9

The single/plural duality of 親 as a concept is actually not that different from 子供, in that these phrases parallel each other: 親のいない家庭/子供のいない家庭 親同伴/子供同伴 親の目が届かない場所/子供の手が届かない場所 親に反対された/子供に反対された I was thinking about this further, and noticed one good reason that 親たち is so infrequently used. It is rude 親 is simply rude when referring actual parents, and not ...


8

I agree with you that たち is normally used with animate objects. One obvious exception for this rule is when explicit personification is involved. For example, sentences like 山たちが私に語りかけてきた, 乱暴に扱われた本たちが悲しんでいる are perfectly fine. In your question, I think this アプリたち doesn't look that weird to me. Of course I'm not saying アプリたち is a kind of personification, but ...


7

In informal settings, you might use あたし達, to your parents-in-law you might use 私達, and in business settings, you might use 我々 or 私共. It can depend on many things, including possibly your gender, but it doesn't generally depend on whether there is somebody of the other gender in the group you refer to. The Japanese plural marker 達 as well as ら and others ...


5

Unfortunately I don't have a good answer, but I do have one fact to toss out there, since it doesn't look like anyone else has yet. A number of Japanese linguistics texts I've seen indicate that it's a fallacy that -たち and -ら are pluralizers. Rather, it's claimed that their meaning is qualitative rather than quantitative, and it's merely that most cases ...


4

= 達と 水原希子、山口智子らと共演 → 水原希子、山口智子 & Others


4

There's no firm distinction between たち and ら at least in modern spoken Japanese except that the latter may sound old-fashioned. For the particular quote above, it sounds a bit like a translation from English, as is common with tech curated blogs. But it's still within natural and common Japanese of today. あと、日本語では複数形は特に明示しないことが多いのをお忘れなく。 公園で子供が水鉄砲で遊んでいる。...


4

To answer the specific question: No, there is no restriction. You can use 〜たち with two people but you aren't exactly saying "two people", you are saying "groups of ~"; the definition given by JDIC being pluralizing suffix. 〜たち is used to refer a group and this group could very well include only two "animate objects" (or groups of "animate objects"); the ...


3

Your translation is fine. Did you notice that 同士 is actually "reflected" in your English? I mean: subjects 同士 might be a tricky word, but not totally untranslatable to English if you bear with a disproportionately lengthy definition, that X同士 means those each of who/which is (equally) a X to each other. And this may explain why it is usually "not ...


3

No. I suppose it's a bit like you guys. It serves to make it clear there are multiple children.


3

Japanese language doesn't have plural form of noun like English. So we can't know how many children are playing in the park in this sentence "子供が公園で遊んでいます". If you want to say "A child is playing in the park", you say "一人の子供が公園で遊んでいます。" If you want to say "Children are playing in the park", you say "子供たちが公園で遊んでいます。".


3

In this case, I think it's simply because we already have a specific and common word which refers to "one's both parents": 両親【りょうしん】. There is no reason not to use 両親 in formal situations. I feel I sometimes hear (私の)親たちは旅行中だよ (instead of 両親は旅行中だよ) in casual conversations.


3

When is it appropriate or necessary to use -たち or -ら? The suffixes are very appropriate when you're refering to a group of people, for example: 君達、お前ら. That's what a teacher would say to his students. In that case, it seems to me that ら is quite harsh. お前ら、なにしているのかい? (angry guy addressing a group of noisy youngsters) 君達には明るい将来があります! (schoolmaster during ...


1

It is the formal (or polite) way of conjugating verbs. 書く (kaku) write (dictionary form) 書きます (kakimasu) write 書きました (kakimashita) wrote 書きません (kakimasen) don't write 書きませんでした (kakimasen deshita) didn't write 私は本を書きます。 (watashi wa hon o kakimasu) I write a book. です (desu) is でした (deshita) was ではありません (dewa arimasen) is not ではありませんでした (dewa arimasen ...


1

It is explicit, to state that there are several children.


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible