Reading ブラックジャックによろしく manga exercises (p14-and up)


Well, I think he’s sad because he didn’t go against the “orders” of 白鳥(しろとり)?


Doesn’t mean the same thing? I mean we use a different emotion but my reading is the same as yours from what I can tell.

OK, correct me if I’m wrong, because maybe I’m not following the story correctly (like I said, I’m not really reading the manga):

To me, your reading says, ‘I think Saitou is sad because Saitou didn’t go against the orders of Shiratori.’

My reading is supposed to mean this: ‘Saitou is angry with Shiratori for not going against/disobeying the professor.’ I believe (and this is the bit I’m not sure about, because I haven’t been following the story) that the professor is the main doctor who handled the surgery, meaning the guy who introduced Shiratori and Saitou to the patient’s family after the operation. I believe that the professor is also called ‘God’s Hands’.

In your reading, only two people appear: Saitou and Shiratori. In my reading, three people appear: Saitou, Shiratori, and ‘the professor’ (God’s Hands?) In your reading, Saitou is angry with himself. In my reading, Saitou is angry with Shiratori, and the reason is that Shiratori followed the professor’s orders. That’s the difference. Shiratori himself says 「教授の指示だ」in the previous screenshot (p14-15, I think), meaning that the 教授 here is not Shiratori, but someone else.

Again, if I misinterpreted the story or your reading, please tell me. Thanks.

I don’t know exactly what Saitou (or the manga’s author) intends; but there are three involved characters (copied from “places and names”):

  • 斉藤 英二郎 (さいとう えいじろう): the main character. He is an idealist who wants to be a doctor to help people as opposed to become rich.
  • 春日部 一郎(かすかべ いちろう): nicknamed “God’s hands”, is a professor at the Eiroku University hospital that just do initial incisions, and otherwise is interested only in study of eels.
  • 白鳥 貴久(しらとり たかひさ): doctor at the 1st surgery department that did the actual operation (Ep.2) at which “God’s hands” appeared. He is the instructor of Saitou and Dekune.

The professor giving instructions to do the operation, knowing it would be useless, but doing it to get money from the patient family, is 春日部 一郎.
The one that did the actual operation, and that then reveals the futility of it, is 白鳥貴久.

When the operation has been done, Saitou didn’t knew about the ugly side of it, so he couldn’t have disobeyed.
The word 指示 has been used by Shiratori to tell why the operation had been done; “教授の指示だ” B of page 14. So that professor is Kasukabe.

Saitou laments someone (non stated) didn’t disobeyed the “instructions of the professor”. As the professor in the previously said “教授の指示だ” is Kasukabe, then the conclusion of Jonapedia is that the meaning is that Saitou is mad that Shiratori didn’t disobeyed those instructions (at first I had understood it like you; but indeed Jonapedia interpretation is the right one; just after that, Saitou says 僕も同じだ, I am the same (so if he is “the same” he also another one (yes, it’s paradoxical :slight_smile: ) than the subject of the previous sentence.

And the next one (I haven’t looked if it has already analyzed, but I read it on the manga), says Me also,… I didn’t contradict a single word against Pr. Shiratori (crudely worded, as I haven’t correctly analyzed the sentence yet); so as Saitou now says that, he too, didn’t disobey his superior, it’s another indication that the previous sentences is about Shiratori not disobeying his own superior; hence “ぼくもおなじだ”

Ahh ok yeah, I lost track of the characters because I don’t really follow the story.

By the way, ‘‘personnages’’ isn’t really word which translates in English, it’s a false cognate. You’d use character here.

P.S.: Don’t forget the home page :blush:.

☆Just as a heads up, I’ll create it tomorrow if it’s not done today. Having to depend on anyone is something I can’t bear (one of many neurosis) Then everyone can edit it to their liking.

Claiming N:



Since a verb is so important in the meaning of a sentence, I will start with the verb this time.

Again I recognise the past negative, this time of the verb 返す.

返す has a lot of meanings (well by my accounts anyway):

Godan verb with 〜su ending, transitive verb
ⓐ to return (something), to restore, to put back (esp. 返す, see also: かえす)
ⓑ to turn over, to turn upside down, to overturn
ⓒ to pay back, to retaliate, to reciprocate (esp. 返す)
ⓓ to respond (with), to retort, to reply, to say back
auxiliary verb, Godan verb with `su’ ending
ⓔ to do … back (e.g. speak back, throw back) (after the -masu stem of a verb)
ⓕ to do again, to do repeatedly (after the -masu stem of a verb)

I didn’t even retort one word to 白鳥先生.

Yes!! Victory dance!

1 Like

@YanagiPablo O.M.G. That “Home Post” is VERY VERY NICE! Bravo!! (Wine glass tink together)

I'm doing O p.16-17

I think nobody did?

斉藤: 患者さんの事なんて考えてなかった……

Analysis and Interpretation

With furigana:

patient (honorific) (possessiveの)(thing this is about?) think (negative) (past tense)

Umm… It doesn’t seem like any of you would need this one explaining…
I’m just gonna admit her that someone soon I’m going to have to read up this koto stuff. I will skip it for now and see how Duolingo presents it for m to “Experiment”. For now, I understand it loosely as a particle phrase that I essentially skip over with “thing that…” or “person who…”. I hope that is enough for you. And (as always) I hope I’m not wrong. Gotta go to work!! またね

@Jonapedia, re your lengthy comment yesterday about your lengthy comments (haha), I recommend that you write with your first thoughts and don’t spend time going back and trying to “tighten up the text”, editing for brevity. You can’t spare the time! The fact that you take the time to put in pronunciation or link or other commentary is time “better spent”

I didn’t think about the patient……

1 Like

@Shannon-8 Go ahead. I certainly don’t see anything for O. I think everyone’s started translating more or less linearly, which is good, because it’s easier to keep track of things.

EDIT: Thanks for fixing the formatting! And yes, here, that sort of understanding for こと is fine. It’s more accurately ‘matters related to the patient’ and the like, including the patient himself (kinda like turning the patient into a subject of consideration, is the impression I have), but that doesn’t really translate. Finally, to be honest, I can’t remember which post you’re talking about anymore (unless it happens to be what I posted in the ‘input hypothesis’ discussion), but yes, I prefer not to have to summarise my thoughts after writing, honestly. I only did it because of a request.

@YanagiPablo Thank you very much for creating that home thread. It’s very nicely organised.

1 Like

Next two pages:


Direct link to the pages so you can zoom in

Index of all previous sentences in Episode 3

Zizka tell us, here, that we have been requested not to create too much threads…
so we may well continue here until the end of the episode (that is some ~10 more pages I think)

Hi guys, here’s an update: please read this post from one of the mods. She (I think) says we can learn what other clubs are doing, and that we just need to have roughly the same thread creation frequency as the rest. Radish8 has given us a few examples a few posts above the mod’s post. In short, weekly threads are perfectly fine, so we could actually do one thread per episode (and as a challenge, perhaps, try to finish one episode per week, though that’s probably not going to be easy).


Claiming P

斉藤:. “これは試練しれんだ”……

P Analysis


  • 試練(しれん) test, trial, ordeal

“This a test”……

This person(をdirect object)save(Hypothetical conditional) (reflexive pronoun) matureのdoctor is

  • この人を救(すく)えば; transitive verb 救う(すくう) to save; (五段verb; Hypothetical, conditional ,えform +ば)
  • 自分(じぶん)は pronoun “myself” it “oneself”
  • 一人前(いちにんまえ) Nb. This reading apparently was not hitori (!). It seems that this phrase altogether means “adult”, or “full grown man”.
  • の It send to that there is a の usage (I think Zizka calls it “attributive”?) which is (in my mind) a classのsubclass relation; for example “French class” is “classのFrench”.
  • 医者 (いしゃ) doctor

If you save this person, then you are a full-fledged doctor


  • 考(こう)ていたのは Verb 考える (kangaeru) “to think”, past tense progressive (“was verb-ing”); のはmakes this verb the sentence’s subject.
  • 自分の事ばかりだ Myself (reflexive pronoun) is “the thing/person” (koto); ばかりis “just, only, merely”.
    I was thinking only of myself
P Interpretation

Saitou: “This is a test”……
“If you save this person, then you are a full-fledged doctor”……
I was thinking only of myself

The translation looks good! Just a few comments on the transcription and analysis:

You missed an え. It really is 考える (well done for finding the verb nonetheless), which means the て-form should be 考えて. There are some irregular て-forms out there, but not quite as irregular as 「こうて」. Also, you’re right about のは turning the verb – that is, the action it represents – into the subject or topic of the sentence, and your translation is perfectly valid. Still, I’d like to suggest another translation: technically, 僕が考えていたの=what I was thinking of, so if ‘what I was thinking of was myself only’, then I guess ‘all I was thinking of was myself’. Again, your translation is correct, but I think this version preserves the original grammatical structure of the sentence.

My dictionary says that ひとり is a possible reading with the same meaning, but yes, the main entry is いちにんまえ. Separately, I think you’ve got the right idea for the の: it is attributive, to use Zizka’s term, but I think it’s more ‘subclassのclass’ or ‘characteristicのmain noun’. Your ‘French class’ example should in fact be ‘Frenchのclass’ (and if you meant that in the sense of ‘French lesson’, you’d get フランス語の授業)

EDIT: AH, I see… after reading @YanagiPablo’s elaboration below, I understand what you meant by ‘classのsubclass’. My mistake. I was handling your example specifically, since ‘French class’ is a type of ‘class’. Honestly though, since we each have a structure that works similarly, but in reverse, in each of our native languages (English or French), I really think it’s better to just think of it as ‘of’ or '~‘s’ and work from there. It’s gonna be a slightly bigger leap for an English speaker since there are cases where ‘of’ can’t be used while '~‘s’ can, and the attributive/appositional use (i.e. when the first noun functions like an adjective, as in ‘French class’ or ‘steel bars’) doesn’t always work with ‘of’, but if you just treat it as a reversed ‘of’, things should start to click eventually. I’m pretty sure that’s how I started thinking of 的 in Mandarin as a child, and 的 works almost exactly the same as の in Japanese.

PS: the reason I’m suggesting avoiding the ‘classのsubclass’ logic is not that it’s wrong, but that’s it’s not always true, so it might lead to confusion. Let’s say we have two men surnamed 長野ながの, one in the US, and one in Japan. 日本の長野さん would help differentiate the two, and you could argue that a person is a ‘subclass’ of a country because people are what makes up a country. However, I can just as easily say 長野さんの日本. The difference is though, that would be ‘Nagano-san’s Japan’, or in other words, how he sees Japan. It’s much easier to understand this organically than to expect a particular order of things.

1 Like

Indeed, sometimes that is the relation too (that is, in AのB, A is a quality of B, A can be a greater group of which B is a member).

It seems every time that classes and subclasses (and subsubclasses etc) are given, they use that order in Japanese; from broader to narrower.
You can see that in addresses (country->province->town->group of houses->number), people’s names (family name->personal name; there used to be also clan name in old times, but I don’t know how it works).

But, as Jonapedia points out, that classのsubclass only works when the relationship is indeed one of class and sublclass (AのB = B which is a member of A)
Eg: フランス語はインド・ヨーロッパ語族のイタリック語派である
French-language [topic] indo-european-language-family の italic-language-group is
=> French is an italic language of the (belonging to) the indo-european family of languages.

But even that case ( classのsubclass ) is a case of the general rule AのB : A is some information about B.
It can also be viewed as the “of” or " 's " ( B of A; A’s B ).

1 Like

Claiming R:


この this → 人(person)の(possessive marker)家族(family)『は』(topic marker):
This person’s family is the topic of the sentence, what the sentence is about.

一体(what the hell)どんな(what kind of)気持ち(feeling)『で』(manner of action):
How the heck do they feel (the family of the person)

100万円(100x10,000 yen) 出した(to take out) んだ (casual of のだ, used for emphasis):
*to have paid 100万円.

P.S.: Is there a difference between 気持 and 気持? I have two separate entries in my dictionary but as far from I can tell they are identical.

Full sentence: “How the hell does that person’s family feel about having paid 1000000 yen?”

1 Like

Claiming T:

At a glance, I think it means: “And you, do you want to live?” I’ll follow my gut feeling on this one.

☆I’ve added all the pictures in my first reply topic so that they’re easier to find as well. I’ve also put the currently available letters.


Claiming Q: Part 1


I’ve subdivided Q into two, ① and ②:

Picture subdivided

I’ll deal with them in two different replies.

Transcription ①:

With readings:

Without readings:


You guessed it, my question is about the 〜て form here as there are two of them.

The first one is だって which I suppose is the sequential 〜て. However, I googled it and I found various answers. 当直の時 means the time for the hospital job and I think だって is the casual 〜て form of the copula です. So it could mean:
its the time for the hospital job and

Another interpretation for だって from Japanese stack exchange:

Several answers above attempt to make the distinction between だって as a contraction of the copula だ and the quotation particle と, and だって as meaning “because” or “even” or “but”.However, ALL of the various uses of だって can be traced to a simple contraction of the copula だ and the quotation particle と.

So which one is it?

ⓐ sequential 〜て form of copula です in casual form
ⓑ だ+quotation particle と?

The rest of the sentence:
自分の失敗: my own failure…

The rest I wasn’t familiar with. I pasted 失敗ばかりこだわって in my dictionary to see how it would end up being parsed:
『ばかり』is actually a particle meaning: merely, only, nothing but…
こだわる is a verb, “to fuss over”;

Is こだわって also a sequential here?

Edit: I’ve added U-Y at the beginning of the thread.

I don’t think 一体 is really ‘the hell’ all the time, although that might work in this case. It’s just that I think, while he’s angry, he probably also feels sad for the family, so he might use slightly more respectful words to refer to their feelings. Generally, it’s just a way to strengthen a question, like ‘just how’ or ‘how exactly’ or even ‘however’.

Also, で is a sort of て-form (as much as it’s also a particle), so what comes before で happens at the same time or before what comes after で. So the sentence is closer to ‘How the hell/just how did that person’s family feel as they paid/about paying 1000 000 yen?’

For 気持ち vs 気持… check whether the definitions in your dictionary are in any way different. Most likely they aren’t. The kana that come after a kanji character in a word (that is, both the kana and the kanji are part of the same word) are called 送り仮名(okurigana) – ‘escort kana’, if you like. They’re there to give a clearer idea of what word the kanji is part of (for instance, they let us know if it’s a verb form, like 持ち in 気持ち). They’re optional, and I have a feeling that conventions about them have probably changed throughout history. However, I see that they’re quite common in written Japanese today, so I think it’s good practice to write them, because it helps avoid confusion (and this is in spite of the fact that I was against them when I started because I wanted to save time, and hey, Chinese has no okurigana).

1 Like

Q part ②:



Have you ever consider participating at I feel like you’d be an asset there. I can’t imagine a person more fitting. Also, your input would be archived there and referenced.

Development incoming:

ハガキ『が』: memo + subject particle;
来る『まで』v. to come + まで(until). Would it be wrong to interpret 来る here as an infinitive? I’m not sure because in English we’d word it as:

“Until the memo came…” I’m not sure how to interpret a non-inflected dictionary form verb in a sentence like this one. For some reason I currently believe: dictionary form = infinitive but I’d want to make sure my belief is grounded.

患者さん『の』事: last time @Jonapedia said that when a “function word” is written in kanji as opposed to kana, it has its first meaning, so “thing” here and not a nominaliser. So a patient’s thing.

なんてmeans “such as”, “like”;
すっかり: all, completely;
忘れてた: @Jonapedia, is this an instance where the い is omitted like what you talked about last time? 忘れて[い]た as in the past progressive?

Until that note came, I had completely forgotten that thing about the patient

I think 〜ていた here refers to the past perfect, not the past progressive, this is also something we talked about together.

Claiming S:

old man…

Nothing to explain here.

Claiming U:


Japanese English
死神【しにがみ】 God of death
歩く【あるく】 to walk

:speech_balloon:In the middle of the night, the god of death walks at the hospital

Again here there a dictionary form 歩く which I didn’t translate as a progressive but rather as a statement of fact, much like we sometimes use the simple present in English.

Claiming X:


:speech_balloon:Doctor, it’s terrible!!
Not much to say here, a pretty typical descriptive sentence. 大変【たいへん】means “very, greatly, terribly” with a negative connotation as far as I can tell.


:speech_balloon:Wake up please doctor!!

Claiming Y:

I’ll get the second part out of the way:


:speech_balloon:Wake up please!

As for the other one:


金子【きんす】funds; but since it’s followed by さん it’s probably the name of the old man;
急変しました【きゅうへん】sudden change, suru verb past;
:speech_balloon:There was a sudden change in mister Kinsu’s condition!

Claiming W:


:thought_balloon:平均して I’m having a bit of trouble with this one. So this is a 〜する verb and 平均 means average. Is it a sequential here as in the “the average is made” and then “in one night”, out if two people, one will die.

:speech_balloon:On average, in one night, out of two people, one person will die.

Claiming V:

:speech_balloon:At Eiroku university affiliated hospital, there are 1,100 beds…
:writing_hand: This ties in nicely with what follows: there are 1,100 beds and one out of two will die;

Claiming Z:


:speech_balloon:There is no pulse
This is a simple negative sentence. So the old man is presumably deceased for the moment.

1 Like