だけ Usage

[Angel Valis]

I know that だけ means "only" but I'm curious to its usage.

I believe that it can follow numbers to denote that there are only that many of something, such as: 「切手が一枚だけあります。｣

Also, I understand that unlike しか, だけ does not require the negative form of the verb.

However, what I keep getting confused by is its use with verbs. My instructor corrected a sentence I had written 「だから、一か月に一枚小切手を書かなくてはいけませ ん。」, after I explained that I meant that one "had to write only one check per month" as, 「だから、一か月に一枚の小切手を書くだけです。」

And so now I have a few questions:

I take it that だけ follows after the short forms of verbs. Is this correct?

Can it follow tenses other than non-past affirmative? If so, how would that change the meaning?

Why in the example I gave, should だけ follow 書く and not 一枚 directly? Is this because it is 一枚の小切手 in this example? While we're at it...WHY are 一枚 and 小切手 connected with の here?

Also, when だけ follows a number, it doesn't seem to require additional particles (because counters aren't [at least in the amount of Japanese I've learned] followed by particles). Does this hold true when using だけ with verbs, or do they need particles based on how the verb is being used in the sentence with regards to other verbs?

I often feel that I want to say "only" this, or this "only", but I have a very limited grasp of how to accomplish this.

よろしくおねがいします。

 

[lounli]

I rather say "There is just one stamp." when I translate 「切手が一枚だけあります」 into English.
If you had said "had to write just one check per month" your instructor might have answered 「一か月に一枚だけ小切手を書かなくてはいけません。 」
"verb + だけ" is a right expression.
You can change this as these:
1.「書くだけです」 What I have to do is only to write...
2.「書くだけでした」 What I had to do is only to write...
3.「書いただけです」 What I did is only to write...
The expression 1 implies 「書くだけでよい」 thus whole sentence your instructor offered means 「ひと月に小切手をたった一枚だけ書けばよい」.
Your instructor might translate liberally, I think...

 

[Toritoribe]

Yeah, as lounli-san wrote, 一か月に一枚の小切手を書くだけです would be used as 一か月に一枚の小切手を書くだけでいいです here. In this usage, you can think that だけ modifies not just the verb 書く but the whole clause 一か月に一枚の小切手を書く, something like "only/just to write one check per month".

I take it that だけ follows after the short forms of verbs. Is this correct?
Can it follow tenses other than non-past affirmative? If so, how would that change the meaning?

In addition to lounli-san's

小切手を書くだけでよかったです。
All I had to do was just write a check.

小切手を書いただけです。
All I did was just write a check.
(I omitted 一か月に, since "past habit" is a bit complicated
.)

Why in the example I gave, should だけ follow 書く and not 一枚 directly? Is this because it is 一枚の小切手 in this example? While we're at it...WHY are 一枚 and 小切手 connected with の here?

It's no relation with だけ. Both 一か月に一枚の小切手を書く and 一か月に一枚小切手を書く are correct. Grammatically, 一か月に一枚の modifies 小切手 (i.e., an adjectival usage), and 一か月に一枚 is somewhat adverbial.

Also, when だけ follows a number, it doesn't seem to require additional particles (because counters aren't [at least in the amount of Japanese I've learned] followed by particles). Does this hold true when using だけ with verbs, or do they need particles based on how the verb is being used in the sentence with regards to other verbs?

DDo you mean the usage of だけ in a complex sentence, 書くだけが生き甲斐だった or like that?