>>879
>does a bicycle consume energy?
Yes, it does. Everything requires energy to move.
And I parsed it correctly. "although it's not as much as a bicycle (consumption of energy), just running the motorads requires a fair amount of energy. I know what I'm talking about. Maybe you don't. I made an additional leap in logic beyond what the sentences provided (not as much as ほどではない), so it stands to reason
Name:
Anonymous2012-08-17 0:06
>>880
And I'm talking about the DIFFERENT ideas presented in the DIFFERENT sentences. There is no flow between the first and second sentences beyond the subject of the motorads.
Name:
Anonymous2012-08-17 0:06
>>880
And I'm talking about the DIFFERENT ideas presented in the DIFFERENT sentences. There is no flow between the first and second sentences beyond the subject of the motorads.
Name:
Anonymous2012-08-17 0:17
>>882
Yes there is. Sentence one is a statement that riding the motorads is a sport. Sentence two explains why they think so.
Name:
Anonymous2012-08-17 0:18
>>882
I don't really want to take this beyond Japanese, but since when does what qualifies a sport have anything to do with energy consumption?
What are you two even arguing about? It's clearly talking about the energy it takes to ride it (what else is there?). While it's not as intensive as bicycling, riding a motorad takes considerable energy.
Name:
Anonymous2012-08-17 8:28
>>887
>It's clearly talking about the energy it takes to ride it
Yes, which is what >>871 wrote before the arguments started.
Name:
Anonymous2012-08-17 9:17
>>887
Except everyone has failed to notice that the OP of this question ALREADY FIGURED THAT OUT. The other guy was just saying that the nishiro clause was referencing the second sentence, not the first.
Name:
Anonymous2012-08-17 11:44
Is this a gramatically correct sentene?
"The matter could've already been dealt with by the time it took you to say that."
それを言いかかった時間の間に問題はもう扱えていた。
About the 言いかかる. I've never used Japanese grammar like this before and I just need to know if it's possible. Also, while the second half sounds good to me, I want to make sure if it's grammatically correct. If it's not, how would I otherwise say this sentence?
Name:
Anonymous2012-08-17 11:53
Also, I've seen these big black downwards pointing triangles in Japanese textbooks that I just can't figure out what they're for. I've never seen them in novels and fiction but they seem to recur quite often in texts meant for studying.
Doesn't that change the meaning a bit? I wanted the word かかる for "the time it takes", but maybe that is implied.
The second part I can understand, that was just a case of me thinking one thing and writing something different. The meaning I wanted to convey was: "You could've already dealt with the problem by the time it took you to say that". Does "問題はもう扱えていた" work for that?
Name:
Anonymous2012-08-17 19:47
>>893
言いかかる isn't a word. 言いかける is "begin to say" or "start saying". 言う時間をかける (take time to say) or 言う時間がかかる (takes time to say) are the extent of what you're able to do. If you're trying to say "the time it took for you to say that", using 言いかける and "during" doesn't make sense like >>892 pointed out, thought his revisions discardws your original meaning. それを言いかけた時に問題はもう扱われていた translates directly to "When you (or I)started to say that, the problem had already been dealt with". 問題は扱える is awkward and grammatically incorrect but understood. Using を is a much better choice if you don't want to change the nuance by using the passive. Below is a rough estimation of what "You could've already dealt with the problem by the time it took you to say that"
Thanks, I was experimenting with the 言いかかる thing. Wanted to test if Japanese grammar can be made to work like that.
The problem originated from the term あっという間に. I was trying to explain that in Japanese and needed to say "the time it takes to say "ah"" in another way.
Name:
Anonymous2012-08-19 13:10
Does 私は恐ろしい mean both "I am scared" and "I am scary"? I always thought 恐ろしい meant scary, but I definitely heard it used in the scared meaning today. Is it the same for 私は怖い?
Name:
Anonymous2012-08-19 13:30
>>897
Yes, this is why you sometimes here Japanese people say shit like "I am exciting".
Can someone walk me through how japanese addresses work?
Take this example:
"2-3-38 Kikusumi, Minami-ku, Nagoya, 457-0012, JAPAN"
And for reference, this is how addresses work in my country(so please explain it in a way I can relate to).
"Ladugårdsvägen 101, 187 31 Tyresö, SWEDEN"
Ladugårdsvägen: Name of the street
101: Name of the house
187 31: Equivalent to the US Zip code.
Tyresö: These called Municipalities in English. Not sure if the US has them, but they're just a collection of about 10 neighbourhoods. Sweden is divided into 290 of these.
I can guess that Kikusumi is the street name and Minami-ku is kind of like the Swedish Municipalities. 457-0012 is the postal code... I guess?
Problem is, what the fuck is up with that first string of numbers? They count their houses like frenchmen or something?
Name:
Anonymous2012-08-20 17:59
2-3-38 = street/chou number
Kikusumi (chou) = town, block, etc. (chou)
Minami (ku) = ward, district
Nagoya (shi) = city
457-0012 = postal code
If you have at least your chou, ku, shi, and postal code (and name), everything will be fine. That's how it was for me anyway.
Name:
Anonymous2012-08-20 18:03
So in terms of size: Nagoya > Minami > Kikusumi?
Also, 2-3-38, is that the exact number of the building or are there several buildings with that number?
Name:
Anonymous2012-08-20 18:12
>>912
Yes and I'm pretty sure that pinpoints you, not sure though.
Name:
Anonymous2012-08-21 21:53
What is the "officially" you use for a sentence like:
I am officially Swedish, but both my parents are American.