Short Grammar Questions


That is correct. から and まで just like from and until in English can be used in many different ways, just to mention. Just as long as you remain flexible in your thinking to accommodate more ways of using these terms. Consider, when you write method, I take that to mean “verb that expresses method of travel” however, you can also use で to indicate method along with more generic verbs:
The sentence above is based on your example but specifies バス (bus) as the mode of transportation.


Basically, yeah. I’d just add that まで usually means something like “until” or “up to,” so its implication is a little more like “I walk as far as the train station.” (Note that your example sentence was also in non-past tense as well.)

You could also say 「えきへ 歩きます」 (“I walk towards the train station”) or 「えきに 歩きます」 (“I walk, arriving at the destination of the train station”).


Sorry, but I would like to disagree on that.

In Japanese, verbs like 歩く、走る、飛ぶ and such are considered actions verbs, not really movement verbs such as 行く or 来る. That is why they use を and often behave on ways which are unexpected to European languages.

Saying 駅まで歩いた is fine because the まで conveys the meaning that you kept performing that action (walking) until the station. Saying に or へ on the other hand, no. Because to be used as movement direction postposition, they need a movement verb such 行く or 来る.

Searching for に歩 is hard because you get littered with all sorts of adverbs, such as 一緒に歩く and 共に歩く, but if you search for へ歩 on BCCWJ you will quickly notice that ALL results use an auxiliary movement verb together with 歩く, such as 歩いて行った or 歩いてくる


You actually can say えきまであるく (note use of まで)

But you cannot say えきにあるく, that needs to be えきにあるいていく

EDIT: I realize I basically repeated what you said Synchro, sorry.


Context: Nanoblock instruction sheet, think legos if unfamiliar.
Cautionary note not to screw up when assembling


This is how I’m interpreting this:
The top of this part has a slight slanting angle when set (in position). Pay attention to the part’s direction during assembly.

Does that seem right?
Edit: Fixed 向 kanji :persevere:


I’ve been staring at this for an unreasonable amount of time trying to figure out what’s going on around 「同」 in these two sentences. I can make sense of the second sentence if 「同き」 is supposed to be 同期, because then you get a compound that could mean something like like “part synchronization” or “part alignment,” but I don’t know why they’d drop that particular kanji. And I have no idea how to interpret 「同かって」.


Ouch! 同 should have been 向. Sorry for missing that error.


Beautiful; it all makes sense now. Identifying kanji typos is a skill they need to drill more in grammar school.

So applying a dictionary attack to that and assuming I’m correctly interpreting the ~て form of 向かう, I’m reading it as “This part faces upwards and has a diagonal angle applied. Please be mindful of part orientation during assembly.”


Thanks for that!


Now I’ll remember to imagine someone randomly waving her legs around until she happens to find a train station in front of her, and I’ll never forget this distinction. Many thanks!


I always let my boyfriend be in charge of the nabe.

This is the example sentence for 奉行. Wouldn’t the use of くれます means the speaker is receiving the act of being allowed to be the nabe-master? I read this sentence as “My boyfriend always lets me be in charge of the hotpot”. Am I wrong?


No, they’re receiving the favor of having someone else be in charge. Though, the “let” doesn’t really come into play in the Japanese. Seems like a bit of freestyling in the English translation.


Ah, that makes sense. I read it as if being in charge of the hotpot was fun rather than a chore. Thanks!


Well, I mean, regardless of what would make sense for who likes to do what, grammatically the boyfriend is doing the action, because he’s the subject and therefore when the verb comes, he’s doing it. Sometimes it’s difficult to ignore what it feels like you think they’d want to say or something like that.



Another question, I think I may have a brain glitch because I should know this, but is this sentence saying that she should be here 30min early, or that she must have arrived 30 minutes ago? Whichever it is, how would you say the other thing?


I think it’s a confusing translation because it tries to make “I” the subject and “boyfriend” the object, when 彼氏 is the actual subject in the original. More like “My boyfriend always gets to be the cooking-person,” right? The “I” just comes from the fact that it’s implied that someone (the speaker) is the source of that favor.


“Gets to” is also misleading. It’s more like “my boyfriend always takes care of the nabe for me”


Mmm, you’re right; the boyfriend would be doing both the pot-mastering and the giving. Doesn’t that make the official translation just plain wrong, then?


I wouldn’t say that. There’s just some license taken and the English sentence could be interpretted a couple of ways, but it’s clear which way to interpret the English sentence due to having the Japanese one to compare it to.

Which is the trick with translation in general, as a tangent. You could take the English sentence to mean that the boyfriend really enjoys doing this cooking, so you allow him to do it. Or you could take it to mean that you don’t want to do it, so you “let” him do it instead. It’s a little ambiguous, but not in a way that would annoy any English speaker.
But you translate it, and you have to choose, and then you can be wrong. Which is why songs in particular are so hard (not enough context) and also why when you look at all those illegal manga in English online that have been translated to Mandarin and then to English things get really weird, because sometimes you take the wrong meaning twice


If I’m wrong someone else will correct me, but I’m pretty sure this is right:

That sentence says “She should have arrived 30 mins ago”. One hint for this is the use of 前に as opposed to 早い, but 前に can still be used for early technically. Secondly, they’re saying いるはず which means that she is expected to be there now after arriving 30 mins ago. This isn’t just some plan or arrangement for the future.

Now with that being said, she could have also been expected to arrive 30 mins early depending on when this was said. If this was said at the designated time of meeting and is was prearranged that she would get there early for something, then it means both “she should have been here 30 mins ago” and “she shoulda came 30 mins early” if that makes sense.

How I would personally explicitly say “she should come 30 mins early” would be 彼女のことだから、30分早く来るはずだ。But again, thats sorta like a future expectation.