そのままにする is a kind of set phrase, meaning "to leave it be/not to change".1. 男が時代の進歩を理解しないのを、そのままにしている からです。
I'm trying to make sense of this as AをBにする ("make A into B", "use A for B", etc.), but although I understand chunks of the sentence individually, I can't figure out the overall meaning. Help!
2. 主婦でもありキャリアウーマンでもある人の超人ぶりをみるたびに、その力で企業 と男にたたかってくれたらと思います。
My translation attempt:
みるたびに = Every time I see
主婦でもありキャリアウーマンでもある人の超人ぶりを = a "superwoman" who is both a housewife and a career woman,
その力で企業と男にたたかってくれたらと思います = I wish that (she) would use that power to fight men and business.
Is this correct? I'm especially unsure about "... でもあり ... でもある人". Could anyone shed any light on this construction? I'm trying to make "Aでもある人" mean "a person who is (also) A", but will that work with ある?
Yes. くれたらと思います = くれたら(いいのに)と思い ますAlso, is it reasonable to translate ~たらと思います as "I wish that ~"?
"One of the three afflictions" might be more appropriate.3. そんな不公平はごめんだというので、三重苦のどれかを 、はずしている人もあります。
My translation attempt:
"Such unfairness is unacceptable, so there are people who get rid of some of the three afflictions."
Does this look right? I'm especially unsure about the sense of 三重苦のどれか.
という has a nuance of quotation, so it's used here. そんな不公平はごめんなので is basically used for the speaker's/writer's own emotion.Also, I know という has been discussed a lot elswehere, but I still have difficulties knowing exactly what sense it imparts in a given situation (unless it's obviously a literal quote). What do you think it's adding here?
Hi Toritoribe. I'm still not very sure how this one fits together. Is the strictly literal meaning of sentence #1 that some unnamed agent, who is the subject of 窶堋キ窶堙ゥ, has left unchanged the fact that men don't understand the progress made?そのままにする is a kind of set phrase, meaning "to leave it be/not to change".
IIf I try a mechanical translation of キャリアウーマンでもある人, I get, if you can follow my mixture of Japanese and English, "人 who キャリアウーマンでもある". The thing that puzzles me is that ある is used to provide a description of a person. Is there a supressed が that でも has supplanted? In an appropriate context, could I say "キャリアウーマンがある" to mean "(she) is a career woman"? I think I may have got into a muddle here.Yes, your interpretation correct. It's the same to 主婦でもキャリアウーマンでもある人.
Well, good. I feel a sense of relief after seeing that!Yeah, I, too, think it's awkward. I would say その力で企業や男とたたかう instead.
Did you mean object or subject? Isn't the object "男が時代の進歩を理解しないの", since it's marked with を? (I mean the object of している.)For そのままにしているからだ I get the sense that the object is unstated, and I have no idea what it's supposed to be.
Oh, so this でもある is actually the same species as だ or です (give or take the level of formality) plus も, and is not the verb ある?主婦でもありキャリアウーマンでもある: 主婦だ。キャリアウーマンでもある。To mark the copula as "also" you have to extract its components (である) and stick the も between them.
Did you mean object or subject? Isn't the object "男が時代の進歩を理解しないの", since it's marked with を? (I mean the object of している.)
Oh, so this でもある is actually the same species as だ or です (give or take the level of formality) plus も, and is not the verb ある?
Good point. So I guess, then, it's (someone) not bothering with men's lack of understanding of the advancement of the times, then? I still don't know what's going on with that sentence, though.
Thanks Glenn ... Oh, one more thing if I may ... By analogy, could I say, for example,YYes. In formal written language だ is usually である.
Thanks Glenn ... Oh, one more thing if I may ... By analogy, could I say, for example,
主婦だ人
to mean (literally) "person who is a housewife"? Or will this pattern only work with である?
I suppose the writer might confuse 戦う and 戦いを挑む, since 企業と男に戦いを挑んでくれたら makes perfect sense.I'm having problems with その力で企業と男にたたかう. I assume eeky's got the meaning right, but why 男に? That's blowing my mind right now.
The adjectival form(連体形) and the dictionary form(終止形) of verbs are the same in modern Japanese, but the adjectival form of the copula だ/です is な. Futhermore, な can't be used for nouns, so 主婦な is also wrong. We need to use である for these cases.(の sometimes can be used, too, as undrentide-san pointed out.)By analogy, could I say, for example, 主婦だ人 to mean (literally) "person who is a housewife"? Or will this pattern only work with である?
I suppose the writer might confuse 戦う and 戦いを挑む, since 企業と男に戦いを挑んでくれたら makes perfect sense.
This is from an essay included in a textbook for Japanese learners. The essay is attributed to someone with a Japanese name, so I assume it's written by a native speaker. However, another member here commented a few days ago that some other sentences extracted from the same essay were poor Japanese, so perhaps the text isn't very well written. (If that's the case, though, I'm surprised it was included in the textbook!)At least I'm assuming the writer is a native speaker.