5,360 reputation
1422
bio website
location
age
visits member for 1 year, 9 months
seen 25 mins ago

18h
comment How can I come to terms with the animate/inanimate distinction in Japanese?
@Alox: No I missed the point. Thanks
20h
comment How should we read/translate long sentences that end in a question?
@dainichi: Fantastic. I'll go through it again before accepting but FYR: this is the original reference to the rose grammar.about.com/od/60essays/a/selfrelianessay_5.htm
1d
comment Opposite of 歯止め?
Perhaps 計画を軌道に乗せる ; to put a plan into action, or more literally, into orbit.
1d
comment How should we read/translate long sentences that end in a question?
@dainichi: Yes your are right. Correction made. Thanks
1d
comment How can I come to terms with the animate/inanimate distinction in Japanese?
@Alox: Sorry, I'll try make my question clearer: The only difference between the a&b versions of some of those sentences is that (a) is past tense. How does using the plain form in (b) convey that the subject is the speaker's property?
1d
comment What is this sentence using ~たら~たで trying to say about televisions and computers?
Your examples don't make sense in English. Can you explain the context? eg 1) do you mean "( I don't want you to answer the phone because your Japanese is not good enough for customers but if there is no one around then:) if you you have to answer the phone please speak politely", 2) perhaps "Whether you eat the food you are given or not, please tidy up and clear the table when you have finished."???These are just my guesses.
2d
comment How can I come to terms with the animate/inanimate distinction in Japanese?
@Alox: Yes but how does that make it the speaker's property?
2d
comment How can I come to terms with the animate/inanimate distinction in Japanese?
@snailboat: Did you understand how/why the sentences 7b & 8b represented the speakers property but not 7a & 8a?
Apr
21
comment This mother doesn't know her own child?
@virmaior:I am not a native speaker either but although it might not be "good Japanese", I think it works. I will give my thoughts under your new question.
Apr
21
comment This mother doesn't know her own child?
@DaveMG: Some dictionaries might even give a definition of には(?) but the literal meaning of the sentence does not change by having/not having は, just the emphasis. The は makes a contrast between the writer as a child and as an adult and, as in other questions where function of は is discussed, places an emphasis on what comes after it. (Not sure if this helps but when I read the sentence I insert a pause after the は.)
Apr
19
comment Difference between the words for “feeling”
感情 is used for emotions eg 感情的=emotional, 感情を込めて謝りました=He apologized with real feeling. 感覚 is used for sense eg 金銭感覚= sense for the value of money.
Apr
19
comment How can I use できない and しまう? I'd like to apologize for not being able to do something
You could say xyzができなくてすみません(でした). As you suggest I think しまう would be used to apologise for something you did rather than did not do (~してしまってすみませんでした)
Apr
16
comment Which is more colloquial for “I have a headache”?
@Szymon: Hi. I was taught that saying 頭が痛い sounds strange. If you explain to someone that you have a headache then, unless you are Dr Spock, the natural expression is 頭が痛いの(です)because that is how you explain (ie ~のです)and a full explanation needs to convey the pain to get taken seriously(?)
Apr
16
comment Particle に used with ~て頂いてありがとう
Explaining the context makes it much clearer: "(I'm glad that)" is not included in your revised sentence (お父さん〜いただいた)although it might be inferred. (You've also turned the viewpoint of the sentence around from the literal "I received" to Your father gave me" but I think you understand that.) If the speaker forcefully took the energy from the listener then I would say there is a sense of irony in what he actually says ("Thank you for for giving me..."). The sentence is grammatically correct and is not casual (eg いただく is not casual) but it is spoken & the words are chosen to fit the context.
Apr
15
comment Why 罪人=犯罪者のこと、not just 犯罪者?
Hmm. I still can't explain it. For example, 罪人:犯罪者= The guilty party: The criminal (or the person that committed the crime). Guilty: Responsible for the crime, "What the criminal is" (= 犯罪者のこと?)The nominalizer koto seems to fit with 罪 but not 罪人.
Apr
15
comment What is でれでれ (spoony)?
@kaji: Tx. So per your link, spoony and hence でれでれ is to be "enamored in a silly or sentimental way."(?)...IOW my original guess is correct?
Apr
15
comment Why 罪人=犯罪者のこと、not just 犯罪者?
Thank you. (Possibly I should have left out the example which I only included it to show the complete context in which this expression is used) My question is based on the logic that: 犯罪者= a person such as a 罪人. 犯罪者のこと= something relating to the 犯罪者, possibly 罪人のこと,but not 罪人. Why/what is koto doing here? The sentences seems to meant The guilty person is the guilty action? (Actually I appreciate it is bit more subtle than that but I can't work it out for myself and hence my question here.)
Apr
15
comment Why 罪人=犯罪者のこと、not just 犯罪者?
@Earthliŋ: That is kind of how I took it but why use it for 罪人 and not 真犯人? Is there a difference?
Apr
15
comment Why 罪人=犯罪者のこと、not just 犯罪者?
@Hanne: 犯罪者= a person such as a 罪人. 犯罪者のこと= something relating to the 犯罪者, possibly 罪人のこと,but not 罪人. (I understand the 例, I have just included it to show the complete context in which this expression is used.)
Apr
15
comment Why 罪人=犯罪者のこと、not just 犯罪者?
@ssb: The question was in the title but I have repeated it now in the text.