Datasets:

donfu

/

oa-stackexchange

like 7

Does the (USA) English metaphor "Unable to see the forest for the trees" keep its meaning if translated verbatim into Japanese? The phrase "Unable to see the forest for the trees" implies one is too entangled in a situation to understand what is transpiring from a larger context, and thus, unable to determine the correct course of action. I'd like to know whether a native Japanese hearer: 1\. told this phrase in Japanese would interpret it to have the same meaning? 2\. would accept the word to mean a very large amount of information?

In my is from English phrase "You cannot see the woods for the trees". !enter image description here And regarding plural form, can mean many trees in Japanese, since Japanese grammar does not always have plural form. And also In explanation of is > using , which means each tree instead of (one tree). So, might be verbatim translation of "Unable to see the forest for the trees" in Japanese.

stackexchange-japanese

How to say "Hey hurry up! you'll be late!"? When we want to say _"Hey, hurry up! you'll be late!"_ , which would be more appropriate? : 1. 2. 3. any other suggestions

is the phrase you're looking for. does literally mean "become late", but this "late" is more along the lines of an event becoming delayed or postponed beyond the expected time. The context you're looking for is a person being late for a scheduled event, which is what conveys. Either or can be used. The latter adds an undertone of regret. works as an alternate for , if you want to avoid : And depending on the speaker and situation, can be substituted for , which was covered in this question.

stackexchange-japanese

translation for "It serves as a good reminder for me"? After I've say watched a film with some friends (or read a fable or something) and learned something from it, i want to say `"It [the teachings of this fable/film] serves as a good reminder for me"`. I'm wondering is there a phrase in japanese which conveys this meaning? If not could I say this: ``? Or will it sound awkward (like a non-native speaker)? If so what are the alternatives?

Even if it might sound awkward to a native-speaker, I think the point you are making would still make its way across languages. But, as a nit-picking aside, how would something be a _reminder_ if it is something you _just_ learned? :) Although it's not the explicit meaning you are wanting to use here, it may be more natural to (instead) use a phrase like: `..` But it's up to you; one of the best ways to find out the "awkwardness factor" is to try using your phrase and seeing how the listener responds. :)

stackexchange-japanese

Can placements of adverbs be altered freely? 少なくとも週に一度車を洗う vs 週に少なくとも一度車を洗う I'm curious if there is any difference in nuance between these two sentences: 1. 2. I'm aware that grammatically speaking both are 100% right, but this question is not targeted at this issue.

Your sentence 1 is ambiguous with respect to the scope of ``: > [] > 'He washes his car at least once a week.' > [] > 'He at least washes his car one a week. (He also changes the motor oil once a month.)' The first meaning is the same as your sentence 2, but the second meaning cannot be expressed by sentence 2. In general, the position of an adverb often gives different possibility for its scope.

stackexchange-japanese

What is the difference between 出来る限り and 出来るだけ? EDICT gives almost the same translation for these two expressions: > ; ​ (n) as ... as one can > > (exp) (uk) as much as one can; as much as possible; if at all possible; Even the example sentences are almost the same: > I'll help you as far as I can. > Read as many books as you can What is the difference between the two expressions?

The meaning is the same. If we compare and , (literally “to the limit one can”) sounds stronger than (literally “as much as one can”), so the nuance is slightly different, but not much. While onteria_’s answer and the answers on Goo to which it links have some points, I think that they are describing the difference between the two phrases bigger than it actually is. I wrote above “ _If we compare_ and , sounds stronger than .” But when we hear one of the phrases, it is rare to compare it to the other phrase which was not used. I do not buy the argument that implies the possibility of cutting corners. Sure, it is true that “ **depending on the situation** , **sometimes** gives the impression of cutting corners,” of course, but that is saying nothing. The same applies to , and it does not explain any difference between the two phrases.

stackexchange-japanese

What exactly does an adjective stem + そう mean? The other day I posted a picture of some food on Facebook, and I noticed that all of my Japanese friends were saying . I made a good guess to what it meant, but I wasn't certain what exactly they were saying. I've seen this stem+ with other i-adjectives too, such as , but none of this is covered in any of my Japanese books. What exactly is this? Is it slang? Can it be used with na-adjectives or nouns too? If so how? Thanks! :)

See [this question, which deals with the same pattern when used with verbs. I'll adapt my answer from that question to answer yours.] - after the stem of a adjective means "looking/sounding as if ___." means "it looks as if it will be delicious." It is similar to constructions like or , but - emphasizes evidence of the senses rather than general "seeming." Contrast it with , which means "it is said to be delicious." You can use - with verbs, adjectives, and some na-adjectives, but not with nouns. Here are some na-adjective examples: * (looks like it's no good) * (sturdy-looking) * (peppy-looking) * (Sounds rough!) You can also use the - phrase itself as a na-adjective: * (a delicious-looking cake)

stackexchange-japanese

Rules for slang of Japanese numbers I often hear Japanese using a different method for saying a number like "248" as — especially for highways and license plates. While this one is easy to understand, there are others that I don't quite understand. Could someone provide a list of the different pronunciations of each number? "2525" being is probably a good example of what I'm talking about. > 1: > 2: > 3: > 4: > 5: > 6: > 7: > 8: > 9:

That's called and you could find full article at Wikipedia. Quoted from Wikepedia > 1 : > > 2 : > > 3 : > > 4 : > > 5 : > > 6 : > > 7 : > > 8 : > > 9 : > > 0 : O

stackexchange-japanese

What is the difference between "meshi" and "don" for the food sometimes translated as "rice bowl" in English? I'm a big fan of the Japanese fast food gyudon (cooked thinly sliced beef strips on top of a bowl of boiled white rice) and its variants such as butadon (the same but with pork). But why do some chain restaurants call it "gyudon" and others "gyumeshi"? Are both spelled the same? Also at my local Japanese restaurant at home in Australia they seem to sell this dish but never understand me when I ask for gyudon. Does it have other names or are there simply dishes which seem alike to ignorant foreigners like me?

The _donburi_ in _gyūdon_ specifically denotes a _bowl of rice_. The _meshi_ in _gyūmeshi_ just means _rice_ or even more generically _meal_. Both describe the same thing: > ‐ > "See _gyūmeshi_." > ‐ > "A rice meal with onions and fried beef [...]. _Gyūdon._ " I'm not sure which one is preferred in which situation, but personally I see more _gyūdon_ in daily life (caveat: I don't eat it too often though). There are many specialized kinds of _donburi_, while _meshi_ can be used for almost anything edible and is usually just used in the sense of "meal". It can also specifically denote _rice_ though, as in _yakimeshi_ \- "fried rice", which is more often called _chāhan_ though.

stackexchange-japanese

Does "おつまみ" (otsumami) mean "snack" or "rice crackers" or "crunchy snack" like chips and peanuts, or something else entirely? This is a word I learned by reading and not by studying or in conversation with Japanese. After learning the kana years ago I had occasion to fly with JAL and the pre-meal snack was a little packet of various savoury crunch things like nuts and what I assume were a kind of rice cracker. Perhaps some included nori. On the pack in hiragana as I recall was written "". To what specifically does this refer? I'm often surprised that my Japanophile friends don't know what I'm talking about when I use this word.

In my understanding, everything you could eat when you drink beer/osake is otsumami.

stackexchange-japanese

Meaning of pattern 「XがXなら、YもYだ」 While reading, I came across this sentence: > What does this XXYY pattern mean? "Like X, like Y"? "X will be X, and Y will be Y"?

“XXYY” means that X is bad in some sense and it explains that Y is bad in the same way. Therefore can be translated as “like officer, like his subordinate,” but it is only used to mean the similarity in something bad.

stackexchange-japanese

What is the difference between 特殊 and 特別? I've got two questions. Firstly, what is the difference between {} and {}? Secondly, is it true that all these grammar forms are correct: * {} [noun] * {} [noun] * {} [noun] * {} [noun]

I'm a Japanese student studying English at university. Let me try and answer your question. We use _tokushu_ in academic situations, describing something strange or crazy. In contrast, we say _tokubetsu_ in casual situation, describing something precious or valuable. For example, we say **** ( _kimi wa tokubetsu na hito da_ \- "You are precious to me"), but we don't say **** ( _kimi wa tokushu na hito da_ ) in that sense. When we say **** , this means "You are strange" or "You are not an ordinary person." The answer for your next question is clear: andare correct, and they are not noun but adjective that can be translated as "special" or "peculiar." arenouns. We don't say or in Japanese. What's more, to be precise, "special" is an adjective ( _keiyōshi_ ) in English, but is ( _keiyōdōshi_ ) in Japanese. can be classified as adjective, but we distinguish

stackexchange-japanese

What does とな mean (and how do I use it)? I came across this on Twitter, it seems to be mostly a question but sometimes an exclamation. Is it , or maybe ? How do you use it? My dictionary has a as word that come at the end of a sentence to get confirmation. Is this the same? 4 ()!? The avatars of people using it are overwhelmingly cute. Is this a cute word.

As YOU wrote, in these examples is a combination of the particle signifying quotation and the particle signifies that the speaker wants reply or agreement or wants to make sure. I think that in this meaning is rare in the modern Japanese except as an Internet slang or possibly in some dialects. “!?” is a set phrase used in some Internet forums including 2channel. It means something similar to “You started a new thread (in the forum) without even including a single image in it? Seriously?” I guess that many of the uses of “!?” (or “?”) are inspired by this set phrase.

stackexchange-japanese

Grammatically correct expression similar to the {～って感じ} slang Is there a grammatically correct expression similar to the {} slang? For example, I heard something like the following conversation in an anime: > A: ? > B: ? > A: ? What grammatically correct expression should B-san replace the {} part with, while retaining similar nuance, emphasis and emotion?

I guess you can always use `` or ``, which, I guess, is where `` comes from.

stackexchange-japanese

What's the difference between 悪 and 惡 ? I'd like to know what the difference between and is. And also what usage you should do between both. I heard that they both mean "bad"

is the traditional (pre-1946) form of the kanji, while is the new, simplified form. The simplification in this case may not seem much (just a single stroke has been removed), but it was probably made to make the form of the kanji more 'natural' and flowing.

stackexchange-japanese

Using くれる for doing something bad Today I heard the phrase , as in: > which I learned means "Look what you've done". I thought was only used when someone does something nice for you. Is this just a set phrase, where is being used sarcastically, or are there other times you can use when someone does something you don't like?

Speaking from personal experience, I do hear the ~ form used this way all the time in video games and such, and it seems to me that it does carry a kind of sarcasm(the Japanese kind :D). I mostly hear ! when the opponent does something to the person, but I seldom hear it used this way on any word besides and , so I'd assume yours is a good bet.

stackexchange-japanese

Katakana changes The katakana changes with time, and so recently they introduced the "v" "", and I'd like to know if there's a possibility they'll add letters like "si" "" or something similar in the future? Do the Japanese government has some plans for that or not?

There are no plans that I know of, but I would be surprised if Katakana (and even Hiragana) does not change over time. Writing systems tend to change with time, to better reflect natural changes in the languages they represent. So the real question should probably be whether there will be a change _soon_. And maybe there will be change soon, since already some Japanese can perfectly distinguish between `[si]` and `[shi]`, snd it seems like the Japanese government isn't too conservative about small changes to the gairaigo spelling rules. Anyway, I'm not sure that there is a definite answer to your question. Unless the Ministry of Education (which is in charge of these things, AFAIK) is working on a solution _right now_ , everything we can say is just speculation.

stackexchange-japanese

What does the final て in 待ってて signify? In this scene a young girl, Yotsuba, drops in on her neighbors for some breakfast. The mother who's cooking breakfast says: > So I guess she's preparing her husbands food first, and tells Yotsuba to hang on for a minute. But why didn't she just say ? [Image redacted]

Like Mark says, it's short for , which is the -form of . I think it's a little softer than saying , and since Yotsuba is not one of the family, the mother is being a little more polite. Saying can sound a little short. The meaning changes with the extra , but I can't describe how it changes well. Something like "please be there waiting".

stackexchange-japanese

How commonly are "あたし" or "[僕]{ぼく}" used? My friend and I are learning Japanese. For a time, all we knew was , but after we learned more words, she started to use when referring to herself, and I began using . What I'm wondering is, how commonly are these used? Related: [Is it ok for non-japanese to refer to themselves as []{} and if not why?](

is quite common for females, but is not that much. In my feeling, has some romantic sense, so using when you talk to girls should be no problem at all. (Note that I use romatic sense here is for non-family members, and non-closed friends) Japanese use a lot recently, and here is a report about usage about and - 1895~1935, - 1966-1991, - 1991~1998 !enter image description here And this is the another report about vs at business/work taken at 2011, results in around 20%~20% people using . !enter image description here ref: * < *

stackexchange-japanese

Is there a dialect where older men refer to themselves as あたし? I remember reading that there is a dialect in which older men refer to themselves as . It didn't have a feminine connotation, it may have even been a bit rough. I think I read it on Wikipedia, but being as I can't find it now, I wonder if it was a prank edit. I'm also pretty sure it was a Honshu dialect.

Looks like the reason I couldn't find it was because someone recently rewrote the Tokyo dialect article on Wikipedia (by chance the old page was still cached and served to me!). It said, "Atashi is a feminine first person in standard Japanese, but in Shitamachi dialect, it is often used by both men and women." Sorry if I threw anyone off by limiting it to older men. I think my brain just associates Shitamachi with older people (maybe because of this). I also found this goo question which was answered with (Forgive the translation: Tokyo-ben's atashi isn't connected to gender. In particular, it's a trait of the Shitamachi men who use it.) Unfortunately, the Wiki wasn't well sourced, and well the goo site isn't definitive either. By the way, I found a few links that agree with what YOU said about being used by rakugo professionals.

stackexchange-japanese

Is 超 (chō) seldom used in written works? Is it true that the prefix to mean “very” is seldom used in written works (like novels, not counting direct speech), and is usually only used when talking?

It depends on what kind of written works you consider. As Boaz wrote in a comment on the question, () meaning “very” is very colloquial. It is highly unlikely to see it in formal contexts, written or spoken. However, this does not mean that (also written or ) is not used in written Japanese. See latest search results on Google of "", "" and "" (but note that not everything in the results is this usage).

stackexchange-japanese

When is it appropriate to refer to yourself by これ? I have occasionally heard and read instances, where a person has referred to themselves as . My Japanese dictionary also lists "Me, I." as a definition of . Now, this obviously isn't used as frequently as , , etc., so it makes me wonder: When can it be used to refer to one's self? and Does it have any extra or particular meaning as such? Thanks! :)

To add a little bit more to what YOU said in his answer: in some Classical Japanese texts was indeed used as a first (and also second) person pronoun. It's not the most common first person pronoun in Classical Japanese (that would probably be ), but it's a possible use, so maybe that's where your dictionary got that from. The quote from (The Pillow Book) YOU referred to is probably the one which shows up in Daijirin: > Don't ask me to translate that though. :)

stackexchange-japanese

What are the origins of the 「こそあど」 demonstratives? I've noticed the following sets of words that seem to have a very obvious pattern, and, of course, their meanings are very closely related: * * * What are the origins of these sets of words? I'm asking them all together because I'm thinking that their origin is interrelated.

Well, if you use the kanjis, you see the pattern even better! From there, the suffixes "" "" and "" indicate whether you're talking about a thing, a "possessive", or a location. The prefixes are, as you had guessed, the "distance": close, somehow far, far, and the question "which". So, "" is the close thing, X is "the X of mildly far away" and "" is "which location?". Understanding the others is then straightforward.

stackexchange-japanese

What is the sense of 気配がする (けはいがする) versus 気がする? I'm (trying) to read a Japanese spy novel at the moment. It could just be the author's style, but I see lots of sentences end in The more I read, the more I wonder - is there any difference between this and ? > > > The above example is mine, but it was the context of the book (I am too lazy to go find the page now). A cursory look in the dictionary tells me that is more like "sense" whereas the latter may be more like "feeling" \- anyone care to help?

is defined in as something which is "not clearly seen, but vaguely sensed." It is used to describe an indication or hint of something outside the person who senses it, and shows up in more patterns than just : > I felt the presence of someone. > > The first signs of autumn appear. You cannot replace with in the above examples. , on the other hand, always refers to the subject's intuition or suspicions: > I have a vague feeling we met somewhere. > > I feel like something like this happened before. > > I have a hunch things are going to start now.

stackexchange-japanese

What’s the difference between [v] たとしても and just the plain ても What’s the difference between [v] and just the plain ? Example: > (1) > > (2)

The difference between these two hinges on whether or not the action has been completed at the time the statement was made: **** This could be taken in one of two ways: 1. Even if you (I) read the instructions, it **will [still] be** hard to understand. 2. Even after reading the instructions, it **is [still]** hard to understand. So with the form in this sentence, the action () may have already taken place, or it may be a hypothetical action to take place in the future. **** By contrast, the pattern always refers to a hypothetical situation which may or may not take place in the future. As such, the translation "even supposing you were to [action]" often works well for : 1. Even supposing you (I) were to read the instructions, it **would [still] be** hard to understand. Note that while both and can both express hypothetical cases, better matches a "even if … will" pattern, while better matches a "even supposing … would" pattern in English.

stackexchange-japanese

How do I politely ask my boss for a moment of his time? My boss is a native Japanese speaker. In English, when I have a question or an issue to bring up, I can ask "Do you have a minute?" to see if it is an appropriate time to interrupt them. In Japanese, when I tried the literal translation `` I was told I sounded like an Instant Ramen commercial. I've heard another Japanese student use `` but they were also told that's not real Japanese. I know the word but this doesn't seem like an appropriate context to use it, since my boss isn't free, I'm just interrupting him. How do I politely ask him for his time?

is a casual expression. Depending on the relation between you and your boss, you may not want to use the phrase to your boss. One of the formal and polite expressions is (). If you want to state an estimate of the length (say five minutes), you can say something like . literally means to be given someone’s time, and is a polite expression which means either to disturb/interrupt (e.g. for discussions) or to make someone wait (e.g. until the speaker finishes some work). Therefore the phrase can be used both when the speaker wants to interrupt the listener and when the speaker wants the listener to wait for something. does not make sense (I assume that your boss was joking). In Japanese () means the length of one minute and does not mean “a short period,” unlike the English expressions “a minute” and “one minute.”

stackexchange-japanese

Why "社会の窓" (shakai no mado)? A few years ago I was told by a Japanese friend "" (shakai no mado). It was explained after some giggling that this is what is said to a man who has inadvertently left his fly open, and that it means literally "society's window". So why use "society's window" for this situation? Is it actually an additional sense added to a more straightforward older one? Or does it provide some insight into Japanese culture why such wording would be used?

(slang dictionary) says that that word was formed because of the radio program called around 1948-1960, which tried expose anything about society/community. And people start to called zip fasteners , because it is a hidden place for men. Also when zip fasteners are opened in any place other than the toilet, they called it .

stackexchange-japanese

Words/characters for fast food meal sizes: 並, 大, 特 When dining at Yoshinoya I never know how to ask for the size meal I want. Their sizes are , , and . I only know that "" means big, but it also has two readings so I have no idea whether to ask for "dai" or "ooki". And since the word/character I know for "small" is not included, I assume they are using a similar gimmick to that seen in Western chains where there is no small but only "regular", "medium", "large"... sometimes up to the infamous "venti" (-: Then again maybe there are various ways of writing "small". So are these standard words or gimmicky like "venti", what do they mean literally, how do I know which reading to use for each, how would I say them in an order? Are these same sizes used just about everywhere in Japanese restaurants or are there some other terms I should also know?

Although (nami), (dai) will work in most of the places, others would depend on each restaurant. * For Small - (shou), (mini), (hanbun), (sukuname), S ()... * For Normal - (nami), (futsuu), (chuu), M ()... * For Big - (dai), (oomori), (oome), L ()... * For Special Big - 1.5 (ittengo mori) (sukiya invented it) * For Extra Big - (tokumori), (tokudai)... * For Extreme Big - (oni mori), () (chou kyodai mori), (baka mori), (geki mori), (mega mori)....

stackexchange-japanese

Is "ガール" (gāru) now considered a Japanese word? What about "ガールズ" (gāruzu)? In my wanderings around Japan giving my kana knowledge some practice I've noticed both the words "" (gāru) and "" (gāruzu) in use at least in signage. Obviously they are borrowed from English "girl" and "girls" in turn, but is either or both of them now considered to be Japanese words, or are they merely seen as English written in katakana? If they are now considered to be Japanese words, how do their usages differ from the native Japanese words for "girl"? And if both are now considered Japanese can "" be considered a plural of "", especially since Japanese doesn't normally have a grammatical concept of plurality?

Japanese also called as , but the word is taken by blackish/brownish (may be sun-burn or make-ups) girls, see the on Wikipedia. So, I guess someone start using as normal girls. And I think comes from something like popular (Tokyo Girls Collection) fashion show or (girls talk). And also has some good sense about fashionish, stylish, so poeple might use it just because it is cool ().

stackexchange-japanese

Can the qualifiers "very" and "too" be expressed unambiguously in Japanese? I've noticed that some of my Japanese friends with fluent but imperfect English often say "too _adjective_ " when a native English speaker would say just "very _adjective_ ". (I am asking about "too" in the sense "too big", not as in "me too") Does this reveal that English makes a distinguish that Japanese doesn't make or one which Japanese speakers would find too subtle? How would I unambiguously express each in Japanese?

Not only "too [big]" and "very [big]", but I have also very often heard "so [big]" added to the mix of confusion by semi-conversational Japanese (not sure it's related, but it sure sounds like it). A potential lead for an explanation might be in the nuance of in Japanese: it is generally more neutral than "too ~" in English. In fact, it is often **colloquially** used as a synonym for "very ~" (when used with a positive adjective): → This is _really_ good! (with positive, not negative, nuance) [col.] When quizzed about that, Japanese coworkers agreed that, in their mind, there wasn't such a strong difference between "too ~"/"so ~"/"very ~"... possibly because of the softer divide between and . I doubt there is a stronger grammatical explanation for this (but would love to hear if there is).

stackexchange-japanese

When did you last...? I am searching for a way to ask a question like "When did you last see her?" or "When did you last do the laundry?, or also "When did we last meet?" Basically, how do you construct a question with this content: > "When was the most recent time when X happened?" And even less specific: How to talk about the most recent point in time in general. > "Last time you ate lunch, did you eat a salad?" > "When was your last holiday?" > "Who was your last boyfriend?"

I don't think _"last"_ can be translated literally in most situations, or at least shouldn't. _"Last"_ will be very much understood from context in most cases. I'd come up with: "When did we last meet?" > _Kono mae atta no wa itsu?_ "When did you last see her?" > _Kanojo o mita no wa itsu datta?_ "When did you last do the laundry?" > _Sentakushita no wa itsu datta?_ > _Itsu sentakushitan desu ka?_ is a common way to say _"last time"_ , but it's usually only used if you find yourself in exactly the same situation as before and want to refer to the _last time this happened_. You can't usually apply it if you're asking another person when he last did something if you had no part in that "last time". Usually the best way is to simply phrase the question in past tense, which very much implies that you're asking for the _last time_ something happened. If you want to very explicitly say _"most recently"_ , _ichiban saikin_ should do.

stackexchange-japanese

What is the origin of the theatrical intonation used by Tokyo Disneyland's cast members? When I had the chance to go on a Jungle Cruise at Tokyo Disneyland, I noticed the skipper talked with sprinkles of prolonged vowels and uncommon rising and falling intonation patterns. Is this "dialect" original, or was it borrowed from existing profession/region? **Edit:** you can check video recordings of the ride on Youtube: * By a male captain * By Captain Sato: Part 1, Part 2 * By a female captain

It's just typical for entertainers who want to capture the attention of the audience. It's not even unique to Japanese. When you take the English one in Disney World (Florida) they talk the same way. < The guide in this one does the same thing in English, if not quite as often. On the rides I've been on, some of them have done it just as often as those Japanese videos.

stackexchange-japanese

Can 差す be an intransitive verb? WWWJDIC lists as an intransitive verb, but in all of the example sentences I've seen it looks more like a transitive verb. So my question is, is a transitive or intransitive verb?

It's both. My copy of Kōjien has entries for both the transitive and intransitive uses of this verb. **Intransitive** * () * () **Transitive** * () * ()

stackexchange-japanese

how would a native ask the question "Where are you going later?" After reading the 2 threads: How to use (-e), (-ni), (made) and (no-hō) with destination and direction? and When going somewhere, is there any difference between e () and ni ()? I would like to ask how would a native ask the question "Where are you going later?" 1) 2) 3) ? Context: john talking to mary 30 minutes before school ends.

Well, I'm not native, so I don't know if this disqualifies me from answering... ... But in the context of your question, I'd say {} Your #1 could work, but using just instead of gives a sense of "later" later. Adding the solidifies the meaning of "after this", where "this" means being at school. You wouldn't use unless John knows she is definitely going somewhere somewhat far away and is really interested/concerned with the details of the whole journey. #3 is just a question mark and presumably means he is just looking at her with a stupified, questionable look on his face. :)

stackexchange-japanese

What are the Japanese terms for "character dictionary"? "漢辞海"? "漢字典"? I'm looking for a cheap secondhand character dictionary in Japan but: I don't know if there is one or more kind of these, and I don't know what they are called. Two I saw had these on their spines, but I don't know if they are titles or types of dictionary: * * Tsuyoshi Ito suggests this term in a comment: * Is there more than one kind of character dictionary? What are the various kinds called? (Please supply romaji or at least kana too) I do not need to know about general Japanese or translating dictionaries, just the ones that focus on kanji.

is what you want: Shinchosha have just released a Kanji-only dictionary called: Shin'Nihongo Kanji Jiten: < that includes not only words with origins in China, but also native Japanese words that happen to be scripted in Kanji.

stackexchange-japanese

ご～いただけます vs. ご～になれます I know that you can use toward "clients" (which is something I've never really understood; maybe better as a question of its own) such as ("Thank you (customer) for coming to our store"). Following this logic, I know you can express "can" with . However, the normal keigo pattern would then (also) morph into . I've heard both in practical situations, but I'm very confused as to the nuances of when to use which. For example, I'm currently translating a software help file, which is directed toward the end user. If I want to say, "you can see X", I'm not sure if I should say or .

Although @crunchyt provides a helpful answer about the `` form, it didn't answer my original question about comparing the two forms. I knew I had this somewhere and I finally found it. If you have a copy of `` dictionary, it contains an article for exactly this question. I'll summarize it for you: `` is grammatically **correct**. `` is grammatically **incorrect** to use toward "clients" since it is really , but it is **WIDELY USED** if you want to say 1. The "client" is able to do the action 2. The client is doing something useful/beneficial for you by doing the action 3. You want to show respect for the client 4. You want to put the focus of the statement on the client, and/or 5. You don't want the client to feel obliged or compelled to do the action. I can't find the actual `` entry online anywhere, but here are several links talking about this. * < * < * <

stackexchange-japanese

Sites/ways helpful for learning internet/slang lingo? As the title says- I'm wondering if anyone is aware of a website used for learning dialects and internet lingo?

There's a zokugo dictionary here, which includes both normal slang and internet slang. Of course, it's all in Japanese. I haven't been able to find any other resources for this sort of thing, though.

stackexchange-japanese

How would you translate: 毎日は楽しくなりました。 Would you translate this: Every day was fun. or Every day became fun. I know that can be used to say that A becomes B. But in this example what is the nuance of the meaning of

generally makes it seem like the context is: 1) everyday life was not much fun before 2) a particular thing happened and pretty much changed it over night 3) everyday life is now fun. Thus, it's difficult to actually translate this into an English sentence that contains all that context. Something like "everyday life became fun". As for Kdansky's post above, the form _could_ add more emphasis on the fact that "yeah, it really DID become fun". However, the form that he used implies something slightly different: that it wasn't a "particular thing" that changed the situation "overnight", but rather that everyday life steadily became more enjoyable, and now it is fun.

stackexchange-japanese

What's the difference between "巻寿司" (makizushi), "海苔巻き" (norimaki), and "巻物" (makimono)? It seems there are three words for the same Japanese food item, a kind of "sushi in a long roll": * "" (makizushi) * "" (norimaki) * "" (makimono) Are they all identical / synonyms? Do they refer to subtly different things? Are they used in different regions? Are they used by different generations of Japanese? [Sidenote: At the risk of side-tracking another food question, there only seems to be one word for these in Korean: "" (gimbap).]

The literal meanings of these words are: * (): sushi roll * (): something rolled with nori, a specific kind of seaweed * (): something rolled usually refers to sushi roll with nori, but depending on the context, it can refer to other kinds of food, including () and (). Unlike , I do not think that is understood as sushi roll unless it is clear from the context that one is talking about sushi. As crunchyt wrote, can also mean a scroll. When used to describe kinds of sushi, these three words are almost synonymous, but sushi rolled with something other than nori (usually egg) can be called or but not .

stackexchange-japanese

Are there any Japanese words as versatile as "fuck" in English? I was wondering about this one recently. "Fuck" in English is famous for being applicable in a wide, wide range of circumstances (none of them formal). What word in Japanese covers a wide spectrum of possible meanings and uses like "fuck" does. Does not have to be a rude/vulgar term. Any suggestions? EDIT: half of you seem to have missed the point of my question. I don't need a translation for "fuck", I want a word as versatile. Maji is pretty good but I would've thought there'd be more contenders. Admittedly it's a vague question, but one for my izakaya zatsugaku collection.

I am surprised nobody mentioned: ("maji") Only used as an adverb, with the meaning of "fucking", for instance for "fucking cold". Combinations can be done:

stackexchange-japanese

What's the difference between "家" (ya), "屋" (ya), and "や" (ya) as used in the names of shops/stores/restaurants? As a gyudon addict I have noticed that the names of the three major national restaurant chains all end in "ya" but they used two different characters: * "" (Yoshinoya) * "" (Matsuya) * "" (Sukiya) Other shops and restaurants I've noticed just use the hiragana instead: * "" (ya) So is there a subtle difference where one is more like restaurant and the other is more like shop/store? And is the hiragana a handy way to be ambiguous or would people reading such a sign immediately know whether "" stood for "" or "" based on their language intuition? While I'm at it, is this yet another character for "ya" used in the same contexts? * ""

and both roughly mean _"house"_ , with tending more towards the meaning of _building_ and more towards _home_. The choice of which to use is entirely the owner's. is the ambiguous way to write either and is pretty much a stylistic choice. Do keep in mind that in the olden days Japanese stores tended to be part home, part store, with the owners living in the back while serving guests out front. You can still find such stores today, but they're disappearing in favor of purely business stores. The naming stuck though, possibly due to it's "homeliness".* _ten_ has the pure meaning of "store". * * * * Note that I'm pretty sure that even in in the olden days there were purely business stores called _-ya_. I can't say whether was used for such whereas was used for "home stores" or whether the choice was always arbitrary.

stackexchange-japanese

what is the past tense of お腹が空いた? if means "I'm hungry", then what would be the past tense of since (i think) it's already in the past tense?

The past tense would be: **** This would be along the lines of "my stomach was in the state of being empty" or simply "I was hungry." Additionally, the "” in is not showing "past tense" but is actually showing the completion of an action. In this case, the stomach has emptied. This is the "” which shows completion of an action. This is the past tense version of "". I believe this is called in grammar terms.

stackexchange-japanese

How do you pronounce the Japanese "r"? How do you pronounce the Japanese "r"? Is it more like an "l" or something inbetween? Would there be any picture or video explaining it correctly, please link it!

The sound that's transcribed in Romaji as 'r' is what's refered to in phonetics as an alveolar flap (or alveolar tap). It's a sound made by quickly tapping the tip of your tongue on the alveolar ridge (the same place you use to pronounce sounds like 't' or 'l') and to native American English ears sounds somewhere between an 'r' and an 'l'. If you are an American English native speaker, you probably already make this sound when speaking your own language. It's what's the double-t is pronounced as in "better", for example.

stackexchange-japanese

Am I coming or going? 戻ってくる vs 戻っていく A little while ago I was in a shop, and about 5 minutes after I left, they phoned me to tell me I had left my USB stick there. I said I would head back and pick it up. I used `{}{}` to mean "I'll go back", but I wonder if `{}` would have been better, as in "I'll come back". Japanese has always tripped me up a bit in terms of which point of view one refers to when describing direction. Am I coming to where they are, or going from where I am? Or are both okay? Now that I think about it, English can be flexible on this as well, so perhaps there aren't strict rules. Maybe I'm over thinking it...? In any case, does anyone have any pointers which can help determine when one comes to where the other person is, or when one goes from where the speaker is?

_I'm not really answering my own question as much as I am relaying what I believe is the correct answer after polling a few Japanese people on this._ A simple `{}` or `{}` would be the usual way to go. `{}{}` is definitely wrong. However, `{}` isn't totally wrong, and I was told there are some people who would use it. Specifically they said `{}{}`. However, possibly the best to say would have been: > {}{} Which is something like, "[I'll] head back to pick [my USB thingy] up".

stackexchange-japanese

Does the particle "を" (wo) have a special use when at the end of a sentence? I thought the character "" (wo) was only used for the particle whose only job was to indicate the direct object of a verb. But today I saw it at the end of an exclamation on a sign I think on a shop: > !! So what job is doing here?

It's still the object marker. The sentence is just not finished and the verb is implied. (there was a question mentioning suspended sentences but I cannot find it for the moment) Anyway it's often used: > {} > > May the force be with you! Additionally it gives some kind of propaganda feeling to the sentence.

stackexchange-japanese

Where does the word ダイヤ come from that means "train schedule"? For the longest time I've been hearing the word and just always assumed it meant "Diamond", but found recently it all means "train schedule". My question is, what word/language did this word originally come from?

Original word is from "Diagram" , which is a .

stackexchange-japanese

What's the difference between "さけ" (sake) and "しゃけ" (shake)? Today I saw onigiri claiming to contain "" (shake). When I asked my friend what that was, she said it was the same as "" (sake), "salmon". So are these two just different readings of a kanji, regional differences, used by different generations, etc? How did the two pronunciations come about? Which should I use?

Both and mean salmon and are written as in kanji (but I will avoid using this kanji in this answer for an obvious reason). As far as I know, there is no difference in meaning, but some people seem to distinguish the two words in meanings (see below). According to a webpage by Maruha Nichiro Foods, Inc., the Kōjien dictionary lists the word as a variation of the word with the same meaning. The webpage also states that there is no obvious geographical tendency between the use of and . According to this page and this page, some people distinguish the two words, in which case means living or raw salmon and means cooked salmon. I had never heard of this distinction personally, and I doubt that many people distinguish the use of the two words.

stackexchange-japanese

What is the difference in usage between [問]{と}い[合]{あ}わせ and [依]{い}[頼]{らい} Both and can mean to ask, but my co-workers are using both words in the application we are working on as if they are two different words. I have a suspicion one is transitive and one is intransitive in their usage, but not entirely sure. Edit: From the comments an enquiry and a request are both asking for information. That is where i was getting confused.

The two words mean different things. They just happen to be different things that can sometimes be represented by a single English word. `` is a request for information. You often see it used for customer support phone numbers you can call if you have questions about the product you just bought. `` is a request for someone to do something (such as provide you with a service), often also translated as "commision". It's the word you use if you ask a lawyer to represent you, hire a freelance design firm to make you a web page, etc.

stackexchange-japanese

What is the difference between 完了 and 終了? Both and seem to have the connotation of finished/complete, but what is the difference, if any, in usage?

_kanryō_ means "completed", while _shūryō_ means "ended". > - The preparations for the ceremony are complete. > - The festivities finally came to an end late at night.

stackexchange-japanese

Difference between various "calculation" words (演算, 算出, and 計算) Is there a difference in usage between these words? 1. () 2. () 3. ()

is an operation. When you apply an operation, such as a boolean NOT, you could use this word. is a computation, a calculation. Morally, it involves many operations. It is also the word for formal calculi in the scientific domain (such as "lambda calculus" or "pi calculus") I never encountered and I therefore do not know its usage and nuances. However, a quick check on the internet give a few compound words where it appears to express the result () of a computation: : calculated tax amount, and : calculated amount. P!

stackexchange-japanese

What does っつの mean? I recently saw . What does it mean, or how does it modify the meaning of a sentence?

(sometimes ) is a slang version of (or an alternate version like , depending on the context). It's extremely informal. > **** ( **** ) I said I was joking. [Idiomatically: Chill out, I was just kidding.] > > **** ( **** ) He's saying he wants to quit, so why not let him? > > **** ( **** ) Well, it's…what should I say…kind of a bad situation.

stackexchange-japanese

Computer calculation: is there a better word than "オンザフライ" to say "on-the-fly"? As a valuable feature of my software product, I want to say that results are calculated on-the-fly, meaning the user does not have to wait and receive results by email: results are displayed after two seconds. Should I say as advised by my friend alc? The context would be something like "" in a bullet list

You could say * **** For example, an article introducing Google's Instant Previews was titled "GoogleInstant Previews". I think this is the most natural way to put it. The downside is you lose the conciseness coming from the use of all-kanji/katakana compound nouns.

stackexchange-japanese

When and to whom should I use the expression ご苦労様 (gokurousama)? In what context and relationship wise to who can I safely say (gokurousama)? I often defer to using otsukaresama since I'm not sure if I'm talking down to someone by saying gokurousama. Please provide some example contexts where it would be appropriate. Thanks.

AFAIK, it means more or less the same thing as (). But the nuance is to whom you say it. is used for colleagues or superiours ("highers"), I believe is only used from superiours to subordinates ("highers" to "lowers"). So you'd probably only say it if you have people "working" under you, such as direct subordinates at a job, if you're the leader of some type of group project, etc. So you're probably safe most of the time to defer to unless there's a very clear pecking-order of which you're at the top.

stackexchange-japanese

Is there a difference between すみません (sumimasen) and すいません (suimasen)? My friend tells me one is more polite. I think they're the same. Who's right? When can I use one or the other?

**** is the correct pronunciation, so on that count I suppose it would be considered more polite by a very small margin. But just like in English, people can be lazy with pronunciation, which is why you'll sometimes hear **** . You also might run across **** and **** **** , but from what I've read these are more Kansai-isms than anything else. When in doubt, stick with the standard pronunciation, but in all cases the difference is in pronunciation only (the meaning stays the same).

stackexchange-japanese

What is the nuance of この + [first person pronoun]? For example, from the song Fare Well by L'Arc~en~Ciel: > and countless examples from manga, like: > ... > > > > My guess is that it + first-person-pronoun is just emphasis, but is there anything more here?

I would say nuance of song is different with other manga texts. > in above sentence is more like , kind of humble. Will you ever love me even if I were such ... But, other sentences on manga are trying to express himself superior > ... No wonder, I won't die (such easily) > > , Remember!, this I will destroy/ruin you next time. > > . You can never ever beat me for any reason!!!

stackexchange-japanese

How should I use 始める (はじめる) and 始まる (はじまる) as a suffix to intransitive verbs? When describing intransitive actions that are commencing, I often end up saying dumb things like () instead of () - starting to boil. Perhaps it's some meta pattern I am projecting from my knowledge of English!?! When should I use which, what are the rules and common exceptions? Thank you

When you express the idea of "begin to [verb]", the pattern is masu stem + , without exception, whether the verb is transitive or not. The distinction between and only applies when the verb is used on its own. You could think of, say, as having as a sort of object of , in which case it's obvious that you would never use , though I don't know if this is etymologically what's going on.

stackexchange-japanese

Use of the question mark and か I was surpised to hear from a Japanese coworker that using a question mark "?" (gimonfu) after the particle is correct Japanese. Which of these are NG? 1. 2. 3. In what context is each acceptable/appropriate?

All 3 are correct. 1. could appear in old and/or formal Japanese, where the question mark is often absent. Note that you would still need a punctuation then, probably a full stop: 2. and 3. will both appear anywhere and depend only on the level of formality of the conversation. Omitting the particle would make your question slightly more familiar (or, in some case, slightly more masculine-sounding).

stackexchange-japanese

What is the difference in meaning between "husband and wife" 夫婦【ふうふ】 and 夫妻【ふさい】? I see that those two compounds mean husband and wife, as a married couple. But is there a difference in usage or context?

They mean the same thing but fusaiis more polite. For example, you can use fuufuto refer to yourselves (), you can use for others and use it formally (). But you can't use fusaito refer to yourselves ( = NG). Also when speaking formally, is better than .

stackexchange-japanese

What are the nuances between these three terms for intelligence: 知恵 [ちえ],　知能 [ちのう],　知性 [ちせい]　? In particular which one is closer to the idea of "ability to reason over things" as a quality of someone in particular? What I believe is that on the other hand is closer to "knowledge" and "understanding" and is more about "discrimination, insight", but as an intellectual operation, not a property attached to someone, like .

I'd add to @istrasci's answer that: * is more oriented towards mechanical problem solving skills, while * is more about reasoning and discerning abilities only thought to be possessed by humans. Words like (artificial intelligence), (IQ) show this aspect of . Also, because of these differences, you will hear more about "" (animal intelligence) than "" (animal intellect). So, "ability to reason over things" as a quality of someone, will likely be about .

stackexchange-japanese

Why is the correct counter for rabbits 羽（わ） Why is the correct counter for rabbits , the counter that is used for birds. I figured it is because they jump, cause fly and jump are the same verb in Japanese, but then frogs are .

I also heard the Buddhist monk story, but another theory is that while the word is theorized to have come to Japanese from a Sanskrit origin through Korea, it was reinterpreted by some as +, providing a linguistic connection to birds and to the counter.

stackexchange-japanese

What is the meaning of 人児, and is it a compound? There's this rather unpleasant sign on a restaurant that says: > Putting aside the racist content, from a linguistic point of view, the one word that throws me is . It's not in Yahoo, Denshi Jisho, or Goo dictionaries. I know in general that it means people and children, but I'm unclear on exactly how to read and define it. What is the right reading? ? And does it mean "young people", or "adults and kids", or "adults or children", or something else? Lastly, is it actually a compound, or is it just the two individual kanji with their individual meanings that are beside each other like a list (as in "adults, children")?

is just means child, but could also be used for adopted, and can even used to non-humans. the one you seen in is not supposed to be , but which should be > () + () + - chinese related (japanese) + mixed blood people's + child **Note** : according to some searches, that place is looks like adult store or kind of, sometimes sex related places here reject for foreigner for several (even strange) reasons, but that one is too much. I think that poster might be even offensive for Japanese. And they could be choosing only Japanese to do something bad for example.

stackexchange-japanese

What is the difference between は and のは? The following sentence means "seeing all the different foreign people was interesting." This, according to my Japanese friends is incorrect: > ... and this is correct: > To me, the difference is so subtle that I can't really get a feel for how the presence of really changes it. Can someone provide an explanation that clarifies what makes important in this situation? Update: I'm actually still confused by this. Couldn't the first example mean "Looking at the various foreigners was interesting", and the second example mean "That I was looking at the various foreigners was interesting"?

In this case, changes the verb "to [be] see" into the gerund form "[be] seeing", which is what you found interesting. After that, is just .

stackexchange-japanese

Written resources for scientific and philosophic japanese? In this Question about computer science jargon, most answers to date are electronic resources and that makes sense. But I would like to know if there are printed japanese/english or japanese/german dictionary which gives careful consideration to scientific, technological and philosophical (analytical, epistemology) meanings of kanjis without being too difficult to peruse for a non-native learner. I would not be able to comfortably use a japanese-only reference. It does not need to be strictly a dictionary. I am interested in printed books about scientific japanese writing for instance, or specialized documents with a glossary for that specialty. I remember among other things seing a japanese colleague with a nice book about german philosophical concepts and their kanji approximation and translation. I presume there are other such books in areas such as biology, cognitive sciences, physics, history of science.

< has many dictionaries, including some scientific ones. But you asked for print media... * Computer Terms - English-Japanese / Japanese-English Dictionary of Computer and Data-Processing Terms * Chemical & Science - Japanese-English Chemical Dictionary: Including a Guide to Japanese Patents and Scientific Literature * Science and Technical Terms - Japanese/English - English/Japanese Glossary of Scientific and Technical Terms There are others, too. Searching Amazon for "japanese english dictionary scientific" is a good start. Thanks to the rules here, 2 of those don't get linked. You'll have to copy and paste.

stackexchange-japanese

When should either 「」 and 『』 be used? In what scenarios would you use quotation marks instead of , and vice versa?

In Japanese, the symbols are called []{} and the symbols are called []{}. The basic rules for these symbols are simple: is used to denote quotation, and is used to denote quotation inside a -quote. Example: > []{}[]{}[]{}[]{}[]{}[]{} > A teacher asked a student, “How do you say ‘Good morning’ in French?” In some contexts, is also used to denote the title of a book and other kinds of works. Example (from Wikipedia with an English translation by me): > []{}[]{}[]{}[]{} > “Kōjien” is a middle-sized Japanese dictionary published by Iwanami Shoten, Publishers.

stackexchange-japanese

What is the etymological connection between sake (alcohol) and sha-ke (salmon)? I read once somewhere that the word 'sake' (, Japanese rice wine) comes from sha-ke (, salmon). Can someone explain what this connection is? Any thoughts on why _most Japanese people_ * don't know the origin of the word sake are also appreciated. _*Most Japanese people who I know ... @Tsuyoshi Ito may know more._

What is the connection? None, apparently. According to (always a good place to check on that sort of question), none of the likely etymologies have anything to do with "sha-ke" or fish in general. The above site mentions a couple of theories for the etymology of the word "", including: * 'soup' 'eat/food' * 'water that makes you prosper' but goes on to state that the most plausible etymology is the following: is a prefix (of unspecified meaning) attached to , an older word for sake. The final vowel assumedly changed somewhere along the way.

stackexchange-japanese

Is the title ～[殿]{どの} used in modern day japanese? Is the title []{} used in modern day Japanese? If so, which people can you use it with? I've only really seen it come across in referring to []{}[]{} (feudal lords). Also it is applicable to use as a translation of "sir" of people who have been knighted by the queen of England?

You may use it in emails, especially when you contact another company or another department which you have never contacted before. > To whom it may concerned > > To (someone) in company > > () To (Department name) **Note** : I personally don't use it, because I feel that it's extreme polite, but when I searched mailing list in my company, I got around 400 hits for around a year, so indeed some people use it.

stackexchange-japanese

"Statistically speaking ... " I am looking for a way to express the equivalent of "statistically speaking, ..." (followed by a quote from a paper, or something like that), or pretty much any other grammatical construction that works well for the subject of quoting statistics or papers. I know the word , but that always results in very cumbersome (and probably wrong) sentences, such as: > > I am sure Japanese people will understand what I try to express, but it's hardly correct. While I honestly care about the answer and do not know it, I have also made this question for meta-discussion: Who is our target audience?

try .... asked google translate and it makes sense + shorter than what you used and seems more grammatically correct.

stackexchange-japanese

Difference between で and の when referring to "usage" Simplest example would be when you are getting a coffee and ask for a paper cup. It seems that both and are acceptable. What are the differences?

My (non-native) intuition here is that by using you are picking an attribute of the cup, which can really be any salient attribute it has. Syntactically, you are just omitting the noun after the particle. By using , on the other hand, you are choosing among a given set of options. I most frequently hear this kind of when picking a meal size (for example , or ). Look at it this way - you can also answer this question by saying , but not .

stackexchange-japanese

What is the meaning of かい and き in Google's Summer Solstice Doodle? I was wondering what the meaning of and is for the Google Summer Solstice Doodle pictured here: !enter image description here I'm guessing it has some relation to summer, but what?

Unfortunately, it is unlikely that these Japanese letters have anything to do with summer. These are mascots of Kaikai Kiki Co., Ltd., a company run by Takashi Murakami, the artist who painted this Google Doodle. Also note that the same mascots appear in the Winter Solstice Doodle, too.

stackexchange-japanese

～まくる as a suffix, what does it mean and how is it used? I found this phrase and I believe it means "[my] family really stuck it [to me]" but I'm not familiar with the suffix . Any examples and clarifications would be appreciated.

Ok, first, I _think_ your sentence translates as "my family put me in a very bad situation." If that's what you meant, forgive my bad English. Then, for "", a quick glance at ALC gave me nice examples to share with you: : talk ~ to death : panic wildly about : blat (: gush over : give someone a bunch of errors (a program would) I guess this is helps you understand the nuance of .

stackexchange-japanese

sometimes だけ gets mildly confusing.. If someone says , does it mean: 1. Please don't eat only that [eat other things too!] or 2. [You can eat anything you like but] only that, please don't eat it. * * * What about ? Does it mean: 1. Please eat only that [and don't eat anything else]. or 2. [I don't really care if you eat anything else but] only that, please eat it.

This is really ambiguous and depends on how it's stressed/paused: > > "Please don't eat _only_ that." > > > "Please don't eat that. (Eat anything else.)" The actual sentence seems to have been this though: > > ^ That marks as the _topic_ , which clearly means _" Please don't eat that."_

stackexchange-japanese

Can とても be used with [大好]{だいす}き or [大嫌]{だいきら}い? means "very" []{} means "like" []{} means "like very much" If I really like something can I use ?

Google says yes, to the tune of 1 million hits. A lot of the time it's used to describe how much you like something (). I presume that you were asking "Can you say totemo daisuki desu to someone". You can say that too (). Totemo daikirai doesn't have as big a number of hits in Google. Someone else will have to confirm this, but it sounds sort of childish. Maybe because the feeling is so strong.

stackexchange-japanese

How did 革 "leather" come to mean newness? How did the character for "leather" - []{ } - come to also convey the meaning for "newness"? lists one of the definitions (under ) as `, `, and we can see this in some of its associated : , , . Anyone know how this came to be?

The source for this dual meaning already exists in Chinese. is originally a pictograph of a stretched hide that is turned into leather. As a noun it meant just "leather", but as a verb it also meant "stretching something flabby and making it taut", which then was extended figuratively into "making something old new" and from there "renewal". Thus came all the meanings in compounds such as , and . See e.g. **** : > !kaku You can also find a similar explanation online in Gogen-Allguide: <

stackexchange-japanese

When and how did USA and UK come to be written as [米]{べい}[国]{こく} and [英]{えい}[国]{こく}? I know of four countries with a specific kanji besides Japan: China, the Netherlands, the USA and UK. The last two must be quite recent (I presume 19th century) but I wonder on the details and context of the selection. There is of course , abbreviated from (o-ran-da/holland) used in , dutch learning.

Good question! **** According to Japanese Wikipedia, the pronunciation of American was during the Meiji period, and was rendered into kanji as Since the first character is the abbreviation became . This was despite the fact that the full kanji representation of is . I suspect it was because is already used to represent Asia. Source **** Similarly, the Meiji era phoneticisation of England was or in kanji. Taking the first kanji of this for the abbreviation we get . Since England is also synonymous in Japan with Great Britain, or - was also used (in Meiji times, not now) Source Here is a complete list of (nearly) all countries foreign to Japan and their corresponding kanji-fied versions. Very interesting link that one.

stackexchange-japanese

what's the difference between ところで and ちなみに ? what's the difference between and ? Are they always/often/seldom interchangeable?

Yes, as a sentence opener, they are mostly identical and definitely interchangeable. As for details and nuances, cursory Googling yielded this: > **** > > > A:50050 > B: > > > **** > > > > > The gist of which is: would be introducing a new topic that is (however loosely) connected to the conversation so far, while would be for absolute _non-sequuntur_. However, as it also points out, will often introduce a "new" subject that came to the speaker's mind because of the previous subject (and is therefore not all that disconnected). Bottom line, they are pretty much interchangeable (but the nuance exists). **Note** : make sure not to confuse with its many variants (and their plentiful meanings): , etc.

stackexchange-japanese

Reading 男 or 女 as ひと Why is it that in Japanese sentence one sees or with furigana that says ? Furigana is supposed to help clarify the meaning of a kanji character, but using doesn't seem to help clarify anything. So what's the point of doing that?

I think one of the reason would be politeness, for example is more polite than or in the sense. And the latter has some sarcasm or contempt. Using with or can be seen in manga or may be used in lyrics. My understanding of the difference between actual words and furigana is that furigana sometimes refer to colloquial form, while main words or kanjis are used for deeper meanings. For your case, reading as is for politeness, and using kanji or to clarify the meaning, sometimes you may see as or (for females).

stackexchange-japanese

How can I say "some X " in Japanese? I was thinking, and I can't express the word "some" in Japanese. Examples: * There were **some** fruits on the table. (I would say " Maybe - but then I would translate as "there were few fruits". * There are **some** people here I know, and some I've never seen! * I still have **some** things to buy for that trip. * **some** of those CDs were broken. * we will have **some** news soon, just wait **some** minutes. Yoroshiku! Thanks

Basically, you don't say it, it would be the default situation. You would insist if there were only one, or a lot, by saying "" or "" You may still say "" to mean "some", but it would even rather sound like "several": "" So, to sum up: you don't have to emphasize it, it's already implied!

stackexchange-japanese

低い鼻 vs 短い鼻 and 高い鼻　vs 長い鼻 ? After reading this thread: When would you use vs , I'd just thought of something. I once heard that a long nose (witch / Pinocchio) is called and not whereas the opposite (short nose) is called and never . but i couldn't be sure (i mean in english, a tall nose just sounds wrong) Does anyone know what's the difference between a vs and a vs a ?

The distinction is not directly due to human vs. non-human as the other answers say. In case of human, people are interested in the distance of the tip of the nose from the surface of the face (excluding the nose); hence the concept of height is relevant. With elephants, their nose is not a solid thing sticking straight out of their face. Rather, its hanging off the face; hence the notion of length is more appropriate.

stackexchange-japanese

Pronunciation and meaning of  I just received an email ending like this: > How to read the `` ? Zero results on Google. As for the meaning, is it equivalent to `` ?

It's _mojibake_, not a valid character. Looking at the character code I suppose it's this _emoji_ sent from a mobile phone: !emoji <

stackexchange-japanese

What's the difference in the nuances that 呪縛【じゅばく】 and 呪い【のろい】 convey? Is usually used to refer to a good spell or a bad one (like a curse)? I mean the dictionary writes the english meaning as: **spell/curse** but I was wondering what sort of nuance would be attached to ? Because I was watching this show and they were saying stuff like: it's not a curse (), but a spell () So well from that i grasp that.. uh the nuances of are evil spells/curses, whereas the nuances of are neutral spells/good spells?

I've learnt it. It is like this : ` > > ` (from strongest to weakest curse) is a spell but not the others if I'm taking the meaning of spell and curse right. has more anger, and has more hope.

stackexchange-japanese

What does the "〜やしない" conjugation mean? In episode 76 of Fairy Tail, Gildarts said this to Natsu: > **** _(honki de sou omottara, tome **yashinai** yo)_ Which was translated in the subtitle as: > If that's what you honestly believe, I won't stop you. I thought "I won't stop you" would simply be "tomenai yo", so I'm kind of lost about what nuance the extra "+yashinai" conjugation carries. What kind of negative conjugation is it?

As others have said, this is probably really , which is transmutation of . What this suffix does is usually one of two things: 1. It makes the verb a topic (with ) and then negate it. This is used to bring up the event described by the verb and then saying it won't happen (or isn't happening, have never happened - you get the point). From the context, this seems to be what's mainly happening here, Gildarts says to Natsu: "Well as for stopping you (as you may expect or fear I would try to) - no, I won't do that". 2. It's also often used when there seems to be little intention to topicalize the verb. In such cases, I think it's mostly used as a stronger and more passionate negative than the simple .

stackexchange-japanese

Why is 五右衛門 read "goemon"? Why is the name read as ? How can the three kanji be read with only two syllables?

Originally, these kanji were thought to be pronounced as: > : _u we mon_ But since Japanese _u_ and consonant _w_ have little difference, the actual pronunciation was like: > : _wwe~we mon_ Later, undergone the phonological change that merged _wi, we, wo_ into _i, e, o_ : > : _e mon_ So the truth is and share a single syllable, but the fact has been obscured by the sound change.

stackexchange-japanese

way to use さっぱり (sappari) and すっかり (sukkari) Maybe it's just me, but I keep mixing up As in > > > I've completely forgot and > > > I haven't the faintest idea / I really don't know are there other expressions to use them?

Note: This is not a direct answer to your request for further usage examples of the two terms in different verbs. I rather try to explain the nuance with the help of a diagram and a pair of contrasting examples for each of the verb you gave. As you state in the question, both and is about the completeness of something. The difference is that they deal with different kinds of completeness: ! - diagram is interested in the degree, or progress regarding completeness. 's interest, on the other hand, is how completely clean it is of something. For example: > : I've completely forgotten to eat. (= how much you forgot about a single thing) > > : I've completely forgotten my Japanese. (= all the vocabs, syntax are gone from your head) > > : [I thought I knew something, but] Now I'm back to zero. > > : I don't have a clue.

stackexchange-japanese

Are there inflections/endings that can be applied to verbs but not i-adjectives? (or vice versa) After reading in an answer to another question that Japanese adjectives are less inflected than Japanese verbs I'm wondering if there are inflections that can be applied to verbs but not i-adjectives? Or what about the converse?

Most of the verb endings cannot be applied to adjectives. There are no modern potential, passive, causative, or imperative suffixes: > x (could be red) > x (was redded?) > x (was made red) > (be red! [archaic]) Also, politeness of adjectives is encoded by the copula, and not by polite verb endings: > o (is red [polite]) > x (is red [polite]) > o (is not red [polite]) > x (is not red [polite]) In fact, the only endings that adjectives can really have are tense, negation, and the conditional mood. > o (is red) > o (was red) > o (is not red) > o (was not red) > o (if it were red) > o (if it were red)

stackexchange-japanese

How is 〜んじゃない different from 〜じゃない? Is it possible to say If it is, how it differs from In what situation I should use / for it, and what does / express? Examples: > **[~ + ]** > **** > **** > **** > > **[~ + ]** > **** > **** > > **[verb(~/~) + ]** > **** > **** Is it all possible? In my opinion, the form expresses there is something implicit or implied. like a desire, or a sad comment, etc ; but saying it in a soft way. Also: * is the shorten form of . Can I say , then? > > > >

Yes, you can say . The / performs its usual function indicating that you are explaining some fact (see my answer to this previous question). here turns the sentence into a tag question (see Derek's answer to your previous question). > A: (I've already gotten five great answers to questions I asked on the Japanese.SE site!) > B: Here B uses to relate to A's statement, thus explaining why A is so happy. "Yes, it's convenient, isn't it [and that's why you are excited about it]!" > A: (I'm so hungry...) > B: Here B uses to explain B's own surprise at A's statement. "What? Didn't you just eat [and this is why I'm surprised that you're hungry so soon]?" As for , yes, you can use it. But is pretty blunt/masculine, so don't use it with your boss.

stackexchange-japanese

Is ～がる suffix limited to specific adjectives only? I noticed that there are some adjectives that have suffix to make them into verbs. Some examples from WWWJDIC: > > > > > > Apparently form also can take the suffix to become suffix: > Rikaichan popup explains the as: > to feel (on adj-stem to represent third party's apparent emotion); to behave as if one were So I thought that I could append this suffix to any adjectives to add those connotations. However, it seems that not all adjectives and have the suffix. WWWJDIC does not return any exact matches for the following words: > (to behave as if one were nice?) > (to feel that one wants to come? - Since exists so logically should exist too?) > (to behave as if one were sleepy?) My question is, as in the title, is suffix limited to specific adjectives only? How do we know which adjectives can have the suffix and which adjectives can't?

As explained by the Rikaichan popup you reference in your question, is a suffix for representing a third party's _apparent **emotion_**. As such, you cannot use it with or as these are not adjectives which describe emotions. As it was explained to me, you cannot generally _know_ another person's emotions or thoughts, and so when speaking of them, you use either (e.g. ) or (e.g. ). To some extent, this is true even in English -- "John seems sad today" seems more generally applicable than "John is sad today" (without John having said so himself). **To answer your question:** you use this for adjectives (including ) which represent emotional or psychological states. It's very difficult to provide an exhaustive list of such adjectives.

stackexchange-japanese

What do the question marks on these gas station signs mean? !Gas station signs > > > What meaning do the question marks have?

I traced the photo to this place in Okazaki (Aichi prefecture): !photo of the gas station On their web page, they claim to offer the cheapest gas based on a crowd-sourced survey of gas prices elsewhere in Japan. The numbers shown on the signs are based on these survey results: > Further down the page, it mentions that the prices are rounded up to the nearest whole yen, which is why there are question marks displayed instead of numbers: > As you can see, the price at the bottom of the sign is for 18 litres of kerosene (). This number has no decimal point, so the last digit hasn't been replaced. As Dave suspected, these question marks have very little to do with at any level. But I hope someone finds this useful and/or interesting :-)

stackexchange-japanese

Can we optionally include (or exclude) an を particle in between the noun of the する-verb and the する itself? When we have a verb (e.g. {}{}{}{}{}{}), is it true that we could optionally insert an particle in between the noun and the ? Because in the example sentences here and here, we can see this usage (the usage of particle appearing between the noun and the ). So basically am I right to say that for all verbs, we can optionally include (or exclude) an particle in between the noun and the ? If not, how exactly should we decide whether or not to include that ? I mean I know with a lot of usage we will _just know it_ , but are there any rules that we can apply here?

Here are the only two exceptions I can think of where you absolutely can't insert "": If the construction wasn't based on but like → If the construction is "merged" single character verbs like etc. However, it's uncommon to just add in in many cases - so the result may be awkward if it's without precedent. Basically, adding an adds emphasis on the noun the verb comes from, rather than the action that notes. Think of and as "to do preparations" vs. "to prepare" - either sound fine, but {}{} and T "to do(?) a kidnapping" vs. "to kidnap" It's not exactly like that, but I guess I'm trying to show how some cases like with it would sound awkward. Also something to note is that if you're adding a "" for instance with {}{}. You can't add another "". you would write it as - however this isn't a problem if you've omitted the . For instance with . Again, would be grammatically "correct" but would sound extremely "off".

stackexchange-japanese

Are there any common Japanese words which were borrowed from Ainu or other indigenous languages? I know plenty of Japanese words that came from English and a few from other European languages (obviously tons from Chinese), but what about words from Japan's indigenous languages such as Ainu? Also if there are any are they all written in kana like the newer borrowed words?

What I think common from them is ref:

stackexchange-japanese

Where does "もしもし" (moshimoshi) for answering the telephone come from? Does the term "" (moshimoshi) predate the telephone? Does it have any use besides answering the phone? Where does it come from, is it just a reduplication of "" (moshi) "if", and if so how does that work?

is used to call for someone’s attention. Although it is often used on the phone, the use is not limited to phone calls. is a repetition of , which is also used to call for an attention. is a variation of (), which was used in the same way in old time. definitely predates telephones, and I guess that both and for asking for an attention predate telephones, too. The use of in this meaning is archaic. Both and in this meaning sound a little old-fashioned to me except for the use of on the phone. Some people write on the web that is a contraction of (“I will speak, I will speak” in a humble and polite form), but I do not know how reliable this claim is. By the way, one of the most widely known uses of other than on the phone may be children’s song . The lyric starts with .

stackexchange-japanese

Using な particle after common nouns (non na-adjectives) Is particle allowed to be used after common nouns (i.e non na-adjectives) for whatever reasons, e.g. cuteness, trendy, humor etc? Dictionary@goo website seems to use (normal noun)+ in a couple of the column names: * JAPAN * Is this kind of ungrammatical usage of particle allowed in publication?

This may not be the "standard" way to use , but I don't see anything particularly wrong with it, especially considering how it can shorten titles and save space. JAPAN and sound better than JAPAN and , don't they? For a more extreme example of this non-standard , you can look at the way Yui Horie signs off of her weekly radio show, . This is from the June 26th, 2011 show: > **** Everything in the (which she changes every week) is wrapped up by the and used to modify . Of course, just because she uses this way doesn't mean you can start throwing s around like shurikens in a ninja fight, but it goes to show that there are more ways to use than are in the dictionary.

stackexchange-japanese

Other meanings of でしょう besides "probably" can usually be understood to mean "probably." But does it sometimes mean the same thing as ? What other meanings can it have? Can it mean "you know?"

Aside from the meaning of "probably", I've heard () used in the following manners: 1. In polite speech, can replace . sounds "softer" and a little less direct: > How about this color? > > **** How about this color? (slightly more polite) > > Do you suppose it's somewhat hard to follow? > > **** Do you suppose it's somewhat hard to follow? (slightly more polite) 2. and can be used like to form tag questions, primarily when the speaker knows something to be true and is using it to prove a point to or convince the listener of some fact. This use of often has a rising intonation: > **** So when you got back, your cell wasn't in your bag, right? > > **** I told you, didn't I? That I'd be going to Tokyo tomorrow. The question particle is omitted in this use. In my experience, you're more likely to find being used by men and by women here, but the split is not well defined, as both are fairly gender-neutral.

stackexchange-japanese

What are the meanings of ~とも [tomo] and ~かしら [kashira]? Sometimes I think: came from came from It's possible I'm wrong, so I would like to know the real meaning of those suffixes. Also, I'd like to know when I can use them without any problem (when talking about spoken language). Ex: * *

(in the sense you seem to be talking about) is a rather archaic sentence-final particle which is used for strongly asserting something that the listener may not be so sure about. That makes it similar to the far more colloquial particle , but it's somewhat stronger and more decisive than . , for instance, would usually come in the context where A asked B whether it's okay to do something, and B wants to firmly reassure A that it's okay. This has no relation whatsoever with , but rather comes from combining the particles and . , on the other hand, indeed comes from (), as Dave has already indicated.

stackexchange-japanese

Difference and nuance between することはない and する必要はない/する可能性はない I understand the grammar point "Verb (Dictionary Form) + " can mean either "There is no need" or "There is no possibility" depending on context. However, what are the differences? Are there any nuances which I should be aware of? Can they simply be interchanged in any circumstance? "There is no need" example: vs "There is no possibility" example: vs

When is used to mean “there is no need,” _I think_ that the nuance is that it is not only unnecessary but also should be avoided. on the surface just states that it is unnecessary. (I wrote “on the surface” because if someone _chooses_ to say that something is unnecessary, it is often because he/she actually thinks that something should not be done. But the phrase itself does not mean “should avoid.”) When is used to mean “there is no possibility,” I am not aware of any difference in meaning from . sounds a little more explanatory and argumentative than because of the use of the word which is semantically heavier than .

stackexchange-japanese

The reason for using 何も+negative, but 何でも+positive In one of the Japanese classes I attended, I've been taught that while we use to say "He cannot do anything", to say "He can do anything" we use instead of . Why is there a grammar rule that says is used before negative predicate while is used before positive predicate? Why do we need additional particle for the positive predicate? Is the rule still being followed, and are there any exceptions (something like exceptions to the +negative rule)?

Rather than memorizing edge cases like this one, I think the key here lies in understanding the difference between and in this context. In **positive** statements using **** , the grouping is explicit. In other words, when you say , , , and so on, it's clear through context or prior statements what "every" includes: > …× Piano, guitar, drums…he can play all of them well. > > ×DS All my friends have a DS. > > When I enter the store, she's always there. In **negative** statements using **** , you don't have to worry about qualifying the scope of the statement, so and are sufficient. With **** , however, the grouping can be left unstated: > Anyone can solve a simple problem like this. > > × With this I can read a book at any time. > > × My daughter isn't picky at all, and she'll eat anything.

stackexchange-japanese

天気 vs. 天候, what's the real difference? What's the real difference between and ? In at least one of my dictionaries, just redirects to . I've always thought (read: "felt") that is the general "concept" of weather, or even climate > - "the [type of] weather in the fall"; - "the climate of Hokkaido" whereas seems to be the actual tangible weather. > - "Tomorrow (the actual weather) will be rain"; - "weather (not climate) forecast" **EDIT** : After looking a bit more through the different definitions, it seems that **** is more closely related to "climate" than ****.

Daijisen's got you covered. The usage note under says that refers to the atmospheric conditions over a short period of time (two or three days at most), while is for describing those conditions over a period of several to several tens of days. And of course can be used in the sense of "good weather", which is a connotation does not have.

stackexchange-japanese

How do we tell if ばかり means "about" or "only"? If could mean **approximately; about;** and could also mean **only; merely; nothing but;** , then how should we know if this sentence **** means: > 1. I have about 5000 yen. > or > 2. I have only 5000 yen. >

1. after **an amount or a quantity** means 'approximately', 'about': > → I have **about** 5,000 yen. > > → I haven't seen him for about three years. 2. The sense of 'only', 'just' works **after a verb** : > → The train has just arrived here. or a **noun/pronoun** (not indicating a quantity): > ... → All he does is study Note that , etc. also exist and work differently. As @Scott just pointed out, in your example, you would use or (+negative) to mean "only".

stackexchange-japanese

Using Japanese honorifics with non-kana names Some Japanese websites have no problem addressing me as Amanda, but how common is this in human-produced Japanese? Under what circumstances would someone refer to someone else as Amanda, בועז, or Екатери́на instead of , , or ?

Non-Japanese names are usually written with Japanese letters in Japanese text, but it is not rare to see them written with the original letters, too. I do not think that use of honorifics is related to whether foreign names are spelled in kana letters or in the original script.

stackexchange-japanese

Colloquial Contraction Confusion This is taken from one of the mindless pop songs I shouldn't even be listening to: > I know what and mean, of course, but I can't figure out in a way that makes sense to me what the contracted forms after are. Any help?

In this case, I believe that is a reduction of , which combined with likely means roughly "no matter what I say/you say/etc."

stackexchange-japanese

About the な part in negative imperative verb form (e.g. 飲むな) In the Japanese version of "don't drink and drive" slogan, (also ), what part of speech is the that follows the plain verb (or in the second variation) to form the negative imperative verb form? At first I thought it was a conjugation, but a conjugation modifies the verb that it attaches to, whereas and are left unmodified before the . I am thinking maybe it is a special usage of the particle, but I don't discount the possibility that it is entirely a different species. Also, what of its origin? Did it come from abbreviation of longer clauses like (/) etc, or from something else?

It's the strongest, tersest form of negative. It always follows a plain form verb. I have no idea of the origin; it's pretty old though:) Regarding the origin, it goes back to at least the 8th century in this form: **** **** Source: <

stackexchange-japanese

what is the difference in the usage of [成]{な}るべく and できるだけ? Hi guys what is the difference in the usage of and ? Don't they both mean **as [x] as possible**? E.g.: 1) vs 2) vs

I think 's answer isn't that off the mark. If you take and word for word, they become: > become + must: something must become so-and-so > > is capable + amount: you do so-and-so as best as you can See how the subjects are different. just says that some state should be reached, while demands you to make maximum effort in achieving the goal. This difference isn't much noticeable when used in first person, because the speaker _is_ the one who needs to take action. However, under an imperative context, gets all the more demanding for requiring the other person's effort. So sounds softer and more appropriate when you're not in a position to demand effort from the listener. ![Diagram]( This is how I visualize these two adverbs. Again, the difference in nuance between the two is very subtle, and they're interchangeable most of the time, if not always.

stackexchange-japanese