I see... I realized something that made me think I was completely wrong, but I don't remember what it was anymore... Sorry for disappearingYour understanding is correct. As same as ない in modern Japanese, ぬ and ず are attached to 未然形.
未然形 of modern verbs is the same as the classical ones, but the only one exception is する and -suru verbs.
It seems that some phrases like 無理せず have continued to stay in the language despite the disappearance of many other usages, I wonder whyclassical: せず/せぬ
I see. Maybe a year from now, I'll more completely understand the "feel" of these words, hopefully not wishful thinkingIt's the latter. ~ませず used to be used in Meiji period, i.e., a hundred or so years ago, but it's obsolete now.
Ahh okay, I can definitely get that then, ず being more factual (hence me hearing it most often on the news) and ぬ being more emotional (hence me hearing it attached to words in songs, such as 「許さぬ」)ず is a proper way of negation in classical grammar, so it has a neutral and objective nuance like the narrative part of a novel. ぬ is often used in spoken utterance, so it's often connotes the speaker's emotion, like the examples 宝くじは当たらぬ or そう簡単なことでは止められぬ you got in the replies to your question.
I see... I'm going to have to read over this conversation again a few times for sure, since it's definitely not easy to make everything "click" if you know what I mean...宝くじは当たらぬ is a sentence, so it's like "A memory is not forgotten." "A memory that is not forgotten" is also a noun phrase. It's the same as "a memory not forgotten" in meaning, right?
These commercials were pretty interestingMy favorite sentence of all time that uses ~ず was used in American Express Card TV commercials in Japan in the 1970's. The Amex promotional slogan at that time was, "Don't Leave Home Without It." This translates into Japanese as, "出かける時は忘れずに。" (でかける とき は わすれず に。) (Dekakeru toki wa wasurezu ni.)
魔法のキーワードHere are two of their TV commercial in Japanese grouped into one video. The promotional slogan 出かける時は忘れずに is shown on the screen in Japanese is at the end of each commercial, at 0:28 and 0:58.
草Here is a goofy video of the famous American golfer Jack Nicholas saying 出かける時は忘れずに in a really bad American accent at 0:27 and 0:41.
I noticed that as well, it felt like the translation was a bit more loose than direct and I got more of that feel from the original text.Maybe also helpful to point out that it its not a one-for-one translation of "Don't leave home without it".
Rather it becomes, "When you leave home, don't forget it".
I'm curious how that meaning comes to be, if it looks like literally "don't know is buddha"知らぬが佛
when you know too much you get too entangled in the world and you get caught up in worldly desires and passions, and the point of buddhism is to learn how to free yourself from all of those entanglements and reach enlightement/nirvana
he literally sounded like how romaji from foreigners sounds in my head
話す and 殺す are not the classical form of -suru verbs. These are just godan verbs that end with す. -Suru verbs consist of "action noun" + "する", for example 勉強する, 掃除する or 行動する. Indeed 勉強す, 掃除す or 感動す are the classical forms of these verbs, but actually "話す, 殺す" and "勉強す, 掃除す, 行動す" are totally different from each other.Let me guess, is す the classical version of する? (like 話す、殺す、etc.)
In "a memory that is not forgotten", "that is not forgotten" is a relative clause that modifies "memory". Unlike a sentence "A memory is not forgotten", the whole "a memory that is not forgotten" functions as a noun (e.g. I have a memory that is not forgotten.), as same as "a memory not forgotten". This is exactly the same difference between 宝くじは当たらぬ and 当たらぬ宝くじ in Japanese.Also, I'd say "a memory that is not forgotten" and "a memory not forgotten" have the same meaning inherently, but, I think it technically has a different feel to it in a way, more like a title. Also, "a memory that is not forgotten" contains the verb "to be" in the form "is", so on a technical standpoint, that's why I wouldn't be sure it can be called a "noun phrase", since it has a verb in it after all
It's something like "To be unknowing, that is the essence of the Buddha".
Wow, that really makes sense. I didn't really learn much about Buddha, but I definitely understand the idea that this isn't the "base reality" that we're living in now. It's an interesting take to simply ignore it! Maybe through ignorance of the fabricated reality, we can tune into the base reality and find the truthThat is correct. We think this material world is the real reality and the afterlife is just an illusion, whereas Buddhism teaches the opposite, that the afterlife is the real reality and this material world is the illusion. It is the ignorance of this which is the 'ignorance' that is mentioned in Buddhism.
I listened to it, and it was pretty beautiful! I'll try to learn it, thank you for sharing ^_^(This is one of the best-known karaoke songs, and I recommend everyone learn this early in their 'karaoke career,' I have some great memories of singing this song in a karaoke bar.)
Oh, now I get it, I think that'll be the main way for me to differentiate then (since I didn't really learn the verbs in a categorical sense, I kinda just learned "organically" in a sense)Conjugation types are different.
And this tooはな and ころ are not nouns.
(The noun forms of 話す and 殺す are the -masu stems はなし and ころし, respectively.)
I see, at the very least I think I get the difference now (though it's gonna be a while before I can come anywhere close to mastering itIn "a memory that is not forgotten", "that is not forgotten" is a relative clause that modifies "memory". Unlike a sentence "A memory is not forgotten", the whole "a memory that is not forgotten" functions as a noun (e.g. I have a memory that is not forgotten.), as same as "a memory not forgotten". This is exactly the same difference between 宝くじは当たらぬ and 当たらぬ宝くじ in Japanese.
You got it right.the classical す is only applicable to nouns, and certain ones at that, got it. So even if a verb has す, it's not the old form of する unless it's attached to a noun.
It depends on the verb. Some are commonly used as a noun (e.g. はなし from 話す, はたらき from 働く), and some are not used as a noun solely. For example, 見(み) from 見る is not used as a noun by itself, but 花見 "cherry‐blossom viewing" or 月見 "moon viewing" are common words. 食べ is rarely used even in compound words, because there also is another verb 食う(くう)as the same meaning "to eat", and its 連用形 食い(くい/ぐい) is more commonly used as a noun (e.g., 早食い(はやぐい), 大食い(おおぐい)).Speaking of the noun forms, (I could probably figure this out on my own if I think about it but) are most verb stems able to be nouns in that way? Or is there a rule to know when it's likely to be "noun-able", if most aren't?
食す (yes, the reading is しょくす) and the modern version 食する are not the 丁寧形/polite form of 食べる. They are different verbs of the same meaning. In fact, there are polite forms for each verb, 食します and 食べます, respectively.I'm also wondering about something interesting I uncovered; one of my Japanese friends recently used a strange version of 「食べる」 which was 「食す」(しょくす I guess), and when I asked him about the difference, he basically said it's 丁寧語.
As I wrote above, 食す is the classical form of 食する. 食 is actually a noun (e.g. 食が細い). However, the conjugation type is not completely the same as -suru verbs.By the way, I'll use this as one of my own test questions for myself: Is this a classical する verb? I think the answer is no, because the noun form must be 「食べ」, not 「食」.
That's right.so essentially the 当たらぬ part of 「当たらぬ宝くじ」 is like the adjective in a sense (even though it doesn't have い or な) so to make any kind of noun phrase with a verb + ぬ it would generally be like how adjectives are in Japanese, where it has to come before the thing that it's modifying?
It's more simple. Basically, when a verb (or adjective or copula) is put at the end, it's a sentence. Thus, 宝くじは当たらぬ。 is just a classical version of 宝くじは当たらない。, and needless to say, 当たらぬ宝くじ is the classical version of 当たらない宝くじ, as well.And then using は after a noun, then a verb with ぬ after は just makes the statement about what state the noun is in?
PhewYou got it right.
Funnily enough, I learned the word 「食う」 just around a day after I posted on hereIt depends on the verb. Some are commonly used as a noun (e.g. はなし from 話す, はたらき from 働く), and some are not used as a noun solely. For example, 見(み) from 見る is not used as a noun by itself, but 花見 "cherry‐blossom viewing" or 月見 "moon viewing" are common words. 食べ is rarely used even in compound words, because there also is another verb 食う(くう)as the same meaning "to eat", and its 連用形 食い(くい/ぐい) is more commonly used as a noun (e.g., 早食い(はやぐい), 大食い(おおぐい)).
I see, that's quite strange then, that he thought it was 丁寧語 (considering he was a Japanese guy in his late 40s, I would've thought he escaped from the trend of Japanese people not even knowing proper 丁寧語, but I guess it affects even some people of that age in some way...)食す (yes, the reading is しょくす) and the modern version 食する are not the 丁寧形/polite form of 食べる. They are different verbs of the same meaning. In fact, there are polite forms for each verb, 食します and 食べます, respectively.
食す/食する is more formal, stiff or written-language-like than 食べる. This is because it's originally used in 漢文 (a method to read classical Chinese texts as Japanese sentences), and Chinese was the formal language used in official documents, just like Latin in Europe. (Some educated people wrote their diaries in Chinese, or Chinese-like Japanese.)
That's something I'll have to learn to pay more attention toThe same difference exists also in some verb pairs, for example 書する(しょする) - 書く(かく) or 要する(ようする) - 要る(いる). As you might already realize, しょく, しょ and よう are 音読み "Chinese-origin reading", and た(べる), か(く) and い(る) are 訓読み "Japanese-origin reading". (Incidentally, 読み "reading" is also from the 連用形 of 読む "to read" in 音読み and 訓読み.)
Dang, unexpected failureAs I wrote above, 食す is the classical form of 食する. 食 is actually a noun (e.g. 食が細い). However, the conjugation type is not completely the same as -suru verbs.
難しいなぁThis is a trivial thing, but this phenomenon is called サ変動詞の五段化 "changing of the conjugation type of -suru irregular verbs to the godan conjugation type" in Japanese grammar. It only occurs on single kanji stem -suru verbs, and doesn't occur on 勉強する, 掃除する or 行動する in my previous examples. Also, it differs depending on the verb in what degree the verb is changed, i.e., which type, for example 〇しない or 〇さない, is more commonly used.
After looking at them carefully, it seems I'll just have to continue immersion and pay attention even more to try and have the right conjugations in my mind. I doubt I'll be able to memorize them in a conscious way since the pattern to the exceptions seems to be too complex for me at the momentexamples (quoted from a research with using Asahi Newspaper database)
^-^That's right.
Wow, that really was more simpleIt's more simple. Basically, when a verb (or adjective or copula) is put at the end, it's a sentence. Thus, 宝くじは当たらぬ。 is just a classical version of 宝くじは当たらない。, and needless to say, 当たらぬ宝くじ is the classical version of 当たらない宝くじ, as well.
The same goes with the affirmative form of verbs, past form, potential form, etc..
当たる宝くじ(noun)
宝くじが当たった。 (sentence)
I think he used the term 丁寧語 mistakenly. He would want to say that 食す was used in more formal situations than 食べる or something like that.I see, that's quite strange then, that he thought it was 丁寧語
It's not "casual", but just neutral.So, considering it's more stiff/written-like, and considering the rest of the stuff he said to me was generally casual, do you have any ideas why he used that verb in place of 食べる? The sentence was 「秋葉原でケバブを食す」, do you think it was to make it more like an "article" sounding title? More like it wasn't coming from his own words, but like a general concept of "eating Kebabs in Akihabara"?
Ah I see, just a wrong choice of words then.I think he used the term 丁寧語 mistakenly. He would want to say that 食す was used in more formal situations than 食べる or something like that.
Well yeah, but when I said casual I just meant in general how he texted me (not just using the dictionary forms, but using だ、ぞ・ぜ、never using です・ます or other polite language, etc.) so I was originally confused on why he used such a word (assuming it's not normal to use formal/stiff words in casual conversation), but it makes sense now ↓It's not "casual", but just neutral.
Thanks, that makes a lot of sense and also helps me regarding title creation.Yes, it sounds like a title of an article. Classical expressions also have a similar nuance, so it's often used as the title of movies or novels.
e.g.
For Whom the Bell Tolls: 誰がために鐘は鳴る(たがためにかねはなる) (not 誰のために鐘は鳴る(のだろう))
Gone with the Wind: 風と共に去りぬ(かぜとともにさりぬ) (not 風と一緒に去った)