 (food\n> expenses)\n> * [糧]{かて}・[食糧]{しょく・りょう} → food (supply), provisions → [食糧不足]{しょく・りょう・ぶ・そく}\n> (food shortage)\n>", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-14T03:00:42.047", "id": "1915", "last_activity_date": "2017-09-13T23:15:18.317", "last_edit_date": "2017-09-13T23:15:18.317", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "1909", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 1, "body": "I often used に対して when speaking, and have noticed にとって as the favorite\nexpression of the author who's book I'm now reading. What's the difference in\nusage? Are there any other similar expressions I should be wary of misusing?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-14T01:26:11.817", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1910", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-14T05:51:16.597", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "168", "post_type": "question", "score": 10, "tags": [ "word-choice", "usage" ], "title": "What's the difference in usage between に対して and にとって?", "view_count": 2445 }

[ { "body": "These are _way_ different expressions. ～に対して can either mean \"towards/to\n(someone・something)\", or \"as opposed to\". ～にとって means \"for\"/\"thinking about it\nas\" in a way that I can't better explain without just using examples:\n\n## ～に対して:\n\n> * 隣人に対して友情を表す → Be friendly (\"show friendliness\") to your neighbour \n>\n> * 男性に対して女性はドラマやロマンチックな映画が好き - As opposed to guys, girls like dramas,\n> romantic movies, etc.\n>\n\n## ～にとって:\n\n> * うちのワンちゃんにとって必ずしも猫が敵じゃない → To/for our dog, cats are not necessarily\n> enemies \n>\n> * 教授にとって生徒が参加するほど講義が面白くなります → For a professor, giving a lecture is more\n> interesting the more the students participate.\n>", "comment_count": 14, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-14T02:44:32.967", "id": "1912", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-14T05:51:16.597", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-14T05:51:16.597", "last_editor_user_id": "119", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "1910", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1996", "answer_count": 2, "body": "Are there any differences between these three sets:\n\n> からして、からすると、からすれば\n\nvs.\n\n> から見て、から見ると、から見れば\n\nvs.\n\n> から言って、から言うと、から言えば\n\nThese 'sets' seem to be used in 2 basic ways:\n\n 1. Presents something as a basis for judgment. \n 2. To mean \"From the point of view of...\"\n\nHowever, are there any restraints or special requirements when using these?\nAre they simply interchangeable?\n\nFor example are all of the following sentences acceptable?\n\n 1. Presents something as a basis for judgment. \n\n * 症状から **すると** 、心臓の病気かもしれません。 \n * 症状から **見ると** 、心臓の病気かもしれません。 \n * 症状から **言うと** 、心臓の病気かもしれません。 \n 2. \"From the point of view of...\" \n\n * 昔の人から **すると** 、まるで別世界です。 \n * 昔の人から **見ると** 、まるで別世界です。 \n * 昔の人から **言うと** 、まるで別世界です。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-14T05:17:20.580", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1916", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-17T07:07:03.323", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-14T05:22:14.453", "last_editor_user_id": "28", "owner_user_id": "108", "post_type": "question", "score": 18, "tags": [ "word-choice", "grammar" ], "title": "The difference between からすると、から見ると、から言うと?", "view_count": 8328 }

[ { "body": "First of all, even the intra-set items are not the same. Meaning that, for\nexample, `からすると` is not even the same as `からして`, etc. I don't have the\nproficiency to discuss the differences between every possible combination of\nitems, but I do have a strong grasp of the difference between `からすると` and\n`からして`, if it helps. I would speculate that the other items have a similar\ndifference in nuance.\n\nBasically, `からすると` is a completely objective judgement. Imagine, for example,\nthat you're sitting around a table with some guys and a girl walks by that\ncatches your interest (swap the sexes around if you prefer). Your friend says\n\"Ooooh, she's cute. I wonder if she's spoken for.\" You look at her finger and\nsee that she's not wearing a ring, so you say \"Well, judging by the fact that\nshe's not wearing a ring, I'd say she's fair game.\" This is `からすると`. You\ndidn't know this girl before, you had no preconception about whether or not\nshe might be single, you used the facts and nothing but the facts to arrive at\na judgement.\n\nNow imagine a slightly different version of the same scenario. Her shirt says\n\"I'm available\" on it, so you go up and talk to her and she says, much to your\nsurprise, that she's taken. You go back to your friends and say \"WTF, even her\nshirt says she's available!\". I'm sure someone will provide a more idiomatic\ntranslation, but for the purposes of illustration, you could translate this:\n\n> シャツからして、独身女性と思ったんだよ。\n\nHere, it wasn't a completely objective judgement. You had a preformed opinion\nabout this person, and you are singling out one aspect of your opinion for\nemphasis.\n\nAs a general rule of thumb, I like to translate `からすると` as \"judging from\" or\n\"judging by\", and I like to translate `からして` as \"Even **__** \", as in the\nabove example. `からして` sentences tend to require structural modifications to\nthe English counterpart to translate idiomatically.\n\nI suspect `からすれば` is still different, but I will let others comment.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-14T06:49:43.887", "id": "1918", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-14T06:49:43.887", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "483", "parent_id": "1916", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "First of all, からして is a different grammatical construction. As Zach has\nalready covered this in more detail in his answer, I will skip over it. And as\nDave M G stated in _his_ answer, all of these constructions have the meaning\nof \"judging from the position of X.\"\n\n**Where they differ is in their usage** , rather than their meaning.\n\n**～から言うと / ～から見ると**\n\nWith these two, what follows must be something which contains the speaker's\nown thoughts, feelings, or opinion. What differentiates them is that with\n～から見ると, the noun that goes in ～ may be a person, while it with ～から言うと, it may\nnot. Examples:\n\n> * × 彼からいうと、それは間違っているそうだ。\n> * ○ 彼の考え方からいうと、それは間違っているそうだ。\n> * ○ 彼から見ると、それは間違っているそうだ。\n>\n\nAlso seen as: ～からいえば, ～からいって, ～からいったら and ～から見れば, ～から見て, ～から見ても, ～から見たら\n\n**～からすると**\n\nWhat differentiates ～からすると from the others is that what follows it doesn't\nnecessarily have to be the speaker's thoughts, feelings, or opinion (but if it\nis, that's okay, too). Examples:\n\n> * ○ 私の予想からすると、真夏日も後数日だろう。\n> * × 私の予想から見ると、真夏日も後数日だろう。(× because 予想 and 見る have the same meaning here.)\n> * ○ いつもよく食べる彼女が食欲ないことからすると、何かあったのだろうか。\n> * ○ いつもよく食べる彼女が食欲ないことからすると、何かあったと思う。\n>\n\nAlso seen as: ～からすれば, ～からしたら, ～からして\n\nSo essentially, every instance of ～からいうと can be replaced just fine with either\n～からすると or ～から見ると, but the reverse is not necessarily true.\n\n_Note:_ According to the textbooks I used as reference when researching this\nanswer, ～からして, while it can be used in this sense, is slightly different (as\ncan be the other forms of ～からすると). It acts as an intensifier, basically\nmeaning **only** thinking about it from that point of view.\n\n**Applying the Principles**\n\nNow, if we apply these principles to the examples given in your question, we\ncan easily come to a conclusion on their acceptability.\n\n> * ○ 症状からすると、心臓の病気かもしれません。\n> * ○ 症状から見ると、心臓の病気かもしれません。\n> * ○ 症状から言うと、心臓の病気かもしれません。\n>\n\nI believe all of these are just fine, because 1) the noun prior to the\nexpressions is not a person, and 2) what follows is the speaker's opinion. The\nnext set is a little bit different, however.\n\n> * × 昔の人からすると、まるで別世界です。\n> * ○ 昔の人から見ると、まるで別世界です。\n> * × 昔の人から言うと、まるで別世界です。\n>\n\nIn this case, only ～から見ると is valid, because only this expression can be from\nthe \"point of view\" of a person (in this case, 昔の人).\n\n**Summary**\n\nIn sum, while **the meaning** of these three expressions is for all intents\nand purposes **the same** , **their usage is slightly different**. In my\nopinion (自分の意見からいうと(?) :p) the differences are actually due to the slight\nvariations in meaning, but I don't really have anything to back me up on that.\n\nNote in the interest of transparency: Much of my answer (including the\nexamples used) is based the explanation in [this textbook on a Chinese\nwebsite](http://wenku.baidu.com/view/2bdb4c7b1711cc7931b716ca.html). As the\nsite in Chinese, that's about as much as I can tell you about it. :)", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-17T06:52:04.847", "id": "1996", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-17T07:07:03.323", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-17T07:07:03.323", "last_editor_user_id": "384", "owner_user_id": "384", "parent_id": "1916", "post_type": "answer", "score": 13 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1920", "answer_count": 2, "body": "I know that a sentence that ends in the て form of a verb can be imperative.\nHow do you know for sure if it is? Why is「～しようとして」not imperative?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-14T06:19:28.963", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1917", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-08T08:42:20.387", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-08T08:42:20.387", "last_editor_user_id": "125", "owner_user_id": "69", "post_type": "question", "score": 5, "tags": [ "syntax", "て-form", "imperatives" ], "title": "How to know if a sentence ending in the て form of a verb is imperative or not", "view_count": 1469 }

[ { "body": "`て` is a form that is quite basic (called gerund, infinitive, or participle in\nmodern linguistics depending on the researcher) and has different usages.\nAmong the various usages, it can be used as an omitted form of `...てください`\n'please do ...' or `...てほしい` 'I want you to do ...', expressing request with\nvarious strength depending on the context, but it cannot be imperative.\nImperative is `...しろ` or `...せよ`.\n\n`しようとして` can be used as request but is not natural because, if you want\nsomeone do something, you would simply say `して` instead.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-14T06:50:41.810", "id": "1919", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-14T06:50:41.810", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1917", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "As sawa said, the て form [has many\nusages](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Te_form_of_Japanese_verb#Imperative). One\nof them being used to formulate\n[requests](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honorific_speech_in_Japanese#Requests)\n(what you're confusing with the grammatical term \"imperative\")\n\nしようとして (and all the forms in ようとして：食べようとして...etc.) can all be perfectly\ncorrect requests or commands depending on how the sentence ends.\n\nTo understand this, you need to know that the よう form of a verb is called\n[Volitional](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_verb_conjugations_and_adjective_declensions#Volitional_.28Presumptive.29)\nand is used (in brief) to say \"let's do...\"\n\nNow, adding として to this volitional form, it should be decomposed as follows:\n\n-と is the particle (same as と言う、と思う)\n\n-して (て form of する)\n\n * If the sentence doesn't end after the て form:\n\n> 虫が草を食べようとして、鳥に食べられた。\n>\n> The insect was about to eat grass when he got eaten by a bird.\n\nThen the て form is used to combine sentences (see the Wikipedia article\nabove). ようとして then means \"to be about to\" or \"try to\".\n\n * On the contrary, if the sentence ends with として, then you have the request form.\n\nThe volitional form of a verb + として corresponds to the English \"(Please) Try\nto...\". (you can still add ください、ほしい、くれ...etc. like for any other request) It's\na very natural way to request someone to do something and see how it goes.\n\nSome widely used examples to illustrate this:\n\n> (browser doesn't display flash) フラッシュをダウンロードしようとしてください。Please try to\n> download flash.\n>\n> (internet connection lost) 再度接続しようとしてください。Please try to reconnect.\n>\n> このポイントを明らかにしようとしてください。Please try to clarify this point.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-14T08:30:42.670", "id": "1920", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-14T09:59:36.157", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1917", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1924", "answer_count": 3, "body": "What's the difference between 打ち合わせ and 会議 and ミーティング?\n\nTo me it seems that 会議 may be more formal, but I'm not entirely sure.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-14T08:36:24.607", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1921", "last_activity_date": "2016-09-29T10:57:51.727", "last_edit_date": "2016-09-29T10:57:51.727", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "97", "post_type": "question", "score": 8, "tags": [ "word-choice", "business-japanese" ], "title": "Difference between 打ち合わせ and 会議 and ミーティング", "view_count": 1150 }

[ { "body": "打合せ is more generic. When you go abroad to meet your boss, your colleagues or\ncustomers, you'd say 打合せ.\n\nI use ミーティング for when I need to discuss a point with someone. If you're a\nstudent and discuss with you advisor once a week, that's it.\n\n会議 is defined as \"there's a boring speaker, and everyone around is sleeping\"\n:) That's in fact a conference (even a small one with a handful of people).", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-14T09:45:34.013", "id": "1924", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-14T09:45:34.013", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "356", "parent_id": "1921", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "From my experience:\n\n * We use 打ち合わせ about going to a client's place, when talking internally.\n\n * 会議 can be internal or external. 会議中 can be used internally or on the phone with clients.\n\n * We use ミーティング for regular weekly section meetings where everyone tells what s/he is doing and what problems there are.\n\nIt might be specific to my company.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-14T09:47:21.207", "id": "1925", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-14T09:47:21.207", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "107", "parent_id": "1921", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "For a business meeting: 会議\n\nIt basically means: \"To meet for deliberations\"\n\nIt's equivalent to the gairaigo: ミーティング (which I don't like much because\nthere's a widely used Japanese term already)\n\n[打ち合わせ](http://gogen-allguide.com/u/uchiawase.html) is used for meetings of\npeople ”with a common interest\". Meeting of a club maybe? As the link\nexplains, it has it origins in Gagaku, where musical instruments need to \"hit\n(taiko) as a unit and fit with the music\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-14T09:47:28.600", "id": "1926", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-14T09:47:28.600", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1921", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1961", "answer_count": 3, "body": "Is it more common to read 門 as かど or もん?\n\ne.g. how would we pronounce the 門 in 彼らは門が開くのを待っていた。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-14T09:10:04.453", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1922", "last_activity_date": "2013-09-27T04:27:55.227", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "264", "post_type": "question", "score": 5, "tags": [ "vocabulary", "kanji", "pronunciation" ], "title": "Is 門 read as かど or もん?", "view_count": 913 }

[ { "body": "I think that もん is the word you mean, and かど is used mostly (only?) in names.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-14T09:40:50.267", "id": "1923", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-14T09:40:50.267", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "356", "parent_id": "1922", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "I think もん is Chinese reading and かど is Japanese reading .\n\nYou would found かど is usually used for the Classic Movies\n\nfor example...\n\nみかど(mikado)「御門」\n\nかどまつ(kadomatu)「門松」\n\nかどで(kadode)「門出」\n\nかどうき(kadowaki)「門脇」（name）", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-14T13:42:20.057", "id": "1929", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-14T14:49:15.160", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-14T14:49:15.160", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "509", "parent_id": "1922", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "When the kanji character 門 is used as a noun in itself (meaning a gate), it is\nusually read as もん, although it was also read as かど in older time. As other\npeople say, 門 in your example should be read as もん in the modern Japanese.\n\nThe most common example of 門 read as かど in the modern Japanese that I can\nthink of is a proverb 笑う門には福来る (わらうかどにはふくきたる). This 門 is read as かど and means\na house. The literal meaning of the proverb is “Happiness comes to a home\nwhere family is laughing.” [Progressive Waei Chū\nJiten](http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF-8&p=%E7%AC%91%E3%81%86&dtype=3&dname=2na&stype=0)\nsuggests two translations of this proverb: the more literal one is “Fortune\nfavors cheerful homes,” and the less literal one is “Laugh and grow fat.”", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-15T18:05:33.390", "id": "1961", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-15T18:05:33.390", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "1922", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1932", "answer_count": 7, "body": "I noticed that \"dame\", which means \"not good\" or \"don't do that\", is sometimes\nwritten in manga as katakana. I was wondering, is it because katakana is used\nto express a strong feeling?\n\nSometimes, there are also other words written in katakana. In general, what\nare possible reasons why people would choose _katakana_ for a word instead of\n_hiragana_ or _kanji_ , especially when that word is not usually spelled with\n_katakana_?", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-14T13:56:22.927", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1930", "last_activity_date": "2019-05-21T06:00:29.147", "last_edit_date": "2014-12-12T00:00:07.300", "last_editor_user_id": "4964", "owner_user_id": "300", "post_type": "question", "score": 57, "tags": [ "katakana" ], "title": "Why are katakana preferred over hiragana or kanji sometimes?", "view_count": 23101 }

[ { "body": "There are several usages for katakana.\n\n 1. To describe (what feels like) Western origin words\n 2. To describe onomatopoeia\n 3. To describe the fact that it is normally written in kanji, but that it is written without it because either the writer wants to write faster, has no access to the kanji form (as in the case where the writer is given the name in a romanized transcription or the writer just heard the name), forgot the kanji form, or does not want to bother to write in kanji for any other reason.\n\n`だめ` has the kanji form `駄目`, and in this case, the reason is likely 3.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-14T14:17:43.907", "id": "1931", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-14T16:22:58.680", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-14T16:22:58.680", "last_editor_user_id": "128", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1930", "post_type": "answer", "score": 35 }, { "body": "In addition to user458s list: \n\n * To give visual and/or _very_ slight semantic emphasis. Almost like using **bold** or _italics_ in English.\n\n> それはだめだよ！\n>\n> それはダメだよ！\n\nYou can see that the latter stands out more. As for the onomatopoeia, those\nare often a little emphasized too, so it probably overlaps with reason 2 a\ngood amount. \n\n * Plant, animal, and mineral names are often written in katakana.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-14T14:38:08.537", "id": "1932", "last_activity_date": "2014-12-15T04:37:14.050", "last_edit_date": "2014-12-15T04:37:14.050", "last_editor_user_id": "29", "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "1930", "post_type": "answer", "score": 51 }, { "body": "* Style - Simply as personal style", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-14T15:07:55.417", "id": "1933", "last_activity_date": "2014-12-15T04:38:30.260", "last_edit_date": "2014-12-15T04:38:30.260", "last_editor_user_id": "29", "owner_user_id": "264", "parent_id": "1930", "post_type": "answer", "score": 13 }, { "body": "I think it's sometimes used when it's more like a series of syllables being\npronunced, rather than real Japanese. An equivalent in English would be Ginger\nMegg's mother saying something like \"Giiingerrr!\" when he's in big trouble.\nThe English language Wikipedia says\n\n> Katakana are also sometimes used to indicate words being spoken in a foreign\n> or otherwise unusual accent, by foreign characters, robots, etc. For\n> example, in a manga, the speech of a foreign character or a robot may be\n> represented by コンニチワ konnichiwa (\"hello\") instead of the more typical\n> hiragana こんにちは\n\nI haven't heard of any examples, apart from reading that McDonald's \"Mr James\"\noriginally spoke only in katakana.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-04-27T03:24:01.997", "id": "5328", "last_activity_date": "2014-12-15T04:38:58.527", "last_edit_date": "2014-12-15T04:38:58.527", "last_editor_user_id": "29", "owner_user_id": "91", "parent_id": "1930", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "Japanese often use katakana for certain Japanese-origin words when they are\ndifficult to write or imagine in kanji. I guess it's because they sound\nsomewhat like 'foreign' or 'onomatopoeia' to Japanese.\n\nCommon examples I can think of are:\n\n```\n\n 滅茶苦茶 as メチャクチャ\n 御洒落 as オシャレ\n 出鱈目 as デタラメ\n 駄洒落 as ダジャレ\n 辻褄 as ツジツマ\n 我儘 as ワガママ\n 馬鹿 as バカ\n \n```\n\nOf course these are not foreign words, and even elementary school children\nunderstand their meanings. However, they are so difficult or bothering to\nwrite in kanji that it became very common to write them down either in\nhiragana or katakana, even for adults using word processors. Daring to use\nkanji may look as if you were an old man.\n\nWhether to use hiragana or katakana is up to the writer's taste. I don't\nbelieve it has something to do with emphasizing. Generally, using hiragana\ntends to give soft, childish, cute or girly impressions, although the nuance\nis fairly subtle.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-03-28T06:53:47.763", "id": "15102", "last_activity_date": "2017-03-26T23:47:45.163", "last_edit_date": "2017-03-26T23:47:45.163", "last_editor_user_id": "5010", "owner_user_id": "5010", "parent_id": "1930", "post_type": "answer", "score": 25 }, { "body": "There are various reason depending on situation. Yesterday i saw a frog shaped\nearpick on which it was written カエル instead of かえる. I asked about it and i was\ntold that these things are done so as to avoid any confusion about the product\nor the instruction given for the user or consumer. かえる can also mean to return\n, or to change. Also some people can't read Kanji. These are the reason that\nleads to writing some catchy phrases or words so that there is no ambiguity\nbetween both parties. These are informal...\n\nedit: to grab eyes as well...", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2015-10-18T18:32:59.717", "id": "28759", "last_activity_date": "2015-10-18T19:09:42.310", "last_edit_date": "2015-10-18T19:09:42.310", "last_editor_user_id": "11481", "owner_user_id": "11481", "parent_id": "1930", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "There is also the case where some words are written in katakana on signals so\nthat everyone, even children, can notice easily and understand. For example,\nthe warning signals about Bear in the forest say クマ instead of 熊, or カラス\n(crow) instead of 烏.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2016-11-02T06:23:56.733", "id": "40580", "last_activity_date": "2019-05-21T06:00:29.147", "last_edit_date": "2019-05-21T06:00:29.147", "last_editor_user_id": "125", "owner_user_id": "18225", "parent_id": "1930", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1941", "answer_count": 1, "body": "On twitter I saw this:\n\n> なのに風呂掃除したら100円もらってたおれ…叱ってやりたい！笑\n\nWhat does it mean?\n\nThis is the previous tweet:\n\n>\n> 最近だなー。食ったらすぐ食器洗うのが習慣になったの。実家に居た頃は全部母親がやってたから甘えちゃってた。仕事もしてて家事も完璧にやってた母親、今更ながら尊敬します。", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-15T01:31:37.947", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1940", "last_activity_date": "2019-09-02T01:52:17.633", "last_edit_date": "2019-09-02T01:52:17.633", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "69", "post_type": "question", "score": 4, "tags": [ "translation", "meaning", "perspective" ], "title": "What does 叱ってやりたい mean in this context?", "view_count": 724 }

[ { "body": "When this person used to live with the parent(s), the mother had a job and did\nhousehold work, both completely. Nevertheless, this person recieved 100 yen\nfrom the mother each time for washing the bath tub (Washing the bath tub is a\ntypical daily household job assigned to children in Japan). After living alone\nand learned to do household work by him/herself, this person now understands\nthe burden of household work, and **wants to scold himself/herself of the\npast** for having received 100 yen for just doing a small portion of the\nhousehold work without considering the hard work the mother had been doing.\n\nOf course, you cannot actually go back to the past and scold yourself. This is\nonly possible within imagination. If you couldn't take this meaning easily,\nprobably this kind of mentality is difficult to understand for a native\nEnglish speaker, who are more rational than literary.\n\n`やる` means to do something resulting in either positive or negative effect on\nthe person.\n\n> * 子供におもちゃを買ってやる 'I will buy a toy for the child (with a positive effect).'\n> * お前を叱ってやる 'I will scold you on you (with a negative effect).' \n> Cf. お前を叱る 'I will scold you.'\n>\n\nA politer/slightly feminine form is `あげる`. This is only used for positive\neffect.\n\n> * 子供におもちゃを買ってあげる 'I will buy a toy for the child (with a positive\n> effect).'\n>", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-15T02:02:34.133", "id": "1941", "last_activity_date": "2011-12-30T08:47:48.407", "last_edit_date": "2011-12-30T08:47:48.407", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1940", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1943", "answer_count": 1, "body": "If I've understood correctly, ちょうど followed by a counting word usually means\nsomething like \"just x\" or \"exactly x\" depending on the context, but I can't\nfigure out what it means in this opening sentence of a novel:\n\nバルサが鳥影橋をわたっていたとき、皇族の行列が、ちょうど一本上流の山影橋にさしかかっていたことが、バルサの運命をかえた。\n\nI understand the overall meaning of the sentence, but the exact purpose of\nちょうど一本 here eludes me. What does the 一本 count? Or is ちょうど一本 some sort of set\nphrase beyond counting cylindrical things?", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-15T05:51:51.360", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1942", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-15T23:42:11.747", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "135", "post_type": "question", "score": 5, "tags": [ "vocabulary", "translation" ], "title": "What is the meaning of ちょうど一本 in this context?", "view_count": 1141 }

[ { "body": "**Edited**. (As Tsuyoshi Ito points out, it may be more natural to take `ちょうど`\nas modifying `さしかかる` rather than `一本`.)\n\nPerhaps, this river has several bridges crossing it, and when バルサ was crossing\n鳥影橋, the royal parade had just reached 山影橋, which is **one bridge** (i.e., the\nnext bridge) towards the upstream of the river (from 鳥影橋).\n\n`本` is used to count long things. It does not necessarily have to be\ncylindrical.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-15T06:05:35.993", "id": "1943", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-15T23:42:11.747", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-15T23:42:11.747", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1942", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "2094", "answer_count": 7, "body": "As a foreigner in Japan, one has to get used to the fact that some Japanese\nwill compliment you on things that are too mundane to really deserve mention.\nLike the fact that you can use chopsticks, eat sushi, say 「今日は」, and all that\nsort of thing.\n\nMost of the time, it's harmless, and a mere stepping stone to genuine\nconversation.\n\nBut sometimes you'll meet that person who will just go on about it for a bit\ntoo long. They'll ask follow up questions, and keep the topic alive, blocking\nthe potential to interact as more than just a gaijin novelty.\n\nTo those people, I want to say, \"yeah, look, can we get past that?\" Well...\nthat would be the politer version (though obviously not devoid of a little\nfrustration). Sometimes I just want to say \"Get over it, will ya?\"\n\nI think the more or less literal translation for \"get over it\" would be:\n\n> [乗り切って]【のりきって】\n\nFirst question is: Is that a suitable translation, or is it too literal in the\nsense of physically crossing something?\n\nNext question: How would I, and could I, differentiate between \"Get over it\"\n(slightly stronger and a little more confrontational) and \"can we get past\nthis?\" (a little softer but still conveying some annoyance).\n\nAdditional note 1: I'm okay with being a little confrontational on this, so\nplease don't hold back on potentially stern suggestions for translation.\n\n**IMPORTANt:** This is a _language_ question about how to express a concept,\nthis is _not_ a question about how to socially handle an interaction. Answers\nshould be about how to express the idea of \"get over it\" in the Japanese\nlanguage. Answers about how you would come up with different responses or how\nyou handle the given examples are off topic.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-15T06:50:57.247", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1944", "last_activity_date": "2018-03-03T17:24:57.033", "last_edit_date": "2017-03-08T07:31:02.880", "last_editor_user_id": "119", "owner_user_id": "119", "post_type": "question", "score": 31, "tags": [ "word-choice", "translation", "set-phrases", "idioms", "english-to-japanese" ], "title": "How would one convey \"get over it\" in Japanese?", "view_count": 6103 }

[ { "body": "I don't think `乗り切って` is a suitable translation in this case. It is too\nliteral of a translation. It does not have to be physical, but it will mean\n'to overcome something'.\n\nMaybe you can start a different topic by\n\n> * それは置いておいて 'leaving that behind, ...'\n> * それはそうと 'while that is that, ...'\n> * ところで 'by the way'\n>\n\nIf you want to be more direct, you can say\n\n> * それはもういいよ/いいから 'I had enough of that'\n> * しつこいよ 'You are persistent'\n>", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-15T07:14:00.100", "id": "1946", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-15T07:14:00.100", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1944", "post_type": "answer", "score": 19 }, { "body": "I really like Sawa's \"しつこいよ\".\n\nI would say (and happen to say) things like:\n\n> もういい\n\nI've had enough of this\n\n> おはしが上手だって当たり前だよ。あんた、フォーク使えるのと同じだろう？！\n\nOf course I can use chopsticks! Can't you use a fork?\n\n> 外国に行ったら、それぐらいみんなできるよ。知らないの？ええ？！\n\nDidn't you know that every one abroad is capable of that? I can't believe it!\n\n> どうでもいいから、話変えてくれないか？\n\nGreat. Can't we talk about something else now?\n\nBut be warned. Those are a lot ruder that they may seem to a westerner…", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-15T08:10:34.630", "id": "1948", "last_activity_date": "2014-10-26T06:29:43.130", "last_edit_date": "2014-10-26T06:29:43.130", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "356", "parent_id": "1944", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "[This\narticle](http://eow.alc.co.jp/gochisousama/UTF-8/?ref=ex&exp=HT160032&dn=2160552&dk=EJ&pg=1)\nsuggests that one can use 「ごちそうさま」to indicate that one is tired of hearing\nabout a subject. However, I have not been able to verify that it applies to\nyour case; it may only apply when one is bored of hearing the other person\nbrag. I'll try and research some more.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-20T05:49:34.887", "id": "2069", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-20T05:49:34.887", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "28", "parent_id": "1944", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "How about the ever popular 仕方がない?", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-21T01:28:01.163", "id": "2093", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-21T01:28:01.163", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "187", "parent_id": "1944", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "乗り切る doesn't quite fit here because it's about enduring _through_ a hardship.\nWith 乗り切る, wave(s) of difficulties come and go while _you_ persevere, where as\nin \"get over it,\" you need to overcome it yourself.\n\n乗り越える, 克服する and 打ち勝つ do have the sense of actively overcoming some obstacle,\nand may work if you use it together with the right noun. I'll come back to it\nlater.\n\nMy word of choice for expressing \"getting past it\" would be 卒業する, in the sense\nof outgrowing (wwwjdic's second definition for 卒業: `(2) (col) outgrowing\nsomething; moving on`):\n\n> もういい加減その話題からは卒業したら? Can you just \"outgrow\" that subject already? (most\n> naturally found in a parent-to-child or friend-to-friend scolding)\n\nTurning it into a shared problem can make it softer:\n\n> こういう話題からはそろそろ卒業しませんか? Shall we \"outgrow\" these kinds of subjects?\n\nNote that 「卒業しませんか?」 as a set phrase is most commonly found in cheap-sounding\nads, and may sound unnatural in a real conversation.\n\nOther phrases that can get the point over include:\n\n * 頭を切り替える switch one's mode of thinking \n * 「その点頭を切り替えてもらえるとうれしいです」 Would you change your way of thinking and stop dwelling on that point? (pretty condescending)\n * 偏見/先入観 を乗り越える/を克服する/に打ち勝つ \n * 「あなたにはぜひともその先入観を乗り越えてほしいんです」I really hope you overcome that preconception of yours. (pretty condescending)", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-21T01:38:53.907", "id": "2094", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-21T01:48:48.253", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-21T01:48:48.253", "last_editor_user_id": "128", "owner_user_id": "128", "parent_id": "1944", "post_type": "answer", "score": 25 }, { "body": "I would just do the same thing I do in English, which is just abruptly change\nthe topic. To change the topic, you can use words such as 因みに\n(\"Incidentally...\") and ところで (\"By the way...\"). I would try not to get\nconfrontational with Japanese people, especially older people who are more\nlikely to engage in this conversation topic with you; they appear difficult to\nupset, but being too direct/forceful/rude is very bad.\n\nAnother approach if you just want to end the conversation and not change the\ntopic is to start saying そうですね over and over again. Eventually they'll wind\nthemselves out of things to talk about and end the conversation naturally.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2016-12-28T16:58:54.327", "id": "42078", "last_activity_date": "2016-12-28T16:58:54.327", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "11449", "parent_id": "1944", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "Pretty late to the party, but something that I've used to pretty great effect\nis turning those situations around on the person.\n\nStart off with a bit of:\n\n * 当たり前でしょ？ \n * 当然でしょ？\n\nWhich conveys the feeling of \"Duh\" or \"Well of course...\"\n\nThen you just follow it up with a bit of \"もうX年間日本に住んでいるので、それをできないとおかしいでしょ?\"\n\nFor the chopsticks or meaningless compliments about really simple Japanese,\nsometimes a 「まあ、難しくないからね。。。」is sufficient.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2017-03-08T03:29:36.840", "id": "44178", "last_activity_date": "2017-03-08T03:29:36.840", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "20190", "parent_id": "1944", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1956", "answer_count": 6, "body": "In a grammar textbook I have, there is this phrase:\n\n>\n> 幸{さいわ}い日本{にほん}で日本語{にほんご}を勉強{べんきょう}して、かなり話{はな}せるようになりました。日本{にほん}に行{い}っただけのことはありました。\n\nThe translation given is:\n\n> Fortunately, I studied Japanese in Japan and now I can speak it fairly well.\n> I didn't go to Japan for nothing.\n\nThe thing that confuses me is in that last part, where the translation is \"I\ndidn't go to Japan for nothing\".\n\nIt seems to me that `だけのことがありました` literally translates to something like\n\"there was just that thing\". `だけ`, to me, implies exclusion of other things.\n\nSo to me, the sentence should be something like \"That's all I went to Japan\nfor\", or perhaps \"That's all I got from being in Japan\". The way I read it has\nmore of a negative implication than the given translation.\n\nWhat am I not understanding about this phrase in order to see how the given\ntranslation makes sense? Or perhaps is the given translation not as good as it\ncould be?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-15T07:10:25.790", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1945", "last_activity_date": "2014-04-21T06:40:08.793", "last_edit_date": "2014-04-21T06:40:08.793", "last_editor_user_id": "119", "owner_user_id": "119", "post_type": "question", "score": 13, "tags": [ "word-choice", "grammar", "translation" ], "title": "Shouldn't this phrase using だけのこと mean \"just for that\"?", "view_count": 1026 }

[ { "body": "The given translation is a good one.\n\nGiven some scale, `だけ` either excludes the lower side or the higher side of\nthe standard. Probably you only knew the usage of excluding the higher side.\nThat usage is more common.\n\n * Excluding the higher side of a scale: 'no more than', 'nothing other than (= only)'\n\n> * 寿司だけを食べた 'I ate {nothing other than/only/ at most} sushi'\n\n * Excluding the lower side of a scale: 'no less than', 'as much as'\n\n> * 日本に行っただけのことはあった 'It (= the outcome) was worth {no less than/as much\n> as} (the cost/effort/etc. of) going to Japan'", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-15T07:37:04.433", "id": "1947", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-15T14:44:28.047", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-15T14:44:28.047", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1945", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 }, { "body": "I think a slightly more literal translation, that still flows nicely in\nEnglish, would be, \"It was worth going to Japan just for that.\" or maybe \"I\nwent (could have gone?) to Japan for that alone.\"", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-15T10:47:41.113", "id": "1950", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-15T10:47:41.113", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "393", "parent_id": "1945", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "I think the source of your initial confusion is that there's some ambiguity in\nthe phrase \"didn't do X for nothing.\" In the above translation, it seems to\nmean \"fortunately, my time in Japan didn't go to waste\" but I think the more\ncommon use is to kind of sarcastically remind someone of the reason or purpose\nof something. Something like, \"I didn't bake all these cookies for nothing,\nyou know!\" or \"They don't call it Death Valley for nothing!\"", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-15T14:40:54.737", "id": "1955", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-15T14:40:54.737", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "486", "parent_id": "1945", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "Some of the other answers try to connect the meaning of the idiom だけのことはある to\n“just” or “only,” which is one of the meanings of だけ, but I do not think that\nit is the right way to analyze this idiom.\n\nだけ means “extent.” It sometimes means some kind of limitation on the extent,\nbut not always.\n\nFor example, if you go to buy a cloth and are asked how much you need, you can\nshow the length of the cloth you need with your hands and say,\n\n> これだけください。 I would like this much.\n\n(Depending on the context, this sentence can mean “I would like only this.” In\nthe Tokyo dialect, これだけ is pronounced LHHH in the the first case and LHHL in\nthe second case, where L and H mean low and high pitches.)\n\nThe literal translation of the sentence\n\n> 日本に行っただけのことはありました。\n\nwould be “There was something to the extent that I went to Japan.” In your\ncontext, the “something” refers to the fact that the speaker improved his/her\nJapanese language skills, and the speaker is saying that it was worth visiting\nJapan.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-15T14:48:23.250", "id": "1956", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-15T14:48:23.250", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "1945", "post_type": "answer", "score": 15 }, { "body": "Quoting entry 【だけ】no. 3-2 from Daijisen :\n\n> 多く「…だけあって」「…だけのことはある」「…だけに」の形で、素質・能力・価値が相応に発揮される意を表す。\n\nEntry no 3 from Daijirin:\n\n> 物事の状態がそれにふさわしいという気持ちを表す。「だけに」「だけあって」の形を取ることが多い。\n\nwhich is: it shows that it is deserving of a certain characteristic, ability,\nor value due to what is said.\n\nTherefore, in your example, \"I went to Japan\" therefore it is just deserving\nthat \"I'm able to speak Japanese\".\n\nExamples:\n\n> 令嬢 **だけに** 、社交辞令も上手で話し方も品がある。 \n> _As expected of a daughter of nobility, she's good at social manners and is\n> well-spoken. \"_\n>\n> 北海道 **だけあって** 、冬がとても寒いし雪もよく積もる。 \n> Hokkaido, worthy of its name, the winter is very cold and the snow piles up\n> real good.\n\np/s: please comment my Japanese grammar/English translation, I think it may\nneed fixing.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-15T14:48:53.013", "id": "1957", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-15T15:00:22.567", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "154", "parent_id": "1945", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "I came across this today in the Dictionary of Advanced Japanese Grammar, and\nremembered this question. I'm posting here even after all this time because it\noffers some translation examples that haven't yet appeared in this thread. The\ndescription it gives is:\n\n> A phrase expressing an evaluative component regarding how s.t. is\n> contributing to an expected, remarkable result\n\n(This description isn't particularly helpful to me, but it may be to someone.)\n\nAnd some possible English translations:\n\n * don't do s.t. for nothing;\n * ~explains it\n * no wonder~\n * it's no surprise that~\n\nIt also states that さすが is commonly used with the phrase to further emphasise\nthe sense of \"expectedness\":\n\n> [reason for expectation]。 さすがに [remarkable result] だけのことはある。\n\nSo while I can't give info on the origin or word-by-word breakdown of the\nphrase, it is considered enough of a standalone \"set phrase\" to have its own\nentry in a grammar dictionary.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2012-05-05T08:03:04.673", "id": "5426", "last_activity_date": "2012-05-05T08:19:57.350", "last_edit_date": "2012-05-05T08:19:57.350", "last_editor_user_id": "1272", "owner_user_id": "1272", "parent_id": "1945", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1953", "answer_count": 5, "body": "How do you respond to ありがとうございます and other ways of giving thanks? Are there\nany expressions similar to the English \"You're welcome\" or \"No problem\", or is\nit appropriate to not respond at all?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-15T12:31:42.493", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1951", "last_activity_date": "2014-08-23T18:08:23.990", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "80", "post_type": "question", "score": 19, "tags": [ "usage", "politeness" ], "title": "How do you respond to thanks given?", "view_count": 29102 }

[ { "body": "どう致しまして(どういたしまして) is one way. I tend to go with a simple nod and 'ん', myself.\n(I'm really bad at receiving 'thank yous' in both languages, though.)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-15T12:41:16.013", "id": "1952", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-15T12:41:16.013", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "393", "parent_id": "1951", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "The simplest one is 「いいえ」, \"not at all\". The next one up is 「どういたしまして」, \"would\ndo the same\". Another one you may come across is 「とんでもない」, \"don't mention it\",\nor one of its more polite variants (replacing 「ありません」 or 「ございません」 as\nappropriate). There are even more polite responses, but as a 外国人 you will not\nbe expected to have to worry about them.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-15T12:42:02.030", "id": "1953", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-15T12:42:02.030", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "22", "parent_id": "1951", "post_type": "answer", "score": 15 }, { "body": "Also, \"no problem\" = 問題ない（し） - (I personally add the し to soften it).", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-15T14:33:16.570", "id": "1954", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-15T14:33:16.570", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "78", "parent_id": "1951", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "> どういたしまして\n\nIt's the safe way to go but it' very long and can be viewed as a little too\nmuch for a simple \"thank you\" (this is still keigo)\n\n> いいえ いいえ\n\nOften pronounced as: いえいえ or いやいや as it is shorter\n\n> おぉ\n\nJapanese like to make sounds like this often. Can be used for very small\nthings, like someone dropped a paper and you help picking it up. 「ん」with a\nsmile works as well.\n\n> ノープロブレム\n\nNo problem.\n\n> 問題ない\n\nNo problem. (To use with いいえ for clarity?)\n\n> 構わない\n\nOften preceded by いいえ -> That's ok, no problem.\n\n> おやすいご用です\n\nOften preceded by いいえ -> Lit. \"That was an easy task\". Very polite.\n\n> 良かったらまたどうぞ\n\nLit. \"I'll do the same next time\" Very polite.\n\n> とんでもない\n\nOften preceded by いいえ -> No, that's nothing.\n\n> うん, いいよ\n\nSay that to a friend. \"oh, it's OK\". Simple and widely used.\n\n> こちらこそ (ありがとう)\n\nIf you need to say thank you also (thank you too)\n\n> 礼にはおよばないんです\n\nLit. \"No need to be polite\".\n\n> 気にしないで\n\nOften preceded by うん or おー. \"Don't worry, don't mention it\"", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-15T14:53:04.060", "id": "1958", "last_activity_date": "2014-08-12T11:04:47.373", "last_edit_date": "2014-08-12T11:04:47.373", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1951", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 }, { "body": "No one said two really common expressions: どうってことない and いいってこと, followed\nusually by よ ... Also any similar expression ( どうってことはない, どうと言うこともない,\nどうって言うことはない and so on...).\n\nTo prove the use of ii tte koto, which I guess may be regional, here is [a\nlink](http://m.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/detail/q1051461125) \nHowever, I'm not questioning how often you hear it in real life, I'm saying\nyou hear it pretty often. And that's true if you watch television (you can\nread more in the comment).", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-08-13T14:33:11.230", "id": "18223", "last_activity_date": "2014-08-23T18:08:23.990", "last_edit_date": "2014-08-23T18:08:23.990", "last_editor_user_id": "2972", "owner_user_id": "2972", "parent_id": "1951", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 3, "body": "「けれども」と「けど」と「けれど」はいったいどう違うんですか。「けれども」はテレビ番組でよく使われているが、「けれども」は「けれど」より丁寧ですか。\n\n_**English translation:_** What exactly do 「けれども」 and 「けど」 and 「けれど」 mean?\nThey often use 「けれども」 on TV programs, but is 「けれども」 more polite than 「けれど」?", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-15T22:35:10.587", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1964", "last_activity_date": "2018-10-27T17:02:39.383", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-16T03:49:17.167", "last_editor_user_id": "119", "owner_user_id": "23", "post_type": "question", "score": 17, "tags": [ "word-choice" ], "title": "What is the difference between 「けれど」 and 「けれども」 and 「けど」?", "view_count": 9112 }

[ { "body": "`けど` is short for `けれど`, and hence, is colloquial and less polite. `けれども` has\n`も` 'even' added somewhat redundantly. I don't see clear differences between\n`けれど` and `けれども`. The difference among the three may be parallel to the\ndifference among English `though`, `although`, and `even though`. So if a\nnative English speaker can tell the difference among them, it may be a clue\nfor telling the difference for the Japanese words.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-15T23:01:27.290", "id": "1965", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-15T23:07:06.400", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-15T23:07:06.400", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1964", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 }, { "body": "The difference lies in how polite they are. The longer the word, the more\npolite it is.\n\nThe shorter a word, the more curt and impolite it is.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-18T15:30:41.187", "id": "2034", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-18T15:30:41.187", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "69", "parent_id": "1964", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "けれど is 98% used only in writings. \nIt’s slightly more polite than けど, though, it sounds awkward if you use it in\nconversations.\n\nFor example, if you want to say “I’d like to visit Japan but I’m too busy”, \nyou would say “日本にはいきたい **けど** 、忙しすぎる。\" in a conversation with your friend\nwhereas you would write “日本には行きたい **けれど** 、忙し過ぎるんです。” in your blog, which\nshould be a little more polite.\n\n**けれども** is definitely more polite than these two, and is used in both\nspeakings and writings.\n\nけれども can be used for someone like your customers or boss, but not for\npresidents or priests. For those people or in a formal situation where you\nshould be very polite (not necessarily with priests but with people you have\nto be polite to), “ **ですが** “ is usually used instead.\n\nAs for the levels of politeness, \nけど(informal)<けれど(only in writings)<けれども(polite/formal)<ですが(very polite/formal)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2018-10-26T23:24:36.520", "id": "62448", "last_activity_date": "2018-10-27T17:02:39.383", "last_edit_date": "2018-10-27T17:02:39.383", "last_editor_user_id": "31724", "owner_user_id": "31724", "parent_id": "1964", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1967", "answer_count": 1, "body": "When starting some activity, I've heard something like 'Se..inou... ' (I'm not\nsure what are the specific words for this). The context for this word I'd\nthink is pretty much the same as when saying 1,2,3 start! in English.\n\nActually, is it just some sound or is it a word? Is there a story behind this?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-16T01:18:28.807", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1966", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-16T06:21:51.720", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-16T06:21:51.720", "last_editor_user_id": "501", "owner_user_id": "79", "post_type": "question", "score": 14, "tags": [ "set-phrases", "culture", "interjections" ], "title": "What is that thing yelled in Japanese when starting something?", "view_count": 1454 }

[ { "body": "It is used to do something simultaneously. \"Together on 2... one, two!\"\n\n「せーの」 is used the most.\n\nYou can hear せーのーで or いっせーの for 3 \"beats\"\n\nVariations will apparently depend on regions and dialects, but 「せーの」looks like\na national standard.\n\nThe stories and origins are multiple and vague. I'll just list what I've\nheard:\n\n * いっせーの comes from the French \"Hisser\" used by French soldiers during the Meiji Restoration.\n * いっせーの comes from the word 一斉に meaning simultaneously\n * Or simply comes from 一、二の三 (1, 2, three!)\n\nI cannot confirm which one is the real origin or if there are others...", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-16T02:11:09.377", "id": "1967", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-16T04:15:39.850", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-16T04:15:39.850", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1966", "post_type": "answer", "score": 14 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1980", "answer_count": 2, "body": "I recall in my speaking/listening class last semester in Japan, when we were\ndiscussing proper intonation in the standard dialect, that the intonation of\nありがとう varied rather widely between dialects (i.e. on which mora the intonation\nrises and falls).\n\nCan someone please refresh my memory? **How does the intonation of ありがとう vary\nbetween dialects?**\n\nPlease also see the question I've posted in meta regarding notating\nintonation: [What notation should we use for showing the pitch accent of\nwords?](https://japanese.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/403/what-notation-\nshould-we-use-for-showing-the-intonation-of-words)", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-16T07:54:24.900", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1973", "last_activity_date": "2013-09-23T18:50:14.810", "last_edit_date": "2017-03-16T15:48:25.793", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "384", "post_type": "question", "score": 8, "tags": [ "dialects", "pitch-accent", "intonation" ], "title": "How does the intonation of ありがとう vary between dialects?", "view_count": 1802 }

[ { "body": "Well, it's kinda tough to put this in text, but I'll try. The number indicate\nthe strength (bigger=stronger).\n\nTokyo: \nありがとう \n5 3 3 3 2\n\nOsaka (Kansai): \nありがとう \n3 3 3 5 5 \nおおきに \n3 3 5 2\n\nI'm not very sure how they sound in other areas like Tohoku, Nagoya, Chugoku\n(Hiroshima etc), Kyushu, Okinawa. Hokkaidoers sound pretty much like Tokyo\nguys, although if you go to really rural places within Hokkaido (or even\nHakodate) they sound more like Tohoku-ish.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-16T09:36:54.533", "id": "1978", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-16T09:36:54.533", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "1973", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "~~In Nagoya, ありがとう is pronounced as LHLLL~~ (see below), where L and H mean\nlow and high pitches, respectively. I think that this is the same in Tokyo,\ntoo.\n\n_Correction_ : According to the [publisher\nwebpage](http://www.iwanami.co.jp/moreinfo/0074580/top.html#04) on the book\nアクセントの法則 by Haruo Kubozono, the accent pattern of the word ありがとう is as\nfollows:\n\n> * Tokyo: LHLLL\n> * Nagoya: LLHLL\n> * Osaka: LLLHL\n> * Kagoshima: LLLHH\n>\n\nI admit (with sadness) that I confused the traditional Nagoya pronunciation\nwith the Tokyo pronunciation.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-16T11:51:35.357", "id": "1980", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-16T22:06:40.530", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-16T22:06:40.530", "last_editor_user_id": "15", "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "1973", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1979", "answer_count": 1, "body": "I'm having trouble understanding this rock star's tweet:\n\nたまーに仮歌とか流れてくる笑RT @maoloveai: @mao_sid シド率はどのくらいですか(^0^)？\n\nWhat is 仮歌？\n\nWhat does that tweet say?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-16T08:14:24.167", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1975", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-16T09:48:56.867", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "69", "post_type": "question", "score": 3, "tags": [ "translation" ], "title": "What's does 仮歌 mean here?", "view_count": 1522 }

[ { "body": ">\n> 口でメロディーを歌うデモテープの場合は適当な言葉をあてがうことが多く、この状態のものを「仮歌」と呼び、仮歌を専門に歌う「仮歌シンガー」と呼ばれる歌手もいる\n\n[from\nwikipedia](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%87%E3%83%A2%E3%83%86%E3%83%BC%E3%83%97)\n\nSo I'm not 100% sure but they are probably talking about some early prototype\nof a song which still uses some temporary random lyrics for the time being.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-16T09:48:56.867", "id": "1979", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-16T09:48:56.867", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "499", "parent_id": "1975", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1984", "answer_count": 1, "body": "What are the differences between these three words. They all seem to translate\nto \"books\".\n\n書物、図書 and 本", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-16T13:00:54.793", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1981", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-17T07:28:33.630", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-17T07:28:33.630", "last_editor_user_id": "125", "owner_user_id": "108", "post_type": "question", "score": 10, "tags": [ "vocabulary", "synonyms" ], "title": "The difference between 書物、図書 and 本", "view_count": 2174 }

[ { "body": "`本` typically means hard-bounded volume. `図書` can equally refer to magazines\nas well. `書物` has an academic flavour. See Tsuyosh Ito's comment below.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-16T13:52:38.357", "id": "1984", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-17T03:15:25.333", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-17T03:15:25.333", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1981", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1983", "answer_count": 1, "body": "What is the difference between:\n\n書店 and 本屋\n\nAre there any specific places where you can use one over the other? Or is it\nsimply like the English Bookstore/Bookshop, and are perfectly interchangeable?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-16T13:02:50.427", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1982", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-16T15:06:44.313", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "108", "post_type": "question", "score": 12, "tags": [ "words" ], "title": "The difference between 書店 and 本屋", "view_count": 1593 }

[ { "body": "`本屋` means bookstore. `書店` means bookstore or publishing company, latter of\nwhich would be normally called `出版社`. `書店` but not `本屋` can be used as\naffixal; there are `....書店` but no `...本屋` with this meaning. There are\n`[...本]屋` like `貸本屋`, but that has a different structure.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-16T13:44:01.717", "id": "1983", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-16T15:06:44.313", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-16T15:06:44.313", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1982", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1987", "answer_count": 3, "body": "This is a mistake I habitually make, even though I know what the right form\nis.\n\nEarlier tonight, I wanted to tell my friend \"Let's go together!\", so I sent a\nmail saying:\n\n> 一緒{いっしょ}`で`行{い}こう！\n\nMy friend sent back a mail :\n\n> はい、一緒{いっしょ}`に`行{い}こう `;)`\n\n... reminding me that `で` is incorrect, and `に` is the appropriate particle in\nthis case.\n\nWhich I know is right, but the reason it's stuck in my head to use `で` is that\nit makes more sense to me.\n\n`に` is used to indicate direction of action(?), so I don't see how \"going\" can\nbe directed _at_ \"together\".\n\n`で` makes sense to me, because my understanding of `で` is that it means \"by\nuse of\" or \"by way of\" or something like that.\n\nSo to me it makes perfect sense to say `一緒{いっしょ}で行{い}こう` because with `で` it\nmeans \"let's go, and the way we'll go is together\".\n\nCan someone help me break this habit by making some kind of logical sense of\nwhy `に` is right and `で` isn't?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-16T15:13:31.530", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1985", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-03T02:37:59.513", "last_edit_date": "2014-06-03T02:37:59.513", "last_editor_user_id": "119", "owner_user_id": "119", "post_type": "question", "score": 16, "tags": [ "grammar", "particle-に", "particle-で" ], "title": "Why is 一緒に correct and 一緒で incorrect?", "view_count": 3823 }

[ { "body": "First, we can't make the blanket statement that 一緒で is always incorrect, only\nthat it is incorrect in this particular case.\n\nLet's start by identifying how に is used here. In the case of 一緒に, に works the\nsame way as in expressions like きれいに (\"neatly\", \"prettily\") and 気軽に\n(\"casually\"): it turns the preceding word into an adverb and shows how the\naction is done.\n\nBecause the point of 一緒 in the sentence 一緒に行こう is to show how the action is\ndone (\"together\" as opposed to, say, \"separately\"), it must be followed by に.\n\nOn the other hand, で, when following a quantity or a noun identifying a group,\nexpresses the range of the subject (such as in 一人で, 二人で, みんなで, and 家族で) and\nshows how many people/things participated in the action. 一緒 is too vague to be\nused with で in this sense, because it does not specify a number or a precise\ngrouping.\n\nBut there are cases when 一緒 can be followed by で. This typically indicates\nthat the parties involved are in the same physical location, but they may not\nbe performing the same action. (In these cases, the line between the particle\nで and the ～て form of だ gets blurry.)\n\n> ~~この会社では、社員は一緒で昼食をとる。 At this company, the employees have lunch together.\n> [Implying that some may start eating a little before others, but everyone\n> has lunch in the same place and at roughly the same time.]~~ (incorrect)\n>\n> 友達と一緒でよかった。 I'm glad I was with a friend.\n>\n> 子供と一緒で荷物が多いと大変です。 It's tough when you're with your kids and you have a lot\n> of luggage.\n\n一緒 could also indicate that two things are the same; in this case, 一緒で can be\nreplaced with 一緒であって:\n\n> 彼は母校が一緒で、子供のころは毎日遊んでいた。 He went to the same school as I did, and when we\n> were kids we played every day.", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-16T16:54:55.250", "id": "1987", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-17T17:53:37.393", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "94", "parent_id": "1985", "post_type": "answer", "score": 9 }, { "body": "This is only a speculation, but the etymology might be relevant. `一緒に` derives\nfrom `一所に`, which means 'at/to one place'. So the expression `一緒に行こう` 'let's\ngo together' is etymologically driven from `一所に行こう` 'let's go to a single\nplace'. In the latter, `一所` 'a single place' is the destination, and hence you\nshould use `に` instead of `で`. If that is just carried over to the usage of\n`一緒に`, then it will make sense.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-17T02:50:21.150", "id": "1992", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-17T02:50:21.150", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1985", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "`一緒に`: adverb. Which means, it gives a description to an action (verb).\n\n> 妹と一緒に浜辺へ行きました。 \n> _Went to the beach together with my little sister._\n\nThe verb `行く` now has extra information: it was done together `妹`.\n\n`一緒で`: predicate + conjuction. Which means, `一緒` is used to describe that the\nsubject is together. Then `で` is used to continue description with other\npredicate (description).\n\nTo borrow Derek's examples:\n\n> 1. 友達と一緒でよかった。\n>\n\nbecomes\n\n> 友達と一緒でした。それで、よかったです。\n\nand\n\n> 1. 子供と一緒で荷物が多いと大変です。\n>\n\nbecomes\n\n> 子供と一緒です。また、荷物が多いです。すると、大変です。\n\n(note: this split sentences are talking about self. The original joined\nsentences could be a general statement.)\n\nand\n\n> 彼は母校が一緒で、子供のころは毎日遊んでいた。\n\nbecomes\n\n> 彼は母校が一緒だ。子供のころは毎日遊んでいた。", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-17T11:45:02.160", "id": "1997", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-17T12:03:56.303", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-17T12:03:56.303", "last_editor_user_id": "15", "owner_user_id": "154", "parent_id": "1985", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1990", "answer_count": 1, "body": "I was wondering how do we identify what instruments may be used with the verb\n引く, or 弾く, or both?\n\nIf both 引く and 弾く can be used is there any difference in nuance between one vs\nthe other?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-16T17:10:06.000", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1989", "last_activity_date": "2013-01-11T16:03:23.587", "last_edit_date": "2013-01-11T16:03:23.587", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "264", "post_type": "question", "score": 5, "tags": [ "word-choice", "words", "nuances", "homophonic-kanji", "music" ], "title": "which instruments use 弾く and which use 引く?", "view_count": 4590 }

[ { "body": "引く and 弾く, while pronounced the same, mean different things:\n\n * 引く means to pull, draw or otherwise move or lead in a literal or mostly literal sense (e.g. 手を引く, to lead someone by the hand; 引っ込める, to withdraw or retract)\n\n * 弾く means to play, for a wide variety of instruments, ranging from the piano to the violin, i.e. string instruments and keyboards (potentially caused by the piano and harpsichord in particular secretly being string instruments at heart).\n\nSome instruments, however, use entirely different words, like 打つ for drums,\nespecially the 太鼓.\n\n**Edit:** Confusingly, 打つ is also used for an entirely different sense of the\nword play; namely that to play a single move in 碁.", "comment_count": 8, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-16T21:48:17.503", "id": "1990", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-16T21:56:54.380", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-16T21:56:54.380", "last_editor_user_id": "519", "owner_user_id": "519", "parent_id": "1989", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1993", "answer_count": 1, "body": "Another rock star tweet that I don't understand. Here the word たいがい confuses\nme.\n\nいや、しん様には負けます( ；´Д｀)RT @shinji_sid: いやいやあなたもたいがい…RT @mao_sid: しん様(((o( _ﾟ▽ﾟ_\n)o)))今日もイケメンでした(((o( _ﾟ▽ﾟ_ )o)))RT @shinji_sid: ♪(´ε｀ )つティモテ\n\nIt looks like they are complimenting each other on how beautiful they are.\n\nWhat does it say?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-17T00:48:45.967", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1991", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-17T03:01:16.197", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "69", "post_type": "question", "score": 2, "tags": [ "translation" ], "title": "What does たいがい mean here?", "view_count": 518 }

[ { "body": "`大概` (taigai) in this context means 'to a decent degree'. In the example, they\nare being modest to each other. A person is praised for something, and that\nperson says that that appies to the other person as well to a decent degree.\nDepending on the context, it may be an irony, and they may actually be blaming\neach other.\n\nTo my understanding, this is used in the Kansai dialects. Another usage is as\nfollows. They both mean the same.\n\n> * 大概にせいよ [Kansai dialect]\n> * いい加減にしろ [Tokyo dialect]\n> * 'Stop doing it!'\n>", "comment_count": 6, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-17T03:01:16.197", "id": "1993", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-17T03:01:16.197", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "1991", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "1995", "answer_count": 1, "body": "Here's another habitual mistake I make. I'm looking at a sign for a restaurant\nwith pictures of great food. So I remark to my friend:\n\n> 美味{おい}しいそう、ね？\n\n... intending to mean, \"that looks good, don't you think?\" (more literally:\n\"[that] seems delicious, huh?\"). I'm going to make \"good\" synonymous with\n\"delicious\" for `美味{おい}しい` in this question, by the way, because it's more\nnatural for me to say food is \"good\".\n\nMy friend laughs, though, and tells me that by using `そう` in this case, I'm\nsaying that I've heard or been informed that it is good. It does not mean that\nI am directly assessing the picture for myself in that moment.\n\nYet, when I look up in the dictionary, one of the definitions of `そう` is\n\"seems\" or \"looks like\". There's no mention of hearsay.\n\nI've also looked at some related\n[questions](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/850/what-exactly-\ndoes-an-adjective-stem-mean) on this site, but I'm still left confused. In the\nanswer to that question, it says \"`そう` emphasizes evidence of the senses\nrather than general _seeming_.\" Well... if that's true, then shouldn't my eyes\nlooking at the picture be the evidence of the sense I need to justify using\n`そう`?\n\nFirst, what should I say if I want to say \"that looks good\"? `「美味{おい}しいみたい」`?\nThat seems like I am saying that the presentation might be deceptive, as in\n\"that might be good, but that's just the way the picture is, and who knows\nabout the real thing.\" `「美味{おい}しいかな」`? That makes it sound like I'm seeking\nconfirmation, as in \"I wonder if that's good?\" `「美味{おい}しいだろ」`? That sounds to\nme like I'm asking the question \"does that look good?\"\n\nSecond, I feel like I hear Japanese around me saying `「美味{おい}しいそう」` all the\ntime. If it involves some hearsay, then is it only used as a confirmation\nafter someone has made a previous statement? Like so:\n\n> 昨日{きのう}、めちゃうまいビーガン店{みせ}に行った！ (\"Yesterday I went to an insanely awesome vegan\n> restaurant!\")\n>\n> 美味{おい}しいそう！私{わたし}も行{い}きたい！ (\"That sounds good! I want to go too!\")\n\nPlease help me kill this bad habit.\n\n_Please no technical linguistic terms. Thanks!_", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-17T05:41:16.797", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "1994", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-31T06:50:12.517", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.397", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "119", "post_type": "question", "score": 23, "tags": [ "word-choice", "grammar" ], "title": "Why does そう in 「美味しいそう」 not mean \"seem\" the way I think it should?", "view_count": 12960 }

[ { "body": "I believe the issue can be explained more simply than you might think. ～そうだ\nhas two different meanings. One is, indeed, to report hearsay. The other is to\nmake a judgement or conjecture based on a visual cue or observation.\n\n_They have an extremely similar, but slightly different formation._\n\nFor i-adjectives, if you drop the い at the end, you are using the \"visual cue\n/ observation\" version of ～そうだ. If you leave the trailing い in the word, you\nare reporting hearsay.\n\nWhen you say\n\n> 美味しいそう\n\nyou are thus saying \"I heard this place was good.\" On the other hand, if you\nsay\n\n> 美味しそう\n\nyou are saying \"This place looks good.\"\n\nThis is especially tricky for い adjectives whose penultimate kana also ends\nwith an \"i\". It's for a similar reason that I still can't break the habit of\nsaying かわくない instead of かわいくない 「可愛くない」.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-17T05:52:14.733", "id": "1995", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-17T05:52:14.733", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "483", "parent_id": "1994", "post_type": "answer", "score": 24 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "2002", "answer_count": 2, "body": "I saw this in a tweet just a few minutes ago.\n\nアメリカ…俺よりカイデーな選手がゴロゴロ(ﾟoﾟ;;\n\nThis could be talking about the world cup.\n\nI can't find カイデー defined anywhere. What does it mean? What does that tweet\nsay?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-17T20:58:45.887", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "2001", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-11T03:06:00.153", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "69", "post_type": "question", "score": 7, "tags": [ "translation" ], "title": "What does カイデー mean?", "view_count": 648 }

[ { "body": "I am not fully sure, but it may be an instance of playing around with words:\ncut a word in half and put them together in the wrong order, which is often\ndone especially among celebrities. In this case:\n\n> でかい → デ + カイ → カイ + デ → カイデー [Vowel lengthened to make it four-mora, which\n> sounds more familiar and cool]\n\nIn this case, it will mean\n\n> America ... There are bunches of players around who are larger than me.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-17T21:32:38.223", "id": "2002", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-11T03:06:00.153", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-11T03:06:00.153", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "2001", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 }, { "body": "I'm inclined to believe it's the reordering of pronunciation. English has a\nsimilar concept. It's called Pig Latin(which actually has nothing to do with\nLatin).\n\nThis answer might not be directly relevant to Japanese, but if the concept of\nreordering exists in English, it seems to make it more believable that similar\nphenomenon occurs in other languages.\n\n> The first onset (the consonant (cluster) that comes before a vowel) is put\n> to the back of the word, then \"ay\" is added to it.\n>\n> E.g. \"Scram\" turns into \"Amscray\" (Typical Pig Latin example. It was\n> frequently used to the point where it eventually became a recognized English\n> word)\n>\n> E.g. \"Bird\" turns into \"Irdbay\"", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-29T17:28:27.550", "id": "2316", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-30T00:10:49.190", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "542", "parent_id": "2001", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "2010", "answer_count": 1, "body": "A few minutes ago after the World Cup ended, Shinji, guitarist of SID, tweeted\nthis:\n\n胸が熱くなりました…(^-^)/日本に勇気と希望をありがとう！\n\nI'm having trouble understanding 日本に勇気と希望をありがとう！\n\nDoes it mean, \"Thank you for giving courage and hope to Japan,\" or does it\nmean \"Thank you Japan for giving me hope and courage?\"\n\nSentences with に in them are often confusing to me.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-17T22:08:46.613", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "2005", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-17T23:01:43.817", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-17T22:16:50.780", "last_editor_user_id": "69", "owner_user_id": "69", "post_type": "question", "score": 2, "tags": [ "translation" ], "title": "How to correctly understand a sentence that has に in it.", "view_count": 115 }

[ { "body": "It is the former. The full sentence will be: `日本に勇気と希望を(くれて)ありがとう`. `有難う` is\nliterally 'it is difficult to happen' or 'it is rare, and hence a valuable\nthing'. There is no room for a `...に` phrase or `...を` phrase to appear within\nthe frame of the predicate; you cannot attribute the rareness to someone.\n\nThis kind of phrase is often heard right after Japan had went under a\ndisaster. Among the famous one is, when Japan was about to recover from the\ndisaster of World War II, Yukawa Hideki was given the first Novel prize in\nJapan, and similar phrases were seen all over in Japan. The text you cited is\nprobably based on the recent earthquake and tsunami diaster that hit Japan.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-17T22:33:27.073", "id": "2010", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-17T23:01:43.817", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-17T23:01:43.817", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "2005", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "2016", "answer_count": 1, "body": "Saw this on twitter.\n\nつんくさん！いただきます！\n\n<http://lockerz.com/s/121213710>\n\nWhat does that mean?", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-17T22:49:57.107", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "2015", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-18T07:56:54.957", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-18T07:56:54.957", "last_editor_user_id": "125", "owner_user_id": "69", "post_type": "question", "score": -1, "tags": [ "translation", "culture" ], "title": "Who, or what, is Tsunku san?", "view_count": 254 }

[ { "body": "[He](http://www.tsunku.net/) is a rock musician, and is the person who created\nthe idol group `モーニング娘。`. He seems to have appeared in [a TV\ncommercial](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ga-jpFONIic). `いただきます` is the\ngreeting word said before meal, or occasionally before drinking, as in this\ncase.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-17T22:56:29.247", "id": "2016", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-17T22:56:29.247", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "2015", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "2018", "answer_count": 2, "body": "I assume you don't -san about the company or organization that employs you, on\nthe grounds it'd be akin to using it about your own family members.\n\nBut when is it usually used? Is it merely when you're talking about the\norganization itself (eg \"This event was supported by Microsoft\") rather than\nwhen you're merely talking about something associated with the organization\n(eg \"This product runs on Microsoft Windows\")?", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-17T23:13:55.560", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "2017", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-18T07:53:29.807", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-18T07:53:29.807", "last_editor_user_id": "125", "owner_user_id": "91", "post_type": "question", "score": 7, "tags": [ "usage", "politeness", "honorifics" ], "title": "When do you use -san about a company?", "view_count": 1069 }

[ { "body": "It can be used for companies because companies have a \"quasi-personality\", but\nnot for their products. But if you use it for companies, it will sound like\nyou are a business person.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-17T23:44:36.467", "id": "2018", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-17T23:44:36.467", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "2017", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 }, { "body": "-san is polite but not honorific. I would use it in polite conversation, in cases where you have some connection with the company you're referring to (maybe they're a customer, or they did some work for your company, or whatever).", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-18T00:41:39.290", "id": "2019", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-18T00:41:39.290", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "511", "parent_id": "2017", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "2022", "answer_count": 2, "body": "I think this what the women's soccer team is called, but I'm not clear on it.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-18T00:51:43.460", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "2020", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-22T21:44:03.407", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-18T01:00:53.320", "last_editor_user_id": "69", "owner_user_id": "69", "post_type": "question", "score": 4, "tags": [ "translation" ], "title": "What is なでしこ in なでしこJAPAN", "view_count": 259 }

[ { "body": "It's a nickname for the Japan women's World Cup team:\n<http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%B5%E3%83%83%E3%82%AB%E3%83%BC%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AC%E5%A5%B3%E5%AD%90%E4%BB%A3%E8%A1%A8>", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-18T01:04:24.900", "id": "2021", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-18T01:04:24.900", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "511", "parent_id": "2020", "post_type": "answer", "score": 3 }, { "body": "It is short for `大和撫子` (yamatonadeshiko), which refers to the stereotypical\nattributes (particular kind of beauty and purity, etc.) that are traditionally\nconsidered to be observed among ideal Japanese women. It also refers to\nJapanese women with such attributes. The male counterpart is `日本男児`\n(nippondanji). This meaning was derived from the plant name ナデシコ as Dave\npoints out. The `ヤマト` (yamato) [old name of Japan] part was added in order to\ndistinguish it from `カラナデシコ`.", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-18T01:14:28.553", "id": "2022", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-22T21:44:03.407", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-22T21:44:03.407", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "2020", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "2029", "answer_count": 2, "body": "What's the difference between 少{すこ}し (sukoshi) and 小{ちい}さい (chiisai)?\n\nIn what situations would I use each one?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-18T04:35:11.963", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "2023", "last_activity_date": "2012-01-15T14:53:18.607", "last_edit_date": "2012-01-15T14:53:18.607", "last_editor_user_id": "903", "owner_user_id": "82", "post_type": "question", "score": 18, "tags": [ "word-choice", "grammar", "usage" ], "title": "What's the difference between 少{すこ}し (sukoshi) and 小{ちい}さい (chiisai)?", "view_count": 17994 }

[ { "body": "「少し」 is an adverb, and as such it modifies verbs (「少し話せる」 -> \"can speak a\nlittle\"), and refers to ability or capability. 「小さい」 is an adjective, and so\nmodifies nouns (「小さい餓鬼」 -> \"little brat\"), and refers to size.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-18T04:44:45.903", "id": "2024", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-18T04:44:45.903", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "22", "parent_id": "2023", "post_type": "answer", "score": 12 }, { "body": "To add to the answer from Ignacio, 小さい is \"little\" that is opposite to \"big\"\nwhile 少し is \"a little\" that is opposite to \"a lot\". That is to say that 小さい\ndescribes the small size/volume, while 少し describes the small\nquantity/magnitude.\n\nAdding 少し in \"もう少し安いのはありませんか\" adds the connotation of \"a little\" to \"cheaper\"\nto become \"Is there one that is a little cheaper?\" instead of simply \"Is there\none that is cheaper?\". It softens the tone of the request.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-18T11:31:36.340", "id": "2029", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-18T11:31:36.340", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "112", "parent_id": "2023", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "2027", "answer_count": 1, "body": "At the bottom of this picture it says あーんしちゃろうか？\n\n<http://ameblo.jp/maofish/entry-10957305590.html>", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-18T05:02:17.050", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "2025", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-18T08:30:26.250", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "69", "post_type": "question", "score": 1, "tags": [ "translation" ], "title": "What is あーんしちゃろうか？", "view_count": 239 }

[ { "body": "```\n\n 「あーんしちゃろうか」 = あーん　して　やろう か \n Shall I give you a mouthful?\n \n```\n\nAt first I also thought it might be 「してしまう」 but only something very unhealthy\n(i.e. a guilty pleasure) would justify this. The 高菜チャーハン (たかなちゃあはん) seemed\npretty healthy to me.\n\nOn further examination (and checking with a native speaker) we concluded it's\n**して + やろうか**\n\nThe ちゃ sound results from mixing the て+や very quickly into しちゃ.\n\nHere's an example from the wild: 「。。。おか〜ちゃんがダッコしちゃろうか（ダッコしてやろうか）」\n\n**Ref:<http://koryu04.exblog.jp/7853917/> \\+ bonus material, this page has\npictures of puppies!**", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-18T08:30:26.250", "id": "2027", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-18T08:30:26.250", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "168", "parent_id": "2025", "post_type": "answer", "score": 7 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "2054", "answer_count": 1, "body": "Hi all is it true that\n[と言っても](http://jgram.org/pages/viewOne.php?tagE=toittemo) and\n[とは言え](http://jgram.org/pages/viewOne.php?tagE=tohaie) are the same thing\nexcept that [と言っても](http://jgram.org/pages/viewOne.php?tagE=toittemo) is for\nspoken clauses whereas [とは言え](http://jgram.org/pages/viewOne.php?tagE=tohaie)\nis for written clauses?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-18T13:17:32.133", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "2030", "last_activity_date": "2020-09-01T02:01:53.183", "last_edit_date": "2020-09-01T02:01:53.183", "last_editor_user_id": "9831", "owner_user_id": "264", "post_type": "question", "score": 8, "tags": [ "word-choice", "nuances" ], "title": "「と言っても」 vs 「とは言え」", "view_count": 625 }

[ { "body": "According to [A Dictionary of Advanced Japanese\nGrammar](http://bookclub.japantimes.co.jp/en/title/A%20Dictionary%20of%20Advanced%20Japanese%20Grammar),\nと（は）言っても and とは言え are synonymous and interchangeable without changing the\nmeaning of the sentence. とは言え is used primarily in writing, while と（は）言っても is\nused in both written and spoken Japanese.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-19T09:27:30.617", "id": "2054", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-19T09:27:30.617", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "384", "parent_id": "2030", "post_type": "answer", "score": 4 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 3, "body": "I received this email from someone close, who has a deadline to finish a\ngraduation thesis:\n\n```\n\n 期日は20日です(>д<)\n これ右端揃うかな？笑\n \n```\n\n右端揃 means \"right-alignment\" but I don't understand what is the meaning of the\nsecond sentence? Is the verb \"うかなう\", which I can't find a definition of ? Is\nit about postponing the deadline? Or is the verb 揃う ?", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-18T14:41:14.607", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "2031", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-20T09:01:30.183", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "107", "post_type": "question", "score": 5, "tags": [ "meaning" ], "title": "Meaning of 右端揃 in \"これ右端揃うかな？\"", "view_count": 196 }

[ { "body": "Japanese fonts are usually non-proportional. Each Japanese character\n(hiragana, katakana, and kanji) is a complete square: the height and the width\nare the same. This size is called 全角 'full square'. One reason for this is to\nmake it possible to use the same fontset for vertical and horizontal writings.\nHowever, for the latin part, these characters are also non-proportional within\nthemselves but, the width is the half of its height (I believe the depth is\nset to zero), and are called 半角 'half square'. So whenever you have a computer\ntext displayed solely in Japanese font, the width of a line is exactly a\nmultiple of the width of half square.\n\nIn your example, the first line has six full squares and seven half squares,\nwhich add up to 9.5 full square width. The second line has nine full squares\nand one half square, which add up to 9.5 full square width. In this sense, the\ntwo lines (should) align exactly at the right end. (However, if your setting\nis such that the Japanese part and the latin part are using different fonts,\nthey are not aligned.)", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-18T15:21:00.623", "id": "2032", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-18T15:21:00.623", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "2031", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "From the context of a quote from [this (admittedly unrelated :D) website entry\nabout CSS](http://allabout.co.jp/gm/gc/24009/3/):\n\n> 標準では文章は左端から **「左寄せ」で** 表示されますので、何もしなくても各行の **左端は揃います** 。しかし、 **右端は揃わない**\n> 可能性があります。CSSを使って **「両端揃え」** を指定すれば、左右の両端を揃えることができます。\n\nFrom this context, we understand that with left-alignment of text, the left\nside is **justified** , which means the text is in even against the left side\n(左端が揃う then is \"to be justified on the left\"). However, the right side is not,\nnecessarily. In order to have the right side be justified as well, one must\nuse 両端揃え (both-sided justification, what most word processors call \"justified\"\nparagraphs).\n\nNow that we have context, we can see that 右端が揃う is \"to be justified on the\nright.\"\n\nIn this particular usage, I would interpret the second sentence as being used\nto mean **\"put everything off to the last minute,\"** or at the very least\n_working on it_ until the last minute. Perhaps this is a misinterpretation,\nand sawa's purely graphical interpretation is more accurate, however.\n\n**Summary:** I would say that the second sentence means roughly \"Maybe I\nshould put it all off until the last minute? lol\"", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-18T15:27:55.870", "id": "2033", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-18T15:39:49.910", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-18T15:39:49.910", "last_editor_user_id": "384", "owner_user_id": "384", "parent_id": "2031", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "I would say that the person is saying that by making the text right justified,\n「右端揃う」, that will then force the\n[tracking](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letter-spacing) to expand, which in\nturn makes it so that the text fills up more space and gives the appearance of\na longer essay. This makes it easier to meet the required amount of pages in\nless time, since one has to write less words.\n\nIt's a cheap trick, like using a bigger font. However, since Japanese has no\nspaces or [kerning](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerning), then this tactic is\nultimately futile, which is why it's just a joke (indicated by 笑).", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-18T16:07:40.843", "id": "2036", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-20T09:01:30.183", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-20T09:01:30.183", "last_editor_user_id": "119", "owner_user_id": "119", "parent_id": "2031", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": null, "answer_count": 2, "body": "最近の家電はブルーライト推しですな♪(´ε｀ )宇宙船ぽくてカッコマン(^-^)/\n\n<http://lockerz.com/s/121398862>\n\nWhat does カッコマン mean?\n\nWhat does はブルーライト推し turn into in English?\n\nWhat does that whole thing say?", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-18T15:36:49.283", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "2035", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-19T07:18:14.060", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-19T07:18:14.060", "last_editor_user_id": "69", "owner_user_id": "69", "post_type": "question", "score": 1, "tags": [ "translation" ], "title": "What is カッコマン here?", "view_count": 420 }

[ { "body": "As for the `カッコ` part, it is pretty much obvious that it is shortened from\n`格好いい` (kakko(o) ii) 'cool'. I am not sure about the `マン` part.\n\n`ブルーライト推し` means 'to favour blue light LED'.\n\nThe whole translation (except the `マン` part) is:\n\n> Recent household electronics use blue light LEDs so often. They look like\n> spacecrafts, and are cool.\n\nThe background here is that a blue light LED is a recent invention, and until\nthen, LED lamps seen on electronics were either green or red, or a color\nsynthesized from them, like yellow, orange, etc., and introduction of blue\nlight LEDs changed the appearance of household elecrtonics.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-19T00:43:06.007", "id": "2042", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-19T02:59:25.697", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-19T02:59:25.697", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "2035", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "Seems to be saying that he's a \"Cool Man\" for having a telephone with a blue\nlight?\n\n> 最近の家電\n\n\"Latest/Newest Telephone\"\n\nETA: Actually, that's slang, just noticed. Probably just means random\n\"consumer electronic device\", since it doesn't really look like a phone ^_-\n\n> ブルーライト推しですな\n\n\"Has a blue light, yeah!\"\n\n> 宇宙船\n\n\"Spaceship\"\n\n> ぽくて\n\nTrash?\n\n> カッコマン\n\nKakkoMan = Cool Man, seems to be a shortened version of かっこつけマン\n\nMaybe he found it in the trash? Not sure...", "comment_count": 9, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-19T01:33:41.947", "id": "2043", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-19T02:14:01.927", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-19T02:14:01.927", "last_editor_user_id": "187", "owner_user_id": "187", "parent_id": "2035", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "2040", "answer_count": 1, "body": "I'm somewhat confused about the usage and limitations of the ～め suffix that\nmeans \"somewhat/slightly\". I've only ever heard it on a handful of words:\n\n> * 大きめ\n> * 小さ目\n> * 多め\n> * 少な目\n> * 早め\n>\n\nand maybe a few others that I can't recall at present.\n\n1) Can these be used with any イ-adjectives, or only certain ones? \n2) Can they be used with ナ-adjectives at _all_? Can't say I've ever seen one. \n3) What are the limitations of its usage? For the イ-adjectives, is ～めに\ninterchangeable with ～く for forming the adverb? \n4) などなど", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-18T18:22:47.427", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "2037", "last_activity_date": "2018-02-05T02:42:27.027", "last_edit_date": "2018-02-05T02:42:27.027", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "78", "post_type": "question", "score": 20, "tags": [ "grammar", "usage", "suffixes" ], "title": "\"slightly/somewhat\" の 「～[目]{め}」: Usage and limitations", "view_count": 2741 }

[ { "body": "1. Yes. There seems to be no limitation on the combination of i-adjectives and `目`.\n 2. Yes. For example, `静かめの曲`\n 3. It is not interchangable. As you already wrote in the question, `目` weakens the attribute expressed by the adjective. Therefore, the adverbial usage `...目に` will in general be a weakening of the adverbial usage of `...く`.\n\n> * 早く走った 'ran early'\n> * 早めに走った 'ran somewhat early'\n\n 4. ???", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-18T19:12:46.713", "id": "2040", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-18T22:32:51.197", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-18T22:32:51.197", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "2037", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "2041", "answer_count": 1, "body": "What are the differences in the following words meaning **flattery** / **to\nflatter** :\n\n * お世{せ}辞{じ} \n\n * 追{つい}従{しょう} \n\n * おべっか \n\n * 胡{ご}麻{ま}をする \n\n * 阿{おもね}る \n\n * 諂{へつら}う \n\n * 煽{おだ}て（る） \n\n * 美{び}辞{じ}麗{れい}句{く} \n\nWhich ones are honest, sincere flattery??? Which ones mean to \"butter someone\nup\" or \"suck up\" (to compliment them only so they'll do something for your\nbenefit)??? Do any of them convey both/additional meanings?\n\n* * *\n\n**EDIT** : Which one(s) are most commonly used in modern Japanese??? What are\nthe (in)formality levels of each??", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-18T18:42:35.570", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "2038", "last_activity_date": "2018-02-09T22:14:14.367", "last_edit_date": "2018-02-09T22:14:14.367", "last_editor_user_id": "78", "owner_user_id": "78", "post_type": "question", "score": 10, "tags": [ "nuances", "words", "definitions", "synonyms" ], "title": "Fun with synonyms - “flattery\"", "view_count": 988 }

[ { "body": "Most of the listed words imply some insincerity, or at least mixed motives,\nwith the possible exception of 美辞麗句. Roughly, the nuances are as follows:\n\nお世{せ}辞{じ}: Praising someone to make them feel better (despite their poor\nshowing)\n\n> \"Honey, that's a fantastic drawing, I don't care if it got a C-\".\n\n煽{おだ}て（る）: Praising someone to egg them on:\n\n> You're doing a great job with the vaccuming; keep it up! (Just don't come\n> into the kitchen to \"help\").\n\n追{つい}従{しょう}: To follow someone around and be a yes-man. Phillip Seymour\nHoffman does a lot of this in The Big Lebowski.\n\n美{び}辞{じ}麗{れい}句{く}: (lit. \"beautiful elegant phrases\"). Ornate, elaborate\npraise designed for flattery. Could be sincere. Note that this is a noun, not\na verb.\n\nThe following are all similar, and mean to butter someone up:\n\n * おべっか\n * 胡{ご}麻{ま}をする\n * 阿{おもね}る\n * 諂{へつら}う", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-18T23:05:34.003", "id": "2041", "last_activity_date": "2012-02-08T04:25:22.213", "last_edit_date": "2012-02-08T04:25:22.213", "last_editor_user_id": "796", "owner_user_id": "448", "parent_id": "2038", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "2046", "answer_count": 4, "body": "I have found a kanji in a manga I am attempting to read, that looks like this:\n\n\n\nI have tried to find it in numerous dictionaries, and used multiple different\nmethods. I know the third section is a radical, but the first isn't, and\nsearching the third on it's own at WWWJDIC returns many results, but none of\nthem are this one. Skip code has also been unfruitful. Handwriting has been\nchallenging, because I'm not 100% certain on the order.\n\nA friend suggested that it may be a kanji that is out of use, but used because\nthe manga author thinks it's cool. I doubt it's slang, though, due to the\ncontext of being a formal statement.\n\nThe context is: 我輩はノイ＝クレザント(?)騎士である where the (?) is the character. It was\nwritten vertically.\n\nI have stated the question as \"How do I look up this kanji?\" because I suspect\nI may get into this situation again.\n\nEdit: The answer I have marked as correct actually contains the answer in the\ncomments, so I've written it up here. It is actually a Google Chrome character\nfont problem. The character did really appear in the dictionaries, but I\ncouldn't recognise it because it was displayed incorrectly (Chinese instead of\nJapanese). Chrome doesn't check all the fonts on your computer like IE or FF,\nso I changed the standard fonts and it worked.", "comment_count": 7, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-19T03:02:59.940", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "2044", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-05T09:56:48.353", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-29T19:46:15.567", "last_editor_user_id": "3437", "owner_user_id": "452", "post_type": "question", "score": 12, "tags": [ "kanji", "writing-identification" ], "title": "How do I look up this kanji?", "view_count": 2093 }

[ { "body": "It looks like a cross between\n\n\n\n<http://jisho.org/kanji/details/%E5%96%9E> (喞)\n\nand\n\n\n\n<http://jisho.org/kanji/details/%E5%8D%BF> (卿)\n\nI love the jisho.org kanji by radical lookup:\n<http://jisho.org/kanji/radicals/>", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-19T03:14:13.357", "id": "2045", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-19T03:42:45.470", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-19T03:42:45.470", "last_editor_user_id": "187", "owner_user_id": "187", "parent_id": "2044", "post_type": "answer", "score": 8 }, { "body": "This character is pronounced 'kyoo' or 'kee'. It is the name of a highly-\nranked title: [卿](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8D%BF)\n\nActually, you have correctly identified that the third section is a radical.\nVery Good. In this case, it is called ふしづくり. The character is actually listed\nunder this radical: look\n[here](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8D%A9%E9%83%A8). So, don't give up.\nTry just a little bit harder.\n\nSince you do not seem to have the necessary font installed on your system, I\nam adding a graphic capture of the character from the wikipedia page that I\nlinked:\n\n\n\nBy the way, this notification on the up right portion of the wikipedia page:\n\n\n\nis telling that the character may not be showing up correctly if you do not\nhave the particular setting. So, whenever you see it, you might want to\nsuspect if you are actually seeing the right thing.", "comment_count": 18, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-19T03:16:00.610", "id": "2046", "last_activity_date": "2014-05-29T23:31:40.337", "last_edit_date": "2014-05-29T23:31:40.337", "last_editor_user_id": "91", "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "2044", "post_type": "answer", "score": 16 }, { "body": "卿 - きみ Meaning: you, lord, secretary, state minister Not exactly sure if this\nis the right kanji, but I'm linking a software that I find is really good for\nlooking up kanji: [zkanji](http://zkanji.sourceforge.net/). I'm just not sure\nwhether you're asking for help looking up kanji in general, or just this one.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-02T13:30:00.463", "id": "16264", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-02T13:30:00.463", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5395", "parent_id": "2044", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 }, { "body": "I think the most difficult part of looking up a Kanji is that you can't find\nany way typing it, and here a solution if you're using computer.\n\nMost of Chinese and Japanese input method in Windows has handwriting input\nfunction, you can type a Kanji this way.\n\nFor example : [Microsoft IME Japanese\nInput](https://www.coscom.co.jp/learnjapanese801/msime_win7_en1.html)\n\n\n\n\n\nThen you can just click on the Kanji as a input for search.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2014-06-05T09:56:48.353", "id": "16298", "last_activity_date": "2014-06-05T09:56:48.353", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "5516", "parent_id": "2044", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "2048", "answer_count": 2, "body": "From Google searches, I can see that all three particles と, に and が are used\nwith 出会う, but are there differences when using each of the particles or are\nthey interchangeable?\n\nFor ease of explanation, would anyone please explain the differences in\nnuances among the following clauses:\n\n> あなたと出会う \n> あなたに出会う \n> あなたが出会う\n\nN.B. I tried to use the logic from > [What is the difference between 〜となる and\n〜になる?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/108/what-is-the-\ndifference-between-and) < but saying that と is quotative when used with 出会う\nsimply doesn't make sense to me.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-19T04:11:32.713", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "2047", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-19T10:38:49.800", "last_edit_date": "2017-04-13T12:43:44.157", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "112", "post_type": "question", "score": 7, "tags": [ "word-choice", "nuances", "particles" ], "title": "Which particle to use with 出会う {であう} : と, に or が?", "view_count": 1526 }

[ { "body": "Consider the similarity and the difference between the following English\nexpressions:\n\n> * I and you met ( _or_ You and I met)\n> * I met you\n> * You met me\n>\n\nThe first one handles the two people as a group and as the subject. The second\none is describing from the viewpoint of _I_ ; _you_ is the\n\"destination/target\" of meeting. The third one is the same construction but\nfrom the viewpoint of _you_.\n\nYour third example does not sound quite right unless you add `私と`, and if you\ndo so, it will correspond to the first English example.\n\n> * (私と)あなたが出会う 'I and you meet'\n>\n\nFor the second and the third of your examples, the subject is omitted, which\nis okay, and they both correspond to the second English example with a\nslightly different nuance. `と` means 'with', whereas `に` means 'to'. So the\nword-to-word translation will be something like:\n\n> * (私が)あなたと出会う '(I) met **with** you'\n> * (私が)あなたに出会う '(I) met **to** you'\n>\n\nThey both may not sound grammatical in English, but that is how Japanese\nworks. Whatever difference you can feel between `with` and `to` is the\ndifference between the Japanese sentences. In reality, the difference is so\nsubtle so that you do not have to care. In practice, you can think that your\nsecond and third examples are interchangable.", "comment_count": 2, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-19T04:42:56.610", "id": "2048", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-19T07:26:40.387", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-19T07:26:40.387", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "2047", "post_type": "answer", "score": 6 }, { "body": "Aに出会う means that A is the person that crosses your path。 \n困難に出会う is an example from 広辞苑, which I believe is correct…\n\nAと出会う means the same thing, and has a lot more occurrences on google.\n\nAが出会う means that A is the subject, and that he'll bump into someone. There is\nno problem with this one.\n\nBased on use of particles と/に with 会う, I thought that the correct form was\n\"に出会う\" but I suddenly have a doubt. Japanese people around me don't seem to\nagree on which is natural either. At least, と could be used to emphasize, に\ncould be used to refer to a specific person. According to a colleague of mine,\nthe nuance is the same as that of the verb \"会う\".", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-19T05:24:29.040", "id": "2050", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-19T05:24:29.040", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "356", "parent_id": "2047", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "2091", "answer_count": 2, "body": "Like a lot of other foreign guys, I picked up some of my Japanese from\nimitating the women I spoke to. Certain phrases may have made me sound\nunwittingly effeminate in the early days when I had less of a grasp on the\nnuances.\n\nOne of those habits was to use でしょう at the end of sentences, to express\nuncertainty, asking confirmation, or wondering aloud.\n\nLater on I was told that it was more masculine to use だろう. Even though that\nwas years ago, I never really got comfortable with だろう. I'm not sure I'm using\nit right, and it feels weird saying it.\n\nFirst, is だろう really the more masculine form of でしょう? It seems sometimes I do\nhear men use でしょう, and women use だろう. Do they mean different things?\n\nSecond, are だろ and だろう different?\n\nLastly, what is the difference between these two statements:\n\n> 何かあったのだろうか。\n>\n> 何かあったと思う。", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-19T05:05:14.230", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "2049", "last_activity_date": "2022-08-02T07:18:47.273", "last_edit_date": "2022-08-02T07:06:06.030", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "119", "post_type": "question", "score": 21, "tags": [ "word-choice", "usage", "nuances" ], "title": "What is the proper use of だろう, is it \"masculine\", and how is it different from と思 【おも】う?", "view_count": 7965 }

[ { "body": "_It's late so I'll keep this fairly short and make edits if need-be later._\n\nIt's not that だろう is more masculine in form, it is that it is less formal. And\nto be less formal, is to be more masculine.\n\nWhile slowly changing, Japanese speech is still, for lack of a better word,\nsexist (as well as many other languages, English included). Therefore it is\nmore manly to speak in a more blunt, and less formal tone.\n\nだろ is a shortening of だろう, which is itself a shortening and so on. Think of\nthem as the same, as the diphthong, in this case, is more of a pronunciation\nthing. Although, once again, more masculine is shorter and blunter, therefore\nだろ is technically manlier.\n\nでしょう is the polite form of the same expression, just to clarify.\n\nThe Difference between だろう and と思う:\n\nThere are many nuances, so I will just state the major points. だろう is an\nassertion, it means, I feel this way, you should to. Much similar to the よ\n(だよ) particle. But よ is a bit more forceful saying, this is how it is, I'm\ntelling you.\n\nOn the other side is と思う. と思う means to think, while not entirely knowing. It\nis one of the more humble ways to make a statement, since it distances you\nfrom your views as they are merely incomplete thoughts.\n\n> 何かあったのだろうか。\n\nThis phrase to loosely translate would mean, \"I think something happened,\nright?\" It is in essence asking if you are correct in your owns assertions.\nWith a larger tone of, I think I'm right. In order to get a higher contrast\nwith the next phrase, I'll use the translation of \"Something had to have\nhappened, right?\"\n\n> 何かあったと思う。\n\nThis phrase loosely translates to \"I think something happened.\" Notice how it\nis not imposing on the listener. It is simply a statement of thought, whereas\nthe former statement seeks agreement.", "comment_count": 9, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-19T05:43:24.800", "id": "2052", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-19T05:43:24.800", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "481", "parent_id": "2049", "post_type": "answer", "score": 1 }, { "body": "_Note: I'm going to try to do this without using technical terminology. If I\nstart being too technical, let me know and I'm more than willing to revise!_\n\nOkay, let's get a few things out of the way. As you know, there is a scale of\n**informal ⇔ formal** in Japanese grammar. It is very similar to the scale of\n**impolite ⇔ polite** , but _politeness_ is generally dependent on context.\n\nSo what does this mean for だろう and でしょう? Basically, the former is informal,\nthe latter formal. If that's the only difference, why is だろう often considered\n\"more masculine\"? I would say that it has to do with **what kind of language**\nyou're using in **what kind of context.** My overbroad generalization of the\nsituation is represented by this table (where L is the kind of language used\nand C is the context):\n\n```\n\n Informal-L Formal-L\n Informal-C Masculine Feminine\n Formal-C Impolite Polite\n \n```\n\n_[Note: if anybody knows a better way to format a table, please let me know.]_\n\nCulturally and historically speaking, \"feminine\" speech is generally more\nformal (though there are certainly other features), while \"masculine\" speech\nis more informal (consider 俺、僕、私 and where each falls on the scales of\nformality and gender). So because だろう is less formal, it may be considered\nmore masculine; likewise, because でしょう is more formal, it may be considered\nmore feminine -- but mostly, it's about context. Using でしょう with your teacher\nor boss is not feminine. Using it with your friends may be.\n\nSo that's the answer to the first part of your question! Now let's move on to\nthe **third** part. I'll come back to the second in a moment. You ask about\nthe differences between these two sentences:\n\n> * 何かあったのだろうか。\n> * 何かあったと思う。\n>\n\nThey are actually quite different. To answer, however, we'll need to analyze a\nthird:\n\n> * 何かあったのだろう。\n>\n\nBut wait! Aren't ～だろう and ～だろうか the same thing? The answer: **no.** The first\nis for confirmation (\"Something happened, right?\") or conjecture (\"Something\nprobably happened.\"), while by attaching か it becomes either a question (\"Did\nsomething happen?\") or wondering (\"I wonder if something happened.\").\n\n~~～と思う, on the other hand, is simply used to express what one thinks. It\ncontains conviction: \"I think something happened,\" while ～だろう（か） is much more\nuncertain.~~\n\n_[Edit: Derek Schaab pointed out in the comments that this is a less than\nsatisfactory explanation. Allow me to try again. Here goes...]_\n\n～と思う, on the other hand, offers one's thoughts. When you say ～と思う, you believe\nwhat you are saying; the same is not _necessarily_ true for だろう (though it may\nbe much of the time). It's difficult to compare to these two because 思う is for\n_thoughts_ and だろう is more for _guesses._ ～と思う is always subjective, but\nsubjectivity isn't an issue with だろう: it can range from completely subjective\nto based in solid fact.\n\nNow that we have this out of the way, what is the difference between だろ and\nだろう? First of all, だろ is even more informal than だろう. But more importantly, I\ndo not believe it can be used with か, though I may be wrong.\n\nAs for the actual difference in sound, the difference is that だろ is two morae,\nand だろう is three. Basically that means that だろ is the same length as みず, but\nin だろう, the \"o\" sound is twice as long, making it as long as みずが. The traits\nof short and long vowels in Japanese could be a question in its own right,\nhowever.", "comment_count": 4, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 4.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-20T20:28:49.210", "id": "2091", "last_activity_date": "2022-08-02T07:18:47.273", "last_edit_date": "2022-08-02T07:18:47.273", "last_editor_user_id": "30454", "owner_user_id": "384", "parent_id": "2049", "post_type": "answer", "score": 22 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "2058", "answer_count": 4, "body": "In the names of cartoon movies 桜花抄, 百鬼夜行抄, what's the special meaning of 抄? Is\nit a kind of synonym of 物語?", "comment_count": 5, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-19T05:26:26.423", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "2051", "last_activity_date": "2016-09-29T10:50:11.840", "last_edit_date": "2016-09-29T10:50:11.840", "last_editor_user_id": "1628", "owner_user_id": "523", "post_type": "question", "score": 9, "tags": [ "words", "suffixes" ], "title": "How to understand 抄 in Japanese?", "view_count": 466 }

[ { "body": "It means a collection of abstracts/summaries from some original writings.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-19T07:16:18.953", "id": "2053", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-19T07:16:18.953", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "2051", "post_type": "answer", "score": 5 }, { "body": "The literal meaning of 抄 is “excerpt,” and it also means an annotation of\nliterary work. However, it is often used in a title of a literary work when it\nis neither an excerpt nor an annotated version of another writing, and I guess\nthat your two examples fall into this category. I do not know the exact\nmeaning of 抄 in such cases.\n\nSometimes the use of 抄 in a title can be explained from the meaning “excerpt”\neven when it is not an excerpt of another work. There is a well-known\ncollection of poems by [Kōtarō\nTakamura](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C5%8Dtar%C5%8D_Takamura) titled\nChieko-shō\n([智恵子抄](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%99%BA%E6%81%B5%E5%AD%90%E6%8A%84))\npublished in 1941. Chieko is the name of his (deceased) wife. This work is not\nan abridgement of anything. The title may mean that this work describes some\nessential part of his wife, but not her entirety.", "comment_count": 1, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-19T13:31:41.107", "id": "2058", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-19T13:31:41.107", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "15", "parent_id": "2051", "post_type": "answer", "score": 10 }, { "body": "I am putting my guess here that the suffix 抄 comes from 詩抄 {ししょう} which means\n\"anthology\" in English, and similar to the English word it does not have to\ncontain summaries only; it can probably be a collection of short but full\nstories/poems, which is what 秒速5センチメートル is an example of.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-19T14:13:59.973", "id": "2060", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-19T14:13:59.973", "last_edit_date": null, "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": "112", "parent_id": "2051", "post_type": "answer", "score": 2 }, { "body": "抄 etymologically is a **Transcription** of an event or **Copy** of an existing\nliterary work.\n\nIn your case it's simply the transcription of a story (or stories) => **Tale**\nor **Story of**", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-20T02:46:26.197", "id": "2067", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-20T02:51:40.203", "last_edit_date": "2011-07-20T02:51:40.203", "last_editor_user_id": null, "owner_user_id": null, "parent_id": "2051", "post_type": "answer", "score": 0 } ]

{ "accepted_answer_id": "2056", "answer_count": 1, "body": "I've been thinking if it is true that にしたって is the colloquial form of にしたところで.\nIn other words, are the bottom two sentences identical in meaning and nuance?\n\n1) 彼は日本語を20年も勉強しているが、その彼 **にしたところで** 、まだ分からない文法に時々出くわすそうだ。\n\n2) 彼は日本語を20年も勉強しているが、その彼 **にしたって** 、まだ分からない文法に時々出くわすそうだ。\n\n> He has studied Japanese for 20 years, but he told me that even he encounters\n> grammar he doesn't understand.", "comment_count": 0, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-19T10:54:34.707", "favorite_count": 0, "id": "2055", "last_activity_date": "2012-08-16T02:21:19.147", "last_edit_date": "2012-08-16T02:21:19.147", "last_editor_user_id": "921", "owner_user_id": "264", "post_type": "question", "score": 10, "tags": [ "grammar", "words", "synonyms", "colloquial-language" ], "title": "Is it true that にしたって is the colloquial form of にしたところで?", "view_count": 1943 }

[ { "body": "The タ-verb (plain past) form + って pattern is most similar, if not identical,\nto the ～ても pattern:\n\n> そんなこと **言ったって** しょうがない。（＝そんなこと **言っても** しょうがない。） It doesn't help matters to\n> say things like that.\n>\n> 名前を **変えたって** 基本的な問題はそう簡単に消えてくれない。（＝名前を **変えても** 基本的な問題はそう簡単に消えてくれない。） Even\n> if you change the name, the fundamental problem won't disappear so easily.\n\nThis construction is mostly found in informal speech, whereas ～ても can be used\nanywhere. **However** , it is important to not confuse the って in this たって\npattern with the other use of って, which is an abbreviation of some form of\nと言う:\n\n> なでしこジャパンが **勝ったって** メールが来た。（＝なでしこジャパンが **勝ったという** メールが来た。） I got a text\n> saying the Nadeshiko won.\n>\n> 彼は昨日、ドイツから **帰ったって** 。（＝彼は昨日、ドイツから **帰ったと言った** 。） He said he got back from\n> Germany yesterday.", "comment_count": 3, "content_license": "CC BY-SA 3.0", "creation_date": "2011-07-19T12:49:13.250", "id": "2056", "last_activity_date": "2011-07-19T12:49:13.250", "last_edit_date": "2020-06-17T08:18:27.500", "last_editor_user_id": "-1", "owner_user_id": "94", "parent_id": "2055", "post_type": "answer", "score": 11 } ]