- 27 Apr 2014
- 940
- 243
- 58
The nuance behind おかしい becomes clear when written with kanji: 可笑しい.For example おかしい and 変. I assume 変 does have a feeling of "odd" or "weird", while おかしい also can mean strange, but more in an amusing way.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The nuance behind おかしい becomes clear when written with kanji: 可笑しい.For example おかしい and 変. I assume 変 does have a feeling of "odd" or "weird", while おかしい also can mean strange, but more in an amusing way.
Yes, your understanding is correct.For example おかしい and 変. I assume 変 does have a feeling of "odd" or "weird", while おかしい also can mean strange, but more in an amusing way.
Then 直す is the correct choice of the word. Actually, I thought so, but I was confused because of the logic that you were able to visit the park because the park was left in a fixed state. Usually, you can't go to the park if it's in a fixed state, no? The same goes to the case of the car in a repaired state since you can't use it. I believe the negative form should be used for the main clause (I wasn't able to visit/come). Anyway, ~っぱなし is hardly used for those cases. Instead, 直している would be used.Like something in the park was broken and had to be fixed/repaired. I can imagine that the choice of words is strange though. Guess I can exchange some of the words, since I'm mainly interested in the grammar here:
車が直しっぱなしだったのでここに車でこられた。
Because (Someone) left the car in a repaired state (I) was able to come here using the car.
It's understandable, but I would say more simply 自動の方なら値引できます in that case.How about this sentence?:
もし自動のを買うなら割引で買える。
If by any chance (you) would buy and automatic one(assuming they where talking about an electric tool or something like that), (you) could buy with a discount.
I assume that a sentence like that in reality would be formulated in honorific language, but I have yet to repeat honorific and humble language... Well I'm not sure if "automatic one" can be done like that. I have always wondered what "no-adjectives" are, are they maybe used exactly like that?
Thanks for that hint. I didn't check the Kanji, because Jisho says "Usually written using kana alone" and I on purpose learn new words, where that is the case, without learning the Kanji.The nuance behind おかしい becomes clear when written with kanji: 可笑しい.
I think I got it now. The grammar guide uses examples like "leaving the TV turned on overnight" and "Leaving the window open so the cat can jump out". In both cases the Object in question is left in a state and basically not touched anymore, which is different in my examples, since I try to use the Objects that are supposed to be left unchanged.Then 直す is the correct choice of the word. Actually, I thought so, but I was confused because of the logic that you were able to visit the park because the park was left in a fixed state. Usually, you can't go to the park if it's in a fixed state, no? The same goes to the case of the car in a repaired state since you can't use it. I believe the negative form should be used for the main clause (I wasn't able to visit/come). Anyway, ~っぱなし is hardly used for those cases. Instead, 直している would be used.
OK so the grammar is basically correct, that is good :emoji_grin:It's understandable, but I would say more simply 自動の方なら値引できます in that case.
For now you can do that, but eventually you'll have to learn the kanji anyway . Not just novels, but also video games and manga can and will use kanji even for common words. 成程, 流石, 洒落, 筈, 殆ど, 僅か... Authors don't hesitate one bit to use these.Thanks for that hint. I didn't check the Kanji, because Jisho says "Usually written using kana alone" and I on purpose learn new words, where that is the case, without learning the Kanji.
Sorry, I finally realized that I misunderstood "fixed". ~っぱなし can't be used for 直す, anyway, though. Actually, 直しっぱなし means more likely "leaving/continuing the theme park in a fixing/repairing state", not "fixed/repaired", i.e, the park or car is still repairing. That's why I said "you can't go to the park" or "you can't use the car" in that state. 直してある, 修理してある or 直っている is used for "fixed/repaired".I think I got it now. The grammar guide uses examples like "leaving the TV turned on overnight" and "Leaving the window open so the cat can jump out". In both cases the Object in question is left in a state and basically not touched anymore, which is different in my examples, since I try to use the Objects that are supposed to be left unchanged.
Does that sound about right?
Yes, you got the meaning correctly.I think I don't get the first part. I can imagine that 方 is read as ほう and then I would translate it as "In case it is and automatic type, (you) can get a price reduction" I am kinda confused though, because there is no verb and also no だ in the first part of the sentence.
Hmm I guess I will learn them, but write them in brackets then. That way I will know them, but I will also know that the word is usually written in kana.For now you can do that, but eventually you'll have to learn the kanji anyway :. Not just novels, but also video games and manga can and will use kanji even for common words. 成程, 流石, 洒落, 筈, 殆ど, 僅か... Authors don't hesitate one bit to use these.
Oh well it seems my example sentence was kinda weird, but one way or the other I understood the grammar and that was the main point of the exercise.Sorry, I finally realized that I misunderstood "fixed". ~っぱなし can't be used for 直す, anyway, though. Actually, 直しっぱなし means more likely "leaving/continuing the theme park in a fixing/repairing state", not "fixed/repaired", i.e, the park or car is still repairing. That's why I said "you can't go to the park" or "you can't use the car" in that state. 直してある, 修理してある or 直っている is used for "fixed/repaired".
Oops it seems I mistook the grammar rules of なら for the rules of the と conditional where a だ must be attached for non conjugated nouns and na-adjectives.Yes, you got the meaning correctly.
なら can be attached to nouns directly. It's an adverbial particle (副助詞) in this case. (Incidentally, なら for conditional, e.g. 晴れるなら, is a conjunctive particle (接続助詞).)
e.g.
彼ならできる(= 彼だったら)
晴れなら行こう(= 晴れだったら/晴れたら)
In my examples, those three sentences are almost the same in meaning.Your examples make sense. However the emphasis of 晴れなら and 晴れだったら should be a bit different in the way that the second one is focuses on the part that comes after the ら right?
No problem, of course.Even though this is a thread about sentences I wrote myself, I would like to post a sentence I have a question about even though I did not write it myself. If hope that is OK. I don't think (and hope) that it will present that much work.
多い is hardly used alone as an attributive. 多くの is used instead. When 多い is the predicative in a modifying clause, it's valid.この教科書は多くの人に読まれている。
This textbook is being read by a large number of people.
I am wondering about the 多くの人 here. Wouldn't it be simpler to use 多く directly as an i-adjective like 多い人 here?
多い is hardly used alone as an attributive. 多くの is used instead. When 多い is the predicative in a modifying clause, it's valid.
e.g.
〇多くの人 many people
△多い人
〇友達の/が多い人 a person who has many friends
Interestingly, 少なくの doesn't have this usage. Instead, 少しの is used for the attributive, and confusingly, 少ない is used in a modifying clause.
e.g.
×少なくの人
〇少しの人 (a) few people
△少ない人
〇友達の/が少ない人 a person who has few friends
I guess I can live with that, since having more choices to say the same thing is easier to remember than having to remember different rules for each grammar type.In my examples, those three sentences are almost the same in meaning.
I don't recommend believing the classification "no-adjective" in (non-Japanese) dictionaries. See the following threads.Oh well it might only be me, but since for both predicative usages i-adjectives are used, that is the only part that seems regular to me.
What really confuses me is that jisho.org tags 多く as a の-adjective, but 少し not...
The -ku form of almost all i-adjectives can't be treated as a noun. The exceptions are not so many. The most common ones are 遠く and 近く, but unlike 多く, 遠くの and 近くの are not the same in meaning as 遠い and 近い, respectively. 遠くの/近くの is only used for "spatially distant", but 遠い/近い also can be used for "relational closeness". For instance, 遠くの親戚 only means "relative(s) living far away", but 遠い親戚 can mean "distant relative(s) in relation (e.g. second cousin)". (Or rather, 遠い親戚 only used for this meaning in most cases.) Similarly, 大学の近くの学校 only means "a school located near by the university", but 大学に近い学校 can mean "a school whose function is close to university".Now I wonder if many i-adjectives should not be used as attributives or if those two are just special cases.
が can't be used to indicate the object of 登れる, since に, not を, is usually used for 登る. が always indicates the subject of 登る/登れる. Indeed 山を登る is acceptable, but the nuance is a bit different from 山に登る. See the following thread.Here is another of my self written sentences:
富士山が登れたのが信じにくいよ.
富士山が登れたというのが信じにくいよ.
It is hard to believe that (you) where able to climb Mount Fuji.
I think both of those sentences have about the same translation.
I am not sure though if the というの is necessary here or if a の is sufficient.
Also I have read that for the potential form が is used instead of を and that's also a point I am not sure about.
Oh well that certainly helps! I remember that when I started learning Japanese about two month ago I read that I should not pay that much attention to the idea of "no-adjectives". For a long time I did exactly that, but now that I was confronted with i-adjectives used like ~くの I am glad that you explained it.I don't recommend believing the classification "no-adjective" in (non-Japanese) dictionaries. See the following threads.
The adverb 一々(いちいち)- ichiichi | Japan Forum
"no" adjectives | Japan Forum
As I wrote there, they often use the term without clarifying the correct definition. Japanese dictionaries don't use it. For instance, 多く is a noun and adverb, and 少し is an adverb, which can have a nounal usage.
Before you mentioned it I didn't even know that i-adjectives can be used like that with the く ending. I will keep those two exceptions in mind and again thank you for explaining it in such a detailed level!The -ku form of almost all i-adjectives can't be treated as a noun. The exceptions are not so many. The most common ones are 遠く and 近く, but unlike 多く, 遠くの and 近くの are not the same in meaning as 遠い and 近い, respectively. 遠くの/近くの is only used for "spatially distant", but 遠い/近い also can be used for "relational closeness". For instance, 遠くの親戚 only means "relative(s) living far away", but 遠い親戚 can mean "distant relative(s) in relation (e.g. second cousin)". (Or rather, 遠い親戚 only used for this meaning in most cases.) Similarly, 大学の近くの学校 only means "a school located near by the university", but 大学に近い学校 can mean "a school whose function is close to university".
が can't be used to indicate the object of 登れる, since に, not を, is usually used for 登る. が always indicates the subject of 登る/登れる. Indeed 山を登る is acceptable, but the nuance is a bit different from 山に登る. See the following thread.
富士山に登ったことがあります | Japan Forum
Well here is another passage from that guide:~のが/というのが is understandable, but ~と(いうの)は信じられない/信じがたい is more natural.
Not really. The i-adjectives whose -ku form can perform like a noun are not so many, or more likely very few. The rest I can think of now are just only two; 早く and 遅く, and moreover, these two are rarely used as 早くの and 遅くの alone. They are mostly used in compound word forms, for instance, 朝早くの起床 early-morning waking up or 夜遅くの仕事 late-night work. You can think almost all -ku forms can't be treated as a noun, and 遠くの/近くの are the exception of exceptions since 遠くの/近くの could be different from 遠い/近い in meaning.So there is no huge difference in meaning for most i-adjectives, when using them in the ~i form and using them in with the ~くの ending are compared?
Hmm, I checked a corpus and got a result that が doesn't indicate the subject.Could it be that he mistook the potential form for the passive form in his guide? Since both have the same ending, at least for ichidan-verbs.
Or could it be that for some potential-form-verbs the object is actually indicated by が, but for others not?
~がたい is used only with volitional verbs, and often expresses "want to do so emotionally, but the situation is hard or impossible to do so". It's often used with the verbs such like 信じる, 許す, 耐える, etc. The point is that it has a nuance of "impossible", so 信じがたい has almost the same nuance as 信じられない, as I wrote in my previous thread. The same goes to 許しがたい vs. 許せない or 耐えがたい vs. 耐えられない.Well here is another passage from that guide:
「にくい」 tends to be used for physical actions while 「がたい」 is usually reserved for less physical actions that don't actually require movement.
Don't get me wrong, I do not try to question you here, but rather I am worried that I learn a lot of wrong stuff in that guide... In this case it is only about naturalness, but the other case is kinda scary...
OK in that case I more or less just have to keep 遠い, 近い, 遅い, 多い and 早い in mind and of those especially the first two. And for most others adjectives I don't have to worry about that stuff. I was a bit scared that I would have to learn tons of special meanings for adjectives with く endings and now I'm glad that it is not like that. Well that certainly was a loong explanation... And I wrote I expect it to be rather short hahaha...Not really. The i-adjectives whose -ku form can perform like a noun are not so many, or more likely very few. The rest I can think of now are just only two; 早く and 遅く, and moreover, these two are rarely used as 早くの and 遅くの alone. They are mostly used in compound word forms, for instance, 朝早くの起床 early-morning waking up or 夜遅くの仕事 late-night work. You can think almost all -ku forms can't be treated as a noun, and 遠くの/近くの are the exception of exceptions since 遠くの/近くの could be different from 遠い/近い in meaning.
OK I got it. Since the に particle is more natural in case of climbing a mountain it does not make a difference that for the potential form the を particle becomes が. And this is because When we talk about 富士山に登る we have a specific location as a goal and are not "running over a street" for example like 道を走る, where the street is not the goal. Does that sound about right?Hmm, I checked a corpus and got a result that が doesn't indicate the subject.
滝の左側が登れそうだった
(the left side of the fall seemed able to climbed)
丹沢夜話 ハンス・シュトルテ著
This sounds natural since 滝の左側 "the left side of the fall" is the location of transfer as same as 空を飛ぶ vs. 空が飛べる. So, I have to accept that my previous statement "が always indicates the subject of 登る/登れる" was wrong. It's not always at least. Sorry for that.
However, 富士山が登れた sounds awkward to me, because 富士山に登る is the most common and 富士山を登る has a different nuance from it, as I wrote in the thread linked above. For instance, 富士山が登れるような装備 (equipment you can climb Mt.Fuji with) would be acceptable since there is a nuance of purpose/aim in this expression. Anyway, I recommend using the most common expression 山に登れる instead of 山が登れる.
Oh well it seems I didn't think the things through correctly. What I though was that にくい was modifying the physical action of climbing, but that was just a mistake in my head since it is modifying the non physical action of believing right?...~がたい is used only with volitional verbs, and often expresses "want to do so emotionally, but the situation is hard or impossible to do so". It's often used with the verbs such like 信じる, 許す, 耐える, etc. The point is that it has a nuance of "impossible", so 信じがたい has almost the same nuance as 信じられない, as I wrote in my previous thread. The same goes to 許しがたい vs. 許せない or 耐えがたい vs. 耐えられない.
On the other hand, ~にくい means "hardly to do" with volitional verbs, and "hardly to happen" with non-volitional verbs. The main nuance is "hard to do comfortably/easily" or "hard to do than usual". For instance, わかる is non-volitional, so わかりにくい is OK, but わかりがたい is odd.
The meanings are overlapping, so it's really confusing. I think you would be able to get the nuance gradually.
Right. That's the best choice.OK in that case I more or less just have to keep 遠い, 近い, 遅い, 多い and 早い in mind and of those especially the first two.
Yes, your understanding is correct.:emoji_thumbsup: You can think that 山 mostly refers to the summit of the mountain in 山に登る. That's why the particle for the destination に is used here instead of を. Now, you can see why 崖を登る is common for "to climb a cliff", not 崖に登る, right? :emoji_wink: (And needless to say, 崖が登れる is also common.)OK I got it. Since the に particle is more natural in case of climbing a mountain it does not make a difference that for the potential form the を particle becomes が. And this is because When we talk about 富士山に登る we have a specific location as a goal and are not "running over a street" for example like 道を走る, where the street is not the goal. Does that sound about right?
Hmm, there are so many exceptions for "physical vs. non-physical" classification (e.g. 考えにくい, 理解しにくい, おぼえにくい, 捨てがたい, 近寄りがたい, 離れがたい, etc.), so I don't recommend it. I think the reason "「にくい」 tends to be used for physical actions" is just from the meaning "hard to do".I guess the physical and non-physical explanation can be kept as some kind of "rule of thumb".
That's exactly a merit to use forums like here JREF, which is far better than self-teaching, I believe.:Especially since discussing it here in the forum makes me think about it much deeper and at the same time I can feel safe that I don't learn the stuff wrong, since it is supervised
OK, I will refrain from using the physical/non-physical rule then and will use your's instead.:emoji_thumbsup:Hmm, there are so many exceptions for "physical vs. non-physical" classification (e.g. 考えにくい, 理解しにくい, おぼえにくい, 捨てがたい, 近寄りがたい, 離れがたい, etc.), so I don't recommend it. I think the reason "「にくい」 tends to be used for physical actions" is just from the meaning "hard to do".
What about something like this?1)
Both work fine. 雨も sounds more natural because of the meaning "too/also" of も. As for the nuance that other reasons exist, it's the best to use し also for the last example, i.e., 寒くなるそうだし雨も降るそうだし / 寒くなって雨も降るそうだし.
OK, I am already familiar with those types of grammar and now that you made me think about it, I can see why they are necessary here. Also I am glad that this combined with ような works the way I intended it to work.まだ聞いていない/聞いたことが(or の)ないような話を聞いた。
This ~ている/~たことがある expresses "experience".
Well the first two sentences are good to understand, but the third sentence is a bit hard. Does it mean something like: "What the...I expected I was not putting it somewhere else"?A: 机の上に財布置いてある?
B: ううん、置いてないよ。別の場所に置いたんじゃないの?
A: いや、他には置いてないはずなんだけど。
OK I think I got it.Incidentally, 明日は試験だから、寝坊できない "Because I have an exam tomorrow, I can't oversleep" is valid. As you can see, this できない actually means "shouldn't/mustn't".
なんだけど is used to soften the nuance of the sentence, like "..." at the end of the sentence in written language. The rest is OK.Well the first two sentences are good to understand, but the third sentence is a bit hard. Does it mean something like: "What the...I expected I was not putting it somewhere else"?
The なんだけど confused me a bit, but it is just kind of a filler giving the sentence a cursing intonation right?
Right. ~ことはありえない is the negative potential of "the present form of verbs + ことは/がある", meaning "it's possible to ~" or "sometimes".ありえり/ありうる and it's negative simply describe the possibility (it can/can not exist) of something.
Yes, your understanding is basically correct, but できない expresses more likely "their will or duty not to do" rather than "trying not to do".できる and it's negative are restricted to things one aims for.
できる is used to say that a person can do something (the person is either good at something or expects/is expected to be able to do something).
できない means the person is not good at something or expects/is expected not to be able to do something. But the negative can also mean that the person tries not to do something?
なんだけど is used to soften the nuance of the sentence, like "..." at the end of the sentence in written language. The rest is OK.
I'm glad that those are mostly correct, since I was not completely sure there.Yes, your understanding is basically correct, but できない expresses more likely "their will or duty not to do" rather than "trying not to do".
So what would be the difference if one would put ありえる at the end of the sentenceあの店に行くと彼女に会うことがある。
When I go to the shop, it's possible to see her (= I sometimes see her).
The probability of ありえる is less than ある, but the meaning is basically the same.So what would be the difference if one would put ありえる at the end of the sentence
instead?
おかげ performs as a noun, so the attributive form (short form of verb/i-adjective, the stem of na-adjective + な, noun + の) is used to modify it.Here is another sentence:
私の頭のおかげでたくさん勉強せずに試験に合格した。
Thanks to my head I passed the exam without learning a lot.
Actually I wanted to to make it "Thanks to my good head", since I came across the expression "頭がいい" a few time already, but I did not know how to fit いい in there.
Anyway the new grammar type that was new to me here is the せず and I think I could have also used しないで instead of せずに.
Since this grammar is new to me and the sentence is rather long, I wanted to make sure it is correct.