small transcription typo, it is 過ぎません, from verb 過ぎる (すぎる), to exceed.
I’ll add on a few things and suggest some full-sentence translations that would fit the context. First off though,
I’m sorry, I don’t understand what you mean by ‘with a different pronunciation’. Did someone in the manga call him はくちょう先生? If you mean to ask whether 白鳥 means both ‘white bird’ and ‘swan’… well, the answer is yes. Interesting, no? I didn’t know that either: I’ve just checked the dictionary. Both pronunciations that you mentioned (there’s also a third, しろとり, which is probably rarer) have that double meaning, but it seems はくちょう is usually used for ‘swan’, whereas しらとり is used for ‘white bird’ and as a surname.
Now for the sentence analysis. Just a few comments on what follows:
- I prefer to think of の as an inverted ‘of’, or as an apostrophe S ('s). I know you understand what it means, but thinking of it as ‘(whose)’ may give you trouble when parsing sentences because ‘whose’ creates a subordinate clause. E.g. ‘A whose B is [adj] does C’ would make A the subject of ‘does’, whereas AのBがCをする has B as the subject of する. The ‘apostrophe S’ interpretation covers possession, as in 田中さんの車は新しいですよ！(Mr/Ms Tanaka’s car is new, you know!). The ‘inverted of’ interpretation is useful in understanding apposition, as in ‘my friend Suzie’, which would be written as 私の友達のスーズィ. It’s important to be able to differentiate the two based on context.
An example of the difference from a fantasy light novel translation
A light novel translator translated a character introduction, 星のアルベルト as ‘Albert of the Star’ (this is from the series commonly called Rokuaka aka ロクでなし魔術教師と禁忌教典 Akashic Records of Bastard Magic Instructor). However, ‘The Star’ was his codename (they’re based on the names of tarot cards) in the Imperial Mage Corps, not his division or anything like that, so it should have been ‘Albert, The Star’.
葡萄糖 is indeed glucose (the kanji were autosuggested, so I’m leaving them there, but you know how to read them anyway ), but apparently it’s called ‘grape sugar’ because dextrose (the ‘right-hand’ form of glucose) is the most common sugar in grapes!
You missed the 濁点 (the two dots indicating a voiced aka ‘muddy’ consonant). It’s 過ぎません. (Edit: I see @YanagiPablo has pointed this out. I’m just leaving this here in case you haven’t seen the term 濁点 and the other uses of すぎる before.) The root verb is すぎる, which can often be added after the stem of i-adjectives and na-adjectives to mean ‘too [adj]’. By the way, what’s 過(か)?
Some examples of how adjectives are combined with すぎる
E.g. 古い=old. The stem is ふる (just remove the い), so when we add すぎる, we get 古すぎる=too old
大切な=important → 大切 → 大切すぎる=too important
It works with compound adjectives too:
かっこいい is ‘cool’. It’s made up of 格好=external appearance/posture and いい=good. The stem of いい is よ (since いい and よい are related, and even both written with kanji as 良い), so we get かっこよすぎる. You may more frequently see the adjective written as カッコいい, because katakana are often used to replace complex kanji.
- 栄養分: Just a little literal translation of this expression. 栄養 is ‘nourishment’ or ‘nutrition’. 分 is ‘part’. So in actual fact, this means ‘the amount of nourishment/nutrition’.
- One more thing: 程度 can also mean ‘extent’ or ‘degree’, and is often used to mean ‘about’ or ‘around’ in a comparative fashion, as is the case here.
With all that settled, what I would propose as translations:
‘A 500cc IV drip’s contents are, in short, nothing more than 25g of glucose.
It’s just 100 kilocalories’ worth of nourishment, comparable to half a cup of cow’s milk, you know?’
する ってー と 何 かい？
do called/said when what [male-question]
In that case, what?
するってーと=(そう)するというと. It’s a verbal contraction or ‘euphonic change’ according to the dictionary. ( Here’s a discussion about this expression. You may have seen という becoming って. This is essentially the same thing, but with a と added at the end, and some vowel lengthening. そうするというと is roughly (semi-literally) ‘If (we) say (we) do that’, which is to say ‘if we take it that way’ or ‘in that case’.
I believe 何 here is pronounced なに. It could also be なん, but I doubt it since なんか is transcribed without the kanji one bubble later.
かい is a masculine question particle in Japanese. Another way is to form it is to add い after だ as in ‘どうだい？’ but I believe that only works for sentences ending in だ. Women don’t use this, as far as I know. An exclusively female (I believe) question particle is かしら, which is used instead of か at the end of a sentence.
点滴 って 奴 は 意味 なんか ない の かい？
IV-drip called thing [topic] meaning something-like not-exist [explanatory question] [male-question]
There's no point to (this) 'IV drip' thingy or something then?
って=という, as said above. という is an inverted ‘to-be-called’ and is made up of と, the quotation particle and いう, ‘to say’, which is written in hiragana here, and not in kanji, because it does not indicate literal speech. AというB means ‘B called A’
奴 is often also written as ヤツ. It indicates an arbitrary thing or person. That’s why I chose to translate it as ‘thingy’.
意味 literally means ‘meaning’, but it can also mean ‘point’ or ‘purpose’. After all, something that is ‘meaningless’ is usually something that is ‘pointless’, no?
なんか means ‘something like’, but as is usually the case in Japanese, it’s an ‘inverted’ version of the English phrase, and is usually placed after the noun in this sense. E.g. あなたなんか大嫌い! = I hate (people like) you! Here, なんか is used in a somewhat condescending manner, which is appropriate (but rude) since the speaker is angry. You might hear this phrase in anime or between friends having an argument in real life, with one of them walking off in a huff. (The reason I say ‘friends’ is because あなた is a form of address that indicates extreme closeness, unless it’s being used in a textbook or other document where a 2nd person pronoun is desperately needed.) It can also mean ‘kinda’, in which case it is placed before the verb, adjective or noun. E.g. なんかイヤな感じ=a kinda unpleasant feeling (嫌 literally means ‘disliked/undesired/causes unwillingness’).
の here is a question particle similar to か. The difference (according to my friend) is that の tends to imply a sort of expectation on the part of the speaker. どうしたの？= what’s up/what’s wrong? indicates an expectation that something really is amiss, as opposed to どうした？=what’s up/what’s going on? I believe it’s something like a contracted のです. It’s said that の is a question particle reserved for women and children (this is what Assimil claims, anyhow), but my friend’s experience (and mine on the Japanese internet) tells me that that’s not true. の as a sentence-ending particle is feminine, but that’s for ending statements, not questions. However, to make it more masculine, の can be transformed into のか at the end of a question. A general (but imprecise) rule is that in informal speech, men are expected to end their sentences in a more complete manner with words like だ or のか, whereas women can end them without those words, or with ‘softening’ particles like わ, though apparently わ isn’t heard among Japanese women in real life, even the ‘well-raised’ ones who stereotypically use it. (わ also has a non-softening use that isn’t reserved to women, and is especially common among men and women in Kansai dialects, but NVM that for now.)
In any case, in order to capture the sense of なんか (albeit imperfectly), I added ‘or something’. I added ‘then’ in an attempt to capture the expectation of の, though I doubt ‘then’ is appropriate in all circumstances, since it changes the tone of the question. Thus, I ended up with the translation above. That is all.
While that works in most cases, sometimes it produces unnatural/hard to understand English wording.
As in 友達のスーズィ (Susie of friend ?).
I think of AのB as A being some characteristic of B. It can be possesion/belonging (“B of A”), but also can be worded otherwise (“B that is A”)
私の友達のスーズィ : Suzie, that is a friend of mine
(until I realised that I had regularly trouble with some の constructions)
The ON reading of the kanji… used as prefix of sino-japanese words (as opposed to すぎる being a suffix to native adjectives)
having mistyped き for ぎ, electronic recognition didn’t make the connection as only seeing “過” that is what appears.
That also is the nice thing about this collective reading excercises. Those small glitches in reading could go unnoticided if we were alone.
It’s because it’s run from “outsiders/newcomers” and locals don’t want to participate for the most part.
Finally made my way over here too! Hey all
せっかくなんで「リ」の解析させてもらいますよ～/Since I’m here anyway I’ll do I!
脱水症状（だっすいしょうじょう）dehydration; 脱水 on its own means dehydration as well, but is used for e.g. washing machines (the spin cycle) - for the medical condition, add 症状 (‘symptoms’).
点滴を打つ（てんてきをうつ）to put someone on an IV; to be put on one is 点滴を受ける／打ってもらう.
～なんて things like ～;
“Administering an IV when you’re not even dehydrated only happens in Japan”.
Of course you don’t have to be dehydrated to get a drip - the も after 脱水症状 is there to include (or, since it’s a negative sentence, exclude) any other possible indications.
Earlier in the comic there was a frame of Saitou having an IV after a tiring shift - oh the irony.
Totally didn’t take me a embarrassingly long time to figure out the hide details thing…
ayamadori!!! So glad to see you here. The party is now complete.
Maybe I’m missing something but:
How can you tell it’s the progressive if the いる is missing?
Woohoo! Apparently I still have my account from years ago so I figured why not
You’re right, but English also provides us an analogy with expressions like ‘a wall of stone’ = ‘a stone wall’. Thus, ‘AのB’ = ‘B of A’ = ‘A B’ (sometimes). You can try it with A=stone and B=wall to see what I mean. It works with A=友達 and B=スーズィtoo: friend の Suzie = Suzie of friend = friend Suzie. That just needs to be fleshed out with the correct possessive adjective/determiner (‘my’ in ‘my friend’, for instance), and perhaps a comma. That’s what I meant when I discussed ‘apposition’ (see below). It’s the same term Assimil used to describe this use of の in their course in French: « apposition ».
Ah yes, right… as in 過去. I didn’t make the connection here because I thought we were talking about 過 in すぎる. You’re right, you’re right…
Like I said, R sounds tend to get shortened into ん in informal Japanese. It would probably look like もらってんんだ if we wrote everything, but no one doubles ん. That’s how you guess. However, why does it have to be the progressive? That’s because what precedes のだ has to be a complete sentence ending with a verb in a terminal form (usually the dictionary/plain form) or a copula (i.e. something that means ‘to be’). The て-form is a connective form. The sentence would be incomplete without it. To understand this through an analogy, you can try to replace の with こと as a nominaliser. Grammatically, こと cannot be preceded by a て-form. It has to be preceded by a terminal form, which is to say something ending in -u.
it’s not uncommon for R sounds to turn into ん in informal Japanese
Ok but in your example below, の→ん. の isn’t a “r” sound.
I don’t understand the progression.
② やっている→やってる this is the part where the い disappears. Is this common in Japanese? It’s slang?
Please vulgarise as much as possible, it’s hard to take in for me with the grammatical terminology .
It would probably look like もらってんんだ if we wrote everything, but no one doubles ん
Ah ok, so the ん(ん) substitutes two sounds then, not just one.
By terminal form you mean dictionary form?
Yes, the terminal form is the same as the dictionary form
So all of the らりるれろ often get replaced by a single ん in informal Japanese?
Hey, don’t be “the outsiders”, the community is very warm and welcoming. As for newcomers, I’m the one (no Japanese before WaniKani), so I cannot participate here because I cannot read on that level.
There are several well-established book clubs, and one of them is reading ゆるキャン right now:
and there is a shared google spreadsheet with vocabulary which is filled by comminuty, and superhelpful for novices like me, since that’s my first manga without firigana.
You are doing your own version of bookclub, with daily threads.
I’d say create the main thread to link your dailies, and get it added to
as spin-off or one-time or whatever buzzword will fit.
Finally, where are my manners: WELCOME TO WANIKANI FORUMS!
Maybe the same way than in 「食べないで(ください)」?
It’s the first time I see such a missing いる; but yet I have not much exposure to spoken Japanese at all.
How are the two related? I can’t understand , you’d need to elaborate more.
I mean, that maybe that is just a common thing happening in spoken language, and that a recognizable pattern exists if you just read/hear it a lot.
I mean, not because there is some “traces” of the missing word (like in the missing “kudasai”, there seem to be nothing at all here); but the context and experience allow to guess the missing part.
Well hopefully there’s more to it than just “experience” because that leaves me stranded .
I did some research and terminal form = dictionary form:
- Terminal form (終止形 shuushikei ) is used at the ends of clauses in predicate positions. This form is also variously known as plain form (基本形 kihonkei ) or dictionary form (辞書形 jishokei ).
Ok, I’m back. Sorry for leaving you hanging with so many questions: I needed to cook something. Anyway, so…
Yup, but I’m saying that R sounds can be turned into ん. They’re not the only ones, and you already know, for example, that のだ→んだ is common.
What I meant to say was that やっているのだ is made up of 「やっている」and「のだ」, and that each of them is transformed into something else. やっている becomes やってる, and のだ becomes んだ. Those abbreviations are then combined. I’m not claiming that this is exactly how the new sounds came about: I’m just trying to give you a way to think about the transformation process.
It’s very common in informal Japanese. My friend drops the い in ている all the time when we text each other. The reason it’s acceptable is that the long E sound in Japanese is written えい, so dropping the い gives you exactly the same sound, just a bit shorter.
I’m sorry about all the technical terms. Thanks for telling me that you’d prefer to do without them. I’ll try to make the explanation as simple as I can.
That’s how I understand it.
Hm… for a verb, yes. I was trying to give you something general that worked for all the types of words that can come before のだ. In that case, a ‘terminal form’ would be ‘a form that you can find at the end of a sentence’. I’ll be more illustrative by providing correct and incorrect examples (in that order):
好きなのだ、好きではないのだ (な and ではない are the ‘copula’ I was talking about. They respectively mean ‘to be’ and ‘not to be’.)
The noun section is basically the same as the な-adjective section. Note that 犬のだ is not grammatically wrong, but it would mean ‘it’s the dog’s (thing)’, which doesn’t mean the same thing as the のだ structure at all.
I don’t know, honestly. It’s just a pattern I’ve picked up, but it may not apply to everything, and I’ve only seen it for ら and る so far. I find it hard to imagine for り、れ or ろ. I think it can only happen when similar vowels are present around the R syllable (e.g. in わからない, there’s a kA before the rA, and a nA after), and it probably also only happens near an N sound like な or ん. The exception to this ‘common vowel’ idea is る, because the U sound in Japanese is extremely small, so it’s easy for る to be reduced to ん. It’s like how the E in ‘the’ in English is almost inaudible in front of a consonant.
Hope that clears things up.
Puh-leeze!! @sansarret, you can (and should!) absolutely join in and translate a sentence–no matter your level. I had no Japanese before last April, when I started on Duolingo! I just hand-write my entire sentence into Google translate (until the kanji is correct) and then pick everything apart from there! That’s where I am pulling the on-kun- readings from. The other guys prefer Jisho.
Shannon blah blah blah like she do
I’m jumping in with both feet, because I will be going to Japan to live for a while, and LIFE doesn’t come with furigana! It’ll just be me and my phone with a local (non-internet) copy of Google translate.
I do NOT take it personally when absolutely everything that I did with my sentence gets “corrected”. I don’t feel “raked-over” by Jonapedia/YanagiPablo today, I feel enlightened! And ever- so-grateful.
When I read on my own, I do “good enough” (with discomfort). I found this group to be responsive and informative. I was staring at those の’s and moving the related units around like building blocks for 20 minutes last night! I was looking at that “no more than” and going up and down the sentence looking for a target and trying to make it fit for AGES! When Jonapedia said that… Everything clicked!
I advise “doing a sentence” instead of lurking, because when you actually are forced to publicly state your rationale…you learn/absorb better (IMHO). (why we are doing this instead of merely going to the translated manga)
I joined another book club, too, since I own that manga and was reading it home alone. Most of the book clubs are running in a nice, legal way that supports the sale of books without getting close to offending copyrights, IMHO. As you can see, Zizka’s thread is different. Zizka selected this manga because the author put it on the internet and specifically invited people to read and share it online for free. So although we are putting up the pictures and discussing every sentence in what is clearly an academic discussion, we are not endangering the forum. We appreciate that booksellers want to earn money from selling books used in classes and book clubs also!
We don’t have an ongoing vocabulary sheet, because we haven’t already, and it’s helpful to not have to be flipping back and forth, anyway. One of us “takes the hit” for all and shares directly.
Here comes the pressure (ha ha): technically @sansarret, you are already a “posting member” now, so… WELCOME!! I look forward to your post on the May 1 thread.
You know how in English, people will rarely say “going to” because it’s awkward to say and substitute to “gonna”. The word is transformed when it gets to oral to facilitate communication and make it more comfortable to say. I assume it’s the same thing for ~てる/ている, it’s strictly speaking (no pun intended) a colloquial thing.
As a learner, I was asking how I can pick up on those colloquial things, to see them so I don’t misunderstand written text.
I’m sorry about all the technical terms. Thanks for telling me that you’d prefer to do without them.
No apologies are necessary, you’re just trying your best to use the right terminology, most precise term. I’d like to develop further about this as it relates to teaching languages and that happens to be my job. The following is just my opinion and personal beliefs, they are not facts.
I think that as language teachers (I prefer language facilitators since it’s closest to what a teacher is in my conception of things) the most challenging part is to vulgarisent i.e. abstain from using what is the most precise word for an alternative which, while not as precise, is easier to understand. If I ask you a question, I would just use what’s precise (non-vulgarised) because you know more than I do and that language is easily accessible for you.
But when it’s the other way around, I think vulgarisation gives the best result.
Here’s an example from Wikipedia:
It’s a precise definition but it’s in no way vulgarised. As a learning device, I find a definition like that sterile. There’s so much jargon that in order to understand what it means, you’d need to read other wiki pages which stem to other pages, etc… Accuracy is sacrificed for accessibility.
This is something common to university cliques and texts. There’s a certain decorum and most importantly, a certain public targeted for the texts being written. It’s like reading Nietzsche, each sentence is so dense, you need to really, really focus to understand what he is trying to say. His goal wasn’t to be understood first, he wanted to translate his ideas as accurately as possible.
I don’t want to talk for others, but I’d say I’m an advanced beginner if I were to need to categorise myself. If I ask a question about something and the answer is:
…there’s no point. Which is why I bring the necessity to change lexicon depending on what the goal is. Something can explained as a scholar or as a teacher. I find both are often mutually exclusive when it comes to dealing with beginners.
To vulgarise is the greatest challenge of teaching. You need to convey an idea in the most approachable fashion without sacrificing meaning or misleading. To explain something difficult is one thing, to simplify something complex is truly masterful and, for me, an astonishing feat. To simplify something to the point where you can’t go further without changing its nature. 5ats the beauty of teaching, when raw information has been processed to the point where it’s easily accessible to all and it leaves obscurity to become knowledge accessible to all. This is why a good scholar doesn’t make a good teacher, I’d go as far as saying that they’re unrelated.
Another disadvantage of using a very technical language is that it discourages questions being asked. People want to protect their language ego and would rather not say anything than come across as stupid or dumb. We have a problem with these threads with participation. Very few people participate. I’ve tried to constantly improve the methodology and @YanagiPablo’s edit have helped towards that to make the exercise more accessible. A member, @sansarret, just now said: “I don’t participate because I can’t read that level”… but they could with some help. I feel that at that moment we’re giving the impression that there’s a high level of entry here when anyone could learn something according to their level.
I’d be really interested and keen your vulgarisation. I think we can learn a lot from you, provided you communicate what you know in a way which makes it easy (easier) to approach it .