- 24 May 2004
- 1,046
- 12
I'm posting this in romaji then correctly it to japanese on my other computer.
The past 2 or 3 months I've studied japanese from the book "Japanese Demystified!" By
Erica Sato. It's a good book,although I found a book at the bookstore called
"Elemtentry Japanese" That I liked more. It was a good textbook.)
From the book I bought, I Mostly learned there was alot more "rules" about grammical structures than I was
aware of. I didn't know "ga" couldn't follow "wa" such as in this sentence:
"Neko wa tsukue no uchiro ni imasu." "The cat is behind the desk."
Or differently as, "Tsukue no ushiro ni wa neko ga imasu." I think it is acceptable in this
case. 'Ni" seems to mark the location of things in different ways. In this case "ni" seems to
mark existantial verbs such as "arimasu/imasu." After "wa" should follow new information I think,
such as, "Tn this cafaternia, there's tempura.""." Kono cafaternia ni wa tempura ga arimasu.
Or, as in Neko wa tsukue no uchiro ni imasu, The cat is marked by the topic marker (Oh, I read that "ga" marks the subject before the verb. The cat is the topic then. though, I read "wa" can be used when it is both the subject and the topic, "Ga" is deleted.)
and "wa" is used). and tsukue no uchiro ni serves as the new information. I've learned about
"na" and "i" adjectives as well as "ru" and "u" verbs. I think a "na" adjective like jouzu,
is made the negative, in a sentence like this: Jouzu ja arimasen. (or Jouzu dewa arimasen.). And
a "i" adjective is made in the negative present tense like, with Kibishii -> kibishiku arimasen.
I think "ru" and "u" verbs are a bit harder for me. "ru" verbs seem easier for me.
I heard there's sometimes not a way to differentiate between "u" verbs and "ru" verbs, sometimes
I read you have to memorize them, unless its not ending in "iru" or "eru." Kau is a "u"
verb. It doesn't end in "iru" or "eru". For "ru" verbs it seems a little more straight
foward. Just drop the "ru" and add ~masu for present polite affirmative or ~nai for
negative present. So for "taberu", it becomes "tabe + nai" (ru is dropped, I think that's why
its called a "ru" verb) or "Tabe + masu." I noticed some of the "u" verbs are a bit more tricky.
I think with "U" verbs, "u" is dropped and something is added, that's I think why its called
a "u" verb.
For example, "kau" is in present negative form, it becomes "Kawanai." Because when ending
in "u" alone, and when its next to a vowel, it changes. Another one is matsu. When "ts" is followed
by "a", it becomes matanai. And it seems, it becomes machimasu in its polite form.
I need to ask something about the particle usage of "to". I read it can be used to list nouns.
such as "I have this, this and this." But it also can be used for to specific an accomplaying person's
action. Like, I think, Watashi wa haha to restauran ni ikimasta.
I went with my mom to the restaurant.
restaurant ni ikimasta ("went to restaurant") " In this case,
since my mom went to the restaurant, and I am going WITH her, I use to, correct?
"I go to the park with my dog."
"watashi wa inu to koen ni ikimasu."
Recently I've been having trouble with "wo" and "de". Some particles have many uses it seems.
Apparently "wo" is used for direct objects, and only for certain verbs. My book said that not
all verbs can accept a direct object. The verbs that accept direct objects are called
transitive verbs. It said "iku" isn't a transitive verb. But something like the verb "make"
is. "someone makes something." It said here, "something" is the direct object." Apparently,
the noun directly after the verb is the direct object. But does "wo" just mark the direct object
of a transitive verb? Is that all it does? Apparently verbs that do not accept direct objects are called
intransitive verbs. But that's a lesson for another day, I think.
It wouldn't make sense to say, "He will go tokyo." But "He will go to tokyo"
makes sense. I heard also "de" often specifies how an action was done. But I think it
can also specific where an activity was done. So, "I eat with chopsticks."
"hashi de tabemasu." It just specifies how I eat? "with chopsticks" . Is this correct?
Also, I heard an example of what a direct object is in a sentence like,
"someone makes something." Makes is the verb, and something (after the verb) is the direct object.
It seems the direct object just perhaps marks the action/verb?
Thank you.
The past 2 or 3 months I've studied japanese from the book "Japanese Demystified!" By
Erica Sato. It's a good book,although I found a book at the bookstore called
"Elemtentry Japanese" That I liked more. It was a good textbook.)
From the book I bought, I Mostly learned there was alot more "rules" about grammical structures than I was
aware of. I didn't know "ga" couldn't follow "wa" such as in this sentence:
"Neko wa tsukue no uchiro ni imasu." "The cat is behind the desk."
Or differently as, "Tsukue no ushiro ni wa neko ga imasu." I think it is acceptable in this
case. 'Ni" seems to mark the location of things in different ways. In this case "ni" seems to
mark existantial verbs such as "arimasu/imasu." After "wa" should follow new information I think,
such as, "Tn this cafaternia, there's tempura.""." Kono cafaternia ni wa tempura ga arimasu.
Or, as in Neko wa tsukue no uchiro ni imasu, The cat is marked by the topic marker (Oh, I read that "ga" marks the subject before the verb. The cat is the topic then. though, I read "wa" can be used when it is both the subject and the topic, "Ga" is deleted.)
and "wa" is used). and tsukue no uchiro ni serves as the new information. I've learned about
"na" and "i" adjectives as well as "ru" and "u" verbs. I think a "na" adjective like jouzu,
is made the negative, in a sentence like this: Jouzu ja arimasen. (or Jouzu dewa arimasen.). And
a "i" adjective is made in the negative present tense like, with Kibishii -> kibishiku arimasen.
I think "ru" and "u" verbs are a bit harder for me. "ru" verbs seem easier for me.
I heard there's sometimes not a way to differentiate between "u" verbs and "ru" verbs, sometimes
I read you have to memorize them, unless its not ending in "iru" or "eru." Kau is a "u"
verb. It doesn't end in "iru" or "eru". For "ru" verbs it seems a little more straight
foward. Just drop the "ru" and add ~masu for present polite affirmative or ~nai for
negative present. So for "taberu", it becomes "tabe + nai" (ru is dropped, I think that's why
its called a "ru" verb) or "Tabe + masu." I noticed some of the "u" verbs are a bit more tricky.
I think with "U" verbs, "u" is dropped and something is added, that's I think why its called
a "u" verb.
For example, "kau" is in present negative form, it becomes "Kawanai." Because when ending
in "u" alone, and when its next to a vowel, it changes. Another one is matsu. When "ts" is followed
by "a", it becomes matanai. And it seems, it becomes machimasu in its polite form.
I need to ask something about the particle usage of "to". I read it can be used to list nouns.
such as "I have this, this and this." But it also can be used for to specific an accomplaying person's
action. Like, I think, Watashi wa haha to restauran ni ikimasta.
I went with my mom to the restaurant.
restaurant ni ikimasta ("went to restaurant") " In this case,
since my mom went to the restaurant, and I am going WITH her, I use to, correct?
"I go to the park with my dog."
"watashi wa inu to koen ni ikimasu."
Recently I've been having trouble with "wo" and "de". Some particles have many uses it seems.
Apparently "wo" is used for direct objects, and only for certain verbs. My book said that not
all verbs can accept a direct object. The verbs that accept direct objects are called
transitive verbs. It said "iku" isn't a transitive verb. But something like the verb "make"
is. "someone makes something." It said here, "something" is the direct object." Apparently,
the noun directly after the verb is the direct object. But does "wo" just mark the direct object
of a transitive verb? Is that all it does? Apparently verbs that do not accept direct objects are called
intransitive verbs. But that's a lesson for another day, I think.
It wouldn't make sense to say, "He will go tokyo." But "He will go to tokyo"
makes sense. I heard also "de" often specifies how an action was done. But I think it
can also specific where an activity was done. So, "I eat with chopsticks."
"hashi de tabemasu." It just specifies how I eat? "with chopsticks" . Is this correct?
Also, I heard an example of what a direct object is in a sentence like,
"someone makes something." Makes is the verb, and something (after the verb) is the direct object.
It seems the direct object just perhaps marks the action/verb?
Thank you.
Last edited:
