5,463 reputation
740
bio website althack.org
location Cambridge, MA
age 23
visits member for 1 year, 10 months
seen 5 hours ago

Native English speaker, beginner in Japanese.

Interested in Japanese grammar & etymology.


Sep
18
comment Trouble understanding grammar in 「名を、柊という。」
Thanks. I guess the reason for that is because the implicit underlying sentence is (彼は)名を柊という。, and if it was something like (私は)名を柊という。 then the 名 would obviously be referring to 私's 名. You'd need to say 彼の名を柊という explicitly for the implicit topic I originally gave.
Sep
18
revised Trouble understanding grammar in 「名を、柊という。」
Fix subject (thanks user4092).
Sep
18
revised Trouble understanding grammar in 「名を、柊という。」
Fix romaji, typos. (Thanks snailplane.)
Sep
18
comment Trouble understanding grammar in 「名を、柊という。」
I did my best. Since the answer is so long and boring I tried to spice up the examples.
Sep
18
answered Trouble understanding grammar in 「名を、柊という。」
Sep
18
comment Trouble understanding grammar in 「名を、柊という。」
@Sjiveru Well, I make no claims that my analysis is the standard one. :P In fact I think there is no standard/agreed-upon analysis of this, at least not that I've seen. (Not that I've seen much, I'm not actually a linguist.)
Sep
17
comment Trouble understanding grammar in 「名を、柊という。」
@Sjiveru I wasn't the downvoter, but your grammatical explanation is not how I would have done it. I think this いう is simply a verb which takes both an accusative and a quotative. It seems related to the "raising to object"/"exceptional case marking" construction (though not the same thing, since I don't think anything is actually being raised here). I have a partially written answer explaining it like this, but have been trying to do some extra research to validate some of my thoughts before posting it.
Sep
17
comment If writing in である form, when is it necessary to use だ?
I assume there may have been a reason you didn't include any, but I would personally find some contrasting examples of statements that suggest 「だ」 vs statements that suggest 「である」 to be enlightening.
Sep
17
comment How to translate “a detail-oriented person”?
No problem. I'd accept naruto's answer since he's a native speaker and has undoubtedly suggested a more natural expression.
Sep
16
comment How to translate “a detail-oriented person”?
I know nothing about interviews in Japanese, but I would be surprised if you'd say something like that at all.
Sep
16
revised How to translate “a detail-oriented person”?
deleted 1 character in body; added 83 characters in body
Sep
16
answered How to translate “a detail-oriented person”?
Sep
15
answered How do you say there are “x” number of days until some event or something?
Sep
15
comment How should I understand the use of particle に in the context of 受身形 and 自動詞 in these sentences?
@非回答者 I am not sure myself. "with" sounds like と共に to me. "Something is dyed the (color of the) evening glow." is the most natural English sentence to me, but given that the point of the answer is to contrast 染まる with 染められる, you probably intentionally avoided that for 染まる (since the syntax of that English I just mentioned is parallel with 染められる). Maybe "Something changes color to the evening glow" is the most syntactically parallel English sentence to 夕焼けに染まる.
Sep
15
comment How should I understand the use of particle に in the context of 受身形 and 自動詞 in these sentences?
@非回答者 I was under the impression 夕焼けに染まる is similar in meaning to 夕焼けの色に染まる. The English you wrote ("Something turns color in the evening glow") means 夕焼けの中で染まる to me, which I don't think is equivalent... Is this my misunderstanding?
Sep
13
comment How to negate “べき”? (ie. “should not”)
You may have not been saying this, but I wanted to point out that literally treating べきだ as the 終止形 (or in other words, treating べき like it inflects) doesn't work. That does not account for だ、である、です、だった、であった, etc. all working. It's clearly the copula there. That means that it's probably not inflecting at all, but is instead being treated as a nominal -- almost a 名詞, aside from the odd adnominal behavior. Whether 行くべきだ is weird or やるべきこと is weird depends on if you're looking at it from the historical or the modern perspective, respectively, that's all.
Sep
12
comment How to negate “べき”? (ie. “should not”)
(a) Whether べき is still a 助動詞 depends on how you define the syntactic class. I think that the reasonable formula of that class includes it, but there are easily arguments here (e.g., no other 助動詞 takes だ). (b) "Connecting to things before it" and "connecting to things after it" are not cases, they are me attempting to break down the syntax of べし into two parts: how the things before it behave, and how it inflects based on the things after it.
Sep
11
revised How to negate “べき”? (ie. “should not”)
Various minor improvements/corrections.
Sep
11
comment How to negate “べき”? (ie. “should not”)
Yes, I did not mean to suggest otherwise. There is also べ which evolved from べし as well, but has changed syntactic class and meaning quite significantly.
Sep
11
revised How to negate “べき”? (ie. “should not”)
deleted 2 characters in body