texts: Problems with the function of に and the meaning of 失礼

texts:
Why is 失礼 used here? And what function does に take?

  カラオケはあまり好きじゃありません。失礼の内容に断ってください。

First, I have no idea how the meaning „impoliteness“ should fit into this, with which jisho.org provides me http://jisho.org/search/shitsurei
Second, the “excuse” meaning was till now always connected to the verb suru „失礼します“.
Third, I don’t know how to meaningfully connect the phrase „失礼の内容“ to the verb „断る“ via the particle に. It makes little to no sense in my opinion should 断る take the meaning of „refuse“.
„To inform“ could work, but I can’t remember that I would ever have seen the particle に used in this way in such a context. Maybe „please inform (him/her) in the impolite details“ ?
I don’t know, I can’t beat sense into it.
I think I know what the sentence wants to tell me, but I can’t properly translate the sentence and therefore have no idea whether my vague interpretation is correct or not…


texts: ～としたら - when exactly used and what's the difference from other "if" structures

texts:
I'm a bit confused about ～としたら and its exact usage. What is the difference between this and other structures expressing "if" (～なら, たら-form, etc.)?
For example, let's take a sentence from one of my textbooks. If I used ～なら, does it have the same meaning?

その話が本当だとしたら、うれしいです。
その話が本当なら、うれしいです。

Another example: do those two sentences express the same?

ここでライオンに出会ったとしたらどうしますか。
ここでライオンに出会ったらどうしますか。


texts: Is イングリッシュ a good translation of "Engrish"?

texts:
Is イングリッシュ a good translation of Engrish?

The Japanese-language Wikipedia article on the subject only uses "イングリッシュ" at the start (presumably just as part of Wikipedia indicating how the subject of articles are pronounced). When trying a google web search, many hits were referring to English schools referring to English, not Engrish (for example english-bell.com), and a google image search mainly gets hits for Johnny English, or the English cocker spaniel.

If it's not a good translation, what words or phrases, if any, are likely to be easily understood, preferably without being offensive?


texts: Parsing of ひっそりとはしておらず

texts:
秋ほどひっそりとはしておらず、冬よりは華やかではない、可憐な夜空。

[current subject is the spring sky]

(the spring sky) is not quiet to the degree the fall (sky) is, ...

I was told that if you have an adv-to and want a noun describing/sentence ending phrase, you add the generic verb する. Can you just stick a は in the middle of that?

秋ほどひっそりと(contrastive は)しておらず ?


texts: What's the best translation of アタリ in the context of drawing?

texts:
I'm reading through a book on how to draw in a classic Japanese manga style. Specifically, the book is about the basics of デッサン, "sketching".

They use the term アタリ a lot. For example, this typical sentence:

  アタリ線{せん}は残{のこ}っている。下描{したが}きのりんかく線{せん}がはっきりわかるように、アタリはごく薄{うす}い線{せん}で描{か}こう。

The context is that in the example drawing, they have more or less finished the drawing by having laid down the bolder lines that emphasize the final image, while leaving some of the sketchy lines underneath so one can see the original contours used to create it.

アタリ線{せん} clearly refers to the "final" lines, so I guess that could work as a translation. But obviously "final" is far from a literal translation of アタリ.

Looking up アタリ specifically in katakana, I see that it is defined as "collision, overlapping". Overlapping makes sense, but it still feels off to use it directly. When one is drawing, one doesn't merely sketch and sketch until overlapping lines become the ones you keep (at least, that's not the default assumption. I guess some people might draw like that). Instead, one deliberately lays down the lines one intends to keep.

Translating アタリ線{せん} as "overlapping lines" seems to convey too much serendipity.

"Bold" lines? "Clean" lines? "True" lines?

What would be the best translation for アタリ in this context?

Bonus question: Does the katakana アタリ come from 当{あ}たる, 中{あた}る, or maybe a different origin? I ask because I notice that when I look it up using katakana, I get different definitions than when I look it up using kanji.


texts:
最近は海外旅行より、国内の温泉旅行やスキー旅行の方が若いカップルに人気です。   why we use 若いカップルに人気です. Noun に adjective, what does it mean ??
can anyone explain this sentence pattern ??


texts: Which would be the better translation for "Even though you're X, you're still Y?"

texts:
Given a phrase of the form "Even though you're X, you're still Y..." what would be the best (i.e. more natural or grammatically correct) Japanese form?

For example:

"Even though you're that weak, you're still a soldier."

A:「お前はそれほど弱くても、まだ軍人だ。」
B:「それほど弱くても、いずれにしてもお前は軍人だ。」

Can 「まだ」 be used in this context? Most of the examples in the Tatoeba sentences seem to imply まだ is only correct in the context of "time" (still here, still hasn't happened yet, etc...); I haven't seen any examples where it's applied to a noun like this.

But, even in English, I'm not sure if the concept of "time" really applies to the use of "still" here, which seems to have more of an "above all" or "in the end" connotation to it.

As I'm typing this, two more possible translations comes to mind:

C:「それほど弱くても、お前だって軍人だ。」
D:「それほど弱くても、所詮、お前は軍人だ。」

All four seem like they capture the spirit of the original English, but all four also feel like they might be missing something or changing the meaning subtly.

The nuances seem to be:

A: "Even though you're that weak, you're still [at this time] a soldier." Which implies that later on you might not be a soldier. It seems more similar in meaning to "Even if it's Friday, you're still on the clock."

B: "Even though you're that weak, when all is said and done you're a soldier." Which seems close, but still feels off.

C: "Even though you're that weak, even you are a soldier."

D: "Even though you're that weak, you're a soldier after all. " or

D: "Even though you're that weak, in the end you're a soldier."

All of the translations seem to be missing the subtle implication of the English, namely that you are a soldier, and thus capable of the things a soldier can do, regardless of the fact that you are weak. In other words, being weak does not change the fact that you are a soldier.

A similar, if not identical form in English would be "Even if you're a pain, you're still my little sister," where the fact that the person being a pain does not negate the fact that she is the speaker's younger sister.


texts: If you watch the Yuru Camp anime, I assume you've noticed this. The title of Yuru Camp in Nihongo is ゆるキャン (yuru kyan) and not ゆるキャンプ (yuru kyanpu). Can you explain to me why キャン is used instead of キャンプ which is the literal translation of camp?


texts: Saying お疲れ様でした to teacher at the end of a lesson?

texts:
I'm taking beginner Japanese lessons. Would お疲れ様でした be an appropriate thing one might say to the teacher at the end of a lesson?

We're "colleagues" in a sense since I'm an academic at the same university; but in the context of the lesson of course I'm a student and she is the sensei.

If it makes any difference, the lesson finishes at 7pm, so it's the end of the work day.

Would this be a good alternative to saying something like ありがとう ございます? What other phrases would be appropriate in that context?


texts: Meaning of 長い物には巻かれろ

texts:
長い物には巻かれろ
  Let me/it be wound on long things

I believe this has a meaning similar to the English "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em".

Is my literal translation correct (I suspect not)?

How do we get from the literal meaning to the figurative meaning?


texts:
So I just come across a dialog that features both of the forms for "walking",  I'm wondering what is the difference between 歩く and 歩いて, below is what I encountered:

歩く：バスで5分と、地下鉄で１５分ぐらいかかります。それから、１０分歩きます。

As you can see, 歩く changed to the ます form, which I understand.

歩いて：私は歩いて来ます。１０分ぐらいです

At another encounter, I read:

...(Other Transportation)...。それから、また歩きます。

So why in this case it's 歩く again?

I hope I phrased my question clearly, thank you very much.


texts: なんなら【何なら】 = なんだったら【何だったら】 -- Why/How do they mean what they mean?

texts:
なんなら【何なら】 = なんだったら【何だったら】 == when transliterated, is it [Then what] ?

  dictionary.goo.ne.jp  なん‐なら【何なら】
  なん‐なら【何なら】 == ［副］ 《「なになら」の音変化》
  １.  相手が実現を希望していることを仮定する気持ちを表す。 もしよければ。 「― 私のほうからお電話しましょう」

  http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/165834/meaning/m0u/
  なん‐だったら【何だったら】  ==  ［連語］ 「何なら」に同じ。   「 ―  先に帰ってもいいですよ」

Does anyone have any idea why/how these mean this? == The meaning is ---  "if you like [wish]"

Is there a similar expression in Jp, English, French, German, Spanish, etc. ?

English expressions like [You know what?] or [For what it's worth] come to mind.

( なんとなれば【何となれば】 means "because" <-- This is curious, too. )


texts: What are the nuances between the use of 訊く instead of 聞く in the following sentence?

texts:
I know that 訊く is another way to write 聞く, so now I'm curious as to why the author of the book used it here instead of 聞く, which has been used for all previous instances in the book.

  こちらから訊くより先に、低く呟くような声が返ってきた。

As I've mentioned in What is the definition of 凶々? , I'm wondering if there are any nuances or slightly different meanings when it comes to using different kanji that have the same-ish dictionary definition and how to understand the why or to discern the meaning behind the seemingly random different kanji being used in sentences.

For example, what is the difference between

  こちらから訊くより先に、低く呟くような声が返ってきた。

and

  こちらから聞くより先に、低く呟くような声が返ってきた。


texts:
これは日本語で言い方ですか
kore ha nihongo de iikata desu ka

Is this correct? I want to point to something and ask how do you say that in Japanese.
Base 2 + かた means how to.


texts: [因果]{いん・が}: A bass-ackwards contraction?

texts:
In Japanese, we often see where the beginnings of multiple words are taken to make a contraction word.

  短大　→　短期大学　→　A juniour college
  収支　→　収入と支出　→　income and expenditure; earnings and expenses
  国連　→　国際連合　→　The United Nations
  リモコン　→　リモートコントロール　→　Remote control(ler)

However, 因果 is an abbreviation for 原因と結果.  I can't say I've seen any other words formed by combining the end pieces.  Why did 因果 come about this way?  Why isn't the abbreviation 原結?

If you have other examples please list them.

Edit:  Oops, yes, of course I meant 結果, not 効果.  I was multitasking and my wires got crossed.


texts: Two different katakana for 'wo' in the Genki textbook

texts:
According to the 'Genki' textbook, katakana for 'wo' can be written in two ways;

Contracted using the 'o'-katakana; ウォ
Non-contracted using just the
'wo'-katakana; ヲ

What are the differences between the two? Is one of the two used more reguarly? It feels, intuitively, liken the 'single-letter' katakana is easier to deal with as it's just one instead of a contraction between two.


texts: The meaning of the phrase 'sou janai' (romaji)

texts: What does the phrase 'sou janai' (romaji) mean in an informal speaking context?


texts: What is the difference between [何もありません]{なにもありません} and 何もあります?

texts:
何もありません and  何もあります both have the same meaning according to google translate. I have no trouble in understanding why 何もありません has the meaning of "nothing/everything" as one of my native languages has a similar structure but 何もあります is what I have problems with.

How can a word when in the negative and positive form both give out the same meaning? Both according to google translate means "There is nothing". Is 何もあります even spoken much in day-to-day talks?


texts: Can one say "A decides that B will do X" with ことにする?

texts:
Can one use ことにする to express the idea "A decides that B will do X"?

Take the sentence 私は外へ出ることにした. The way I see it, 私 is the subject of both 出る and した, with one usage omitted due to being understood. So in full the sentence is

  私は｛私が外へ出る｝ことにした。
  I decided to go outside.

Now what happens if the subjects are different? Can we say

  AはBが外へ出ることにした。
  A decided that B would go outside.

If this construction is not allowed, how else could you say this?


texts: Please help me with this sentence (the を related problem)

texts:
I've just come across this sentence on Kanji Web Easy:

  まず、体を冷たくするスプレーを服を着た人形にかけました。

So many を and the second one really confuses me. How should I understand this?


texts: due to kanji variants, are 器械、海外、劍道 even words?

texts:
I am interested in kanji variants. Please consider these three variant pairs:

(normal kanji) 剣 ---> (variant) 劍
(normal kanji) 海 ---> (variant) 海
(normal kanji) 器 ---> (variant) 器

Are「劍道」、「海外」、「器械」even considered words? Or, for native speakers, are kanji variants a not so important side-note to the language?

If native speakers do pay some attention to kanji variants, then do the definitions change at all?
「剣道{けんどう}」の定義{ていぎ} = 「劍道」の定義?
「海外{かいがい}」の定義 = 「海外」の定義?
「器械{きかい}」の定義 = 「器械」の定義?

How do you say "kanji variant" in Japanese?
Are kanji variants tested for on 漢字検定試験？What level?


texts:
In the sentence

  つい先日も、今のバイトもキツイとか辞めるとか、そんなことばっかり言ってたくせに。

Why is the に at the end? What can it mean?


texts:
日本語

  そのチームのメンバーの中で誰が一番好き？
  そのチームのメンバーで誰が一番好き？

上の文（の中？）で、どちらが正しいですか。論理的には「の中」を入れる方が無難だと思うのですけど、時々入っていない文も見る気がして、文脈からすると同じように解釈してもいいと思えるのですが、本当に同じですか。ではなければ、どこで違いますか。

よろしくお願いします。

English

  そのチームのメンバーの中で誰が一番好き？
  そのチームのメンバーで誰が一番好き？

Which of the two sentences above is correct? Logically, I think that adding 「の中」 is the safer option, but I also sometimes see sentences without it which seem to mean the same thing from context. Are they really the same? If not, how are they different?


texts:
I want to say:

  The word 'foreigner' sounds a little impolite.

These are my attempts:

  foreignerという言葉はちょっと無礼そうです。
  foreignerという言葉はちょっと無礼に見えます。
  foreignerという言葉はちょっと無礼に聞こえます。

Are any of these correct? Should I prefer one form over another when I'm talking about speech or writing?


texts:
In this context:
https://streamable.com/famk1v
She said: 事は一刻を争うわ お願いね
What does 事 mean?


texts:
Currently I am translating a kendo book from Japanese. While I understand the general meaning, I was having trouble translating this sentence:

  こちらにとって、近い間合い、相手にとって遠い間合いになっている考えていい

What does kochira ni totte mean in this context?


texts: What is the difference between 〜を〜とする and 〜を〜とした before nouns?

texts:
In everything I can find online, the constructions [N1]を[N2]とする[N3] and [N1]を[N2]とした[N3] are lumped together as basically having the same meaning. Is there any difference between them?
My textbook contains the following examples:

山田をリーダーとするサークルを作る。
We will make a club with Yamada as the leader.
環境問題をテーマとしたテレビ番組をみる。
I watch TV programs about environmental problems.

Would there be any difference in nuance if とした was used in the first example and とする was used in the second?


texts:
In English, you have the following phenomenon:

○ I sometimes play jazz piano.
? I rarely play jazz piano.

That is, when you have a predicate that usually does not take place, you can use "sometimes" with it, but "rarely" is weird without further context, like "I play various styles of piano, but I rarely play jazz piano."
That is to say, "rarely" is not just specifying that the frequency you do the action is very low, but that you are somehow doing it less than expected.
You can contrast this with ○"I play jazz piano every once in a blue moon", which really just is saying you play jazz piano with a very low frequency.
Linguistically, I think this means "rarely" has a "negative polarity". As supporting syntactic evidence, it licenses negative polarity items like "any": ○"I (never→)rarely see any of them", vs ×"I (always→)sometimes see any of them".
Is 稀に negative like "rarely", or can you use it naturally with the following sentence?

○たまにジャズピアノを弾きます。
（○／？）稀にジャズピアノを弾きます。


texts: ければ possibly used to link verbs instead of causation? (visual novel, narration)

texts:
I apologize if this is a silly question but can ければ be used to simply link two verbs (as in, "and")? It doesn't make much sense (or does it?) in the following sentence for "to scream angrily" making the person to "follow/cling to" to the narrator, that is:
"(he) was in the state as if he wanted to say something (but) Shinji didn't shout and didn't follow" as opposed to "didn't shout, so didn't follow me"?

  何か言いたげな口調のまま、慎二は怒鳴る事もなければ追いすがってくる事もない。

Couldn't it simply be replaced here by ...怒鳴る事もなくて追いすがってくる事...?

Have I completely misunderstood the sentence?

Thank you.


texts:
In the following sentence:

  彦一｛ひこいち｝さんがのこった荷物を見たときは、皆の握り飯が入っているお弁当など重そうなものしか残っていませんでした。

I don't understand how the part in bold fits into the sentence. Without that part I have

  When 彦一 saw the remaining baggage (stuff in bold) there were only heavy looking things left.

The bit in bold I think is "bento boxes containing everyone's rice balls and the like". How does that fit with the rest of the sentence? Is it just a parenthetical statement describing the baggage that 彦一 saw?

I recently came across this link which suggested similar constructs were not possible. Under what circumstances can I use such a construction. For example could I say "If bob goes to Tuvalu -- a small island in the Pacific ocean -- he will need to take a towel" using the same grammar? Here's my attempt:

  ボブはTuvaluに行くなら、太平洋にある小さな島タオルがひつようだ。


texts: Qualitative intensifiers e.g. とても, とっても,  超, etc. How are they different?

texts:
How are とても/とっても,　でかい/でっかい, 超 (and others that I have yet to encounter) used differently? I figured that for とても/とっても-type difference is that the double-consonant(geminated) version is stronger i.e. a greater intensity and used colloquially.

I've also heard "でかい煩い". I presume でかい/でっかい is used with negative connotations?
EDIT: (From the anime Aria the Animation, the character Alice frequently uses でかい as an intensifier in the ungrammatical way as in "でかい煩い". I now understand it as her 口癖)

How about 超 in "超安い" for "very cheap" (price of object)?

What would be the difference if I swap them around?

Are there other qualitative intensifiers that would be good to know? And what differences in nuance would there be?


texts: 収入 or 給料? What should be used when talking about salary or income?

texts:
I would like to know about these two 収入, 給料 (there may be even others I am not aware of). Can they be interchanged as one pleases, or does it very much depend on the context?

Which is more colloquial, which is more formal?


texts: How do you "try" a suru verb? Like "to try to cook"

texts: According to the internet, to say you try an action you need to use the volitional form + to suru. So miroutosuru is "to try to see". But what about suru verbs like ryouri suru ("to cook")?


texts: What is the use of the particle "は" in this sentence?

texts:
I'm currently translating the lyrics of "Realize" by Konomi Suzuki. And the one thing that made me confused was the use of the particle "は" in this sentence of the lyrics.
歩き続けた今を消しては 見ない様に塞いだ過去
Is the "は" working as a topic marker particle making the sentence after the particle the predicate or is it indicating contrast between the two sentences? I need some help.


texts:
父はデジタルカメラの講習を受けに行ったが、あまりの難しさにびっくりしたようだ。

So this sentence is saying, "my dad went to take a short course on digital cameras, but it was difficult to the point of surprising him." Could you say

  父はデジタルカメラの講習を受けに行ったが、あまりの難しさにびっくりした。

instead or would omitting the ようだ make the sentence incorrect.
What is the point of the ようだ　at the end of the sentence?


texts: From a basic Japanese book I'm reading, I found that word in a vocabulary table. Now I'm having problems finding that word using Google, jisho.org, etc. I can find 大切な (taisetsuna) and that kanji sequence Is what I get if I type the romaji in Windows or Linux, but I don't see the other word as an option.


texts:
In the following sentence, does もの mean "person" (qualified by 1人あたり) or "thing" (as in "the 費用 thing")。

  上記費用は1人あたりのものですか？

For reference, below are the definitions I have for もの:

  物  もの  (n,uk) thing; object; the natural thing; a frequently done thing; used to express emotional involvement; used in giving a reason; (P)
  者   もの  (n) person (rarely used w.o. a qualifier); (P)


texts:
In this post, it was verified that indeed the origin of the い-adjective ending 〜かった stems as a fusion of the ending 〜く and the inflection あった of ある (that is, 〜かった comes from 〜くあった). This makes me curious if there are alternate forms of い-adjective inflections that either currently exist or have existed in the past.

To summarize what I had said in that post linked above, I made the following extrapolation.

Modern, plain adjective inflections:

高い
高かった
高くない
高くなかった

Historical adjective inflections:

高い
高くあった
高くない
高くなくあった

Question 1. Is it also possible, either historically or currently, to use the 〜ます form on the ある portion of the "historical adjective inflections" above?

Formal variations of the above, substituting ある→あります:

高い
高くありました
高くありません
高くありませんでした

I know already that 高くありません is possible (at least according to what I've been learning of Japanese on Pimsleur), but I've never heard or seen 高くありました or 高くありませんでした.

Question 2. Furthermore, is it technically possible / grammatical, either currently or historically, to extend this pattern, though perhaps not actually necessary or useful, to say something like 高くある・高くあります instead of 高い・高いです?


texts: How do I express "I slept in a tent" in Japanese?

texts:
How do you say:

  I slept in a tent on/at the campsite.

I've been trying to make sense with it for a while now and I just can't make it work.

I think I know the vocabulary needed: 寝ました, テント, キャンプサイト and maybe 一張? If you know words that would fit better, please tell me.


texts: What's the difference between 身寄り, 親類 and 親戚?

texts:
Jisho gives "relative, relation" for both; I found this answer saying that 身寄り it's like a place where you belong and can stay, but it's not clear by the examples provided if it's something more broad that literal relatives: 私には身寄りがいない, translated as "I have no one who lets me stay with", means "no relatives", or does it imply absolutely no one, so no friends, etc. either?

Weblio says it's someone from the same lineage, and in the same definition lists 親類; 親戚's definition says it's the same as 親類, so... it kinda seems 親類, 親戚 and 身寄り are the same.

I'm confused about the difference between those terms, if any.


texts: What is the breakdown of countries where loan words originate?

texts: Is there any general idea of what percentage of loan words come from which languages? I always thought the majority of them came from English, but I keep seeing more and more that originated in Germany and Portugal.


texts: How can 【所】に【物】があります be converted to 【物】は【所】です?

texts:
Consider the following,

机の上に本があります。
本は机の上です。

What I don't understand is the second sentence which is another form for the first one. It is caused by the fact that there is no preposition に in the second one.

If you don't understand what I meant, let consider the following sentences. The first two sentences are understandable because they have English equivalents. But it is not the case for the last one.

This is a book. これは本です。
This book is red.　この本は赤いです。
This book is on the table.　この本は机の上です。I never read and hear この本は机の上にです。in which there is に inserted between 机の上 and です.

Can anybody here explain why?


texts: What's the meaning of 位 when it follows ことをする a.k.a. "to do something"?

texts:
I'm looking for help with the meaning of 位 in this sentence

  Hawk:「一軒でも来なかったという家があったら、もう貴様もその時がおしまいだぞ。」Nightjar:「だってそれはあんまり無理じゃありませんか。そんなことをする位なら、私はもう死んだ方がましです。」

My only guess is that ことをする位 translates as "do something of a certain rank/social standing". (e.g. "How could you do something so low class?")Which makes my reading:

  Hawk: "If there is even one house that says you did not come, then at that time I will end you also!"Nightjar: "You say that is not very unreasonable?! If you will do such a thing of that rank then I would rather be dead [than do what you tell me to]."

Is that reading of 位 correct?

EDIT:According to Chocolate, the correct reading is "to that extent". See http://jisho.org/word/%E3%81%8F%E3%82%89%E3%81%84 for the definition (it isn't listed under 位).


texts: Are there verbs that end with ず,づ, ふ, ぷ, しゅう, ちゅう and じゅう? Why not?

texts:
I noticed that verb ending syllables cover all of -u syllables (る,く,ぐ,す,つ etc) except ず,づ, ふ, ぷ, しゅう, ちゅう and じゅう.

I suspect that ず is reserved for the negative conjugation thus no plain form verb is allowed. しゅう, ちゅう and じゅう were mostly reserved for on-yomi pronunciation, I think, so no verbs for them either.

Not sure about づ.

ふ and ぷ is a curious case because there are verbs that end with ぶ but not the other two.

I'm not saying that there should always be verbs that cover each of the -u syllables but I'm just curious why there are no verbs that end with some of them. Maybe there are some historical reasons behind the gap?


texts: "雷{かみなり}" is thunder, or lightning, or both?

texts:
In daily conversation, " 雷 " means both the lightning and the accompanying thunder as a single phenomenon, right?
At night, I sometimes see lightning on the horizon, but no thunder. That is 雷, right?
All the time, I hear the thunder, but not see the lightning. That is also 雷, right?
Does "雷を見えた？" sound like natural Japanese?
Does "雷を聞こえた？" sound like natural Japanese?


texts: Which of the following forms are allowed in relative clauses?

texts:
I recently discovered that Relative clauses are mostly made with dictionary form verbs/adjectives, but  [the answer here]says my “...
sentence indeed has three relative clauses marked by (1), (2), and (3)” Seeing as (1) and (3) are both made from past tense verbs, I’m uncertain as to whether they are relative clauses or not. And if not, what are they, and how is this unknown construct (D) translated? This, in addition to confusion over whether a te-form verb + noun construct forms a relative clause or a continuative clause has me overwhelmed. Therefore, I am reviewing what I know and what I don’t know or am uncertain of in the list below to see which forms can make relative clauses.

(A)   私は右手に同じようなナイフを握っている。 - Known to form a relative clause using the な-adjective 同じような, and a noun, ナイフ.

(B)   私は右手に光るナイフを握っている。 - Known to form a relative clause using the Godan verb 光る, and a noun, ナイフ.

(C)   私は右手に込めてナイフを握っている。- Known to form a continuative clause using the same verb + noun format as a relative clause?

(D)   私は倒れた鉄骨の上に散歩する。 - Once thought to have been a relative clause, now unknown construct of past tense verb plus noun.


texts:
先日、同級生は飼い犬を学校に連れてきました。

  彼の飼い犬はゴールデン・レトリバーで、すごく可愛かったです。

  学生達に撫でられたり、甘えられたりすることがとても好きだったので、授業中に教室を走り回っていて、皆を迎えに行きました。

  甘えん坊ですね～！

I posted that entry on Lang-8 and someone corrected my use of は to が
so

  先日、同級生は飼い犬を学校に連れてきました。

to

  先日、同級生が飼い犬を学校に連れてきました。

while other people said it was fine. I'm confused on which one I should use in this sentence.


texts: What does そういうところがです mean in this exchange?

texts:
なつみ 「あの…流星。」
流星　「ん？」
なつみ 「ええと…痛いところとかない？」
流星  　「問題ない。もう大丈夫だ。」
なつみ 「そ、そうなんだ」
なつみ 「それであの…さ。改めてごめんなさい…私のせいで無理させちゃって」
流星が訝しげな目をして、なつみを見る。
なつみ 「な、なによ？」
流星   「お前は…本物のなつみか？」
なつみ 「ばっ――」
なつみは真っ赤になって怒ろうとした。が、ふいに弱々しい顔になり
なつみ 「……そうね。こんなの私らしくないか…」
流星   「……難しいな。女の子というものは…」
Girl 2 「流星さん。あなたからそんな言葉が出てくるとは思いませんでした。」
流星    「なぜだ？」
Girl 2  「もう…そういうところがです。」
Girl 2  はぁ。私もそうだけど、なつみさんも大変ね…

The question is about what the そういうところがです at the end of this exchange means.
Context: 流星 saved Girl 1 a while back and got injured in the process, she goes to meet him wanting to say sorry to him again. He gets surprised by her sudden apology as it isn't normally like her to be this upfront. She runs away and then he says 「難しいな。女の子というものは」 and another girl who was listening in then responds with「あなたからそんな言葉が出てくるとは思いませんでした。」, and I believe そんな言葉 is referring him saying girls are 難しい. He asks her why she thought that he wouldn't say something like that and she responds with 「もう…そういうところがです。」. My question is about what she means by this. It's clearly related to do with how he responds with 「なぜだ？」 to her statement as she's referring to "that part of him" as the reason for not expecting him to say what he said. Having said that, I'm not quite sure what "part" of him she is referring to and so I will include a few of his qualities in a list. He's generally very blunt, to the point, and troublesome to deal with(for a variety of reasons). In response to the answerer (Knowing his character, 女の子を気づかう発言をするとは思わなかった is not what I would logically think as that's the complete opposite of his character(although he is very careless and can end up saying/doing things that injure others even though he didn't intend to), as very shortly after he asks one of the other girls how he can cheer her up.
Edit: added other parts of narration and a bit more explanations.


texts: Do 気が付く{つく} and 気[付く]{づく} have the same meaning?

texts: If they both mean the same, is が optional?


texts: Interpreting 本人がどうにかするしかないことなので

texts:
I just started reading a comic, and I'm having a bit of trouble understand a line said in the first page.
Basically a girl approaches her guy friend and tells him that she's been worried for him since he hasn't been in school for 10 days, the guy responds by saying he was sleeping. She then says

はいまあ、ゆっくり見守ってやるつもりでいます。本人がどうにかするしかないことなので,

The guy then responds with まあじ?
I'm a little bit confused on what is trying to be said in the latter part of the sentence. Is she saying she has no choice but to look over him in person because he's been skipping school?
Well, my intentions were to keep an eye on you, looks like I have no choice but to do in person


texts: Does there exist a poem that uses direction to change its meaning?

texts:
I've been reading about writing order and the question has been poking at me for a while now: since writing order could theoretically introduce ambiguity, is it possible that someone has written a poem that reads differently depending on the direction it's read in?

For example, read left-to-right, it would mean one thing, while read top-down, it would mean something entirely different.

~` ~` ~` ~` ~` ~` ~`
+- +- +- +- +- +- +-
=_ =_ =_ =_ =_ =_ =_

In this pretend language that's supposed to represent Japanese, the poem would read:

~` ~` ~` ~` ~` ~` ~` +- +- +- +- +- +- +- =_ =_ =_ =_ =_ =_ =_
A frog jumped into a pot of boiling water and jumped back out.

or top-down:

~` +- =_ ~` +- =_ ~` +- =_ ~` +- =_ ~` +- =_ ~` +- =_ ~` +- =_
A man went to the deli to buy some ham.

Edit:

Someone provided an interesting example (now deleted), so I thought I should add this in, since it's probably the reason they deleted their answer:

[addendum] I'm thinking about an example that reads in both directions in full, rather than being "Bible code" or the peppering of a message within a larger text. I did not have the following in mind:

In a small town, there liveD a man who, despIte his lOw inTellect, was loved
by many. He was an...

Or

I apologize for my rudeness, but I don't quite think YOU know what
you ARE talking about. Stupidity comes in many forms, not just A poorly
developed intellect. This common assumption tends to JERK those in the know.

Rather, something like

I   l i k e   f o o d
n   i c i v   o n n i
    m a l e   r l o n
a   b r l r   g y m n
    o u e y   e   o e
s   , s d o   t k p r
t     ,   n   f n o
a   t   a e   u o t
g   h v l     l w o
n   e i l     , s e
a     o           i
n   m l o     h a a
t   a e f     e b "
    n n         o ,
    , t         u
      l         t h
      y           e
                "
                  h
                  a
                  d

Pretending for the moment that the vertical passage makes any sense and that "n iciv onni", etc, are English words. Think "crossword puzzle"


texts: If I want to start doing something - translation

texts:
How to ask for advice if I want to start doing something, for example:

If I want to start watching Tv-shows, from which should I start?
If I want to start doing exercises, how should I start?

Is there specific grammar for it? Can I say something like this:

もし私はドラマを見たい初める、からどんな始まりますか？
Thank you.


texts: The Japanese term for "synonym discussion"?

texts:
In English, when I want to know the subtle differences in meaning between similar words I consult a thesaurus's synonym discussion. To give an example of this, see halfway down Merriam-Webster's thesaurus page for the word "ponder". Several English thesauruses have them, but not all thesauruses do.

Is there a term for this which Japanese thesauruses conventionally use?


texts: Ambiguity in meaning of sentences with a noun qualifed by an adjective with が particle

texts:
I was wondering if there is any ambiguity with sentences that have adjectives qualifying a noun, especially regarding the が particle.

For example:

1.) 僕が好きな人

Can this sentences have an ambiguous double meaning of "The person that I like" and "The person that likes me"?

Likewise

2.) 僕が食べたい魚

Can this mean either "fish I want to eat" or "fish that wants to eat me"?

to make the meaning of this sentence clearer would

3.)僕を食べたい魚-

ONLY mean "fish that want to eat me" as the only interpretation?

Is there a go to interpretation for qualifications like this or does one have to identify exclusively via context unless there are further details provided?

For example,  more detailed, clearcut sentences

4.) 僕が好きなところ -
This sentence would ONLY mean "The place that I like/My Favorite place"

or

5.)　野菜を食べるのが好きな人 -
In this sentence the only interpretation could be "People that like eating vegetables"

Thanks


texts:
I have been struggling on finding out what is the meaning of this sentence:

  嬉しくって 楽しくって 冒険も いろいろしたね

Especially in this part

  嬉しくって 楽しくって

I know that those are adjective-i. But I do not understand how it is conjugated into that phrase. Please explain me how it is conjugated and what does it mean then. Thank you.


texts:
The kanji for ''sayounara'' is 左様なら
I'm curious about the kanji 左 which means ''left'' as in ''your left hand''.
What is it doing here ?
My understanding is that 左様 means ''this way'' or ''like this'' but why is ''left'' used ?
To me 左様 looks more like ''the left way''.
All thoughts and insights welcome.


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


texts:
When you cut vegetables, you can say みじん切り.
Can I say 小刻みにする instead of みじん切り?


texts:
The relevant bit goes like:

我が祈りを聞き給え
生きとし生けるものすべては主に帰せん
我が魂よ再び安らぐがよい主は報いて下さるがゆえに

Going off context ん seems to be a volitional auxiliary (推量) as it would make the middle bit as "to you (the Lord) all living beings shall come". Is it that or something else?
But how does 帰す conjugate here? Is 帰せ an older mizenkei?
Edit: I've found some examples, such as

乙女のすがたしばしとどめん I want to keep the image of the young women for a while.

However, I don't know if this verb is the same as modern とどめる, which wouldn't make much sense attaching 連用形　to volitional. If とどめ were a mizenkei form of some other verb it would start making some sense to me, I think.


texts: に vs で with state of being (but no verb)

texts:
All the に vs で comparisons I can find discuss using them with verbs. However I recently wanted to say something like "I am alone at home", and phrased it without a verb:

  家で一人です

But that got me thinking whether it could also have been:

  家に一人です

because my understanding is that に is used in a similar way with ある/いる for "existence in a place".

Google has lots of results for both. Can I use either? If so, what's the difference?


texts:
I have always had problems with sentences ending in ”を”

For example: それで後任を？

(a) Who is the subject?
(b) What is the object? It is confusing because it ended with a "を"


texts:
The full sentence:
彼女と知り合えたのは、寝坊していつもと違う電車に乗ったおかげです。

My attempt at translation:
"Concerning that I could get to know my girlfriend, it is thanks to that I got onto a different train when always oversleeping."

I got problems with the parts in bold/italic.

First, I'm confused by いつもと. Is it いつも+と or a short form of いつも通り　(= http://jisho.org/search/itsumoto)
Since いつも is positioned strangely compared to what I usually encountered in my textbook so far, I would guess that it is the latter.
In this case, I would find it easier to interprete the sentence:

a)"Concerning that I could get to know my girlfriend, it is thanks to that I, oversleeping as usual, got onto a different train."

or

b) "Concerning that I could get to know my girlfriend, it is thanks to that I, oversleeping, got onto a different train than usual."

In version b, the A と B は 違う construction (if I remember correctly) would be reflected. However, いつも通り meaning "as usual", I'm still skeptical about wether or not I can make such a modification from "as" to "than".


texts:
I've seen the phrase 1ターン1度 "once per turn" used in the Yu-Gi-Oh! Card game, so it seems like ターン is a legit counter. But I'm not sure how to pronounce it. From what I've googled so far, some people pronounce it like いったーん which is odd because ターン is a gairaigo.

So how do you pronounce 1ターン?


texts: Is this sentence correct? courtesy/honorific use of the passive

texts:
総理大臣【そうりだいじん】はヨーロッパを訪問【ほうもん】されたくさんの国々の大統領【だいとうりょう】に会われた。
"The prime minister visited Europe and met the presidents of various countries".

され is as this to link the phrase right?
Why use "を" as if it were a normal sentence? Wouldn't it be "で" or "に" as a normal passive sentence?
Are Honorific/Courtesy sentences treated as if they were normal sentences even though they are conjugated using the passive form in the verbs?


texts:
Does there need to be some mistake in order to use the ~なおす suffix:

  宿題をやりなおしなさい。// ok (but there needs to be at least one mistake)
  料理を作りなおした。  // ok (but there needs to be some fault)

Regardless of whether there is a mistake, you just cannot say:

  宿題をやりかえしなさい。// never ok
  料理を作りかえした。  // never ok

Could I say something like:

  (1) 昨日、好きな曲を何度も聞きかえしていた。 // Last night, I listened to a song that I like many times in a row.
  (2) 昨日、好きな曲を聞きかえしおわれなかった。 // Last night, I couldn't stop listening to a song that I like.

I really do hope #2 is correct and natural. It sounds good to me, but stringing 3 verbs together just seems too extreme. It can't be correct?


texts: How many ways to say "but" are there in Japanese?

texts:
So far, I remember 4 ways to say "but" in japanese, but I bet there are more, arent they?
- kedo
- demo
- daga
- shikashi

are there other ways to say "but" in japanese? What about difference in usage?


texts:
The context for this question is from a conversation text. (みんなの日本語中級I第４課）The speaker is leaving a voice message:

……今日ね、急な仕事が入っちゃって、遅くなりそうなの。晩ご飯、先に食べといて。じゃね。

といて here is just short for ておいて, but what exactly does ておく mean in 食べといて? Does it in some sense imply preparing for something? What (nuanced) difference does it make if the speaker said 「先に食べて」instead of 「先に食べといて」?


texts: 「というのは」と「というのも」の違いは何ですか。

texts:
「というのは」と「というのも」の違いは何ですか。
また、下の文章でこの二つの接続語が交換してもいいですか。

わたしたちは感心した。というのは、桜の開花日が気象予報士の予想通りだったからだ
明日は各地とも花見客でにぎわうだろう。というのも、あしたは花見日和になりそうだからだ。

よろしくお願いします。


texts:
I can't understand why "とは" is being used in the following sentences:

  1)...質問があります。その質問とは、「なぜ、皆マスクをしているの？」...

  2) 花粉症とは、植物の花粉によって起こるアレルギーです。


texts: What is the difference between 愛しい【いとしい】 and 愛おしい【いとおしい】?

texts:
What is the difference between 愛しい and 愛おしい?

If possible, can you give me some example sentences?

Thank you.


texts:
Consider this sentence

speaker is talking to himself about how to deal with an adversary (X), he has so far tried to hire a 暴漢 to beat up X, and a 探偵 to snoop on X, both of which have failed.
暴漢に襲わせても返り討ち、探偵を雇っても不発……。

in this case would interpret this as:

(俺が)暴漢に(Xを)襲わせても返り討ち、探偵を雇っても不発……。

Compared to

傾いた太陽の橙色が辺り一帯を神々しく染め上げて、風で舞った花びらたちがまるで雪のように煌めいている。
その中心で美しく長い髪を風になびかせながら、優しさに満ち溢れた瞳を細めて俺を見つめる女の子。

and

だが、どんなに身をよじって暴れても、男の人の力には敵わなかった。
興奮に目を血走らせたおじさんが、まるで嘲笑うようにべたついた手で....

At first glance it would appear
風 "causing" 髪をなびかせる - i don't think 髪を風に(して)なびかせる applies here
興奮 "causing" 目を血走らせた
As far as i can tell, that does not seem grammatical. But i can't easily add unspoken (...) to these for them to make sense.
compare to:

冷たい風が吹き抜け、短い髪をなびかせる。

where 風 is no doubt 短い髪をなびかせる'ing.
How is に and the following causative expressions used here?
thanks


texts:
In the follow manga panel:

I'm not sure about 「見ちゃおれん」. Is this 見ては居れない = 見てちゃだめだ　"(You) should watch"?  My other guess is おれ＝俺.
Context: The man is scolding the girl (he hired to be the stall mascot) for not doing her job properly.


texts:
Like in the examples:

「自分が不幸でも他の人が幸せならいいなんて綺麗事だよ」

「人は外見より中身だ、なんて綺麗事だよ」

In the dictionary I found lip service, but it doesn't "feel" very natural to me, although maybe that's just my impression.

What are some other words/expressions which I use in this situation?


texts:
I've heard this japanese sentence in a dialog:

nihon no inu wa gohan o tabe masuka?

I can't translate it.
"Do japanese dogs eat anything?"
Or "do you eat japanese dogs?"?


texts: Can two clauses joined by masu-stem form have an reason-action relationship?

texts:
新しい駅は、品川駅と田町駅の間にある車両基地の一部を縮小し建設が進められていて、山手線と京浜東北線の列車が停車する計画です。
  The new station will reduce part of the rail yard between the Shinagawa and Tamachi stations and 建設が進められていて and it is planned that Yamanote line Keihintouhoku line trains will stop there.

I have no idea how 建設が進められていて fits into this sentence. I can only translate it as "by means of construction proceeding ..."i.e. the act of construction proceeding is the way that trains will stop at the station. Well, that seems so obvious that it doesn't need to be said. If you don't finish building the station then no trains will be stopping there.

Or maybe the sentence is just saying three separate things strung together into one incoherent sentence. "The station will reduce the rail yard and construction is progressing and trains will stop there".

I feel I must have completely misunderstood/mis-parsed this sentence.

I also feel a bit weird about translating 縮小 as 'reduce'. 'Occupy' or 'replace' would seem like more natural words to use in English. Is there any way I can think of 縮小する to make it seem more natural?

Putting my two concerns together I have a final hypothesis that 車両基地の一部を縮小し and 建設が進められていて go together to give "Construction is proceeding that will reduce part of the railyard and ... If that is so then I didn't know you could join two clauses with the masu-stem form (I don't know the real name for this) where the first clause is the purpose of the second clause.


texts: Rules for 「みたいな感じ」（なっていってるみたいな感じ？）

texts:
Was about to tweet something like this:

  ジェイクさんは野村君にとってどんどん指導者みたいになっていってるみたいな感じだね。

"It feels like Jake is gradually becoming more and more like a mentor to Nomura, doesn't it?"

...but a cursory Google shows that while there's of course a ton of results for 「になってるみたいな感じ」, and plenty for both 「いってるみたいな感じ」 and 「なっていってるみたい」, there's none at all for 「になっていってるみたいな感じ」, so I was wondering if there's something wrong with my usage here? It doesn't seem like this exact combination of elements should be so uncommon unless there was something wrong with it somehow. Any other corrections welcome, of course.


texts:
Context: a boy will soon take the test to become a pro-boxer. After a training match, his trainer says to him:

  まだひきつけられる。まだ寸歩踏み込める。紙一重の域はまだ遠いな。

I found on dictionaries that　〜にひきつけられる means "to be drawn, attracted, charmed by something", but that something is not present here (maybe it's something implicit?), so I thought it could simply mean "to get distracted". Is my guess correct?

I would also appreciate if you could help me with the rest of the sentence. My translation attempt:

  You still get distracted. You can still step a little closer. Your are still far from reaching your limit.

Thank you for your help!


texts:
In both these sentences, what does でも mean? (I think I know the meaning of the sentences, just not the particles)

カードでもいいですか。
なごやでもうっていますか。

I know that で is a particle that can denote location or mean something like "by means of".
I know that も is a particle that means too, either, etc.
I also know that でも can mean but, but this doesn't seem to be the case.

Do both particles acquire different meanings or do they become some sort of particle themselves? Or do they simply retain their meanings, but combined have a different one?

Thank you!

P.S.: I do not know any kanji, hence I wrote in kana and hope you can too.


texts: Why are movies/video-clips counted with 本?

texts:
I just noticed in my Facebook uploads that for my videos, it says I have 25本.  What's the reasoning behind using 〜本 to count videos or movie clips?  The only line of reasoning I can come up with would be thinking of the the movies as as old reel of actual film

Even though they are circular, they are more flat than long, so I would think those would be counted as 〜枚 instead of 〜本.

So what's the reasoning for using 〜本?


texts:
I do not understand the meaning of のを:

a. 彼は家を買った。 しかも大きい庭付きのを(だ)。 (だ is indicated as optional)

Is it different from:

b. 彼は家を買った。 しかも大きい庭付きだ。 (I'm not sure if this is grammatical)
c. 彼は家を買った。 しかも大きい庭付きのだ。

What does it mean when the copula takes on a direct object? I have so far only encountered AはBだ,　AがBだ, Bだ but I have not seen を directly preceding the copula before.


texts: When would I use 飛行場【ひこうじょう】 over 空港【くうこう】 for airport？

texts:
So my flashcards say 飛行場【ひこうじょう】 means airport.

But actual airports in Japan always use 空港【くうこう】, like 成田【なりた】空港【くうこう】.

What are the differences between these?

And in what situations (if any) would I want to use 飛行場【ひこうじょう】 over 空港【くうこう】？


texts: What is the difference in usage of [実行]{じっこう}する and [実施]{じっし}する?

texts:
So at my office i see both [実施]{じっし}する and [実行]{じっこう}する used a lot to mean "carry out" a task.

Any time I ask a Japanese person they tell me "they are the same".

Can anyone tell me any differences in usages, or any specific cases where one is preferred over the other? Or any specific nuances one implies?

Some examples straight from my email inbox:

以下のコマンドを実行してください。
バッチの再実行をしました。
バッチを毎時0分に実施します。
忘年会を実施することになりました。
結合テストケースを実施します。


texts: The meaning of それを昨日、今日、司教になったようなのが！

texts:
Context: This old man, one of the candidates to become the new pope, had one of his subordinates secretly check how the various churches had voted for who they want to be pope, and he noticed that the large majority voted for another person(who has been in the church for a much shorter time than him but not that short). He then complains to this person as follows:

  儂が何年司教を続けたと思っている！　ひゃ、１００年！　１００年だ！　それを昨日、今日、司教になったようなのが！

My question is about what he means in the second part. Is he complaining that they are treating his 100 years of dedication to the church as if he had only became a bishop very recently?

Edit: From l'électeur's answer I now understand the end part of the sentence, but the first part where he says それを is confusing me as I, in gist, can't determine what he means by it as the accompanying verb isn't said.


texts: In general/Generally: 概【がい】して, 一般【いっぱん】に, 全体【ぜんたい】に, 総【そう】じて, なべて, 一体{いったい}に, etc

texts:
When I look at them in the dictionary, they all mean the same thing. How to know which one to use?
If I want to say: "Generally, I go to school by bus" or "Generally, people grow taller" or even "Generally, I like cats", which one should I use? Or can several of them be used for the same sentence?
Examples would be much appreciated.
Edit: Okay, some of the sentences I gave lack context. Here would be the entire sentence:

"Generally, people grow taller but some suffers from dwarfism"
"Generally, I like cats but this one is horrible"


texts:
A follow-up to Why is が added at the end of この小娘が in this clip?

I'm currently aware of the following が particles / usages:

1) Subject marker (exhaustive listing). I think it can appear at the end if the sentence underwent a dislocation?
2) Conjuctive particle ~ "but", can appear at the end of a sentence if the rest is ommitted (among other reasons can be used for softening a request). Some sources state it can have introductory meaning when in that case it would be translated rather with "and" or "so"
3) Arguably an object marker, depends whether e.g. Xが好き is interpreted as ~ "to like X" or "X is likeable" (I am leaning towards the second camp, but I'm not a linguist)
4) Sentence-ending particle as explained in Why is が added at the end of この小娘が in this clip?
5) Possessive in older Japanese? Currently probably mainly seen in names ~ 戦場ヶ原 ... wiki says "In some cases both ヶ and が (and even ケ) are used to write a place name" so I think it may be included here

Are there any / what are other particles that can be written as が or other usages of those listed here?


texts: ば conditional - combinations of action/state verb and same/different subject

texts:
The following sentences are ば conditional sentences, with combinations of action/state verb and same/different subjects.
Which of these are correct / wrong, and why?

Volition

1 Action verb + same subject
(私が)卒業すれば、(私が)彼女と結婚するつもりです。

2 State verb + different subjects
彼女が希望すれば、(私が)彼女と結婚するつもりです。

3 State verb + same subject
(私が)卒業できれば、(私が)彼女と結婚するつもりです。

4 Action verb + different subjects
彼女が卒業すれば、(私が)彼女と結婚するつもりです。

Sentence 1 was said to be wrong while sentence 2 was said to be correct by my teacher.

Requests

5 田中: 山下さんが来られれば(山下さんが)知らせてください
山下: はい

6 田中: 山下さんが来られれば(竹内さんが)知らせてください
竹内: はい

Edit: In both cases, 来られれば is in potential and conditional form.


texts: Does なかなか (with negative verb) mean "by no means" or "considerably"?

texts:
WWWJDIC defines なかなか (with negative verb) as by no means

But shouldn't it have been considerably ?

By no means means 100% not

considerably means like 85% not

So does  なかなか (with negative verb)  bends more towards by no means or considerably?


texts: unclear designation of それ　in this passage

texts:
Like to get some opinions about this passage, speaker is in a situation where only he has a gun (kept in secret so far), but might be forced to reveal his hand soon. Has to deal with the 不良 sooner or later.

  （そうだ。何も本当に撃つ必要はないんだ。拳銃がどんなものかは、他の連中も知ってる。こいつは……抑止力としても使えるんじゃないか？）

  つまりは脅しだ。

  実際に撃たなくても、撃つそぶりを見せていれば相手は最悪の場合を想定せざるを得ない。この拳銃に弾がいくつ入っているかはわからないが、弾がなくなって、さらにそれが周知になるまでは、あの不良どもだって従わざるを得ない絶対の抑止力になるはずだった。

... no need to fire, use as threat/deterence...

i don't know haw many bullets are in this gun, if i run out, even worse, if "that" becomes common knowledge, i expect even those delinquents will be under absolute deterrence as they have no choice to but to comply. - (, the sentence will makes sense, depending on what "that" is )

I think ehe issue in question here is the それ in それが周知になるまでは

At a glance i would expect それ to be [弾がなくなって], but that makes no sense, but because there's no deterrence potential if everyone knows that the gun has no bullets.

So それ seems to be referring to something along the lines of  "the fact that I have a gun" for [あの不良どもだって従わざるを得ない絶対の抑止力になるはずだった] to make sense

What exactly is それ referring to here, and if someone only read up to さらにそれが周知になるまでは, would that know exactly what それ is referring to in this situation?

Thank you


texts: Can 「持ち込んだ食品を飲食するのは禁止である。」be simplified for a notification board?

texts:
I want to write a notification board saying

  Consuming outside food and drink is not allowed.

My attempt is as follows, but I think it can be simplified.

  持ち込んだ食品を飲食するのは禁止である。

Update

Bring outside food and drink is fine as long as they are not consumed. This exemption might be useful for those who come to the restaurant after shopping.


texts:
The following is from one of the definitions of a word in goo辞書:

  どちらに傾くかの度合い

I do not understand why か is used here instead of こと.

Usually, I would expect to see の (or こと) nominalize a verb. Nonetheless, I reckon it would be ungrammatical here, since what follows is the possessive の, and a noun (度合い).

Alternatively, if I were to write this phrase myself, I would simply attach the plain verb (傾く) to the noun (度合い):

  どちらに傾く度合い

Which seems to express the same thing to me.

I do not think this かの is かのように, but what about 彼の? If I understand correctly, 彼の is simply an old-fashioned way of saying あの. If so, the phrase could be rewritten thus:

  どちらに傾くあの度合い

Which seems strange to me. (I am a low-level beginner though.) Could someone please help me understand the grammar at work here?

ご教授どうぞよろしくお願いいたします！


texts: Ambiguous sentences when using の and に together

texts:
In the following sentence, the combination of の and に allows it to be interpreted in two ways:

この巨大なネズミは他の地域に生息する固有種に比べれば小柄。

この巨大なネズミは（他の地域）に生息する固有種に比べれば小柄。
Compared to the endemic species in other regions, these huge rodents are small in size.
この巨大なネズミは他の（地域に生息する固有種）に比べれば小柄。
Compared to other endemic species in the region, these huge rodents are small in size

This sentence is a little bit simplified from the original in here, but it should have the same general structure. Reading a bit more into the story, it seems like the second interpretation of the sentence is the correct interpretation.
My question is: Is there a rule for which way it should be interpreted? So, essentially, is this sentence ambiguous? And if it is, then is this just bad writing because it's a web novel, or do these kinds of sentences show up in polished literature?


texts:
I'm not sure if these two have the same meaning, but I don't think they bear the meaning that I know which is the basic なる (to become).

内なる声と言いますか・・

彼女よりさらに深遠の、未知なる人物こそが黒幕なのではないかと疑わせるのだ…。


texts: I was under the impression that たら was used for "if this then", statements. Be they cause and effects or when statements. Whats the difference with と?


texts: Confusing sentence (~た次第です, passive speech as active, etc)

texts:
Note: I sought out uses of 次第 on other posted questions but didn't find anything that fits here.

There's a sentence in the introduction to 日本語文法ハンドブック (a book written for teachers of beginning Japanese grammar):

寺村先生[an esteemed Japanese teacher the author of this book models himself after]は海外技術者研修協会における草創期の日本語教育に全面的に協力され、同協会の日本語教科書編纂にも大きく貢献されましたが、私[the author of this book]は海外技術者研修協会との縁により、また、若き日の寺村先生の講筵に列した者として本書の監修にあたった次第です。

My questions are:

The passive voice used for 寺村先生's work doesn't seem to make sense.  Is this a case of substituting the active voice for passive as a matter of politeness?
What is 講筵's exact definition?  It doesn't appear in any dictionary, although several possible meanings are inferred ("mat a teacher would sit on and lecture from")
What is the exact translation of ~た次第です here?  The closest definition I can find is "reason" or "course of events", similar (I would think) to ~た理由です or ~たわけです.  Is ~た次第です an acceptable substitute for these constructions?

Thanks in advance.


texts:
I'm trying to figure out what 血のションベン means.  I understand the individual words and literal meaning.  So assuming it doesn't mean "bloods urine", what does this mean?

Perhaps the full sentance is important in this case:
「私が最初に血のションベンを流した」

If you search for this phrase, just as is with the katakana 「ションベン」 you'll find numerous hits online. I seem to always see it associated with 「流す」.

Here's another example, which I found online: 「女性にこんなこと言うのもあれなんやけどな、先生らの時代は　血のションベン（小便）だすまで勉強しろてようゆわれたもんやで」


texts: How do adverbs denoting amounts such as たくさん and ちょっと work?

texts:
Japanese counters such as 一つ are adverbs even though they describe nouns such as in the following sentence.

りんごを一つ食べた

It is clear that 一つ refers to the amount of apples. However, what do adverbs such as たくさん and ちょっと refer to when they are used, the amount of nouns the verb was done to or the amount of the verb that was done? For example

りんごをたくさん食べた

Does たくさん refer to the amount of apples eaten or does it refer to the amount of the verb done such as how "a lot" describes how much running was done in a sentence like "yesterday, I ran a lot"? Some other examples are

人がたくさん死んだ
Many people died.
私はたくさん死んだ
I died a lot.

I am not sure if these interpretations are correct, mainly because I don't know if たくさん as an adverb describes the noun or the verb. The former has たくさん seemingly describe the amount of nouns, but the latter has たくさん describe the amount of the verb done. ちょっと is also confusing. りんごをちょっと食べた sounds natural, but 人がちょっと死んだ doesn't sounds natural and does not feel like an opposite of 人がたくさん死んだ.


texts: やり い-form conjunction vs て-form conjunction

texts:
From Assimil's "Japanese With Ease" volume 2, lesson 72, sentence 10.

  その上【うえ】一人【ひとり】で起【お】き上【あ】がれないから,そのたんびに起【お】こしてやり,半【はん】日【にち】かかって,やっとひとつの山【やま】から降【お】りられた。

その上【うえ】一人【ひとり】で起【お】き上【あ】がれないから,
Furthermore since he couldn't stand up alone

そのたんびに起【お】こしてやり,I had to help him up each time

半【はん】日【にち】かかって,it took half a day

やっとひとつの山【やま】から降【お】りられた。to finally be able to descend from the mountain once

  ,そのたんびに起【お】こしてやり,

I don't understand why it is 起【お】こしてやりand not 起【お】こしてやって.

1.)Wikipedia says the i-form can be used in conjunctions in formal writing. I assume that this is happening here, am I assuming correctly?

1.a) If not, what is happening here?

2.) Could 起【お】こしてやって, be  used instead?

2.a)If not, why?

2.b)If so, how would it change the feeling/meaning of the sentence?


texts: What's the difference between そうですね, そうですか, そうです

texts:
How are the following different:

そうです (thats right)
そうですか (i see;  is that so)
そうですね (thats right)

also what's the difference between いいです and いいですね?

reference or sentence in context much appreciated  especially example/s of where one uses "thats right" in english and then its translated to japanese which of そうですね or そうです are used any help would be much appreciated.


texts: What's the meaning of "くべて" in this sentence?

texts:
"花をくべて　歌をくべて"
I tried to search for the meaning and the only thing I got was something like "throw fire in something" that for me at least doesn't make sense


texts: I know it's a stretch, and I'm pretty sure it's not, but is 名前 related to name? I always thought it was weird that they were so similar in pronunciation.


texts: 「〜に関するN」vs 「〜に関してのN」

texts: In Japanese class, we just learned the grammatical form 「〜に関する」and its various usages. The conjugation 「〜に関しての」was also brought up, and our teacher said that there was virtually no difference between these two forms when using this grammar to modify nouns. I was wondering whether there was any difference, preference, or connotation that these two have that would make the choice of which one to use different based on context, or the noun being modified. Are they truly 100% interchangeable?


texts: What are the origins of 掘った芋いじるな (hotta imo ijiru na)?

texts:
The gag expression 掘った芋いじるな (hotta imo ijiruna) sounds to japanese ears uncannily like "What time is it now?" I'm guessing this is Showa era humour, since English probably sounded more foreign then than now.

Does anyone know the origin of this saying, and anything about how popular it was (or wasn't)?

For bonus points: do you know of any other gag expressions like this? I only know one other: アメリカではバス降りたい時は何と言いますか？ 。。。揚げ豆腐(あげどうふ) = I get off.


texts:
I want to say

  Human beings need not only health and wealth but also knowledge.

For the wealth, I chose 殷富{いんぷ} instead of 富{とみ}. When I said the following

  健康{けんこう}や殷富{いんぷ}に限{かぎ}らず、人間{にんげん}は知識{ちしき}が必要{ひつよう}だ。

my teacher and other students did not recognize 殷富{いんぷ} and looked at me with strange faces as  淫婦{いんぷ} and  婬婦{いんぷ} were the only words available on their dictionaries.

Questions

Is 殷富 never used or deprecated Kanji?

Edit

My dictionary shows me the following.


texts: What is the difference between these sentences used が and は

texts:
I'm trying to translate an English sentence into Japanese , but i got some problems and confuse which should i use between が or は . So please tell me which is the correct one .

ジョンさんは休日にいつも東京にいる。
ジョンさんが休日にいつも東京にいる。

Also
1. 彼は傷口にそっと触れる。
2. 彼が傷口にそっと触れる。


texts: Is my understanding of あんの here correct?

texts:
In the first speech bubble, I'm not sure about「あんの」.  Is it a contraction of 「あるの」?
So the sentence translates to "Do you have awareness as a member of the cultural festival action committee?"


texts: Why is a baby called 赤ちゃん? The term means red. Is the term "red" specific? Can the term refer to baby animals as well?


texts: What is a typical font size for Japanese text?

texts:
What size of type is commonly used in Japanese books, magazines, or in blocks of online text? Since there is unlikely to one single size, I'd welcome an answer that either gave a rough range or listed a couple specific examples from major presses, newspapers, or websites.

(I am asking because I'm curious about whether the complexity of kanji leads to larger type than the type sizes that are standard for works produced with roman letters.)


texts: I was initially taught that いえ was the informal version of いいえ. Recently, I have read on several websites that いえ should only be used to refer to house/home 家. Is this true and if so, what is the negative equivalent of え?


texts:
I've looked through ALC and Jisho but I couldn't find a good expression to convey that someone feels "distant" especially in a romantic setting.

The best word that I found in Jisho/ALC  was よそよそしい. Does this work for the nuance of a romantic partner who doesn't seem to be him/herself?


texts: Grammar of (verb)し(noun) such as in 選ばれし者

texts: Is there a grammatical explanation for this pattern, which I have seen a couple times in writing? I'm guessing it comes from classical grammar.


texts: Meaning of 「生きるにしても死ぬにしても」

texts:
In the video game Mother 3, there is a group of beings called the Magypsy, who are rumored to be very old. While talking to humans, one of them says the following:

  人間なんて生きるにしても死ぬにしても精々たった100年。

Note: The game's text is in almost all kana; kanji are mine. The original text is, 「にんげんなんて　いきるにしても　しぬにしても　せいぜい　たった１００ねん。」

While my guess is that this means something along the lines of, "A human life, from beginning to end, lasts at best a hundred years", I'm wondering about the exact meaning of the 「～にしても」construction. Jisho translates 「にしても」as "even if", but I can't find a way to phrase this sentence like that - "... even if they live, even if they die..." doesn't seem to make a lot of sense.

Is this some grammatical form I'm not familiar with, or is it perhaps my interpretation of the sentence that's the problem?


texts: Can と and を be interchanged with 思う the way I think they can?

texts:
Compare the following two sentences:

  あそこに[行]{い}こうと[思]{おも}っている

  あそこに[行]{い}こうを[思]{おも}っている

If I'm right about this, they both mean that the speaker is thinking of going somewhere.

However, the difference is that in the first case, the use of と indicates the speaker is literally saying those words in their mind. The English translation would be:

  I'm thinking, "I'll go over there."

In the second case, を indicates that the speaker is not literally thinking those words, so it's not a quote of their thoughts, it's just a description of their thoughts. So the English translation would be:

  I'm thinking of going over there.

I think this is right, but somehow the second one looks really awkward to me, so it doesn't feel right in some way.

Is my intuition correct that there is something grammatically wrong with it?

... should it be が instead of を?


texts:
Reading "プラチナデータ" by 東野圭吾.
Not clear on the meaning of:

"俺、何度も彼女を殺しそうになったもんな" -
"I often almost killed her ... (monna?)"

What is "monna"? I suppose "mono nara" ("if that thing"), but then I don't understand the whole sentence - is it "If I often almost killed her"?


texts: I though that けってい means decision. But in this game, it means “confirm” in the English version.


texts:
Good afternoon all,
Sometimes I see that people like to "curl" the last mora of a verb, for example:

瑞生: ああそれから、亜湖にも特別ボーナスだ。
亜湖: えっ。
瑞生: ジャーン！
亜湖: 何それ？
瑞生: かわいいだろう？
瑞生: おいおいおい、ほら、ちょっと、当ててみろよ。
亜湖: 何？
瑞生: ほらほらほら…。
瑞生: わあ、似合ってるぅ！

(Youtube link)
I was wondering what exactly does it mean to curl the "る" sound of the verb, and in what situations do we do that?


texts: Difference between potential form and ことができる

texts:
What is the difference between the potential form and using ことができる？ Are they interchangeable? For example:

日本語が話せます。

vs

日本語が話すことができます。


texts: What is the second word after the 「リミット」 and what is モノ(there is an image)

texts: About the second word after 「リミット」. I guess that it's a museum, but then the question is: How can be linked the word "limit" and "museum". Is it just "limit-museum" (but it's sounds a little strange)? And what is モノ and how to use it when I'm translating? Thanks for answer!


texts: Pattern in onyomi for middle Chinese -p and -ng finals

texts:
I've been thinking recently about patterns between onyomi and their respective Chinese counterparts (as presumably existed in middle Chinese and are now reflected across modern Chinese dialects). Japanese certainly does reflect a lot of the consonant endings that existed in middle Chinese that have been lost in some dialects (particularly Mandarin, which only preserves -r, -n and -ng as consonant finals) (cf. 六 - Mandarin liù, Cantonese luk6, Japanese roku) (cf. 七 - Mandarin qī, Cantonese cat1, Japanese shichi)

I was wondering in particular about the phenomenon regarding the -p final and the -ng final, both of which seem to be widely represented in modern Japanese by the elongation of the vowel sound (cf. 十 - Mandarin shí, Cantonese sap6, Japanese jū) (cf. 零 - Mandarin líng, Cantonese ling4, Japanese rē/rei). Is there any evidence of earlier Japanese having -ng as a valid phoneme, and if not, is there any particular reason why Japanese would have borrowed these elongated-vowel readings as substitutes for the -ng and the -p finals (especially in the case of the latter, which seems like it would be replicable by Japanese phonology)


texts:
I encountered follwoing sentence

  という音葉は胸にしまっておく。

And I think that 葉 is probably just misspelling, i.e. は entered twice instead of once. But I'm not sure. Can someone help?


texts:
From ear, despite what the conventional literature tells me, I often hear that the accented mora has a higher amplitude, not just coming before the downstep. This is particularly obvious in This Youtube fragment, where the recording equipment's low quality causes the audio to crackle on the ga-mora. Searching for it myself, I could only find this, referencing one study that finds it.

  [...] and that since, in his data, the amplitude peak fell on the accented syllable in the words in which the F0 fall was delayed [...]

Obviously this is an argumentative piece, and I cannot find the actual named research anywhere though many others that also reference it, and I cannot find anything else that corroborates it and searching for anything just seems to draw a comparison to English where accent is indicated by amplitude — so does anyone else have anything that corroborates or disputes the notion that in Japanese, accented moræ tend to have a higher amplitude?


texts: What does よろしくおねがいします mean when departing?

texts:
When on business in Japan last year, a Japanese colleague said よろしくおねがいします to me as the group were leaving after dinner.

I'm aware of its usage in initial greetings, as is usually taught in textbooks, but what is its English meaning in this context?


texts: Usage of simplified chinese in place of some kanji in handwriting

texts:
Of course I'm talking about casual writing as opposed to formal or polite writing.

There are many 新字体 that were kind of "half" simplified in to the equivalent simplified Chinese forms such as 関 and 広 (just randomly picking) where the simplified Chinese equivalent would be 关 and 广.

Then there are kanji that aren't simplified at all such as 門, 個 and 機 where the Chinese simplified would be 门, 个 and 机.

Furthermore there are characters that only get simplified when they are radicals such as 金 in 銀 that gets simplified to 银 in Chinese.

My question is that are these simplified Chinese versions of the kanji sometimes used in place of the Japanese version? This is mainly concerning the characters that end up with less strokes in simplified Chinese compared to Japan's versions since they would (usually) be faster to write.


texts:
In English, titles are written with all words being capitalized with exception of certain noteworthy function words. Given this, what are the rules for Japanese titles? I know they exist, titles are clearly written differently; but what exactly are these rules?

Also, if you could give some example titles where these rules are being applied, that would be greatly appreciated. :)

PS. Someone told me that title rules are used when writing news articles as well, like in the body itself; is this true?


texts: What is the proper response when someone tells you, for example, that their mother has died?  Relatedly, what should you do to express your sympathy?  Do you send a card? flowers? bake a casserole?


texts: What is the meaning of "MiN" in the context of a japanese web novel which is using gaming terminology?

texts:
I'm reading a japanese web novel on the website Syosetu and a term popped up which i can't figure out. The original paragraph where it appears is as follows:

HP 120 (14UP)

MP 122 (15 UP)

ViT 118 (13UP)

PoW 117 (13UP)

SpE 118 (15UP)

DeX 116 (14UP)

MiN 130 (16UP)

InT 134 (18UP)

Luk Max (限界突破)

What is the meaning of "MiN" here? (this web novel uses a lot of japanese video game lingo)


texts: Example with 〜だけでなくて、〜も patern that I don't understand

texts:
I'm asking about a grammar patern found in Tobira, that is : 〜だけ{でなく(て)/じゃなく(て)}、〜も (not only 〜, but also 〜). In the grammar point, I can understand the given examples.
For more information, one can see this page that gives more details here about this patern.
I was talking about Netflix and Amazon Prime (two video on demande services), telling to my conversation partner that Netflix is already enough for me and I don't have more time to suscribe to Amazon Prime.
To give me an example using the patern mentioned above, she told me this :
「Netflixだけじゃなくて、Amazonプライムも　というのは好きじゃありません。」
But I don't understand this sentence, especialy with the patern 〜けど{でなく(て)/じゃなく(て)}、〜も, that cannot be translated here by "not only 〜, but also 〜".
The sentence give me more the impression to say "Not only I don't like Netflix, but I don't like Amazon neither.", while my conversation partner told me that she would say 「Nexflixだけでなく、Amazon Primもきらいです。」
Do you have any keys for me to understand the first bolded sentence she told me?
Thank you in advance.


texts: Does 発作 imply involuntary muscle movement?

texts:
Most Americans hear "seizure" and envision a loss of muscle control. But there are many kinds of "seizures".

When a Japanese hears "発作" do they also imagine a loss of muscle control? Some seizures are as benign as a temporary loss of awareness of one's surroundings.


texts: "事故にでもあったのではあるまいか。" grammar help please?

texts:
I came across this example in a textbook, and I can't figure out the grammar of the 2nd sentence:

  彼から来るはずの連絡がない。事故にでもあったのではあるまいか。

ok:

  The correspondence from him that was expected has not come. 事故にでもあったのではあるまいか。

I've no idea what 事故にでもあった means. I can only imagine tokenizing as:

  事故、に、でも、あった

maybe I can imagine:

  事故、に、合った。 I had an accident

Not sure what to make of that でも... I don't know.


texts: Meaning of 「同性から見たって良い女だろ?」

texts:
I tried to understand and translate, I can think of:

"She's a nice woman from the same sex, right?"

"Seeing from the same sex, she's a nice woman, right?"

"She's a nice woman to see from the same sex, right?"

But I'm not sure what is the correct meaning of the sentence.


texts:
in a manga about management, someone says 主張し合っても不味いだけ

Does this mean something like 'bring assertions together'? or come to an agreement when you have two different assertions/ideas that might not neccesarily fit together initially?


texts: How is に used in the following sentence?

texts:
I have the following sentence from my hero academia anime.

つくづく あの入試は 合理性に欠くよ｡

The english subtitles for the show have this as the translation "That entrance exam was definitely not rational enough."

I'm confused at how に is working here. I know that に can be used for nouns that take the copula (na adjectives) to turn them into an adverb but 合理性 isn't one of these na adjectives. I would think を or は would make more sense here. Is に perhaps acting as a substitute for は here?

I've ruled out this acting as an indirect object marker and a direction marker. From there, I'm pretty clueless as to what it's exact function is here. Can anybody help me out here?


texts:
In this sentence I don't understand the beginning
"どうせ 本人と似て軽薄でキラキラしただけの---"
For me it's : Anyway, they look alike, brilliant and frivolous
But I'm not sure. Could someone please help me ?

And if someone could explain to me the meaning of だけの in the end of sentence, does it have the same meaning as "だけ" or does it mean something else.


texts:
I've been reading the section on viewpoint in A Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar (DBJG). In it he states that the following sentence is ungrammatical

私のむすこは私にしかられた
My son was scolded by me

The claim is that 'the passive construction requires the viewpoint of the referent of the subject'. Now I'm not sure I understand that phrase but I interpret it as follows. The subject is 'my son' and 'my son' is referring to 'son', therefore, the referent of the subject is 'son'. Is this correct?
It also references rule B which says 'When a sentence includes the structure, A's B, the speaker is taking A's viewpoint rather than B's'. Therefore since the sentence begins 'My son' it is taking 'my' viewpoint rather than the son's viewpoint. Applying these two rules results in a contradiction thus rendering the sentence ungrammatical. But here's where it goes wrong. I have an example in another book which claims to be perfectly grammatical.

Mikeさんの手紙がMaryさんに読まれました。

This sentence contains the same contradiction that according to the first rule the sentence should be from the viewpoint of the 'letter' but according to the second rule it is from the viewpoint of Mike.
So, have I completely misinterpreted these rules (I'm sure I must have since any passive sentence that began nounのnoun would be incorrect.)? If so how should I interpret these rules?  What is it that makes the first sentence ungrammatical and the second one okay?
I read another rule: 'The speaker usually describes a situation from his own viewpoint rather than from others' when he is involved in the situation. So I suppose that might make my first example invalid, but consider this conversation in which person B is a teacher at the school:
A) All the children at school got scolded today. My son was scolded by Mrs nasty. How about yours?
B) My son was scolded by me
Would 私のむすこは私にしかられた still be incorrect in this scenario?
Sorry for the long question. I've looked at all the other material on this site and nothing has eased my confusion so far.


texts: (Ordering food) difference between なし and 抜き

texts:
What is the difference between endings なし and 抜【ぬ】き when you want to exclude a certain ingredient from food?
Aside from 氷【こおり】なし when ordering soft drinks, I thought that for most other things 抜【ぬ】き should be used. But my friend has been saying 卵【たまご】なし to get rid of an egg, so I'm curious when which one of those is appropriate.


texts: Is there a Japanese universal verb for "imply"?

texts:
Very often I want to express an idea of "X is implied in Y", e.g.

  Is "I" implied in the following sentence?

Google translate tool offers the following:

  「私」は次の文で暗示されていますか？

Three-part question:

Does Google translation correctly expresses the idea?
Is it possible to use the verb 仄めかす in this case?

  「私」は次の文で仄めかされていますか？

Is there a better way to express "Is X implied in Y"?


texts:
The following is an excerpt from a dialogue between me and my language partner. We talked about movies deviating in certain points from the original works they are derived from (e.g. Lord of the rings books vs. movies), and how this can have both its pros and cons.

For context, I will include the full block of her reply concerning this point:
パディントンの映画は原作（げんさく：元の作品のことをこう言います）とは違いますが、ファミリーで楽しめるエンターテインメントになっていて、とても良かったです。
ロード・オブ・ザ・リングも、日本語に翻訳された本の方（『指輪物語』）は、とても長く、難しいので、子どもが読み切るのはなかなか難しいです。映像の場合、エルフとドワーフがどう違うか、一目でわかるので、一緒に観ている息子に説明しなくても済みます。目と耳から情報が入ってくるので、話に入っていきやすいのではないかと思います。

The sentence in question:
目と耳から情報が入ってくるので、話に入っていきやすいのではないかと思います。

My attempt at translation:

"Because the information enters from eyes and ears, I wonder if while one enters the story it isn't the easy way?"

So first, I interpreted the combination of ではないかと思います as way to say "I wonder if...(isn't)?". I don't know if that's legit, I just couldn't come up with something which would make more sense.
Second I parsed 話に入っていきやすい as 話に入って and いきやすい. An alternative I can think of would be to read it as 話に入りやすい and 話に行きやすい. However, this feels a bit redundant, because one would basically say the same thing twice "easy to enter" and "easy to go (there)". Furthermore, chosing this option I can't think of a translation which wouldn't sound pretty wrong.

I'm also not sure wether I should interprete いき in いきやすい as a noun or as a verb, and wether that would actually matter or not^^ I know the verb+やすい/にくい pattern, for example: この料理は食べにくいです。=> "This meal is hard to eat" (probably because it tastes awful...^^). I don't know if the meaning would change by any means if I regarded 食べ as a noun or verb here, and considering what I've learnt about derivation in japanese so far, I guess the verbs ます-stem is regarded as a noun anyway in such cases, isn't it?


texts: The 普通形 of a verb in Japanese - future and habitual interpretations

texts:
According to my grammar book, the 普通形 of a verb in Japanese usually has two functions: it shows a regular common action and the action that the subject is going to do in the future.

For instance:

（毎日）テレビを見る
（明日）テレビを見る

And it is also said that the '......ている' form is also used to show a regular common action, like:

（毎日）テレビを見ている.

So are sentences 1 and 3, （毎日）テレビを見る and （毎日）テレビを見ている, interchangeable?

And if I simply say わたしは本を読む, how will the listener understand it?  Will they see it like 'I read books everyday' or 'I will read a book'?


texts: Is there any difference between じゃあない and じゃない?

texts:
これっ！　石を投げるんじゃあないっ！
  すいちゃったものはしかたがないじゃあないのっ！

I've been reading a light novel called Slayers, and I noticed something interesting: the author usually writes じゃあない and not じゃない.  I'm curious if there are any differences between the two.  (I think it's clear that they have the same basic meaning, so I'm mainly asking about differences other than meaning, like style/formality/dialect.)

Not long ago, I read a post on sci.lang.japan by the linguist Bart Mathias, which I'd like to quote here.  He describes the contraction from ては to ちゃ:

  Because Japanese is length sensitive, it took time to get the two moras of "-te-wa" compressed from "-chaa" to "-cha," and the earlier form still survives as an option.

My guess is that the same thing happened with じゃ:

では → じゃあ → じゃ

That is to say, I guess that じゃあ is older than じゃ.  If that's right, I also guess that the combination じゃあない is older than じゃない, and since I usually hear the shorter form, I'm guessing that じゃあない might sound a bit old-fashioned.  I'm curious if this is correct, so I decided to ask here.

Anyway, here are my guesses about じゃあない:

Perhaps じゃあない sounds like an older way of talking than じゃない.
Perhaps じゃあない sounds a bit closer to ではない (making it slightly less informal than じゃない?)
Perhaps じゃあない is a dialectal variation of じゃない.
Perhaps the author just likes the sound of じゃあない, and there's no real difference.

So tell me, is there any difference between the two?  Or are they totally the same?


texts:
1) 先生は私と会ってくれる。
How is this sentence correct?
[先生は私と会ってくれる] this setence feels unnatural to me becauseと会う means subject and person(me) are going to meet each other so how くれる can be used in this setence. But if I use に会う It means only subject is doing a favor of going to meet the person. Therefore, personに会ってあげる/くれる is grammartically correct but not と会ってあげる/くれる
In conclusion,
先生は私と会ってくれる = incorrect + unnatural
先生は私に会ってくれる = correct + natural


texts:
お誕生日おめでとう vs 誕生日おめでとう
What's the difference? And is it needed?


texts:
So I'm reading a novel about the Sengoku period, and I've come across a sentence that just can't figure out. The context is that this guy (whose ancestor is a famous admiral) built a castle with a harbour, but then boat-building got banned by the shogun so he had to make it look like the harbour had been filled in. The sentence before this says the castle looked just like any other castle.

だが城の東側は海への眺望が開けており、重臣が塩見櫓の門を通るのは、一日の始まりにまず海上に異変がないかを見るという水軍の将を祖とする藩の心得と言われていた。

My translation so far (rough): However, on the east side of the castle, the view to the sea being open, the lord goes through the watchtower gate, at the beginning of the day checking that there have been no big changes at sea...

and here's where I get stuck. I don't understand how the という links this bit to the next bit.

Is it 'the act of checking whether there had been any changes at sea was said to be the knowledge of the clan whose ancestor was a naval commander'? If so, I think it's trying to say that they still watched the sea and therefore were still a naval clan even if it looked like they had no harbour, but I can't figure out the grammar. And it doesn't really seem right to be honest. Am I parsing the sentence wrong?

On a separate note, is the まず linked to the 始まりに meaning something like first thing in the morning, or is it linked to the がないか meaning 'hardly any changes'? It doesn't really affect the overall meaning, but it would be interesting to know what people think.


texts:
そのときに歴史の先生がこう呟きながら連れて行かれます。

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xs-XWk_oQA
1:17

I'm assuming it's the word 斯う meaning "in this way," and here it would be describing how the teacher said the quote to follow. Is this こう anything like the quotative like in English that can be used for either literal quotes or paraphrasing? For example, "He was like, 'When is history not essential?'"


texts: When to use words derived from foreign words or the native words for the same things?

texts:
A lot of things have Japanese words in more than two versions to call them.
I can appreciate there are often many ways to call the same thing in any particular language.

Nevertheless, I'm somewhat perplexed by the difference in usage between Japanese words derived from foreign words and those of kanji for the same things?

With the first example below, it is straightforward to me. ホテル is accommodation of western style while 旅館 is accommodation of Japanese style. The same applies to the second example I suppose, the western lunch and Japanese or even Asian lunch respectively. If I'm wrong, please point out. However the rest are not clear to me.

When to use which?

Would someone care to comment!

Examples:

ホテル - 旅館
ランチ - 昼ご飯
ミーティング - 会議
ショッピング - 買物
デスク - 机
カフェ - 喫茶店
クラス - 授業
テスト - 試験
ストリート - 街路, 通り, 道路
テクニック - 技術


texts:
The reason I'm asking is because I was reading this New York Times article: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/27/magazine/korea-japanese-occupation-surrender-ww2.html
and in the article, there was a picture of a Japanese instructor teaching Koreans how to write in Japanese.This picture:https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/09/06/multimedia/27ww2-korea-03/merlin_176164095_e433a392-9aa3-427b-81aa-496411431e9c-superJumbo.jpg?quality=90&auto=webp
The thing I noticed about this is that they were being taught entirely in katakana, far different than when I was in classes learning hiragana instead. This made me wonder if katakana was actually more widely used back then, or at least if it served a specific purpose (a historical reason) that could explain why they weren't using hiragana.


texts:
背景とかってどうやって描いてるのかすごく気になってたので絶対買います！ソフトはクリスタしかありませんが。

I'd like to understand this better. The context is an artist announced that he is releasing a book about painting digital backgrounds and the above line is one of the comments made by another user. From what I can understand, the comment seems to mean:

  I'm very interested about how backgrounds are painted so I'm definitely buying (the book). I only have Clip Studio Paint（クリスタ）software though.

I'm confused because from my understanding, ありません means "does not have/exist" and I'm wondering if the commenter wanted to write ソフトはクリスタしかありますが instead. And if not, I'd like to understand why it is so.


texts: Japanese verbs can take the suffix -tai, which attaches to the ren'youkei form and turns the verb into an -i adjective, expressing desire to do what the verb says. I have recently wondered where this suffix comes from. Is it known? I mean, do we know where the -tai suffix in question comes from? Someone proposed it might be from -te + ai, love, as a comparison with how "oi", to love, means also to want in Hakka. Could that be?


texts: Question about switching formality in a conversation

texts: In case I am talking with someone using the informal form but we are not close friends yet (perhaps a close acquaintance or someone I'm chatting with online) and I want to ask him a personal question (what is his occupation, something about his family ,etc.), should I proceed with the informal form or should I switch to polite (or even honorific) language to ask him the question?


texts: How difficult is it for Japanese to distinguish between 五日【いつか】 and 何時か【いつか】 in spoken contexts?

texts:
There are times when both 五日 (5th day of the month) and 何時か (someday) could be used I think. Does this become a minor problem for Japanese when speaking (no kanji to guide), or do they speak in some way to avoid the possible confusion?

A sentence I thought of where either いつか could be possible:

  いつか、アメリカに行きます。

Are they going to America on the 5th of the month, or are they expressing intent to go to America eventually in the future?


texts:
I've been taught that 〜てある is used to express that something has been done already in preparation for something, similar to 〜ておく (with a lot of nuance that I'm going to ignore here). However, just from my own observations (mainly from anime, manga, etc.) it seems to me that at least colloquially, 〜てある is used more as a future tense.

Forgive this crude example, but the first thing that pops into my head when I think of this is when an angry anime character may want to kill an opponent, he may say 「殺してある！」. In this context, he means "I will kill you", but that goes against that traditional definition that I have been taught. Is this a colloquial sort of thing, or am I just greatly misunderstanding what 〜てある means?


texts: Is [馬面]{うまづら} a facial expression or a type of face shape?

texts: 馬面 I found it translated as: a horseface, a very long face; horse-faced, very long-faced. Now here we call "long face" to be really sad. So in the translation, I don't know if 馬面 is referring to a facial expression of the face, or to some type of odd face shape people can have. Therefore my question is, is 馬面 an expression or a type of face?


texts:
Does one write:

Smith toshokan
or
Toshokan no Smith

Apologies for not using kana, the Windows' Japanese keyboard is taking forever to install.


texts: How far can a word be away from another and still modify it - 歪み　並ぶ　使い捨てのレール

texts:
I was translating this song (full lyrics here) and I ran across this phrase:

  歪み　並ぶ　使い捨てのレール

I was thinking that it would make sense if 歪み modified レール - "We chose (in the song, they are on a train, so I believe that the general feeling is that the train is doing this action) to go down the warped, obsolete rail" would make sense to me. Does that work? Despite 並ぶ between them, can 歪み be modifying レール? It was the only way I could make sense of it, but maybe I'm wrong.

Thank you for your help!


texts:
If て form is used alone what can it mean? from what I've found on my own it can be a request similar to てください as well as a direct command, but are there other ways to use it alone besides to link two verbs together? The reason I ask this is I saw the phrase "おそくなって すみません". I know It says sorry I'm late due to the fact that おそくなって is the て form of to be late but I'm confused as to why the て form was used here.

Sorry if the answer is obvious here and thank you for any assistance


texts: 今更自分で突っ込まないでよ。追加料金払ってるんだからいいでしょう >>What does this mean in this context

texts:
Context : MC is talking with a girl after he brought food to her place from a restaurant, where he is currently staying and working. The girl complains the food is a little bit cold, and suggests he hire Goppo (a transport lizard in the city) to deliver the meal faster.
G1: …少し冷めてるわね。もっと早く持ってこられないの
MC: 無理を言うなよ。これでも急いだんだぞ
G1:歩いてきたんでしょう。グオッポ使いなさいよ
MC: 料理宅配しながらあれに乗るのは無理じゃないか…
G1:要は慣れよ、慣れ
MC: 慣れかなぁ.
ってなんで俺、デリバリーなんてしてるんだ？？
G1:今更自分で突っ込まないでよ。追加料金払ってるんだからいいでしょう >>This part I don't understand .Please share your English translation


texts:
On Lang-8, for 'early birthday present' I used

  早い誕生日プレゼント

but this was corrected to

  早めの誕生日プレゼント

What's the difference between 早い and 早め?


texts: How to identify myself as someone's son/daughter?

texts:
I'm trying to make contact with one of my mother's old friends from some time ago, and I don't think she really knows or remembers me -- thus, I'd like to be able to identify myself as, say, Jane Doe's son or daughter.

I've searched all over the place and have found musuko/musume, but from what I'm understanding, it's what parents use to refer to their own (or other people's?) children. Would I be able to apply that term to myself as well?


texts:
アイスクリームを食べたら、おなかがいたくなりました
  コーヒーを飲んだら、ねられませんでした

In the above examples, can たら be translated as "because"? If not then why?


texts: How to address and greet Japanese people in an english email

texts:
I am aware that in Japanese it is considered to be rude to address other people with just their first name, but I wonder if this is only true for communication in Japanese, of if this still holds true when communicating with Japanese people in other languages than Japanese like for example in English.

I am especially interested in business communication in industries that use to prefer rather informal communication between business partners in the western world.

For example in the computer games industry a typical email would just be started with "Hi recipientsFirstname" and ended with something like "Kind regards, sendersFirstname", even when addressing people that one has never talked to before and no matter of where in the world the recipient is from, except when it comes to Japanese people.
Whenever the recipient is Japanese, then even for English mails most colleagues try to get more formal and start their email with either "Hi recipientsLastname-San" or just "Hi recipientsLastname" (interestingly, Mr./Mrs./Ms. always gets left out), but they still end it with something like "Kind regards, sendersFirstname".

Now this looks very strange to me and feels just terribly wrong.

Am I even supposed to attach "San" to the name, even when I am not writing in Japanese, but in English, even in the most informal industries?

What about this weird mix of addressing the recipient with his/her last name, but using only the own first name in the greeting, so that in worst case (if he/her can't get it from anywhere else and its neither contained in the signature nor in the email-address of the sender) the recipient would not even know the senders last name?

PS:
I am aware that this is more a question about the Japanese culture and etiquette than about the Japanese language, but unfortunately those don't have there own stackoverflow communities. Please move this question if there is a more appropriate community for it than "Japanese Language".


texts: Compound word ending with an adjective stem (形容詞語幹) and used as a noun or a na-adjective

texts:
The word 大忙{おおいそが}し is classified as a noun or a na-adjective.

If I analyze it correctly, the word 大忙し consists of the prefix (接頭語) "大" and the i-adjective stem of "忙しい." In addition, there is no such i-adjective as "大忙しい."

Out of curiosity, I'd like to ask if anyone knows other compound words that end with an i-adjective stem and are only used as a noun or a na-adjective (its i-adjective form doesn't exist).


texts:
They sound alike. Are they cognate historically?

Morphologically, is よ in both cases a particle or part of the morpheme in -ましょう?


texts: How to say "What the f**k am I doing here?"

texts:
How to say "What the fuck am I doing here?"
I came up with two versions for the above question.

ここ一体何をやっているよ。
ここ何をマジやっているかよ。


texts: How do I express "to survive" in a more metaphorical sense?

texts:
My friend published a multi-part video on Facebook. I wanted to comment "I survived for only one episode", as in "It was so bad I couldn't keep watching after just one episode", but I wasn't sure which word would fit for "survived".  (I'm also not really sure this is a metaphorical usage.)
I thought about:

1話だけ残った
1話だけ生き残った

But, I think both sound really, really ridiculous.


texts: How to say something is [a colour] AND [another adjective] using て form 'and'?

texts:
Do all colours work as な adjectives or い adjectives when using て form 'and'? In a sentence such as "my phone is white and small", would it be 私のけいたいは白いで小さいです。OR ～けいたいはしろくて～?
Also, if the colour were to change to a less basic colour, like はいいろ, would the 'and' form change?


texts: Surprising noun order involving the の particle

texts:
I am puzzled by the word ordering in the following sentence:

  そのうちの一つの[箱]{はこ}は私のです。

This sounds unnatural to me, though I was told that this is correct by a native speaker (who was not able to explain why). Whenever I've encountered this linking/nominalization/possessive particle before, the nouns were ordered with increasing specificity. (e.g. 友達の本の名前).

Based on that principle, I would have expected the sentence to read

  その[箱]{はこ}のうちの一つは私のです。

I.e.:

most general: 箱 (box(es)),
more specific 箱のうち (amongst the boxes)
most specific: 箱のうちの一つ (one of the boxes)

What am I missing?


texts:
I’ve noticed that some song lyrics use 僕 although the singer is female. After reading this and this post, I’m still unsure if the answers apply to the songs that I’ve heard. It seems that 僕 is meant to convey a tomboyish, naïve, or slightly assertive feeling, but this doesn’t seem to be the case for these songs and musicians (in my opinion, which may be incorrect).

A few examples: 「ケセラセラ」 by fhána and 「スタンドバイミー」 by the peggies.

Does 僕 generate some other desirable feeling for these contexts? For native Japanese speakers, how might using 僕 instead of 私 change a song’s impression?


texts:
(The question was asked here but the answers didn't really address what I am about to ask.) One rule about long vowels is that the long vowel for え段 is written え段 + い. For instance けいじどうしゃ is pronounced as ケージドーシャ, not ke-i-ji-do-u-sha.
What about the ている pattern for verbs, as in 知っている? Is it　te-i-ru or te-e-ru?


texts: I'm not sure how to understand "事業者の幹部" in this sentence

texts:
ある海外のカジノ事業者の幹部から聞いた言葉です。ＲＧとは、Responsible
  Gambling、日本語にすれば「責任あるギャンブル」となります。(source)

事業者 implies an executive position so I don't understand the role of の幹部?


texts: when no ka question mark is used instead of ka?

texts: when should I use ka as question marker and when should I use no ka?


texts:
Two characters are walking a corridor in a school, and the following appears in two thought bubbles around one of them.

渡り廊下を越えるって事は

向かっているのは特別棟か

How can 特別棟 be a statement about 向かっているの? As far as I know, the の particle after a verb can mean requiring or giving explanation, or it can make a noun out of a verb. Can it make 向かっているの mean "the place toward which we're going"?


texts: How to respond to ポイントカードが宜しいですか。

texts:
When I am paying for my goods at a supermarket or konbini, the cashier always asks me that question. On dictionaries, the meaning of 宜しい is "fine / good" and it made me confused, "What is good about the point card?"

Then I assumed that they actually asked me if I have a point card. I knew that I can just say はい and show the cashier my point card if I have one. Well, I do not own one so I usually respond 「カードがない 。」 but the cashier often seems confused after hearing my answer.


texts: What is the difference between どのぐらい and どれぐらい?

texts:
I just heard a sentence this morning - "how much money do you have?"

お金、どれぐらい　ある？

I have always been taught "how much" is どのぐらい so hearing どれぐらい has caught me off-guard.
As I recall we use この with an object, and これ when there is not one.
So...

お金、どれぐらい　ある？
どのぐらい　お金が　ある？

Is my understanding correct?


texts: How does one differentiate between future tense (will) and present tense?

texts:
How do I differentiate between future tense and present tense. For example, the sentence:

  私は魚を食べる

If I am not mistaken, the above sentence can either mean "I will eat fish" or "I eat fish".

Also, if I am not mistaken, conjugating the verb to the ます form only aims to make the sentence polite and doesn't actually change the tense or meaning. For the case of the example above, the sentence becomes 私は魚を食べます, which can again either mean "I will eat fish" or "I eat fish" in polite form.

I have read that generally, context will tell me whether the sentence is referring to the present or future tense. But take the example above, from just that one sentence (assuming someone tells me just that one sentence in the example), how do I determine what the tense of the sentence is?


texts: Meaning of それは構わないんだけどね

texts:
「おはよう、有地君』

  「朝早くからすみません」

  『それは構わないんだけどね』

  『わざわざこんな時間に連絡をくれるなんて、なにか問題が？』

Why was んだけどね added onto the end of the sentence above?

I guess my question is really, why is it それは構わないんだけどね instead of それは構わないわ or something else.


texts: What is キノピオ saying in Super Mario RPG? (includes picture)

texts:
I'm watching a Mario RPG translation video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRBRLmhFy-4

What I think I understand so far is:
ながい　おつきあいなだけに、= "Given that I've known you a long time,"
Question 1:
なにがあったか = "What happened..."
I think this is correct? However, I have been reading about か and I cannot understand what it's function is here. I would like to know its purpose please.
Question 2:
気付いてしまいました！ = "...I realize!" or "...now I realize!"
I am very unsure about my translation of this part. I think 気づいて is て form.
しまいました is confusing to me though. Does しま = polite affirmative する?
Also いました, I'm not sure about this. Is this supposed to be 今 past tense or いる past tense?