2

What is the best way to formulate a natural equivalent in Japanese?

From my experience, the most common way seems to be contextual inference. Pronoun dropping is obviously super common, but whether or not that is a way to do doesn't interest me; what is the most natural way to say something like:

one must eat to survive

and retain the information that relates to an unspecified person (explicity). So for a second let's imagine that it was translated:

生き延びるために、食べなきゃ

The problem with that for me is that it loses the meaning in the English that relates to in-specificity. Even 誰か to me seems pretty different, e.g.

生き延びるために、誰か食べなきゃ

Like, how weird does it sound to say "someone must eat to survive" - not really at all an equivalent. Ok ok, apples and oranges to a degree, but if you think about the difference: one refers to someone whether or not they exist, in a sort of timeless semantic space. Whereas somebody has an immediacy that has a much more localized sense of time belonging to its usage and connotation.

Does 誰か have a similar sense of immediacy in this sense? Can I use どれか to refer to people in this situation?

Thanks !

4
  • 2
    Is it just me ot are the two requirements what is the most natural way to say something like and Pronoun dropping is obviously super common, but whether or not that is a way to do doesn't interest me. kind of incompatible with each other? I can't help but wonder whether there is really any meaning lost by dropping a generic pronoun, in a language that doesn't require a subject - the most natural way might be to drop the subject. If you use 人は...なければなりません - that is not as generic as in English, eg. when a Vulcan wants to talk about the necessarity of eating.
    – blutorange
    Jan 30, 2015 at 20:43
  • Your example sounds a bit strange to me, but if we google for a real life example, 「 食物繊維を一日に17g摂る必要があるそうですが、スーパ-で野菜を買ってもどのくらいの食物繊維が含まれているのか分かりません。 例えば、玉葱一個、人参一個には何gの食物繊維があると記載のあるサイトを御存知でしたら教えて頂けないでしょうか?」 sounds fine to me without a single inclusion of some (generic) pronoun.
    – blutorange
    Jan 30, 2015 at 20:49
  • @blutorange; they're compatible, re: "whether or not that is a way" ; I specify why it's not the same in the post. And as for wondering if there is any meaning lost by dropping a generic pronoun, isn't it self evident that there is meaning lost between "私は行く" and "行く"? The point is to specify that the agent is unspecified - rather than leaving it up to context to potentially let someone fill in the blank (possibly incorrectly if we need to specify in-specificity).
    – metasyn
    Jan 30, 2015 at 22:25
  • Haha it is a strange example hence the "let's imagine"; in reality though, any example will do.
    – metasyn
    Jan 30, 2015 at 22:29

1 Answer 1

5

You can use 人:

人は、生きるために食べなければならない。

It makes sense even in English, to a degree - 'a person must eat to live'.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .