Isn’t it saying that the population of women wasn’t even was only 1/3rd of the population of men?
Edit: What @NicoleRauch said. It’s late and I’m no longer fit for human interaction. Goodnight.
3 Likes
1 Like
っす is usually です or んです in this case, maybe.
There’s also おっす which is おはようございます。 
3 Likes
The way I’ve heard it described is that it’s a more informal version of です that you use with people you’re reasonably close to, but still need to use the polite forms for.
For instance even if you get on really well with your boss or teacher you wouldn’t use plain forms, but you can use っす.
2 Likes
Thank you both Kazzeon (hi! I’ve not seen you around for ages! how are you?!) and denzo! Thank you!
2 Likes
Still around. 
1 Like
Can someone help me untangle 終わらせちゃおう?
I assume there is the causative form in there 終わる->終わらせる and the volitional form (the おう).
I have no idea what the ちゃ means though.
It got translated as “let’s just get this over with” i can see the “let’s” from おう. But don’t see how the causative form plays into this (assuming i am right on that). Also i don’t know how accurate the translation is.
Thanks for help!
1 Like
I reckon it’s the volitional form of ちゃう (which is the contraction of ーてしまう).
I guess a rougher translation would be something like “let’s make this thing finish completely”
4 Likes
I can get my head around that, thanks for the help!
2 Likes
Can someone help me understand this example from Wanikani on 詐欺?
詐欺を働いて告訴された経験はおありですか。
Have you ever been accused of committing fraud?
To me it kind of looks like it’s saying “While you were committing fraud were you ever accused of it?” because doesn’t the 〜て signify successive actions? When I look up 告訴された for instance I see the most common form is noun + で告訴された so here I’d expect to see something like “詐欺を働くことで告訴された経験はおありですか。”
Can someone explain what I’m missing? Thanks!
て form doesn’t merely express successive actions. That’s the first defintion you’ll find, but subsequent definitions express the same ideas as you expressed in your reformulated sentence.
「て」の意味や使い方 わかりやすく解説 Weblio辞書 (scroll down or ctrl-f to the 接助 entry for て)
原因・理由などを表す
方法・手段を表す
There’s more than that as well. 10 total definitions for the conjunctive て form.
2 Likes
So I’m still confused because in my (incorrect) reformulated sentence it assigns the fault already to the person being spoken to (they were committing the fraud, not just being accused of it). Which definition for て would you say this sentence is using according to Wanikani’s definition? It doesn’t really seem like “cause/reason” or “method” to me?
Cause, reason seems pretty fitting to me. “Have you ever been accused, with the reason being that you committed fraud?”
It’s the same idea as the で in the “noun + で告訴される” structure. Since で is basically the て-form equivalent of the copula, it’s the same idea, just that the WK sentence is substituting a verb for a noun.
3 Likes
告訴された is more like “charged” in this sense, no? It has a legal feel to it. So… Yeah, the doing of it is included. I was just addressing the Japanese grammar. If we wanted to get into the English sentence, that would be something else.
Okay, so I was reading the sentence right after all. Wanikani’s translation made it seem to me like it wasn’t sure whether or not the person was committing fraud? Since you can be erroneously charged for a crime, isn’t that the point of innocent until proven guilty? So I was wondering whether I was missing something. Thanks (@Myria too).
Well, I mean, that’s just the feeling you get from it being asked, but we don’t actually know for sure that the person has ever done fraud. But why would you ask (the Japanese version of the question) if you didn’t have some reason to think they had? The English version of the question is an acceptable translation, but could be asked even if you have no reason to think they have done fraud before.
It’s possible for two sentences to be matches in some circumstances and not work if other details are clear.
2 Likes
Right, so the confusion I had was because the English question sounded like it could be asked whether or not the asker had reason to believe that they did commit fraud, but the Japanese sounded like the asker definitely believed they did. So I wanted to make sure that I wasn’t missing anything.
Agreed that certain sentences might work as translations in some circumstances and not the others, but since this is an isolated sentence and the Japanese seems more confident that they did commit fraud, I would expect the translation to run more along the lines of “Were you ever charged for the frauds you’ve committed?”
But anyway I’m glad to know that I was just overthinking things. Thanks again.
2 Likes
That’s basically how the godan verbs of that type conjugate.
| If verb ending is | it conjugates to |
|---|---|
| う つ る | った |
| む ぶ ぬ | んだ |
| く | いた |
| ぐ | いだ |
| す | した |
For ichidan verbs, you just swap the る for a た. だった is the past tense of the copula.
You… may want to start working on the grammar aspects of the language as well.
6 Likes
I’m not sure how deep you are intending to go with this question.
As far as most Japanese learners are concerned, that’s just how the た form of an う verb is created. Writing 出会た is ungrammatical, incorrect Japanese. You’d be understood even if you said it this way (and missing these aspects of pronunciation is a common “foreigner’s accent” in Japanese), so it’s not delivering some kind of information that changes the meaning… that’s just how it’s formed and pronounced. (note… I just mean in this one example… there are cases where it could change the meaning in other words)
Unless you really did want to know the history of conjugations from ancient Japanese to now. Which probably wouldn’t qualify as a “short” grammar question, hehe.
2 Likes
私が五歳のころ、近所の家のおばちゃんが、小さいエビを見せてくれた
Now this sentence itself seems perfectly understandable to me - however - what´s up with the punctuation? Am i correct in assuming the first comma is a substitute for で similiar to the topic particle being often replaced? And what function does the second comma serve, isn´t it redundant?