7,520 reputation
1629
bio website no-sword.jp/blog
location
age
visits member for 3 years
seen May 31 at 20:41

Jul
23
comment Why is「ん」the only kana without a vowel?
Labrune also writes extensively on this topic in The Phonology of Japanese (2012).
Jul
21
awarded  Yearling
Jul
19
comment What is the meaning of 女子力?
One difference is the diff. between 女子 and 女. Another is that 女子力 implies a kind of active mastery, where 女らしさ is more of an emergent trait. Like any other kind of power, 女子力 is a means to an end.
Jul
18
comment Are 弱い相互作用 and 強い相互作用 unnatural?
@sawa I don't read very deeply in physics so I almost always encounter the idea introduced explicitly: "the four fundamental forces are called...". I do remember seeing it often used with the definite article, though, which is a way (unavailable in Japanese) of reminding the reader that the reference is to a specific type of interaction/force and not just to any and all interactions that could be characterized as weak.
Jul
18
answered Are 弱い相互作用 and 強い相互作用 unnatural?
Jul
18
comment Does the kanji 妾 still get used by women to refer to themselves?
Yeah, that could cause confusion. In that case I would probably use /ro:/ because the slashes are a sort of rough phonemic transcription, but that would be even less clearer to non-specialists than ろう, probably.
Jul
17
comment Does the kanji 妾 still get used by women to refer to themselves?
No particular reason, I just didn't see much point in using kana to indicate the sounds, so I figured I may as well leave it in romaji. If someone wants to edit it to a different style, I won't roll it back.
Jul
17
answered Does the kanji 妾 still get used by women to refer to themselves?
Jul
17
answered 不被下候: When was it common, and what were the rules?
Jul
11
comment What is the etymology of the word プラスアルファ?
Thanks, @Dono! I'll be keeping an eye out for something more specific myself (if it can be said with such confidence to be a misreading, we should also have documentation of that specific event) but those sources certainly fall on the reliable side of the fence.
Jul
11
comment What is the etymology of the word プラスアルファ?
@Dono Do you have a good reference backing up the origin as a misreading of "+x"? A quick Googling revealed only unsourced hearsay. (Not challenging you on the specifics, just looking for a reliable account of the etymology.)
Jul
4
comment Why is 一緒に needed when it's already clear two people will be together?
@sawa I find both of those unnatural, but I think the verb has something to do with it too: "The kids fought w.o.t." (ok), "The kids fought t." (not ok), "The kids fought t. w.o.t." (not ok); but, "The kids played w.o.t." (ok), "The kids played t." (ok), "The kids played t. w.o.t." (not ok); but, "The kids worked t. w.o.t." (redundant, but more natural than "went shopping t. w.o.t.", and "worked together" feels like a constituent)
Jul
4
answered Why doesn't 分かる have a potential form?
Jul
4
comment Why is 一緒に needed when it's already clear two people will be together?
@sawa Rephrasing to avoid that problem, "My mum and I went shopping together with my dad" also feels a bit unnatural (not ungrammatical), but "My mum and I went shopping with my dad" does not. So maybe even when "together" could function as a VP adverb, the combination of "together" and "with X" feels unnatural for semantic reasons (e.g. "Together" already describes the makeup and relationship of the participant group, which may "disallow" adding another participant using "with X"), and this motivates a reanalysis as "together with X", which is awkward.
Jul
4
comment Why is 一緒に needed when it's already clear two people will be together?
@sawa But in this situation, "go shopping together" cannot be a constituent, because the subject is singular ("I"). (OTOH, "My dad and I went shopping together" and "I went shopping with my dad" are both totally natural.) Perhaps this is the problem: because the non-plural subject does not allow "go shopping together" as a constituent, "together with my dad" is reanalyzed as a semi-independent sentence-level adverbial phrase, and this feels awkward.
Jul
3
comment Why is 一緒に needed when it's already clear two people will be together?
(Incidentally I suspect that a similar (structural) explanation may hold for the difference between と and と一緒に, so the phenomenon may come down to which kind of adverbial modifier is "preferred" or "default" in a given language/situation.)
Jul
3
comment Why is 一緒に needed when it's already clear two people will be together?
@sawa Ironically I know even less about the formal description of English grammar than Japanese, but my subjective feeling is that while "with my dad" functions as a simple (VP-level) adverb, "together with my dad" is more like a sentence-level adverb, or perhaps even attached to the noun. So "with my dad" simply indicates that the action was performed along with "my dad", but "together with my dad" is more marked and may suggest that the addition of "my dad" is unexpected.
Jul
3
comment Why is 一緒に needed when it's already clear two people will be together?
My native speaker intuition says that "Go shopping together with dad" is much less natural than "お父さんと一緒に買い物に行く". "Needed" may not be the correct word but I think that it is quite reasonable to wonder what underlies the fact that "一緒に" appears much more often in Japanese than "together" does in English, when both are equally "unnecessary" from a pure meaning standpoint. Not because the Japanese way is "illogical" or anything, but simply because there must be a reason for the difference and that reason is probably interesting.
Jul
2
revised Indicative form of an i-adjective used adverbially
added 521 characters in body
Jul
2
comment Indicative form of an i-adjective used adverbially
Yep, there are lots in English. "Damned straight," "heaps hard" (is this one Australia-specific?). "Hella", arguably. Japanese has other words like ちょう with similar flexibility (ちょう暑い, ちょう行く, etc.) which is why I think it's a general process of words being ground down to non-inflecting intensifiers, rather than something specific to -i adjectives as such.