Haha, okay Thank you very much𠃊㔾㔾阝口san
It’s a stupid question, but how do you say Bye in Japanese? さよなら feels a bit too formal…
さようなら (or さよなら) is said quite often by students and teachers at school, for whatever reason, but yes, it’s quite rare outside of that setting.
If it’s not a work environment, some combination of では or じゃあ and また and the next time you’ll see them, and maybe ね or something is fine
では、またあした (not the most casual, but not super formal either)
or popular among young girls (at least that’s how it appears to me) バイバイ
If it is a work environment, there are set phrases
The person leaving earlier than other people says
And the person staying beyond says
or some variation on that with different politeness levels
This came up on bunpro but I still really don’t understand it.
んです and のです
How does this really change the meaning?
You mean the difference between them? ん is more casual.
If you mean how both are used, it’s basically used to give some kind of explanatory nuance.
I’m doing a Genki Te-form conjugation worksheet and I just realized the u-verb 会う to meet a person, and
ある there is … both conjugate as あって in te- form. So, is this an instance where kanji differentiates the usage or is it just in context? I get the feeling this is going to happen a lot isn’t it, where short forms and te forms make words ubiquitous?
I would have some difficulty thinking of a case where telling them apart by context and other grammar wouldn’t be possible. Though, sure, in writing, 会う (and other forms like 合う, 遭う, 逢う遇う) is likely to be written in kanji, whereas ある is unlikely to be written in kanji.
A kanji actually wasn’t listed for ある in my textbook. Thank you so much!
Yeah like ～であって～ and such is something youll definitely see eventually and it could be one or the other technically, but context will always clear it up.
You’ll learn one on WK, I believe. 有る, which is used when something exists or you possess something (自信が有る), but not 在る, which is used when the “existing” is in a physical place (学校は東京に在る).
Both are fairly rarely seen.
Yes, many verbs do overlap. But in some cases the pitch accent is not the same. 買う and 飼う for example are considered to be different, even if they conjugate the same. You can search pitch accent for conjugated verbs on OJAD and listen to recordings, it’s pretty nice; although I wouldn’t advise beginners to care that much about it.
Just to be clear: that is not the case with 有る and 会う. They are indeed pronounced the same when あって
So can someone offer an explanation on if the one doing the 横やりが入る is the speaker (the person trying to 守る the 風紀) or the other unnamed party (彼女s dad in this case) that is causing the 何かあった.
My first thought was that it was the speaker and the volitional + と was saying that they would interfere in attempt to protect the public morals, but the 必ず seems out of place if that were the case. The more I look at it, the more it looks like a simple volitional of the party causing the 何かあった時 and a conditional と. Honestly both would make sense story wise since either one could be doing the butting in.
So whos the one butting in, and is there some piece of information that im missing that makes it fully obvious? As it is, I think its the dad, but I’m not 100%.
EDIT: I checked the translation for this book, and the translator also thought it was the dad, but its a fan translation and he has made some baka mistakes before so I dont trust it 100% still.
Can someone please explain the meaning of 忘れずにつけ? I know the meaning of the verb 忘れる but don’t understand the grammar. From the lyrics of “Wire Frame Baby”: Perfumeも忘れずにつけピカピカのbeamerに乗って (talking about a date/preparing to go on a date)
～ずに is another way of saying ～ないで. 忘れずに = without forgetting to
So I don’t think I have enough context to make any judgments on which character is doing what, but I want to translate it as:
“The chairmam is a sich a lenient person, thay he’ll let it slide, but I can’t find a clear solution. Make sure to let your girlfriend know that, next time something happens, for example somebody butts in, the public morals will be protected.”
With the morau denoting that the protecting of the morals is to the good of everyone. So I would agree with your assessment of the unnamed 3rd party doing the butting in. I don’t see anything to indicate the speaker meaning himself to interrupt anything.
Just a quick note, this is the negative version 割り切れる. So its not that she cant find a solution, its that shes not satisfied.
Could I get a link to some source on this? I wanna read further into it since this sounds like something I haven’t heard before.
I don’t use online resources much for studying. This is basic keigo, though, so maybe Japanese Ammo with Misa’s video is good. Just found it, uploaded yesterday! https://youtu.be/lp-2PNSANJ8
Basically 〜てもらう denotes an action (verb in the -te form) being received by the subject (or somebody in ther in group). The person doing the receiving is the subject, so would get particle が/は. The person performing the action would get the particle に. But since the verb もらう already implicates direction of the action, subject and acting object can usually be omitted, as they can be inferred from context.
Furthermore, using 〜てもらう as opposed to 〜ていただく implicates that the person doing the action is of the same relative standing as the receiver of the action. Whereas the humble いただく would implicate a boss, teacher, or somebody else of higher standing is performing the action.
Thanks. I sometimes mistake verbs like these with the potential forms.
I know all that stuff works, but you said
Implying that the receiver is “everyone”. Im asking how you arrived at that, basically.
Ah okay. I just went off f the nature of ‘public morals’ being public, so I thought that the protection was probably meant for the larger group, even though the girlfriend was particularly affected by a previous incident. This is all conjecture, though, since I am missing a big chunk of context, the nature of the incident that happened before. Probably also tired, since it was already after midnight when I read your post. Sorry I was completely wrong, and only managed to confuse you!
That does make sense and honestly it may be implied, but I was just wondering if it was some general grammar rule regarding morau when used this way.