Short Grammar Questions (Part 2)

[Jonapedia]

@Aikibujin

That said, I’m pretty sure in most cases people would actually use:
電話番号をお願いします。
or
電話番号を教えてください。

These are the suggestions I found on Google as well, but the point of these is that they’re for polite use in an isolated ‘phone number only’ context. If other questions had already been asked, I think the ‘what’s your number?’ question would be more acceptable.

@pm215

(I don’t think this forum is a great place to ask “naturalness” questions, though – too few high level speakers and no native speakers.)

For what it’s worth, 何番 is definitely the preferred version in my EN-JP dictionary (Wisdom)

▸ 君の部屋の番号は何番ですか
What is the number of your room [your room number]? (!「105号室」なら Room No. 105 で, Room number one-o | oʊ | -five と読む)

and is also what I found in websites on English phrases for asking for phone numbers with translations. (I searched 電話番号を聞く フレーズ.)

However, I think the most telling thing is what I found on this page that’s supposed to be linked to NHK’s language learning resources explaining how you ask for phone numbers in Chinese:

解説
この文の“多少”は「いくつ」「どのくらい」「何番」といった意味で、“～号码是多少？”は、電話番号に限らず“车牌号码是多少？”（車のナンバーはいくつですか）、“房间号码是多少？”（部屋番号は何番ですか）など、様々な番号をたずねる時に応用できます。

My translation: The 多少 in this sentence means[, for example,] ‘how many’, ‘about how much/many’, ‘which number in a sequence’, and ～号码是多少？can be used at moments when one is asking for various sorts of numbers e.g. 车牌号码是多少？(‘What’s your car number?’); 房间号码是多少？(‘What’s your room number?’)

In short, yes, 何番 is the natural way. The fact that 何番 is listed as one of the possible meanings of 多少, instead of simply 何, tells us that 何番 is a common, natural phrase in this context.

@pm215

Mmm. This doesn’t seem to show up in dictionaries so I guess it’s considered mostly a use of that grammar pattern, but I did find a thesaurus entry for it that gives it two possible meanings:

Just for reference, it appears in Daijirin (which has been taken offline on most sites)

六 動詞の連用形の下に付いて複合動詞をつくる。
① 最後まで…する，…し通すの意を表す。「がんばり―・く」「走り―・く」「耐え―・く」
② ひどく…するの意を表す。「困り―・いている」

and also in Meikyou and Shinmeikai (here’s the one from Shinmeikai):

三〔「動詞連用形＋抜く」の形で、接尾語的に〕
㊀積極的な行動を最後までとる。
「やり抜く・がんばり抜く」
㊁すっかり…する。
「困り抜く〔=はてる〕」

So yeah, indeed, in both cases, it’s about doing something to an extreme degree in either a good/neutral way, or a bad way. There’s also a notion of completeness. I’d liken it to ‘up’ in English e.g. ‘round up’, ‘f–k up’, ‘tie up’, which also express such ideas (completeness, completion, extremeness) with a word that suggests detachment (via vertical distance, in this case).

[pm215]

@Jonapedia

@pm215

Mmm. This doesn’t seem to show up in dictionaries so I guess it’s considered mostly a use of that grammar pattern, but I did find a thesaurus entry for it that gives it two possible meanings:

Just for reference, it appears in Daijirin

I meant specifically that 選び抜くdoesn’t show up as a compound verb with its own entry and definition, not that dictionaries don’t have a definition of 抜く as a suffix.

[Jonapedia]

@pm215

I meant specifically that 選び抜くdoesn’t show up as a compound verb with its own entry and definition,

AH. OK, I see your point. My mistake. Now what you were saying about ‘a use of that grammar pattern’ makes a lot more sense. Thanks.

[tenizey]

I hope it’s the right place to ask, but can someone help me with these:

Full page

1. The first verb’s ending, why is it this way and not されて for example? I’ve seen this pattern come up, but if I understand, it’s just “and”… but how does this pattern work?
2. What’s the function of the のに here? Somehow I can’t quite wrap my head around what the translation would be

• see full page above for context

1. What is this referring to? The main characters arrives at her fiancee’s house for the first time, but again, I can’t quite wrap my head around the meaning here. Like, I understand the literal translation, but how does it fit with the rest of what she’s saying in that panel?

[yamitenshi]

@tenizey

• The first verb’s ending, why is it this way and not されて for example? I’ve seen this pattern come up, but if I understand, it’s just “and”… but how does this pattern work?
• What’s the function of the のに here? Somehow I can’t quite wrap my head around what the translation would be

Not sure about the context entirely (though maybe I know - is this わたしの幸せの結婚?), but my interpretation is it’s not のに, の is the nominaliser (which also explains the plain-form verb instead of a て form), and it’s followed by には. She’s used to being abandoned/neglected/ignored.

[theghostofdenzo]

@tenizey

The first verb’s ending, why is it this way and not されて for example? I’ve seen this pattern come up, but if I understand, it’s just “and”… but how does this pattern work?

I tend to just think of it as identical to されて, but more formal/literary (this applies to verbs in general not just される)

@tenizey

1. What’s the function of the のに here? Somehow I can’t quite wrap my head around what the translation would be

I think the の attaches to the verbs before and then it’s followed by には

Summary

無視さえ放置されるの → to be ignored and neglected (as a noun)
には → with regards to
慣れている → used to

@tenizey

What is this referring to? The main characters arrives at her fiancee’s house for the first time, but again, I can’t quite wrap my head around the meaning here. Like, I understand the literal translation, but how does it fit with the rest of what she’s saying in that panel?

「初めての + place」 can refer to a place you’ve come to for the first time, but I think it can also refer to being in a place for the first time

[tenizey]

@theghostofdenzo

I tend to just think of it as identical to されて, but more formal/literary

Yeah, that’s what I was thinking too, but it always bothers me that I don’t know, and I don’t even know how to look for an explanation

@theghostofdenzo

I think the の attaches to the verbs before and then it’s followed by には

@yamitenshi

but my interpretation is it’s not のに

Ahhhhh I’m a dumdum

@theghostofdenzo

「初めての + place」 can refer to a place you’ve come to for the first time, but I think it can also refer to being in a place for the first time

Interesting

[theghostofdenzo]

@tenizey

Yeah, that’s what I was thinking too, but it always bothers me that I don’t know, and I don’t even know how to look for an explanation

if you want to look it up it’s the 連用形 or conjunctive/continuative form

http://guidetojapanese.org/learn/grammar/polite#The_stem_of_verbs

Reddit - The heart of the internet

[Leebo]

@tenizey

Yeah, that’s what I was thinking too, but it always bothers me that I don’t know, and I don’t even know how to look for an explanation

One thing to remember is that, in native Japanese understanding of grammar, て is a particle. It has its own usages and meanings, but it’s just a particle like many other particles we see. So it never had to be されて. Making it されて would have been adding something to it. It adds casualness/informality, and also makes certain other grammar functions possible.

If they were identical, you could always use one or the other without changing the meaning, but て can do a lot more things than just the plain 連用形.

[tenizey]

I’ve never studied the grammar formally, so I didn’t know て would be considered a particle. I’ll try and find some more resources about it, maybe it’ll help me with understanding other uses that seem “strange” to me. Thanks so much!

[Jonapedia]

@theghostofdenzo

@tenizey

Yeah, that’s what I was thinking too, but it always bothers me that I don’t know, and I don’t even know how to look for an explanation

if you want to look it up it’s the 連用形 or conjunctive/continuative form

In addition to those links and terms, just thought I’d add something about (IIRC) the traditional Japanese perspective on conjugation (I think I was reading this in an article discussing conjugation and tenses in English vs in Japanese (for Japanese learners of English):

In Japanese, words conjugate according to what comes after them. The 連用形 is literally the ‘link-to-用語 form’, and 用語 means ‘declinable word’ (i.e. a word that changes forms). There are six traditional verb forms in modern Japanese, typically listed in this order:

1. 未然形 (irrealis, lit. ‘not yet such’ form)
2. 連用形 (continuative, lit. ‘link to declinable’ form)
3. 終止形 (terminal, lit. ‘end’ form)
4. 連体形 (prenominal/adnomial, lit. ‘link to substantive (i.e. noun)’ form)
5. 仮定形 (conditional, lit. ‘supposition’ form)
6. 命令形 (imperative, lit. ‘order’ form)

(Side note: in Classical Japanese, the 仮定形 is called the 已然形=realis, lit. ‘already such’ form, because it had a different function back then, and the 未然形 handled conditional functions.)

As you can see, some of these names describe function in terms of meaning, but essentially

1. tends to be followed by negation or specific ‘helper verbs’ (suffixes that act like verbs but can’t be used as words on their own e.g. 〜れる in the passive form, which is a conjugation from a foreign/JSL teaching perspective)
2. followed by declinables (adjectives or verbs)
3. appears at the end of sentences, especially statements
4. followed by substantives (nouns, or things that act like nouns e.g. の)
5. followed by ば (the classic conditional form)
6. ends off orders (and some special uses of the imperative in the middle of a sentence like the 放任法 in いずれにせよ=‘either way,…’)

In your example, 無視され is linking up with another verb phrase (放置される in this case, but it could have been longer and included, say, an object, like 物を奪われる=‘having things snatched from oneself’), which is why the 連用形 – for linking to verbs – is used. For that matter, you know the ‘masu-stem’ for polite forms? Yeah, well, that’s actually just the 連用形, because traditionally, ます is just understood as a helper verb that can’t stand on its own. て is just a particle that’s added to perform a clause/phrase-linking function, but it doesn’t change what verb form is used. (The reason distinct て-forms exist is just pronunciation changes for ease of speech; the underlying form is still the 連用形.)

[Redglare]

@yamitenshi

is this わたしの幸せの結婚?

Yes! I haven’t read the manga, but I recognize that panel from both the novels and the anime. Big recommend if you like romance

Btw that’s わたしの幸せな結婚, not の

[trunklayer]

I’m clearly wrong, but if I were to translate it, I’d translated it as “The arrow was pierced by my head”…
The question is where am I wrong?
My train of thought is this:
The arrow is marked as the subject. If we are talking about something that the subject does to the object – we’d use transitive verb. But here we are using the intransitive verb, so it should be something done to the subject by the object, no?

[WeebPotato]

The opposite would be 刺せられた. 刺さる is intransitive.

[trunklayer]

@WeebPotato

刺さる is intransitive.

But that’s my point!
If it’s intransitive – then shouldn’t it be about something being done to the subject not being done by the subject? If the arrow is the one that’s doing the stabbing, shouldn’t we use a transitive verb 刺す instead?

矢が頭を刺した。

[pm215]

@trunklayer

If it’s intransitive – then shouldn’t it be about something being done to the subject not being done by the subject?

Intransitive is the subject (が marked thing) doing something, not having something done to it (the latter would be passive). In this case what the arrow is doing is piercing, sticking into something. This gets a bit awkward to explain because some of the natural English translations for the action are transitive (like “to pierce”, where the thing being pierced is a direct object), but in Japanese this verb uses に (the point of contact marking particle) to indicate what the object is sticking into. “The arrow sticks into my head” is intransitive too, but it’s not very natural English.

[trunklayer]

I see, thank you for the explanation. I guess, I got confused by the 刺さる described as “to be pierced”.
So, when I saw that sentence, I thought:
What’s the subject? The arrow.
What’s it doing? The process of being pierced.
That was clearly the wrong train of thought for understanding this sentence
But in this case, “to pierce” should also be the correct meaning for 刺さる、shouldn’t it?

[pm215]

@trunklayer

But in this case, “to pierce” should also be the correct meaning for 刺さる、shouldn’t it?

Yes; EDICT defines it as

to stick into (of something with a sharp point); to prick; to pierce; to get stuck (in); to lodge (in)

Where did you find that defined it as “to be pierced”? That seems to be the main source of your confusion here.

[trunklayer]

[pm215]

That seems straightforwardly wrong to me (possibly an attempt to avoid giving it a “meaning” that is an English transitive verb, but which has gone wrong); I guess you could query it with the WK content team…