Thank you very much 
Now I understand why Tae Kim left this chapter out. It is pretty complicated for a non-native speaker to understand the difference and it is not a concept that works for all vocab.
So i think, i will just learn these few words as seperate vocabs and I’m fine 
(by the way: I have also been wondering in my subconsciousness about the use of 新た(な) and 暖かな. I just realized that now… lol, the subconsiousness is such a fun thing…)
Greetings
~T 
I just talked it over with my teacher. I think I have it all straightened out now.
Just as you guys were saying, the genitiveの⇒が switch only happens in archaic phrases.
In all other cases it can only happen が⇔の when the particle acts as the subject marker of the subordinate clause.
Thanks guys, I learned a lot today! (Or actually only one thing, but I learned it well!
)
Have a question about a translation:
the scene: a dentists office. one of the secretaries is trying to hand some papers to another secretary who is not paying attention. After having her name called a couple of times the other secretary finally “comes to” and says “はい” and takes the documents.
then the woman who was trying to get the other’s attention says (i think):
なに ほう と して。。。
maybe ほうとう
and the translation is “you were really spaced out…”
any guesses on how you get from that text to that translation?
I’m not doubting your ears, but isn’t ボーっとする pretty common in that kind of situation?
That seems correct. Thanks
Hello which of the following (if either…) are grammatically correct?
田中さんと会社の人では昨日大阪にいきました
or
田中さんは昨日会社の人と大阪にいきました
Does one sound better than the other (and if you can explain why please do!)
Thanks in advance
I think in your first sentence there is a stray で in the sentence, not sure what the idea is there. You don’t need anything there, but you could also put another と there.
田中さんと会社の人(と)は昨日大阪にいきました
The second sentence looks ok.
I think the second one is better because the first one is ambiguous. It doesn’t necessarily mean that Tanaka-san and the others went together. The other sentence indicates that they went together. It also has a concrete subject and not a group of people that you don’t really know much about.
[No guarantees here though ]
Thanks for you reply - I’m just starting out with grammar so my sentence structure is still abysmal.
The sentences already seem very good Why did you put the で there?
The Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar lists the first と as “a particle which lists things exhaustively” and the other is “a particle marking the noun phrase which maintains a reciprocal relationship with the subject of the clause”, and your sentences capture the difference quite nicely.
To be honest, I have no idea why I put the で there aside from the fact that when I was trying to produce this sentence it ‘sounded right’ in my head.
The second sentence was based off the structure of another sentence in a book so I had something to reference with that one.The first sentence was me trying to blindly create it without really knowing how to.
I also think the second sentence sounds better.
With regard to the first sentence, although it’s possible, I can’t think of the point of including an unnamed individual in the topic when the other individual was explicitly identified.
Okay good to know. Thanks for the tip.
Maybe you were thinking of “電車で” (with a train/by train) because you felt that the と in AとB is not enough to show that both go together (which in fact is an issue here).
It’s often more valuable to look at your mistakes than just to accept the right answer 
Thanks buddy - that’s some good advice. Thanks for taking the time to explain it to me too. Happy Friday!
My method is editing the mistake out of my reply and then lashing out at those who helped me by pretending I never made a mistake in the first place. To each their own.
This could also work… 
Was reading the “Try To 2” chapter from Imabi, and there’s a funny bit about using you-to-suru in present/future.
Quoting:
There is a time restraint to ～ようとする that makes its non-past form ungrammatical in many instances. ～ようとする describes the moment right before an action/change occurs, namely the beginning of the “trial”, but the action is meant to be right after when one says it. The moment you utter the phrase is the “base period” for the action implied. If say you are going abroad to Japan like in Ex. 10. You’re trying to put into action some sort of change, and that change consequently is about to happen, but in doing so your attempt has already begun as you are consciously planning its execution. All of this is implied with this phrase, which is why we usually see it in the past tense or the progressive. With that in mind, Ex. 10 should sound weird. The “try” in English should clearly not match the “try” phrase being used in the Japanese.
This one really throws me off, why swap the suru with shite? Is suru always invalid in this phrase?
And
Why would the progressive tense be any more valid than the present anyway?
Not too sure about this, the writing is not so clear. It doesn’t really say it’s wrong but that it sounds weird. The text says that the planning and attempt (する) is already progressing, so it sound more natural to put it into the progressive form.
I can’t explain in complete detail now, but in the sentence you used above, you are expressing what you think is the will of another person. Typically when talking about other people’s thought, volition, or other things not easily observable in Japanese, the 〜ている form is necessary. 〜ようとする implies the exact moment when one will try to do something before it’s a continuous aspect. Since only you can determine that moment for yourself, it doesn’t make a lot of sense to apply that to another person.
When I get home I can provide more links, otherwise hopefully someone who is more available can explain this in more detail.
EDIT: I tried to look for the links where this is explained in English, but inexplicably I’m not using the right search query keywords to get those sites to come up quickly. Anyway, one example referring to talking about another’s volition can be found here. Although I’m aware it’s a different grammar point being referred to, it is a good place to point out that specifically when talking about other’s thoughts, feelings, or volition in Japanese one cannot use the same forms as you would for yourself.
Here are the two point I’d like to bring your attention to:
意志形は単独で使うとひとりごとや勧誘の意味を表わします。話し手がある行為をする意志があることを聞き手に伝える場合には、意志形に「と思います」（普通形「と思う」）をつけて使うのがふつうです。意志を一定期間持ち続けている場合は、「と思っています」を使います。
English:
When used by itself, the volitional form expresses the meaning of talking to oneself or an invitation to that nature. If the speaker conveys something that has their own will to the listener it’s normal to add と思います (と思う in plain form) to the volitional form. If one’s feelings persists for a constant period of time, one uses と思っています.
「(よ)うと思います」は、一時的な意志を直接表しますが、｢(よ)うと思っています｣は意志の持続を客観化して表わします。ですから、｢(よ)うと思います｣は話し手自身の意志しか表わせませんが、｢(よ)うと思っています｣は、聞き手や第三者の意志にも使えます。
English:
(よ)うとおもいます directly expresses temporary volition, but (よ)うと思っています expresses and objectifies the continuation of volition. Therefore (よ)うとおもいます can only express the speaker’s own will, but (よ)うと思っていますcan also be used for the volition of the listener and/or a third party.
So in other words, it could be inferred with this that ～ている has the ability to objectify the continuation of (something) so that it turns into an observation rather rather than an assertion that the speaker actually knows the listener’s or 3rd party’s volition, etc. I think this can be seen when people quote a 3rd party, they sometimes use ～と言っていました or even talk generally about what 3rd party thinks by using ～と思っています.
So going back to example sentence, ～ようとしています is an observation of what the speaker thinks another person is going to do. If that make sense at all.
Great explanation, thank you