Japanese Language Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for students, teachers, and linguists wanting to discuss the finer points of the Japanese language. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

しかも is pretty straight forward:

Let's go get lunch at Ichiban next time. The food is great, also the servings are big.

My kid is a genius. He's great at playing the piano. What's more, last month he passed the 2nd grade of the Eiken.

I think of しかも as 'Also', 'What's more', or 'On top of that'.

The thing is I don't see how that is more different than それどころか. For example:

I had a oyako-don at the dining hall and it was terrible. To begin with, the meat wasn't cooked properly, what's more, there wasn't a lot of rice.

I have a feeling that the translation of the two phrases is not going to change very much when put into English, but that is not really important. What I want to know is the correct time to use each respective phrase. Or, are they not as interchangeable as I am thinking?


share|improve this question
I think you can already see the difference from your example sentences... – Earthliŋ Jun 23 '13 at 15:06
What do you mean? Because one is emphasizes a positive and the other a negative? しかも can be used to point out negatives as well: 現代の若者は電車のマナーがわからない。今朝、でんしゃに乗っている時ある青年の男子が席をゆずってくれなかった。しかも、PETボットルをそのまま捨てていた。 – higehiru Jun 23 '13 at 15:23
Oh, you're right, sorry. – Earthliŋ Jun 23 '13 at 15:25

I think that しかも simply emphasizes what follows, whereas それどころか suggests a nuance like "and, as if that wasn't enough already ...". In your example

The meat wasn't cooked properly and, what's more, there was only very little rice.

The meat wasn't cooked properly and, as if that wasn't bad enough, there wasn't enough rice (to go with it).

The version with しかも emphasizes several facts which amount to the 親子丼 experience to have been awful.

The version with それどころか suggests that the badly cooked meat alone would have made the experience awful, but on top of that, there wasn't even enough rice. I think the second sentence is a much more serious criticism of the restaurant.

share|improve this answer





share|improve this answer
Good answer +1. Though, you might better have answered in English... – Kentaro Tomono Dec 30 '15 at 5:11

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.