3

In English, we often use "would" to directly make the sentence hypothetical, but how would you do this in Japanese? I only know how to use conditionals for this, but It doesn't give me the same feeling...

For example:

You would make a good actor.

役者になったら、上手と思う。

(If you were to become an actor, you would be good at it.)

Example 2:

This sort of thing would be popular in Canada.

カナダにあったら、こんな奴は人気だ。 (If this was in Canada, it would be popular.)

Can you see what I mean? I can't get the same meaning from Japanese...

How would I go about expressing these example sentences?

1

I believe using one of the forms だろう or でしょう would convey the idea that you want.

You would make a good actor
上手な役者になるでしょう。

and

This sort of thing would be popular in Canada.
こんなやつはカナダに人気でしょう。

  • 1
    The latter sentence should be …カナダ で(は)人気でしょう. Here, で is essential and は is desirous. – user4092 Jul 17 '17 at 4:36
1

In english we often use "would" to directly make the sentence hypothetical, but how would you do this in Japanese?

You would make a good actor. 役者になったら、上手と思う (If you were to become an actor, you would be good at it)
This sort of thing would be popular in Canada. カナダにあったら、こんな奴は人気だ (If this was in Canada, it is popular)

I can't get the same meaning from Japanese...

For the conclusion clause: だろう/でしょう adds the sense of assumption. I find these are closer to English 'will' (でしょう is polite). These can be used in the conclusion clause but not a grammar requirement. For the uncertainty of 'would', we say かもしれない.

For the premise clause: When we especially have a need to say it's hypothesis contradicts an actual fact, we do that by adding some expressions. For example,

もし万一、役者になる(ような)ことが あったとしたらあるとしたら、いい役者になると思うよ。

The above sentence means that it's very rare case but still possible. Here, なる for the future. Both あった and ある works for the future in the premise clause.

もし万一、役者になる(ような)ことが あったとしたら、いい役者になったなってたと思うよ。

This is for the past. So, it's something about no longer possible.

Cf: In Japanese, we use the helping verb た not only to express the past but also the sense of completion in any tense. Not like English has the past tense form and the perfect form separately.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.