>>309
>If you're going to do sentences I think the best way to work is to look at Japanese sentences and then have literal English translations. This allows you to comprehend quickly and better understand the way Japanese is put together.
English does not make you better understand the way Japanese works. Everything >>308 writes is spot-on, albeit blunt, while your suggestions are possibly damaging to their studies.
The problem being that >>308 is so vauge that he couldn't be wrong at all. Saying the answer to question might be X, but might not, doesn't actully help at all. Again, nothing wrong with sharing study methods
Holy shit. Sorry for being somewhat off topic, but thanks a lot for that. I've been typing hiragana into google translate to get a feel for how it's pronounced. This is far, far more efficient.
I didn't even say I used EDICT. When I want to look up a word, I go to ALC and look at sentences it's used in. Did you read my post at all? Or did you just want to insult other people?
>>327
I missed the mention of ALC (there was too much EDICT in the post for me to look past). While it certainly is better than Jim Breen's bastard child, ALC is meant as an E-J glossary for translators, and probably not the best suited for language learners. I guess I just don't see why you'd use it instead of a real dictionary like kenkyusha.
I suggest using SRS in whichever way works best for you. This is what >>308 wrote, that you need to find your own direction. I don't do SRS at all, because it doesn't work for me: it's skull-numbingly boring, and only served to slow me down and avoid studies. Language learning is a long process, so what if you "waste" weeks or months while experimenting? Laying the foundation for your studies, tailoring a direction for yourself to follow, that's equally as important as the actual studying itself.
>>327
After having written this, it might seem hypocritical, and may as well be, to proclaim that "English does not make you better understand the way Japanese works" and is a Bad Idea. Translations are useful in the beginning stage, providing you with fairly accurate descriptions of what is going on in the original sentences, but to keep relying on English (or whatever other L1/L2/etc you use) too much later on is not going to do much good for your comprehension.
No matter how literal the translations are, there are nuances, implications and concepts that just won't translate. This is not a problem for the translator, who will always localize their source material to make it understandable for the target language's audience, but very unfortunate for the learner.
As a learner, weaning off using English et al., instead trying to understand Japanese in a Japanese context, is an important step. This isn't specific to Japanese, but goes for all attempting language acquisition. It might be extra difficult for monolinguals who haven't grown up thinking in this way, but tying words to your own internal concepts instead of the closest L1 approximation is a good starting point. This is even more important when it comes to grammar, which usually is more abstract.
>>327
Regarding my reasons for posting, I'm here to give advice just as much as I come with the intent to shitpost, and preferably in combination whenever possible. You really shouldn't climb into the asshole of the Internet expecting friendly, intelligent discourse.
Name:
Anonymous2012-05-25 19:53
>>329
My entire study at this point consists of reading light novels and putting things I would like to actively use into an SRS. I'm well aware of the different kinds of dictionaries, although I don't generally look things up unless I'm completely clueless. I like ALC because it shows things in context with a nuanced translation.
Please note that I'm not the person who originally asked about what method would be best, I'm quite comfortable with the way I study and learn. It's worked well for me.
>>330
The quality of discourse is what the users make it. I've been on this site for 5 years, I know what to expect - but that doesn't mean we can't have a civil discussion, without saying "You fucking idiot, . . ." before making an actual point.
Kanji odyssey says this means "Because I've injured my right hand, I can't write any letters." Do they specifically mean the kind of letters you send off to people, or just writing things in general? I would have expected 手紙 to be present if it were the former?
Name:
Anonymous2012-05-26 7:45
I suppose this question isnt limited to Japanese but since it is the language I am learning this is as good a place as anywhere else. Been studying for about 2 years, about 8 months of constant immersion however, and can understand 標準語 fairly well. However, since starting speaking 8 months ago it doesnt seem as if my output has got any better. Conversation which leaves familiar territory is a huge struggle and I find it impossible to create compound sentences on the fly. With AJATT and antimoon and others purporting a few years of input and you can reach fluency, I am beginning to question whether their idea of fluency is the same as mine. What is one to do to achieve more natural output abilities? Some places say input is the only thing that matters. Some say output is the way to go. 流暢に話せる方法は？
Name:
Anonymous2012-05-26 8:07
>>333
字 is basically 文字, a character or letter, but is more general. 字が書けない essentially just equates to 'I cant write' unless context provides a specific character (but using 文字 would be more appropriate in that case)
>>334
Fluency has no definition. A 4 year old child is just as 'fluent' as a 60 year old professor of English. The latter obviously knows more words and grammar structures but their 'output' is for all intents and purposes the same. Its not a matter of one or the other. The professor can speak in his way because hes received input. But the same is true for the the 4 year old. I know some people who can speak Japanese 'fluently' but they make frequent mistakes, know only basic forms, conjunctions, grammar etc. Take your time. Learn. Speak. Listen.
Name:
Anonymous2012-05-26 8:14
>>334
This is pretty obvious. Its not a matter of one or the other, input or output. You need to do everything. If you dont speak, you'll assume 雨 and 飴 or 雲 and 蜘蛛 are pronounced differently, or pronounce づ incorrectly. If you dont read, you wont know the difference between 作る and 創る, or written forms that sometimes come up in spoken language.
Sorry to have to ask this, but does anyone have any links to the JPod 101 lessons? I've looked for quite a while, but can only find the beginner lessons, which are of no help
Name:
Anonymous2012-05-27 0:53
Quick confirmation: 貯金は切り崩す means something along the line of "the savings is cut down", right?
切り崩す literally means "cut and break/pull down". It usually is used with regard to destroying defenses incrementally or whittling away at something overtime, changing it in the process. With the latter understanding, the translation would be something like "cut into, raid, etc." However, the most appropriate word to use in this situation is 取り崩す, which is defined as "to take away until nothing remains".
Actually, we say "cut into savings" frequently in English, so that comparison doesn't necessarily work.
There is actually some discussion about which is "proper". I don't really think prescriptive grammar is the best thing to base our language learning on, but we have to choose something.
But there is also this NHK article: www.nhk.or.jp/bunken/summary/kotoba/kotobax3/pdf/063.pdf which I rather like because the author realizes that dictionaries only reflect the way people use words, and not the other way around.
Name:
Anonymous2012-05-27 1:59
>>341
Adding to that some relevant examples on ALC:
（人）の利益を切り崩す
cut deep into someone's profits
資金を切り崩す
raid funds
and I don't think we can simply say "it's wrong".
Name:
Anonymous2012-05-27 3:01
>>341 >>342
Are you talking to yourself? I never said anything was "wrong" or that we can't say "cut into savings" in English. Most people would use, or in the very least designate, 取り崩す as appropriate in this case. That's the general consensus. Regardless of any debate of which is "more correct". The OP's question was whether the words equate to "the savings is cut down", which is just bad English. That's it.
Name:
Anonymous2012-05-27 3:26
>>343
Sorry, for some reason I saw him as just asking what it means and then you said it was wrong. I misunderstood.
I'm preparing for an oral test tomorrow and I just read a point on the marking sheet that says: "Say ‘しつれいします’ three times appropriately." which is confusing the shit out of me. Most of my tests have been straightforward grammar and dictation written tests, so I'm very poor when it comes to actual speech. This oral test is a 2 minute 'show and tell' sort of thing, so when should I be using しつれいします? As I enter the room and when I'm leaving, but when else?
Name:
Anonymous2012-05-27 6:44
>>343
Well, the original sentence goes "貯金も切り崩したりしてるから。。。" which I figure it means "Since the savings is also cut down, among other things...". It makes sense overall but like you said, the dictionary is telling me otherwise so I had to confirm it.
I won't be surprised if this is regional dialect, though.
Name:
Anonymous2012-05-27 6:50
Is the counter word 件 ever used for areas or ground sites?
Name:
Anonymous2012-05-27 11:10
>>345
As an actual "excuse me", when you make a mistake, etc.
>>346
"I'm also doing things like cutting into my savings"
We don't say "the savings is cut down" in English. That doesn't make sense.
>>347
No. 件 is the counter for items, incidents, reports, happenings, etc. 所 is places.
Name:
Anonymous2012-05-27 15:44
Could someone translate this? Of course a detailed translation would be nice, but a quick explanation would be cool too. I'm especially interested in the top left panel.
How much Japanese would you say an intern needs to properly get around in Japan? Also, what would be the most efficient way to learn?
Name:
Anonymous2012-05-27 17:54
>>348
Okay, so the general meaning remains the same thing along that lines, and the argument was just about how to put it in English words. "the savings is cut down" might make sense in the way that "budget", "investment", "capital" or some other monetary funds are cut down (figuratively) so that's also a choice for a more liberal, less literal translation.
Name:
Anonymous2012-05-27 18:13
>>350
Around the 200th post or more so is some suggestions of how to cover the basic, so refer to that. Past the basic, you mostly figure your own way out.
Name:
Anonymous2012-05-28 3:55
その女の人は男の人に時計をあげました
Genki gives the translation as something like "That woman gave the man a watch." Am I failing to understand the grammar, or could it also mean "That women gives men watches?" If I'm wrong, then how would you say that?
Plurals are not explicit, but you'll often see 達（たち） added in the case of people. It could be that but it's rather unlikely.
Name:
Anonymous2012-05-28 4:47
'見える means "something or someone is spontaneously visible"; 見られる, on the other hand, means that the subject of the sentence can see something or someone actively rather than passively.'
Could someone help me elucidate the difference here? I don't understand why looking at the sea is considered 'spontaneously visible', and a movie is 'actively rather than passively'. Is it due to the dynamic change in the movie, due to the fact that you had to move to a different place to see the movie, etc? I can't figure it out.
>>353
It couldn't mean "That women gives men watches?" because the sentence is in the past tense. To say that, it'd be "その女の人は男性(たち)に時計をあげます".
Name:
Anonymous2012-05-28 5:32
>>355
The ocean is a "sight", if you want to think of it that way. It's something you would put on a postcard, or take a picture of. A movie is not. It is something actively watched. The ocean is something passively watched, in comparison.
>>355
It isn't "looking at the sea" that's considered spontaneously visible, it's the sea. If it's within your field of vision, you'll spontaneously see it.