Datasets:

donfu

/

oa-stackexchange

like 7

Help with adverbs with とする and としている Taking yadokari's sentence: > The part that I need help understanding is the relation of `` with `` and ``. Looking up the dictionary entry for ``, it is "an adverb taking the `` particle" **(Question 1)** Does the adverb modify ``? Or is `` treated as an adverb as a whole? **EDIT** : What is the difference between `1. ` and `2. `? **(Question 2)** Is `2.` the `~` construction of `1.`? And what is its significance when used with an adverb? English parsing would be greatly appreciated.

is the adverb. is the form of . > "vividly do" Of course, you need the that follows in order to translate it completely, as is given in your other question. **EDIT:** Yes. > > (v1,vi, **uk** ,aux-v) to be (of animate objects); to exist; to stay; (after the -te form of a verb) verb indicating continuing action or state (i.e. to be ..ing, to have been ..ing); (P) Same as without the adverb. Only with the adverb instead. > "be vividly doing"

stackexchange-japanese

Lyric in this song: 気の思い? There is an Indonesian song with titled "Aishiteru" which is fully in Indonesian language except for one line in Japanese (and a few "a a a aishiteru" lines). YouTube link The one line in Japanese starts at 2:38, which I transcribed below but I have difficulty in deciding the part with question marks: > > [ ??? ] > > At first I thought it was but dismissed it because it's grammatically wrong unless there is a particle there. So now I'm guessing that it's "ki no omoi", , but I have never seen that phrase before and I couldn't find it in dictionaries. What does the phrase mean? Could it be instead (also not found in dictionaries)? Here is the English translation of the stanza that follows after that one line, in case it would help set up the context: > Even though our bodies are far apart, > Our hearts are always near, > When you miss me just close your eyes, > And think of me. Any idea anyone?

It's , and the is just sung quickly.

stackexchange-japanese

"一目ぼれから長持ちする関係は望めません。" この表現のニュアンスを説明して頂けませんか？ > > > Falling in love at first sight won't bring you a lasting relationship. I found this sentence and translation without any other context, and have a few questions about the expressions used here. First off, after studying the sentence, I came up with two alternate translations: > You can't hope for a long-lasting relationship from falling in love at first sight. > > You cant expect a long-lasting relationship from falling in love at first sight. Which translation of do you think is more accurate (if accurate at all)? Secondly, if is a verb meaning "to be long-lasting" or "to be durable", is ever used by itself, perhaps as a noun?

As for your second question, []{} can mean the fact that something lasts long (). For example, the title of this page is []{} (the secret of taste and long life (of the food products)). also means a container with a lid to store cloths and other goods, usually made of wood. As for your first question, I still have trouble understanding the difference among the three English expressions in the question. My understanding is that their meanings are the same (although the meanings are different _on surface_ ), and I think that they are equally correct translations. Probably my understanding of English is insufficient for me to answer this part of your question.

stackexchange-japanese

What is な-particle doing in `ってなわけで`? I noticed that `` is commonly used as a substitute for `` in colloquial speeches, but what exactly is the purpose of the -particle in that phrase? Does it make the context that the phrase refers to adjective-ish, like suggested in this answer? Or is it actually the -particle that is similar in usage to the one in ``? How does the construction work though?

The crucial part you are asking is ``. As you suggest, it is a colloquial version of `` that introduces an appositive clause. They are probably interchangable. The noun is not limited to ``, but has to be able to take an appositive clause. > , , , , , , , , > , , , , , , , , Furthermore, `` is a colloquial version of `` that introduces a subordinate clause. > ... > ... It can also be a colloquial version of the topic particle ``. > > `` is probably related to the `` that introdoces a na-adjective in attributive position. But that does not explain why it is used together with ``. Somehow, `` is ungrammatical. Maybe you can just consider the whole `` as a fixed expression.

stackexchange-japanese

酔う vs 酔っ払う: does it depend on how drunk you are? {} and {}{} both seem to mean "to get drunk" but how are they different from each other? Does it depend on how drunk you are, and assuming is worse than , exactly how drunk would you need to be to cross from to ? Does the part has any meaning or purpose?

Daijirin defines as . This clarifies two differences between and : * As istrasci explained, is used only when one is drunk because of liquor, while is broader. * With , the degree of being drunk is high. With , it depends.

stackexchange-japanese

Does a list using と end with が? Asking this other question has reminded me of another confusion I often have, one of my long standing bad habits that you'd think I'd have sorted after all this time in Japan. I'm never quite sure how to end a list of two or more things. So, I want to say "I like apples and oranges." Saying it this way seems weird, because of having `` and `` together. It just feels weird in my mouth. > {} This next option also feels weird, though, because it's like saying, "apples and oranges and like". > {} Which is right? Or are both wrong? Does it make a difference if there's more than two items? > (){}

The most usual way is to attach to all alternatives except for the last one: > > (Unrelated note: “papaya” is usually rather than in Japanese.) Attaching to all alternatives including the last one is acceptable. > > I heard that in older days, was always attached to all alternatives, but I do not have anything to back up this claim. The following are ungrammatical. > >

stackexchange-japanese

寝る vs. 眠る, what's the real difference? What's the real, definite difference between []{} and []{}? I know they both mean " _sleep_ ", but also that each carries some additional (sometimes, figurative) meanings. Where do the meanings overlap? In what scenarios are they interchangeable?

> {} go to bed, be in bed. Does not imply you sleep, since you could be listening to the radio, watching TV… 11 > {} to sleep, not be awake. Physiological state.

stackexchange-japanese

Are the names of some food items written in katakana? Japanese for Busy People 1 (lesson 11) mentions when talking about []{kisu} (whiting) at a []{tempura-ya}: > NOTE: Names of fish, fruits and vegetables etc. are sometimes written in katakana. Does using katakana only apply when talking about the animal, as opposed to talking about the food? (For an English equivalent, people refer to the animal as "shark" but sometimes refer to the food as "flake") Assume that it's not gairaigo and therefore would be in katakana anyway.

Unscientific survey: I looked for recipes on Cookpad (cookpad.com). By my count: katakana: 13 hiragana: 8 In my experience in a cooking context when there aren't set rules (e.g. outside something like a newspaper which will presumably have some sort of style guide), individual usage varies. I can also confirm that the section of Yomiuri generally uses katakana in this situation, or sometimes the kanji if appropriate.

stackexchange-japanese

Can a noun + suru have an adjective modify the noun as well? ”I did some difficult studying last night." Could I say, "”? Basically, my question is: can an adjective, relative clause, or adjectival phrase modify a noun that has attached, for example or ? And does it make that word or phrase actually adverbial when applied like that?

(The combination sounds slightly off to me, but I put this aside for the purpose of this question.) You have to distinguish noun+ and noun+. * Noun+: Once you attach , what was originally a noun becomes a verb, and you cannot modify it with an adjective. * Noun+: Attaching does not change a noun to a verb, and you can still modify it with an adjective. For example, is ungrammatical (although this is not unheard of), whereas is grammatical.

stackexchange-japanese

How does a noun phrase translate into a verb? Ok. The whole sentence is: Person A bandages Person B's arm. Person B says: I get what the sentences are saying. But! For the life of me I can't parse into that makes any sense to me. All I can come up with is: "You do very accustomed treatments." Which I know barely makes any sense (grammatical or otherwise). Can someone please break this down for me?

`` can also mean "become skilled at", so it's more like "You've become quite skilled at this treatment. Were you a nurse or something?" More literally, it would be like "This is a treatment at which you've become quite skilled." There is a `` that's omitted before ``; if this wasn't obvious to you, that may be the reason you had trouble with it. So there's no " **do** " in it as you were thinking. It's an " **is** ".

stackexchange-japanese

How to type こんにちは (not こんにちわ) with windows Japanese keyboard Google spells as but when I type "konnnichiwa" I've got and if I do space I've got : ... maybe don't need to trust google here ? or there is some another way to write it

is always entered into an IME as "ha", even if it is romanized as "wa" due to use as a particle.

stackexchange-japanese

Making a sentence that ends in なかった polite What are the different ways to make a sentence that ends in polite?

Let's consider it in cases: * If the is attached to a verb, then the correct polite form is (with the appropriate stem, of course). * If the is attached to a noun or an adjective (both types), then the orthodox polite form is . However, it is also common to see for this. * If is being used as the main predicate, the polite form is . As above, is also common. For extra politeness, forms are used: e.g. instead of . Unlike , it is possible to use with i-adjectives, though the u-stem must be used, e.g. , not **. In the colloquial language, is sometimes attached to plain forms to make them polite without necessarily having the usual explanatory connotations. This is regarded as incorrect in formal contexts. Finally, I'll just note that is universally regarded as wrong.

stackexchange-japanese

Pronunciation of 家 In this sentence: > **** is pronounced as "kono yo" as opposed to "kono ie o". And this phrase > **** is pronounced as "kono ye" as opposed to "kono ie". So my question is, is this normal pronunciation for when Japanese people talk normally/colloquially? Note: sentence from Noir the anime, Episode 1.

I do not know the anime, but is never read as “yo,” and Japanese does not have “ye” sound at all. What you heard as “yo” is probably “ie o” and what you heard as “ye” is probably “ie,” both just spoken fast.

stackexchange-japanese

Taking Class, Course, Lecture - Which verb is fit? I would like to know how we say taking class or course or lecture in japanese. I have heard about and . Are there significant difference? And Is there any other verb we can use with?

Within relevant contexts, `` means 'to attend' whereas `` means 'to be registered for'. If you are unofficially attending a class, you should use the former. If you are officially registered but tend to be absent, you should use the latter. Formal ways of saying it are `` 'to be registered for', `` 'to be registered as a non-full time student for'.

stackexchange-japanese

What is the difference between がる and ぎみ? In one of my study flashcards, I have this sentence: > {}{} Which should translate to something like, "[He] appears worn out but [he's] still kicking." The main point is that in this instance, my understanding is that `` means "appears to," or, "looks like." This card just came up in the rotation, and I remembered seeing this question, where it is explained that `` also means something similar. So similar, that I'm wondering what exactly is the difference between `` and ``? Obviously one difference is that `` can be modified ("conjugated"?) like a verb (maybe it is a verb of some kind?) to become ``, and `` doesn't look like it can be modified in any way that I'm aware of. So there almost certainly a difference in grammatical usage. The definitions still seem to be pretty much the same though. Can someone explain if they have different implications in meaning, and in what situations one would apply and the other couldn't?

Honestly speaking, I do not find the suffixes and []{} anything similar to each other. This may mean that my explanation is not going to help you resolve your confusion, but anyway here is my attempt. The two suffixes have different grammatical roles and different meanings. is attached to the stem of an i-adjective or a word which conjugates like an i-adjective, and forms a verb. It adds the meaning “to act showing ….” * []{} (i-adjective; aching) → []{} (verb; to act showing an ache) (Progressive Waei Chu Jiten, New Century Waei Jiten) is attached to a noun or the form of a verb, and forms a noun. It adds the meaning “having the tendency of …” or “being slight ….” * []{} (verb; to be tired) → []{}[]{} (noun; slight feeling of tiredness) Example: []{} I am a little tired these days. * []{} (noun; a cold) → []{} (noun; slight feeling of a cold) Example: have a touch of a cold

stackexchange-japanese

壱, 弐, 参 vs 一, 二, 三 Can you tell me the difference between and , and , and ? Do these pairs have the same meaning? If yes, why do we use different Kanji? If no, what is the difference in their meanings? Can you give example usage in sentences for each of them?

The more complex ones are called daiji (``). Find out more here. <

stackexchange-japanese

いAdjective. difference between くて and く Is it > **** or > **** What's the difference between and ?

This construction is not limited to i-adjectives. You can have similar pairs with verbs. In general, you can continue a sequence of predicates with either * The stem of a verb/i-adjective, or > > * The -form. > > The stem form is the neutral way of connecting predicates. It just lists predicates. On the other hand, the -form is close to participles in English, adds additional meanings, and imposes the following restrictions: * The volitionality of the predicates connected must match. (Reminiscent of prohibition of dangling participles in English.) * The order in which the predicates are connected implies the temporal order. Reference: Kuno, Susumu (1973). _The Structure of the Japanese Language_ MIT Press.

stackexchange-japanese

のか - Particle "lamenting reflections on the preceding statement". What? I've come across this sentence in my manga. > It's actually fairly easy, but the particle at the end has confused me. I thought it was the two particles `` and ``, but then I saw this in a dictionary: > - Particle - endorsing and questioning the preceding statement (sentence ending particle); lamenting reflections on the preceding statement (sentence ending particle) That seems to fit, because it's at the end of the sentence, and he's commenting on what another character said to themselves. But beyond that, I have little idea of what this means. Is it actually a question particle similar to ? When would you use this instead?

This `` is called a formal noun, and has a very general meaning that can be translated to English as 'the case', 'the fact', or 'the situation', and it heads an appositive clause. It is the same `` used in the `` consruction. It typically implies that the appositive clause is an explanation to the previous context. It has pretty much similar implications that the English `the case that ...` implies. > ... **** > 'It is **the case** that ... .' > > ... **** ... > 'Things being **the case** that ... , ... .' > > ... **** > 'Is it **the case** that ... ?'

stackexchange-japanese

Clarification of hard to understand Japanese Mahjong rule This one probably needs a Japanese _and_ Mahjong expert to decipher: > This is the third rule about the basic game setup of (my version of) the official Japanese Mahjong Tournament rules. A _kyoku_ is one round, a _han_ is a type of multiplier used in scoring. So far so good, but I have no idea what this rule is trying to convey. There's no further context in the immediately preceding or following rules. Can somebody tell me what this means?

: your hand must be worth one han before you can declare a win. I think, is a reference to which is an additional two han given when calculating the score (two han is usual, at least). is just the stem form of , so it's laying out these two rules, which apply to every round.

stackexchange-japanese

Does the volitional form of a verb mean both "let's" and "I want to"? I was taught ages ago that the volitional form of a verb means "let's" do something. For example, if you take `{}` and change it to `{}`, you get "let's go". However, I feel like I can use the same form to express "I want to". For example: > {}{} ("[I'm] thinking maybe I'll go") Am I wrong that it can be used this way? If it's true that it can mean that, what is the difference between the sentence I have above and this one: > {}{} My understandng of the plain form is that it can be used to imply future tense, and if so, maybe it also implies intention. If so, then the two sentences mean the same thing, don't they? Perhaps I'm thinking too much in English, though, where "will go" can be both intention and future tense? So, my questions in summary are: Does `{}` mean "will go" as well as "let's go"? Can `{}` and `{}` both be used to mean future tense and/or intention?

Japanese has a clearer distinction between volitional-future and simple-future than English. "I think I will go" can be parsed in two ways, one involving volition, and one without. > (Volitional future) > > (Simple future) * * * "Will" being interpreted without volition when used in the first-person can be a little counter-intuitive. So here's one way I look at it: > "Tomorrow will be Saturday" \- Clearly no volition is involved. It is this sense of "will" that is used when talking about simple-future. This is easy to see since there is nothing that can exert volition. Now let's bring in something that can exert volition: > "Because I did not study, I will fail the test". > > > > O Although there is something that can exert volition, it is however still not volitional since the person is not intentionally exerting his will to fail the test. This is simple-future.

stackexchange-japanese

The difference between 皮膚【ひふ】 and 皮【かわ】 What's the difference? I got told that only works for mammals (and humans), and for other animals too.

{} is generally a formal word for skin, used in academics, clinics etc. (but also frequently in everyday speech). For example, some fishes do {} {}. So it's not really for mammals only. My layman definition is that it has to be on an animal, and doesn't include extra structures like hairs, feathers, scales etc. (but does include the smooth underlying tissue). {} is more colloquial and can refer to any organic, generally thin structure that can be peeled. For example, {}{}.

stackexchange-japanese

The difference between 超{こ}える, 越{こ}える and 過{す}ぎる {}, {} and {} are said to mean " _to pass through_ " in the "edict" dictionary, but I don't fully understand the difference between the three. How does their usage differ please? Can anyone provide any relevant examples? One example that I'd like to express, but don't quite know how to, is how to say " _to pass a peak of a mountain_ " or " _to pass a peak point on a graph_ ", but I'm not even sure these are the right words to do that.

`{}` implies the process of passing though. `{}` and `{}` mean 'exceed'. In this example: > × 20kg{}{}{}{}{} > 20kg{}{}{}{}{} the weight of a luggage is a static property, and a luggage does not grow, so `{}` cannot be used. In this example: > {}{}{} > {}{}{} `{}` is more appropriate than `{}` because there is no inherent notion of excess among locations (unless a context is set such as to provide the origin of measurement). Rather, the process of passing through is the intention of this expression.

stackexchange-japanese

Understanding て in 言葉{ことば}を失{な}くして 壁{かべ}は無関心{むかんしん} This is from a song lyrics ({}{} by AKB48) {} {}{} {}{} {}{} {} Does here indicate a command, as in "lose the talk"? Or, is it connected to the next phrase? Perhaps as a description of {}?

I'm going to try to parse the stanza: * {} - loneliness (establish context) * - any time * {}{} - price of freedom (dative/locative case?) * (A pause in the singing) * {}{} - to get rid of (the) word(s) (requesting) * {}- wall/barrier (establish context) * {}{}{} - indifferent * {} - no choice but to endure * * * There seems to be a lot of elision going on. I'm going to try to put it back together. * - loneliness is always in the price of (our) freedom * - please get rid of words* *(I'm guessing this in the sense of "actions speak louder than words" kind of meaning) * - the barrier is indifferent (to attempts at overcoming it) * - (we) have no choice but to endure

stackexchange-japanese

を vs が with use against 好き? The difference between and with the potential form of a verb. and Is it true that all nouns must be able to accept a particle and a particle? are noted as possible duplicates; however, I haven't seen an analogous structure. The examples I have seen use a verb on the right-hand side, rather than an adjectivial noun. Please compare two sentences: and Both are correct, right? Is `` emphasized in the sooner sentence and `` emphasized in the latter sentences? Or are these sentences completely the same? Or is there something else going on? Please, feel free to just explain the difference. Thank you.

In this case, `` is a na-adjective, and the situation is different from potential verbs, which optionally allow accusative case marker ``. In order to have a noun phrase marked as accusative case, there has to be a transitive verb. In the expression ``, there is no transitive verb that can assign accusative case, and so it is ungrammatical. > × > However, if the relevant part is embedded as a subordinate clause of a transitive verb, then you can use ``. In the example below, `` has the ability to assign accusative case, and since it does not have its own direct object, and hence has not used up this ability, it can assign accusative case to the object `` of the subordinate clause. > [] > []

stackexchange-japanese

In customer settings, is it ok to ask for keigo to be repeated in more "normal" Japanese? In the context of restaurants, convenience stores and similar situations, is it ok for a customer to ask for something that was said in keigo (or in manual keigo) to be repeated in more "normal" Japanese? Or would staff rather speak in English rather than non-keigo Japanese? Assume the customer is not asking because they want to be more intimate, but because the customer (an obviously non-native speaker) hasn't learnt Japanese in its entirety yet.

Sure, that's fine. You could say {}{}{} Although it's a bit funny when a beginner uses the word because it's a bit slangy. But I can't think of a better way of saying it. {}{} should work well too (and has no slangs).

stackexchange-japanese

らしい / っぽい / みたい question: Why 黒{くろ}っぽい車{くるま} and not 黒{くろ}みたいな車{くるま}? I'm using Nihongo So-Matome {} while preparing for JLPT N3, and having some issues with some of the grammar descriptions. This StackExchange answer was awesome in clearing up most of my / / questions: Contrasting However, this one remains - why is it OK to say: {} **{}** {} But not: {} **{}** {} Thanks.

Axioplase's answer to the question you linked expresses the nuance. * ``: '-ish'. Can be used for an attribute, or resemblance. > [attribute] > 'a blackish car' > > {}{}{} [resemblance] > 'a hearse-ish car' * ``: 'like'. Can be used for resemblance, but not for an attribute. > × [attribute] > 'a car that is like black' > > [resemblance] > 'a car that is like a hearse'

stackexchange-japanese

What is あっちゃう in this sentence? My friend sent me an email saying her mobile phone is having problems. Specifically, she said this: > {}{}{}5{} I get the overall meaning, which is that when she makes a call, the battery runs out of power after only 5 minutes. However I can't parse ``, specifically the `` part. What is going on here, and how is it different from `{}{}{}5{}`? _(Please no overly technical linguistic terms. Thanks!)_

As Flaw comments, this is a typo of `5`, which is a contracted form of `5` 'unfortunately, runs out in five minutes'.

stackexchange-japanese

What is ~なかって and how is it formed? Taken from alc.co.jp: > {}{}{}{}{}{}{}{} **** {} > > (I rang the doorbell because I couldn't find the house key, but you weren't home, so I was waiting for you all this time.) I've been trying to form the bolded portion but I can't find a way to derive it. These are the forms that I know, and none of them match the bolded portion above: > ~ > > ~ > > ~ > > ~ > > ~ I'm guessing that it comes from + (-form of ) + sound contraction. But I have no idea what it means and how it should be used. **(Question)** What does ~ mean and how should it be used? Where does it come from?

This is a typo of `` 'were not there, and'.

stackexchange-japanese

How do you avoid multiple が in a sentence I would like to ask on how to avoid multiple occurrences of the particle ga in a sentence. For example: {}{}0 What I meant in the sentence: `The Detail query does not contain the condition of "delete-flag equals 0".` Right now I would work around this by using equals symbol or change the verb like _fukumemasen_. {}{}0 or {}{}0{} Is the original sentence's grammar correct? If not, are my alternative sentences correct?

I'm a little confused because `0` means "there is no zero". Perhaps "delete-flag equals zero" should be `{}` or `{}{}` * * * I'm going to interpret your sentence as : `The Detail query does not contain the condition of "delete-flag equals 0"` > Nouns: `Detail query`, `(the condition of) delete-flag equals 0` (Not really a noun phrase unless interpreted as a condition) > > Verb: `contain` > > Negatives: (negates existence of "condition of delete-flag equals 0") The sentence should be of the forms: > [Detail Query][Condition of delete-flag equals zero][not contain] > > `{} {}{}{}` **``**`{}` \- Condition of delete-flag equals zero is not included in the detail query. > > `{} {}{}{}` **``**`` \- Condition of delete-flag equals zero is not present with respect to the detail query. Alternatively, I think you can use the `~` construct. i.e `{}{}`. Using this will turn the sentence into `... does not contain "delete-flag equals zero"` (instead of `condition of ~`)

stackexchange-japanese

What's the word to use for "confidential", as in a company report? I'm preparing a sales presentation; it contains some company data and I want to indicate that the entire presentation is confidential. In English, this would likely be accomplished by stamping the corner with "confidential". What's the best word to use in Japanese for a similar meaning? I've seen this somewhere in my old company, but I forgot... here are the candidates I know of, but the one I think I've seen before isn't there, I'm having trouble finding something where I say "aha that's it". * () -- more used as in "private", like a small secret between a few people * ( -- "secret", but not sure if this is the appropriate word * (-- don't understand how this is different than * () -- you see this on envelopes of letters, but that's about it

There is a special symbol printed/stamped on secret documents, which is in red color with the character `` circled. They look like this. Because of this symbol, secrets are usually abbreviated as `{}`. Some Japanese font encodings even have this as one of their characters. For corporate documents, I think the most orthodox word is `{}{}{}` 'to be kept secret from company outsiders', for which stamps also exist.

stackexchange-japanese

What kind of conjugation is 済{す}ませた? This is from the anime Noir, Episode 1 starting at 23:13 at the school: > [The two characters A and B are leaving the country.] > A: {}{}{} > 'I've made the arrangements to leave the country.' > B: My question is about the conjugation of ``. I would have expected to hear: `()`. I can't figure out what kind of conjugation that is. It looks like the potential form with `iru`, but I've never seen a past potential form. Plus, 'can finished' or 'can have finished' is much different than 'have finished'. So again, what kind of conjugation is ``? How is it formed?

It is simply the form of , which basically means the same as . Quoted from : > > And : > >

stackexchange-japanese

How is たら used as a particle? The other day I came across and while looking it up I noticed that is classified as a particle. is apparently an abbreviation of , so I see that it should work for and (by the way, what are these called?), but I'm having a hard time imagining how else it is used.

and replace verbs here. - is a particle that attaches only to verbs and i adjectives. It means something like "do this, do that".

stackexchange-japanese

Who is the subject of Aにはaction? Here's an example. Who was scared, the speaker, or the maid?

This is context-dependent. It _could_ be the speaker that was frightened, but it could just as easily be the most recent subject (e.g. person) being discussed prior to this sentence. Without more context, it's really impossible to say for certain. In any case, though, _someone_ or _something_ was frightened _by_ the maid.

stackexchange-japanese

Repeating the vowel sound of the mora that precedes gemination in songs I noticed that in songs, the vowel sounds of the morae that come before geminations are sometimes repeated. For example, the first lyric line of “” is sung as `` where the line is actually ``. Another example: in the second lyric line of “”, the final `` sounds like ``. Also, at the beginning of the song “Gem Stone”, the repeated `` is pronounced as ``. My questions are: 1. Is this way of pronouncing gemination limited to songs, or are there instances where it's used elsewhere? 2. It seems to be limited to songs with children or children-like voices, so is it by chance the way Japanese children initially pronounce gemination?

It is common in songs, and it is not specific to children’s songs. In the first case, the pitch of the lyric line is probably something like: > (G) (G) (G) (G) (G) (F#) (G) (E) (F#) (D) but if you try to sing this as it is, there is a problem: gemination is not a sound but just a pause, and you cannot sing it with any pitch. Therefore, the vowel preceding the gemination is prolonged to fill the first part of the mora which should filled by the gemination: > (G) (G) (G) (G) (G) (F#) (G) (E) (F#) (D) I did not check the other two videos, but I guess that they arose for the same reason.

stackexchange-japanese

How to express: I am going to Japan to study? This is an exercise from Genki 1, Chapter 12. Now the way I would word that sentence is: {}{}{}{} However, I put that same [English] phrase in Google Translate and got this: []{} So now I'm not sure which translation is correct. Since the exercise didn't specify, we'll assume that the person is studying the Japanese Language. So which one is correct? My translation or Google's translation?

I am going to Japan to study: I am going to Japan to study the Japanese language: []{} I **intend** to study in Japan: **** ( has the added meaning of "overseas study")

stackexchange-japanese

Does 被【かぶ】る have any relation to "cover"? Topic. I've heard/seen somewhere that `` was "gairaigo-fied" (?) from the English word "cover" (similar to `` or ``), and then presumably given ateji from `` since the meanings overlap so much. I searched several dictionaries for some sort of verification but have found nothing so far. Is there any truth to this?

As Tsuyoshi says, there is no truth to it. The earliest reference given in the []{}[]{}[]{}[]{}[]{}[]{}[]{} is from the mid-13th century []{}[]{}[]{}[]{} edition of the [[]{}[]{}[]{}[]{}[]{}]( > Even English barely had the word cover at that point. Also, according to the same dictionary, `` is derived from ``, which is even older--It's in the Man'yōshū (9C): > []{}[]{}[]{}[]{}[]{} / []{}[]{}[]{} []{}[]{}[]{}[]{} / ...

stackexchange-japanese

How does 話{はなし}が噛{か}み合{あ}わない work? I saw this phrase discussed on esaura.cc > > 'There's a gap in their conversation.' > 'They can't meet on common ground.' > 'They have been at odds with each other.' > 'They have not been on the same page.' Is this the same `` as in `[]{}[]{}` 'to bite (at), to snap at, to snarl at' or `{}` 'to bite, to chew, to gnaw'? If so, or if not so, would anyone care to explain or expand on the metaphoric implications of the original sentence (on the assumption that it uses a metaphor)? Here is the original page: <

A definition from Jim Breen's EDICT: > > (v5u,vi) to gear (engage) with; to be in gear (mesh); to bite each other Gears have teeth, so it could be said that they "bite" into each other. ![gears](

stackexchange-japanese

How to say, "try to __", "have to __" For some reason I can't remember how to say "try to **_" or "have to (must) _** " in Japanese. How can I say this? Any variations you can include would be appreciated.

Try to ~ > ~ (Does not give any information whether the action was actually carried out in entirety) > > ~ (Try for the sake of seeing the result, does **not** have negative implication as in "to try (unsuccessfully )" ) * * * have to(must) ~ > ~ > > ~ > > ~ > > ~ ~ is often contracted to ~ ~ can also be contracted and have elided to form "~" or "~" which is used informally.

stackexchange-japanese

What does 意外と mean? I heard the expression `[]{}[]{}` in a video. I know that `` expresses something you didn't expect: > > It's delicous! (and I didn't expect that) Why did I hear `` instead of ``? Is that a specific dialect? Or, is it standard Japanese?

“” is “[]{}[]{}” (unexpectedly good). is a less traditional synonym for (unexpectedly), the latter being the (continuative form) of the na-adjective .

stackexchange-japanese

Why is 領土{りょうど} more suitable than 領域{りょういき} in this JLPT practise question? In my JLPT practise book, there is this question: > {}{}{}____{}{} Which I roughly translate as, "The kingdom lost a part of its ___ _ in the battle." The possible answers to fill the space are: > A {} (territory) > > B {} (territory) > > C {} (occupation) > > D {} (receipt) Both A and B are defined as "territory" and a lot of other overlapping words. So, going by the kanji, I figured `{}` was more to do with the physical land, and `{}` was more to do with the dominion. So my answer was **A**. The book, though, says the correct answer is **B**. As is usually the case with JLPT questions, both _could_ work, but what makes `{}` the more appropriate answer in this case?

A non-academic, franc distinction is that "" means 'area' without particular connotation of possession. It is normally used in mathematics like "C" 'give the area surrounded by the closed curve C'. "" specifically means 'territory land of a country' and has clear mentioning of possession. In this case it is the best answer.

stackexchange-japanese

What does なんたらという mean? What does mean? I searched 's meaning and it showed. The following * oojah * oojahkapiv * oojamaflip * oojar * oojiboo I used eow.alc.co.jp to search. < What do this mean? Is this a japanese only word?

I suspect this is a type of metasyntactic variable, a word which stands in for an unknown word. I don't know why those examples were chosen, but more common metasyntactic variables in my idiolect are 'whatchamacallit', 'doodad', 'thingummy' etc.

stackexchange-japanese

What does "jukai" mean? Does anyone know what "jukai" means? Does it exist in the Japanese language? Some said it means 'birth or emergence'. Some said it is not "jukai" but maybe "jetai" 'fertilization, conception (breeding)'.

I only find 3 occurrences of `` in my (none of them dealing with birth): * → accepting/receiving Buddhist precepts * → giving/conferring Buddhist precepts to followers * → a "sea of trees"; "broad expanse of dense woodland" `Jetai` is not a Japanese word.

stackexchange-japanese

"Should" in Japanese The word "should" in English has these uses when not used as a question: 1. To express the expectation of the speaker (Probabilistic reasoning). * The train should arrive in 10 minutes. 2. To express a condition * Should it rain, the event will be cancelled. 3. To express obligation or the duty of ~. * I should go home. * You should study hard for the exam. 4. To indicate an ideal state perceived by the speaker. * Everyone should have equal rights. From my understanding, I use `~` for 1., `~`(or other conditionals) for 2., and `~` for 3. . **(Question)** What can I use for 4.?

2 could also use `` to be a little more formal (`...`). 3 can also use `` as another option to `` (``). 4 lacks a little context. While most of the time it will be perceived as subjective (i.e., "(It's my opinion that) Everyone should have equal rights," it could also be objective in a few circumstances. For example, "A new law passed. Therefore, everyone should have equal rights (now)," or something similar. Each case would use something different, and I'm thinking `` again if it's subjective and `` if it's objective. I'd also add a #5 to your list: subjective recommendation, for which you could use `` (and, I believe, also `` or ``). > ≪≫ → You seem sick. You should stay home from school today.

stackexchange-japanese

Meaning of -化 in context I don't understand what the `-` suffix in the following sentence means for a word like ``, or why fearing it can lead to early retirement. Can anyone shine some light? > 52...

Let's examine and some compound words it forms: > * (suffix) - action of making something > > * - worsen, deteriorate. Lit: to make worse > Corresponding noun (without ) : deterioration > > * - unify, integrate. Lit: to make into one body > Corresponding nouns: unification, integration > > * - generalise. Lit: to make general/ordinary > Corresponding nouns: generalisation, popularisation > > Now for , the literal meaning would roughly be "to make charismatic", and its corresponding noun would be as glacier puts it "charismatification". Not a real word but it's supposed to mean "the process of being made charismatic". For the translation of the whole excerpt I think glacier has done a pretty good job in the question comment.

stackexchange-japanese

Usage of 忘れる, 忘れた, 忘れている, 忘れていた Consider this sentence: > [fill in the blank] The answer given by the workbook is ``. Choices are: 1. (forget) 2. (forgot) 3. (continued state of forgetting) 4. (had forgotten, currently may or may not be forgotten) My thought process: Choice 1 is ruled out because it is present/future tense, but the question describes something in the past. Choice 3 cannot make sense to me. If one is able to talk about something that one forgets, the person is currently not forgetting it. (I do not see how this can make sense in the first person) (Unless it's a dynamic state of memory where the person keeps forgetting and recalling bits and pieces?) Choice 4 was my choice. I don't understand why 2 is correct while 4 is not. I thought 4 to be correct because he had forgotten about the issue, but is currently remembering it while making the statement. **(Question)** Why is choice 2 correct and 4 wrong? And under what circumstances do we use 3 ?

I am pretty sure that wherever you had this question, there was a context because any of these four can be correct depending on the context. If it was asked without context, I will have to say that your source is not reliable for studying Japanese. > 1. > > 2. > > 3. > > 4. > > ``'s inner event is done at an instance. So the use of `` form for this verb means that the completed state sustains. Together with tense, it can mean four things: * 1). Non-past non-perfective: 'the instantanious event of forgetting happens in non-past' * 2). Past non-perfective: 'the instantanious event of forgetting happened in past' * 3). Non-past perfective: 'the state of having forgotten has sustained up till now' * 4). Past perfective: 'the state of having forgotten has sustained up till past'

stackexchange-japanese

When a number is written in western numerals, how do you say them? Someone has said this in my manga. > Does he actually say "two" or ""? If the latter, why not use ? I don't see as being any different.

“2” is just another notation for “,” and is read as , although some people consider the notation “2” as incorrect.

stackexchange-japanese

This instance of のに is opposite from my expectations I have this sentence in one of my JLPT practise books: > {}{}{}{} **** {} I thought `` meant something like "in spite of". So, to me, this sentence seems to be saying that a microwave oven is convenient (or a "precious treasure") _in spite_ of the fact that it warms cold food. ... but, isn't that exactly what a microwave oven is supposed to do? Shouldn't the sentence be something more like: > {}{}{}{} **** {} Is this a typo, or is `` used in another way that make sense here?

can have several meanings, "despite" being the most common one. But it can also mean "in order to" (~. Here are some examples (taken from here): > > A passport is necessary to travel abroad. > > > A microwave is handy to heat up cold food.

stackexchange-japanese

Can I always use 色々な or do I have to use 色々の sometimes? On the web I can find many occurrences of both and . seems to be used more often though. Can I always use and get away with it, or is the only choice in some particular cases? If yes, which cases?

This is where the status of a word is murky. It is unsettled between a na-adjective and a noun. However, probably most of the cases where you found "" come from some old people. It has an archaic flavour. In addition, "" does not take any other case markers in present-day oridinary conversation like: "" or ""; it should not allow genitive "" as well (but according to the link Tsuyosi Ito provided, there are cases where it may be used). You can always use "", and get away with "". **Addition** : Tsuyoshi Ito's link below reminded me of another similar example: "" vs. "". The contrast between them can be considered the same as above.

stackexchange-japanese

What does あらいだす mean? What does mean? I have been hearing it from my colleague and based on his explanation it means to identify. For example identify the problem. I tried to search the net and it only results to "Washout" {}. Does anyone know what this mean? if it really is identify.

According to jisho.org means "to reveal by investigation". Hope this helps.

stackexchange-japanese

does 「なう」have effeminate connotations? I often get text messages from people who use the twitter-derived slang to mean "now." As in meaning "(I am on the) train now." However, these mainly come from women, and one gay dude. Is that just a coincidence, or does using this term actually have some feminine/effeminate connotation, like appending for emphasis (e.g. )?

No. It does not have any feminine connotations.

stackexchange-japanese

Is 「やってもた」 the same as 「やってしまった」? What is the grammatical rule behind this? I have recently seen used in a Japanese conversation, I don't remember the context exactly, but it was something like > After asking my Japanese friend, it turns out to be some kind of Osaka-ben expression used instead of , where the stands for . My friend couldn't give me another use of this so I'm here asking two questions: 1. Is my explanation of accurate? 2. Can we extract from this example a generic grammatical rule that can be applied to most situation? I seek to learn Osaka-ben and I'm trying to replace my old habits, so I would be very grateful if you can provide some external resources about this or at least mention your sources.

1) It is "" or "". 2) The form "" or "" are shortened forms of "". The (auxiliary) verb "" has a stem ending with the glide "w": "simaw-", and underwent different developments in Kansai and Kantoo regarding inflection. In Kantoo, the "w" was interpreted as a consonant, and was used to trigger gemination (a.k.a. []{}[]{}[]{}) in past tense: > simaw-ta → simatta On the other hand, in Kansai, the "w" (back glide) was turned into "u" (high back vowel), and then underwent further change of vowels (k.a. ): > simaw-ta → simauta → simouta If you are expecting external materials on these sound changes, you may want to study about and .

stackexchange-japanese

What's the difference between 「うまく」, 「上手に」 and 「よく」? What's the difference between , and , all seemingly meaning "well" in English? Someone said that I should use rather than in the following sentence. Can anyone explain why? > ~~~~ **** I'd really like to know the difference between the 3 words, or maybe just some examples of where one is more suitable than another if possible. **Edit:** Doing some digging through many e-mails, it turns out it wasn't vs at all as in the original question, but I think the other person clearly preferred over : > ~~~~ ****

> What's the difference between , and , all seemingly meaning "well" in English? Quite roughly: means "skilfully." You don't skilfully understand a sentence, so that's why you don't say *``. is quite informal in meaning "well" with a "skilfully" nuance. You use it for qualifying how you threw that bowling ball to do a strike, or how your sister sang at the karaoke. is a formal or neutral way to say "well" as in "properly."

stackexchange-japanese

How do the two ideas in this sentence come together? I have this sentence as part of a question in my JLPT practise book: > {}{}{}{}{}{}{} Part of the sentence means, "the pickpocket group steals money from the passengers from the signal given by the boss," and part of the sentence means "being face to face is scary." I presume it's the boss's eyes that are scary, but I can't make this sentence come together. What would be the best translation for this sentence? What is the underlying structure that binds it together?

The sentence has the following structure X Which translates literally as I saw X and I was scared. The X in your example sentence is what is called a noun phrase. The sentence translates as I saw how a group of pickpockets stole money from a passenger at the sign of their boss and I was scared.

stackexchange-japanese

Is this sentence making a comparison? This sentence comes from my JLPT practise book: > {} **{}** {} **{}** {}{}{} I think it's basically saying: > Things like religions and supersitions are hard to define accurately. However, I get a sense that there is a comparison being made. Is the sentence simply saying that religions and superstitions are _both_ hard to define, or that it is hard to define religions and superstitions as different _from each other_?

The sentence just says, []{} (what a religion is) and []{} (what a superstition is) are difficult to define precisely. It does not say anything about their relationship. (It does not say “things like,” either.) _Edit_ : I added readings to in this answer. See also ento’s comment on the question, which actually pinned downs the source of your confusion.

stackexchange-japanese

Does には in this sentence imply vagueness of the source? This comes from a friend's post on Facebook. The situation is that my friend had injured his leg a while back, but it has since healed and he's now in for a checkup. His leg is in great condition, so the doctor thinks he's ready for sports. > {}{}{} Which I think essentially means, "My doctor said [to me] I should go play futsal! (lit: play and come back)" However, I thought `` essentially meant "in the [place]". So, since my friend is not just using ``, is he saying this was said by someone, maybe the doctor, maybe a nurse or someone, in the vicinity of the doctor? Maybe in the office? Or am I over thinking this?

No this is there because the verb is in passive form and it means "by". The sentence literally means "I was told by the doctor to come play futsal already." The following sentence is equivalent: The doctor said "Go play futsal already." The comes whenever there is passive. For example "I was told by you" is * __ * The in your sentence is the normal used for emphasis. Hope this helps.

stackexchange-japanese

How is 名 pronounced in computer terms? For usernames, etc., you usually see like `` or something similar. Or like on my Skype, it says `Skype`. How is the pronounced in these situations? I've never been able to conclusively find this anywhere. My instinct tells me it's `` because these seem like compounds nouns (like ``, etc.) that use kun-yomi.

It is read as . “” is read as , “Skype ” is . I do not know the reason for that, but if I make a guess, this may be because gairaigo in a compound word is treated in a similar way to Sino-Japanese words.

stackexchange-japanese

Who is doing the thinking? Observe the change: > " **I think** that she will not go" > > " **She thinks** that she will not go" `` and `` are conserved in the sentence, yet the person who is doing the thinking is different. **(Question 1)** Is the use of the negative volitional form the direct cause of the change? **(Question 2)** How do I make specific the person who is doing the thinking in each case? I.e. How do I express "I think that she will not go" using and "She thinks that she will not go" using ?

> (Question 2) How do I make specific the person who is doing the thinking in each case? I.e. How do I express "I think that she will not go" using and "She thinks that she will not go" using ? () and

stackexchange-japanese

Is there a difference between に伴う and を伴う? In a report I handed in earlier this week, my professor corrected my sentence to > **** from **** . Is there a practical difference between the two? ALC shows a bunch of examples with essentially identical usage. Here's the definition from > 1. > > 2. > > It seems like and are being used interchangeably. Is there a rule of thumb for when to use which?

Their nuances are different, and you need to decide each time which is appropriate. When is used: * > You are the main person, and your secretary is accompanying you. * > The main event is surgery, and some danger comes with the surgery. When is used: * > Dad is the main person, and you are accompanying him. * > The main (first) event is population growth, then housing problem comes after that. With or , "something happens with the passage of time", so time comes first, then something happens, therefore is appropriate. See also Tsuyoshi Ito's comment.

stackexchange-japanese

How close are なりつつある and なっている? > > > "Is learning languages becoming a part of my new daily routine?" here seems similar to ... are they often interchangeable? Would I be able to change them back and forth without changing the meaning of this sentence much? This is my first contact with this suffix so if anyone has warnings about its usages or beginner's mistakes, please feel free to espouse. wwwjdic defines as :to be doing; to be in the process of doing <

They are not interchangable. * ``: in the process of becoming * ``: have (already) become

stackexchange-japanese

Is the 強い with a ロ instead of ム on top a valid kanji in Japanese? I don't know how to intentionally write the kanji that way, but on my ubuntu system sometimes gets rendered that way. What I'd like to know first if it's incorrect or if it's some rare but still valid way to write it. I went through all the kanji in my jisho that featured but none of them matched the weird tsuyoi. Secondly I'd be interested in if anyone had any explanation for why it's rendered like this? My personal guess is that it has something to do with the fonts or something.

The kanji with () and the kanji with () are two forms of the same kanji. In Japanese, the two forms were used interchangeably before the kanji reform in 1946. After the 1946 kanji reform, the form with is the standard form of the kanji and the form with is used only in limited circumstances such as family names. I think that the simplified Chinese uses the form with rather than the form with . > What I'd like to know first [is] if it's incorrect or if it's some rare but still valid way to write it. Whether it is “valid” or “incorrect” depends on your stance, but it is a nonstandard form according to the current standard of kanji characters in Japanese. > Secondly I'd be interested in if anyone had any explanation for why it's rendered like this? “How to set up a computer to use Japanese” is off topic on this website. I suspect that you are using a Chinese font, and I am not sure.

stackexchange-japanese

What do you say when giving something to somebody? In English when you hold out something to someone, sometimes a vocal prompt like "here" or "there" is said to indicate that you are giving it to the person. In Chinese (or at least in Singapore) we sometimes use something that sounds like "na" or even use the Chinese word "(gěi)" as an expression while holding out something towards the recipient. EDIT: Perhaps I should have been more specific about what I'm referring to. I'm not referring to giving "gifts", but just giving in general. Something like just passing a note to somebody or when someone looks in need of a tissue and you just hold it out to them. **(Question)** What's the equivalent of this concept in Japanese? I ask because I think it feels quite awkward to either remain silent, or to form a complete sentence asking the person to receive it especially if you are familiar with the person.

`` `` `` `…` `…`

stackexchange-japanese

What is the difference between いえ and うち? I am trying to understand the difference between using and . I originally drew the conclusion that is used for your own house and for others' houses, but my Japanese teacher said that this is not always true (but did not explain how to use each...). What is the correct usage of and ? What difference is implied by using one instead of the other?

It is similar to "house" vs. "home". You can say "be at home" but not "be at house". The differences are: * : physical house vs. : includes the environment, family, returning place, as well as a physical house * : neutral about the owner of the house vs. : the speaker's own home by default. Your conclusion is right, but I guess what your teacher means is that, sometimes, you can say things from the second or third person's perspective, and that makes it possible for the first person to say "" to refer to a non-first person's home. For example, "" means "go home". And this means "one's own home", but the speaker can say this standing on the point of the view of the second person, meaning the second person's home.

stackexchange-japanese

Use of に and を with 触れる The verb `` challenges my concept of what does; to mark a direct object. Consider these uses of : > **** (Touch a finger to someone's cheek) > > **** (Touch someone's cheek with your hand) Now, if transitivity of the verb were not taken into account, I would guess that it's the finger or hand that is being touched since they are marked by the direct object marker ``. But because I know that `` is intransitive, I understand that the object is marked by `` instead. **(Question)** What is the role of `` when used in the above type of pattern? Should the particle be `` instead since ``/`` are the "means" by which the action was carried out?

My daijirin lists both an intransitive and transitive form of the verb . I suspect this is just a mismatch between the Japanese verb and it's closest English equivalent. The verb is something more like 'move-to-be-in-contact-with', so the direct object is the part of the body you're moving.

stackexchange-japanese

What Japanese lullabys are available to provide early Japanese exposure to children? I'd like to expose my young children to the sounds of Japanese at night as they go to sleep. Specifically, I'd like to play Japanese lullabies or other soothing music with vocals. Where do I find such music?

I know a children's song, (The Frog's Song, The Frog Song) I'm not sure if you'd classify it as a lullaby, but it has a simple melody and can even be sung in a round (I think of it as the Japanese "Row, Row, Row your Boat") Here's a link: Frog Song Note: There seems to be a regional difference where the line "Gero gero gero gero" is replaced with "Kiki kiki kiki kiki". Enjoy!

stackexchange-japanese

Earnest and serious: when should each be used? I've noticed there's a lot of overlap between the following words meaning "earnest" or "serious" when talking about a person: * * {} * {} * {} * {}: (This word really means "sane" I believe, but I'm including it as I think can translate to "are you serious?") * {}: (I'm not sure whether this word meaning "honest" belongs here I but keep wondering what it's relationship to {} is when it means "obedient". I thought there might be some overlap in it's usage, e.g. "obedient face" and "serious face". It could well be unrelated though.) Would I be allowed to ask what the differences between these words are and when they're used?

* `` colloquial and contracted form of ``. * `` 'diligent, serious' * `` 'serious, under one's best' implies some tension * `` 'one's best, mean it' * `` 'has not lost conscious (due to alchohol, drug, fainting, or extreme situation, etc.)' * `` 'obedient, open minded'

stackexchange-japanese

Usage of the word 心配 Sorry if this is really simple and I'm overlooking the obvious, but I'm not sure how the following sentence should be translated as I've noticed on previous occasions that the word {} might be used in a vague or ambiguous way: > {}{}{}{} I can think of three possibilities: * There are earthquakes occurring in many countries, so there are also concerns that one will occur in Australia. * There are earthquakes occurring in many countries, so Australia is also concerned that one will occur. * There are earthquakes occurring in many countries, so I'm concerned that one will also occur in Australia. Also, when should by itself be used instead of etc, as I think both phrases can be translated to "(I'm) worried" and "(I'm) concerned" in English?

just means “I am worried also about Australia,” and it does not specify what exactly the speaker is worried about. In your example, it is clear from the first half of the sentence that the speaker is worried about the possibility of earthquakes (and more precisely, probably the damage which earthquakes may cause) also in Australia. is a na-adjective meaning “worrying.” From Daijirin with my translation into English: > I am worried about the result of the exams. You cannot replace with , because the subject of is a person who is worried. > × The result of the exams is worried (about something). It is ok to use : > I am worried about the result of the exams. although it is less natural than the example in the dictionary.

stackexchange-japanese

Pronunciation of 対応済 Is the pronunciation of `` `` or `` ? Context: Software Example:

It is . More generally, the suffix or is read as . This is an example of rendaku.

stackexchange-japanese

Emphasis instead of negation in 「そんなバカなことはありません」 In this quote by Akihiro Miwa, isn't used the way I'd expect it to be: > {}[]{} > It's (extremely?) foolish to treat people who don't make an effort equally. I think is used for emphasis here, but is using negation in this way common and how does "there aren't those kind of foolish things" become "extremely foolish"?

`` has two interpretations in arbitrary context. > 1. Literally meaning "those foolish things" are not existent. > > 2. It means that those things set a new precedent for foolishness. That is to say that it was unprecedented, or exaggerated to appear unprecedented. So one way to understand it would be to take it as "extremely foolish". > >

stackexchange-japanese

Why is konnichiwa spelt こんにちは? Why is used at the end of ? Is the last letter the particle , or is there a different explanation? Which is correct: or ? mentions konnichiwa, but the question is interpreted more as "When should I use and when should I use ?"

According to gogen-allguide, `` originated from the `{}` ("today") in `{}{}` ("how are you today") and similar expressions.

stackexchange-japanese

い-Adjective Conjugation: かったです vs でした When we first studied adjective conjugation in my Japanese class, I kept making the same mistake habitually; I would conjugate the past tense of -adjectives with at the end instead of dropping the and adding . My teacher would correct me, and now I've more or less started doing , but I still wonder about how "wrong" adjective- is. > > > ×? Is the second sentence straight out wrong and/or extremely unnatural-sounding? Would anybody in Japan conjugate adjectives like this? Or does it possibly introduce a _slightly_ different meaning?

`` to me sounds strange. If you search Google for ``, you get about 10 results, many of them written by foreign speakers. `` however gets far more results. I wouldn't right out say that it's wrong to use `` as you can find many instances of it when you search for it. However, I think it's overwhelmingly used by females when you look through the results. It's just a speculation of mine, but it may sound slightly "cuter" or "younger" to use `` as in `――` and similar examples. That said, I think people learning Japanese should use `` rather than ``. **Disclaimer:** I'm not a native speaker, just my thoughts.

stackexchange-japanese

伸{の}びる versus 延{の}びる in a JLPT question In my JLPT workbook, it gives these examples to explain the difference between `{}` and `{}`: > {}[]{}[]{}{} > > {}30{}{} They both mean "stretch", more or less, so I assumed the difference was that `{}` was more about time and space, and `{}` is more about distance and length. However, take a look at this practise question: > {}{}{}{}{}____________ > > **A** {} **B** {} **C** {} **D** {} I chose, **D** , because it was about length. According to the book, though, the answer is **C**. How can I make sense of this answer in light of the example sentences?

Using the Microsoft IME as a guide, generally seems to be used as "extend" and as "grow": **:** * Extend a conversation * Extend a schedule * Extend life span * Extend a subway into the suburbs **:** * Plants/people grow * Expand investigations (in relation to the law etc) * Grow one's knowledge * Grow a market/earnings

stackexchange-japanese

たたく versus ぶつ in a JLPT question In my JLPT practise book, there is a section demonstrating the difference between ``, ``, `{}`, and ``. If I understand them, they are all variants of "hit", with subtle nuances to differentiate them. I have this example explaining the use of ``: > {}{}{} And then I have this question: > {}{}{}{}_ ** ___ __**_{} > > **A** **B** **C** {} **D** I chose **A** , which means I fell unto the usual JLPT trap where they deliberately mislead with similar contexts. D'oh! Still, in any case, I can't see why **B** is a better answer. In fact, the subtleties of difference make me unsure why any of them are not appropriate. What makes **B** the right answer, and the rest wrong?

* **** : > Means to spank someone as punishment for something which has been done (in the first case because of naughtiness.) * **** : > Means to give someone a good hiding without those connotations (in that case because of laziness.) * **** : > Doesn't work because `` is used for people and `` for inanimate things. * **** : > Doesn't work because it's more for violently hitting/continuous beating of someone with a stick/fist etc. `` means "lazy person" and `` means "the (younger brother) stays lazy" in this context I believe, so the sentence would translate to "unless the lazy younger brother is given a good hiding, he stays lazy."

stackexchange-japanese

What is the metaphorical meaning of 手{て}? I often see `{}`, hand, used in a metaphorical sense to mean something along the lines of effort or presence... but I'm not totally sure. For example, consider this sentence: > []{}{}{}{} `{}{}` appears to be a set phrase, meaning, "to slack off." However, I'm trying to get at exactly what the `{}` refers to. When I first read this sentence, I thought that if one pulled one's "hand" out, then one simply wasn't doing the work. What it seems to mean instead, though, is that one is still going to do the work, but not put in an effort. Is it accurate to say, then, that `{}`, when used metaphorically, _usually_ refers to "effort"? Would the sentence mean the same thing if it was written like this: > {}{}{}{}

is such a basic word that it represents many meanings, one of which is “efforts.” Other examples of in this meaning are: * (take great care), (be troublesome (because it requires efforts)) * / (intricate) There are too many meanings of to list them up. Look up in a dictionary for a list.

stackexchange-japanese

Not understanding 解{と}く in this sentence This sentence comes from my JLPT practise book in a section explaining the use of `{}`: > {}{}{}{}{}{} I get that `{}` means to "unravel" or "solve", but the sentence seems to be saying "When you can't see the answer to the practise questions, solve it yourself." Which seems odd conceptually to me, because I can't really imagine a situation in which someone needs to be looking up answers for questions they could solve anyway. So I'm wondering if there's something about `{}` that I'm not getting. Or perhaps some other part of the sentence. What does the sentence mean, and how does `{}` play into it?

It means "Try to solve it without looking at the answers" doesn't mean "when you can't see", it's a negative command/encouragement.

stackexchange-japanese

Is ものを similar to けど? Another sentence from my JLPT practise book, this time in a section explaining the use of ``. > {}{}{}{}{}{} **** {} I _think_ this sentence is saying, "My friend who was having debt problems / if I had thought about helping I could have helped / but I forgot about it." If I'm on the right track in the meaning, then I'm not sure what `` is bringing to the party here. Is this sentence equivalent: > {}{}{}{}{}{} **** {} If so, what extra meaning does `` have that would make one choose to use it over ``?

(sense [1]-1 in Daijisen) is similar to , but using signifies the unsatisfactory feeling of the speaker. In your example, I think that using instead of expresses the regret of the speaker.

stackexchange-japanese

Shouldn't this も be が? This sentence is in my JLPT practise book in a section on the use of `{}`: > {}{}{}{}{}{}{} I think the sentence is saying, "There are lots of companies that do not keep up with the bewildering changes in society." If that's right, why does it use `{}{}` instead of `{}{}`?

The suggests that there are (possibly a lot or more) companies that keep up with society's changes, but there are **also** those that don't. is also possible here, in which case the meaning would have no reference to companies that keep up with the changes. It doesn't change the overall meaning, but does change the scope of what the speaker is referencing. With the example I might expect more that the speaker refers to both groups of companies in subsequent sentences.

stackexchange-japanese

Can things hope? This sentence in my JLPT book is explaining the nuance of `{}`, but actually it's the use of `` that's a puzzling me a bit: > {}{}{} This is saying that the pink scarf would go with some very flashy clothes. What I'm not clear on though, is if it is the speaker saying that they would like to choose some flashy clothes to go with the pink scarf. In other words, it's the speaker who is doing the ``. Or, is it that the pink scarf itself is simply more suited to going with flashy clothes? Similar to how in English I could say, "this pink scarf cries out for more flashy clothes to go with it." In other words, it is the scarf doing the ``. So is it the scarf or the speaker that the `` part of the sentence refers to?

That sentence means "I want you to choose clothes which resonate with this pink scarf." After the te-form of a verb, `` means "I want (you) to do something" according to Edict.

stackexchange-japanese

Is "bless" the best translation of 祝福{しゅくふく}? As far as I understand it, `{}` means "bless". I came across it in this sentence, and it struck me as weird: > My rough translation is, "At the same time that everyone was envious of his succes, they blessed him from their hearts." I _think_ I get the grammar and syntax, and I also get that people can be envious and grateful at the same time, or something like that. It's just that to me (perhaps only to me), the word "blessed" has a lot of weight to it in terms of religious origins and conveys implications of ritual. I don't want to get too much into the English meaning of the word "bless", though. My main point is that I wonder if "bless" is really the most accurate translation? Perhaps it means more like "grateful"?

In the example sentence, `{}` means "congratulate." Although `{} ()` is also used in religious contexts, that is not always the case. `{}` can also mean “wish (someone) good luck / a happy life” as in `{}{}{}`.

stackexchange-japanese

"To call" or "To receive a call" Consider these example sentences taken from SPACEALC: > [a] **** " **put** in a call to ~" > > [b] ~ **** " **receive** a telephone call from" My observations: Both sentences use . Transitivity is unchanged, there is no use of construction to indicate passive sentence structure. Yet one is "to call" and one is "to receive the call". So [a] and [b] do not seem to be consistent. In an attempt to resolve the inconsistency, I looked for other examples. Consider other sentence also from SPACEALC: > [c] "get called ()" [c] leads me to conclude that `` is the intransitive counterpart to ``, and sentence [b] should be wrong. **(Question)** How do I express "calling" and "receiving a call"? Is the passive form of `` used at all?(I.e. )? Or is the passive of `` used at all? **(Question)** Can I call the person performing the calling `` and the person who is receiving the call `` ?

You are confused by the translation. (I didn't realize the translation can be so confusing in the site.) > [a] "put in a call to ~" Here "~" is > [b] ~ "receive a telephone call from" Here the part before is the subject() of the translation. So "~" is the part after "from" : " receive a telephone call from ~" So you can see, "AB" means "A calls B". You can translate it as "B receives a call from A". I don't think is correct ( is OK, though). You can say to refer to the one received the call.

stackexchange-japanese

What's the difference between "な感じ" and "という感じ" when written after quotation marks? `` was crossed out and replaced with `` in a sentence that I wrote that was similar to this one: > ~~~~ **** > I think that sentence has a feeling of "that's more than one deserves." What's the difference between `` and `` when written after quotation marks?

`` is the attributive ending of a na-adjective or a noun. The modifier to the noun `` in your example ends with ``, which is an i-adjective, so it should not take ``. As Flaw comments, `` is generally possible, but that has two problems in this particular case. First, `` will not work as intended. You can use `` instead. Second, since the description in the modifier is is made from a non first-person's perspective, it is more natural to insert ``. You can go with either: >

stackexchange-japanese

What are the differences between 技術 and 技能? What are the differences between and ?

There are several diffrences, and I am not sure if I can list them all. The following is what I feel. * is for established techonology/skill (typically traditional ones), whereas is any kind of techonology (typically modern ones). * is attached to a human, whereas can be done by using machinery, human skills, improved planning of process, or combination of these. * is inherited from a master to a younger generation, and has the implication that, once acheived, it stays permanently for the person. does not have that implication.

stackexchange-japanese

What is the difference in these two keigo terms? My JLPT practise book has these two sentences to help explain the difference between `{}` **``**`` and `{}` **``**`` in a context of keigo. > {}{} > > {}{}{}{} Unfortunately, the brief explanation they give about these sentences is not quite enough for me to be sure I've got it. I think the first case, `{}` is when you're asking someone else to look at something. "Please look at **_X_**." And I think the second case of `{}`is when you're doing the looking. "I saw **_X_**." I often get these kinds of differences mixed up. Can someone either confirm I'm right, tell me if and where I'm wrong, or enlighten me if there is some other nuance I should be aware of?

The first is used when you're having someone take a look at something. In this case I think it's safe to assume it means, "let's show [them] the new products." Source (Weblio)--> (2) The second is the Keigolicious way to say . More specifically, ing with a person well above your status. In the Japanese version of "7 Years in Tibet," people use this when they meet the Dalai Lama. Source (Brad Pitt)--> "" >> It's an honor to meet you, oh holy lord of holiness. It seems like every JLPT practice book has like 800 sentences about . It's really irritating. Just be careful... your furigana says "," but your Kanji reads "."

stackexchange-japanese

Difference between Noun+な and Noun+だという I came across this sentence: > **** "It is April, but it is rather cold isn't it?" Recalling what I learned about the conjunction, I can also make the sentence: > **** **(Question)** What is the difference?

In this case, there is very little difference, except in flavor. You shouldn't look at it as vs. because they can't be compared. The here simply allows you to use with the noun . , in my mind, is like putting air quotes on something. gives the former example more flavor, I think. Source --> Opinions, one Japanese and one American. I asked the Japanese lady next to me and she agreed. >> Even though it's April, it's quite cold, huh? Flavor: This super coldness doesn't feel like "April," you know? >> Even though it's April, it's quite cold huh? Flavor: I'm stating a fact about the weather this April. is used a lot, so keep an ear out for it.

stackexchange-japanese

Understanding a JLPT practise question with ものなら This sentence comes from a question in my JLPT practise book that is part of an explanation of the use of ``: > {}{}{}{}{}{}{} My fractured translation is, "If helping out a little is something you intend / that's something good / asking that person's help / you should take care." As you can see, though, I can't make the connection between asking for help and why one should take care. What exactly is this sentence saying, and how does it relate to the use of ``?

From JGram: Once if (one) happen to ... , then (bad consequence)." So the first part of the sentence does not imply the listener is the subject, but the 'that person' in the next part of the sentence instead. So basically it is saying: "You should be careful because if you help that guy out once, he will take advantage of that (act) and ask for favors very often."

stackexchange-japanese

Why is に応{おう}じて the wrong answer in this question? This question is in my JLPT practise book: > {}{}{}{} ** ___ __**_{} > > **A** **B** {} **C** **D** I chose **B** , because it seems to me that it's saying "in accordance with everyone's expectations." Or, put another way, "as everyone expected." However, according to the book, the answer is **A**. But that seems weird to me, because I think of `` as "in response to." Maybe it's just me, but I don't think of expectations as being something that gets _answered_. Instead, expectations get _met_. Where am I going wrong here?

has a totally different meaning than what you're thinking of, and can be thought of as a separate grammar point or expression. If I had to translate it, I'd say it sort of means "correspond to" or "dependent upon." Source (Weblio) --> >> Fuel use will change dependent upon the cars speed. actually uses the same Kanji , and means to live up to expectations or requests. Source (Yahoo) --> ― ―

stackexchange-japanese

Why does someone intend to die in this JLPT question? This is a question in my JLPT practise book: > {}{}{}{} > > **A** **B** **C** **D** None of the answers made sense to me, so I didn't even choose one. The book says the answer is **C**. I didn't choose that one because it seems to be saying, "if you intend to die, you might make it." I get that there could be a metaphorical meaning here, something like "try so hard you might die", but I'm still having trouble parsing the sentence so that it conveys the sense of "as if". I'm just not used to seeing `` used in a hypothetical way. What would be an accurate translation of this sentence, and does `` have a broader meaning than just, "intend to"? * * * **Bonus question:** Is `{}` the same as saying `{}`?

goo.ne.jp's definition for `` is: 1. An intention (of doing) 2. Expectation, plans 3. `` which I might translate to "the feeling as if (something) has become that way." I believe some more natural translations for definition 3 might be: * As if you think.../As if someone thinks... * I think.../I feel as if... Some examples: > > "Work as if (you think) you'll die." > > > "It's as if he thinks he's a singer." > > > "I think I understand." See also: the different usages of ?

stackexchange-japanese

What's the difference between 関{かん}する and 関{かか}わる? This question is in my JLPT practise book: > {}{}{}{}{} > > **A** {} **B** {} **C** {} **D** {} The book says the answer is **D** , but to me the definitions of **C** and **D** overlap so much that I can't see why one is obviously better. So what's the difference between `{}` and `{}`?

Both X and X have the overlapping meaning when it comes to 'concerning or related to X'. However when you see XY or YX it is probably better than when X is something that directly affects Y, or is something that Y is dependent upon. Also, there is the nuance that Y is a big or serious thing such as education, peace, life. For example you might say when talking about policemen to show the large degree in which peace (public order) is a result of the police. You may also say but then it's means more something like a job that has something kind of connection to peace, and would not be as complimenting as the above example.

stackexchange-japanese

What exacty does ゆえ mean, and how does it fit this JLPT question? I have this question in my JLPT textbook: > {}{}{}{}{} > > **A** **B** **C** **D** The book says the answer is A, which is weird to me because I thought `` was kind of like "ergo", or "as a result from". If you say `{}`, it seems to me like one is saying that somehow the `{}` is _because_ of women. So I must have `` wrong. What exactly does it mean?

`{}` appears to mean many different things depending on the way it's used, but the main definition seems to be "reason". * ``: "by reason of (being)", "due to (being)" or "because of (being)". Whether to add or omit "being" can only be determined by context: > > "discrimination by reason of being a woman." > > > "hardships by reason of being a famous person." > > > "efficiency by reason of skill." * `X`: "for the reason of X" or "because of X": > > "be tortured for the reason of one's faith" * `` at the start of a sentence etc: "for that reason", "therefore" or "thus": > > "for that reason, product quality is consumer confidence." According to Daijisen, it can also mean "of splendid history" when written as `` and `` etc, "taste/atmosphere", "relation/affinity" and "break-down/accident".

stackexchange-japanese

what does 卵からかえったばかりの魚 mean? This sentence was from a JLPT N2 prep book. I don't understand the part that modifies . Here is how I parsed it: From egg/returned/just/noun modifier/fish So I thought this means "The fish that just returned from eggs", which doesn't make any sense.

This (; ) means "hatch". "The fish that just hatched from (the) eggs."

stackexchange-japanese

Names for strokes What do we call the different types of strokes of kanji/kana in Japanese? For example, in Chinese the left-downward stroke is called [piě] and the right-downward stroke is called [nà]. And if I wanted to describe what `` looks like, I would say (in Chinese) ", ". Are the Japanese names for strokes commonly used? I would assume so since it's a rather convenient way (for me at least) to describe what a Chinese character looks like in the absence of any writing material to show it (alternatively I could write in the air). Can I similarly describe kanji using Japanese names for the strokes?

These stroked are called , and as for kanji, it is traditionally said that there are eight types of strokes (I copied the words from the webpage that I linked below): 1) ([]{}) 2) ([]{}) 3) ([]{}) 4) , ([]{}) 5) ([]{}) 6) ([]{}) 7) ([]{}) 8) ([]{}) And all those eight appear in the character ``. This web page provides a good explanation. Modern treatment suggests a slightly different set of strokes. According to this web page, it replaces 7 and 8 above with the following two: 9) 10) I think this modern set is familiar among Japanese, but when they need to refer to the kanji in the absense of a writing material, it is more common to refer to the radical () or to refer to a word that includes that character (for example, ``). There are probably no such notions for kana.

stackexchange-japanese

Does the word レストラン make saying 中国レストラン strange? I see that the WWWJDIC emphasizes western style restaurants for the word . So would there be a better word to use in ?

Yes. `` sounds a bit awkward. A normal way to say it is `` or ``. You don't use `` for Chinese foods but rather ``.

stackexchange-japanese

Is it normal to use ただいま in situations other than ただいま戻【もど】りました? By itself, I would say that means something like "just now". I've used it a few times in sentences like this, but it feels somewhat awkward, as I am always reminded of . So, for example, would in the following sentence sound unnatural/awkward? >

As istrasci says, can be a rather formal word to use. But it also has uses outside of the super formal ceremonial use - you still hear it fairly often in announcements, as in those you would hear in an ad or department store. One common use is with a noun that ends with You've probably heard this in an ad before: I just saw this when watching a comedy show when the lead character is doing nothing: Also I have heard in this use case when some status is being reported: This can also be totally informal such as: You can also say but my gut feeling is that you can't add the in there without being awkward, even though it doesn't seem to break any grammatical rules. I don't have anything to back this up other than most of the cases I've heard have been short examples with just the verb or a noun. Please correct me if I am wrong.

stackexchange-japanese

What do I do when I encounter "Written Japanese"? I have read in grammar dictionaries some words/phrases that are labelled as "Written Japanese" and should not be used in normal speech. Let's take for example the sentence-ending `` indicating a command: > "Do not run on the pool deck" > > (This was taken from A Dictionary of Intermediate Japanese Grammar and it's labelled as "Written Japanese".) What I want to know is what happens to "Written Japanese" when: 1. I read it silently 2. I read it aloud to myself 3. I read it to someone else For the above, do I read it as it is written or do I convert it to a "Spoken Japanese" equivalent?

"Written Japanese" doesn't mean "forms that can only be expressed in written form". It means "forms that are generally used in writing rather than speech". So there's no need to replace anything on the fly as you read it. You read it as written, whether it's , , , whatever. It doesn't matter if it would be weird as a conversational utterance... because it isn't one. It's "written Japanese" that you happen to be reading out loud. **Update 12/2:** Actually, let me add one caveat: If you are reading _Classical_ Japanese, or most pre-WWII, then "reading it as written" doesn't mean the same thing as it does for modern Japanese. For example, is pronounced as if it were . This is called historical kana orthography () and it is related to the particles , and being pronounced , , and . But it even in this case, you don't change the actual words -- you wouldn't change to , for example. It's just that the rules for pronouncing certain kana in certain contexts are different.

stackexchange-japanese

How is "誰も" used in this sentence? I am a bit confused about a sentence I came across in an anki deck: I know that that means "who" and means "also", but the translation it gives me is: "No one knows that story." Someone please explain. Thank you n_n

`` by itself does not mean 'who'. Nor does `` always mean 'also'. Words like `` are called indeterminates, and are more essential than wh-words (It can be a part of the meaning of a wh-word; Not wh-word itself). `` only means 'some variable (something that does not have a fixed reference) that ranges over people'. Depending on what particle it is used with, it would be translated into different words in English: > who > someone > anyone/everyone

stackexchange-japanese

When to use 他【ほか】の or 他【ほか】に I always thought only existed, but my teacher uses a lot. Are there differences between when each can be used? Here are two examples of each from my online dictionary: > (Ask somebody else for help) > > (Is there anyone else who wants to go?) In both of these examples, I feel like is describing , so why are different particles used?

One way is to look at them as exclusive () and inclusive (). > 1. **** > Ask **somebody else** _[someone other than me/someone other than this person]_ for help. > > 2. **** > [ **In addition** to who already wants to go] is there anyone else who wants to go? > > Notice that you can use "besides" in both sentences: `1. Ask someone besides me.` `2. Besides those who already want to, anyone else want to go?` Just keep in mind that excludes what it's attached to (1. ), and includes it (2. ). With that in mind, when each can be used should depend mostly on what you wish to say. I am sure there are specific rules for how they can be attached to words, but I don't know them.

stackexchange-japanese

Defining 控える and 控えている `` as far as I can tell behaves more predictably than `` in that it generally seems to mean "to refrain" and "to make notes" (as in ``.) However, `` seems to mean many more things including "expecting (a baby)", "to be soon", "waiting (for)", "facing", "contend with" and "abstain from": > > Is she expecting a child? > > 1 > be just a year away. > > > The messenger is waiting in the next room. > > > There is a mountain behind his country cottage. > > > The company has many difficulties to contend with. > > > He abstains from meat for health reasons. Would I be able to ask how to define `` and ``, how they have come to mean so many things and whether there's a way of determining what `` means in a given context?

Found two dictionaries: goo and alc. (Any good Japanese-English dictionaries that I can reference here? I always use a Japanese-Japanese one. The translation are not very good. However, the examples in alc are excellent, though not 100% correct.) The meaning of can be "waiting/saying behind(for something)", or "to refrain", or "to make notes", or more. And is formed by +, and "" here means something like "in the state of". As for the examples: > > 1 > be just a year away > It means the phrase can be used as " *** _", "_ *Graduation** is just a year away".

stackexchange-japanese

What is 野菜ソムリエ? I have trouble understanding the concept of . I have searched Wikipedia and others but I can't understand if it is the name of a media job, or the name of a restaurant job. I feel it might be more of a cultural question actually, but I don't know yet as I don't understand the word itself.

With a search on the web, I found ja.wikipdia.org/wiki/...(also mentioned by sawa) , < , < , etc. From these pages, we can see the "" is not a job, but a qualification. It is a qualification for people withe various knowledge of vegetables and fruits: classification, nutrition, cooking method, quality, etc.

stackexchange-japanese

How do I say "I am the best" ? の,は or が and 私 or 俺? I'm making a shirt for a (rather egotistical) friend of mine and so am trying to do something with the slogan "I am the best" for fun. I need something with four characters only, and would like to ask the difference between > , , , and which one would be the most appropriate in the context that he is saying it of himself. My grammar is not fantastic. I understand that would entail a meaning like "I am the number one" versus which would be "I am a number one" (correct me if I'm wrong). One of my friends has suggested > , Can someone explain to me how and differ then? I'm quite confused. Also, this is for a boy, just in case anyone wonders.

As you correctly note, the `` in this context adds focus to the noun phrase: > > ' **I** am the best.' or 'The best one is **me** ' > > > 'I am the **best**.' `[]{}` is very formal and polite, and is not usually used other than in business conversations, `[]{}` is neutral with politeness, `` is rough, and `` is self-appraising. Any of them will work with `` or ``. `` does not make sense. `` without the particle `` really sounds like a funny phrase made up by a non-Japanese speaker, the kind that indeed is often seen printed on T-shirts or tatoos.

stackexchange-japanese

Usage of the suffixes 流, 風, 式, 的 and 様 If I was to put the suffixes `{}`, `{}`, `{}`, `{}` and `{}` on the end of a noun etc, what would be the difference between them? I could be wrong, but the following all seem to me to mean something similar to "Japanese style" and I'm having trouble telling the difference between them: * * * * * (I'm not sure whether `` is used or not, but I think `` is.)

* ``: -ish, -like > 'Japanese way of thinking' * ``: Intentionally or unintentionally resembling the style but not itself. Pseudo. > 'Pseudo-Japanese style restaurant' * `` School. Classification of styles that are inherited (occasionally secretly within a family). > 'Kouga-school ninja' > 'Urasenke-school tea ceremony' * `` Design, form of art > 'Japanese style architecture' * ``: Style. More popular and major classification of styles compared to ``. Can usually replace affixal use of ``. > 'Japanese-style garden'

stackexchange-japanese

入社 equivalent for a research internship When writing in some formal Japanese CV (/), it is common to be asked to put each job/university/etc. on a single dated line, with a second line to indicate when one quit/graduated/dropped-out/etc. E.g: > **** > > **** > > **** etc. University enrollment will be /, post-grad would be /, job would be /... My question is then: **What is a proper equivalent to indicate _a research internship_?** That is a non-paying, temporary research position in a public (government-run) lab facility that is _not_ a university (). In such a case, it seems that both and would not fit. sounds like it _might_ be a possibility, but also may be a complete mistranslation (since the word also exists for completely different situations). I would welcome any suggestions, (preferably) with pointers to approved examples or other authoritative sources...

To answer my own question (after receiving the answer from somewhere else at the time), the proper term would be: ****. E.g.: > > >

stackexchange-japanese