10,785 reputation
32396
bio website
location 東京
age
visits member for 3 years, 1 month
seen 2 days ago

Jul
7
comment Who should pay, or not pay, who in this letter written in business Japanese?
Yeah, I knew that... sometimes when you go down a path of looking at something a certain way, even the most blatant clues can become invisible.
Jul
7
comment Who should pay, or not pay, who in this letter written in business Japanese?
@jkerian, I would take your critiques more seriously as being representative of the downvotes if someone had said something of the sort before I commented. As it stands, it just seems like retroactive justification. Not to mention that I could point out dozens of comparable questions that aren't as harshly judged. The fact is, I knew in advance I would get two downvotes nearly right away, regardless of the question. My analysis of the downvoting situation is not just from my experience on JL, but I am an active member on a dozen other SE sites, and the negativity here is unusual among them.
Jul
4
comment Who should pay, or not pay, who in this letter written in business Japanese?
Oh, wow! What a silly error I was making. I had the two companies reversed in my mind, so I thought Moriyama was the 貴社. Now everything makes sense. Thanks for setting me straight.
Jul
4
comment Who should pay, or not pay, who in this letter written in business Japanese?
Two downvotes, no explanation. I am convinced by the patterns that it's just some people being petty and personal. I truly feel sorry for the people who have nothing better to do than to just act out with unproductive negativity.
Jun
29
comment I'm a bit lost on this sentence using なかろうか
@Tim, people have all sorts of levels of ability, all sorts of methods and ways of studying, and so I can't see any argument for assuming why, if, or how anyone should access the meaning of a sentence. Two things to consider: If you don't like the furigana, you can turn it off in options, so you can have your way without imposing on what other people may need. Also, I've personally found that by including furigana, I'm sometimes corrected on a reading, which helps me learn. In short, making things as accessible as possible only creates more learning opportunities, and I can't see a downside.
Jun
27
comment Is に okay in 「田中さんはビデオゲームに遊んでいます」?
Thank you for the additional explanation. :).
Jun
26
comment Is に okay in 「田中さんはビデオゲームに遊んでいます」?
Just an additional question, as per my comment on the question, how would you express "I played in the game"? As in, a person had an avatar in a virtual reality game, and then inside the game they played around. So it's not that they play the game, but instead, within the game they play. Would ゲームには遊んでいます work?
Jun
26
comment Is に okay in 「田中さんはビデオゲームに遊んでいます」?
@Kaji, I think the problem is not so much whether it's translation versus particles, but even as a particle question, the asker doesn't demonstrate any effort on their side, so we don't know why this particular usage confuses them. We don't know the context, the source, or what the user thinks the meaning might be, or anything like that. It's hard to provide a specific answer if we don't know if the asker has even a basic understanding of particles.
Jun
26
comment Is に okay in 「田中さんはビデオゲームに遊んでいます」?
I'm not 100% sure, but what I think the question might be: if one simply plays a game, I think might be the appropriate particle, but in some cases, like online multiplayer games, or ones with sufficient immersive reality, one might consider themselves as being in the game. So maybe in that case, might or には work? Could changing the particle be a quick shorthand way to convey that my sense of agency is not toward the game but within the game? If that's what's being asked, then it would be a very interesting question (to me, anyway).
Jun
25
comment What is the “one type” being “wiped away” in this sentence?
I also now realize I was confusing ~がたい with ~がち, so I was thinking it was "easy to wipe away" instead of "difficult to wipe away". Doh!
Jun
25
comment Words that have been borrowed twice, with different pronunciations?
@snailboat, nice. I stand corrected. Always good to have assumptions replaced with facts.
Jun
24
comment Words that have been borrowed twice, with different pronunciations?
@AthomSfere, interesting stuff. Thank you for the link. According to that article, the term "hamburg" began to fall out of use since 1897, and was supplanted entirely by "hamburger" by 1930, long before strong American influence in Japan. So I'm still not sure I believe that the Japanese term came from the US. Directly from Europe, sounds more plausible.
Jun
24
comment Words that have been borrowed twice, with different pronunciations?
Voted to re-open. We have other questions where the answer is a list, like this one, so I'm not sure what makes this one unacceptable.
Jun
24
comment Words that have been borrowed twice, with different pronunciations?
@AthomSfere, I'm pretty sure there is no such thing as an "original American Hamburg Steak". Hamburg*er* steak maybe, but ハンバーグ without がー at the end to indicate the final "er" is, so far as I know, entirely a Japanese construction.
Jun
22
comment Help with the meaning of 大絶賛 in this sentence
Nice. And people say Japanese don't have a sense of sarcasm. (They're wrong, of course.)
Jun
18
comment When/why would one write a word using 直音表記?
Possibly related: What's the difference between “さけ” (sake) and “しゃけ” (shake)?
Jun
5
comment Why no 移民者【いみんしゃ】?
I think in your first of list of problems with the argument, you are misinterpreting the case being made in the article. In the context of this debate, "Japanese" is too broad a term. The article is saying that particular Japanese policy makers want to constrain the terminology. Whether or not a broader populace would find the word awkward is another, linguistic discussion. The politics is outside JL's scope, but linguistically, I agree the word 移民者 is awkward now, but only as a result of being uncommon. If some people chose to promote it by using it, it could potentially gain currency.
Jun
5
comment Why does 「でならない」 not mean “does not become”?
@snailboat, true, it is idiomatic, but that doesn't mean the explanation stops there or that it doesn't have a logic behind it.
Jun
4
comment Why does 「でならない」 not mean “does not become”?
@YangMuye, I think your comment, with more detail, would be good as an answer.
Jun
1
comment What causes loan words to displace native words for existing concepts?
You might find some interesting points in this question about .