Particles...
Chris Gerteis
a magazine article, a journal article, whatever. I am interested in
something that could help me get a feel for when and where particles
should be used...
Jeff Halverson
there is an excellent book called "Self master Series 1: Wa to Ga" --or
actually "serufu masutaa shirizu 1: Wa to Ga" :-)
Published by Kuroshio Shuppan.
It is an excellent book, but I actually thought at times it got to be a
little bit -too- comprehensive. That is, all the rules they set up
started to conflict at some point. (But what do you expect... There
really are no REAL firm always true rules you can make. It is my personal
feeling that to understand these two pesty particles, you have to just
hear a LOT of spoken Japanese and get a feel for the language.
But nevertheless, I think it is an excellent book and it shed some light
on a lot of questions that I had had.
For the other particles, the same company (Kuroshio shuppan) put out a
book titled "kakujoshi"... --"particles". It is the "Self Master Series
3" book. I can't recommend a better book than this! A++
The "Self Master Series 2" book is called "Suru Shita Shiteiru" and it
is also very good. All three are highly recommended.
They may be hard to come by, we used them in our Japanese Linguistics
class, but the ENTIRE thing is in kanji & hiragana/katakana, so you get a
real vocab workout with it too.
Jason L Tibbitts III
JH> If you want a VERY comprehensive study of the difference between WA and
JH> GA, there is an excellent book called "Self master Series 1: Wa to Ga"
JH> --or actually "serufu masutaa shirizu 1: Wa to Ga" :-) Published by
JH> Kuroshio Shuppan.
JH> The "Self Master Series 2" book is called "Suru Shita Shiteiru" and it
JH> is also very good. All three are highly recommended.
Do these have ISBN numbers? (Unfortunately most books of this nature
don't.) I'd love to come by some books for the intermediate student, as
I've found that now after two years of classroom instruction everything
that is commonly available is at a level that is a bit too low.
JH> They may be hard to come by, we used them in our Japanese Linguistics
JH> class, but the ENTIRE thing is in kanji & hiragana/katakana, so you get
JH> a real vocab workout with it too.
If they have no ISBN numbers, might I be able to get in contact with your
language department?
--
Jason L. Tibbitts III - ti...@tcamc.uh.edu - 713/743-8687 - 221SR1
System Admin: Texas Center for Advanced Molecular Computation
1994 PC800 "Kuroneko" DoD# 1723 GM/CS/S
d--- -p+ c++++ l++ u+++ e+ m---(++) n--- s/-- h* f+ g+ w+ t- r- y+**
Denbushi
CG@> From cger...@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu (Chris Gerteis)
CG@> Can anyone recomend a good overview of the uses of particles? A book,
CG@> a magazine article, a journal article, whatever. I am interested in
CG@> something that could help me get a feel for when and where particles
CG@> should be used...
A friend just purchased "All About Particles" by Naoko Chino. I haven't
examined it too closely yet, but it appears to comprised of many example
sentences (in Japanese, roomaji, amd English) for all of the particles, as
well as some other common suffixes and inflections. A short sampling of
the table of contents includes:
- ha - ga
- mo - wo
- kara - made
- gurai - shika
- tokoro - tomo
- dano - ze
- yori - shi
I just kinda picked them randomly, and the list above represents about
a quarter of the total. As for the content itself, I looked up "to" and
found:
- Three sub-sections, categorized by grammatical principle
1. As "and" or "with"
2. Qoutative particle ( -to omou, -to iu, etc.)
3. Conditional particle
- A total of 14 example sentences
All in all, it looks like a good book if you're looking for a
"particles only" type of reference. However, I find that my
Bojinsha "Basic Japanese-English Dictionary" offers comparable
information on particles (including lots of example sentences in
the same three formats) as well as a complete (beginner's) dictionary.
"-To" yielded the same three categories and 29 example sentences.
I will add that this particular dictionary has proven to be an
outstanding reference for this second-year Japanese student.
"All About Particles" is published by Kodansha, and appears to be part
of a series of "Power Japanese" instructional/reference books. The
cover is gold and white, and its 125 pages make it about a half-inch
thick. ISBN4-7700-1501-1.
Hope that helps.
----------------------------------------------------------------
W. Michael Rollins | denb...@asianet.ces.wa.com
sysop, AsiaNet BBS | (電武士)
Seattle USA | 石の上にも三年。。。
----------------------------------------------------------------
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12
VQWK 6.20 [Rev H - 04/04/94]
Eric Aardoom
I suggest getting "All about particles", by Naoko Chino, published by
Kodansha. It's part of the "Power Japanese" series. I found it very
usefull. It treats the different uses of particles, and gives loads of
examples. Actually, I like the entire series, especially "Gone fishin':
New angles on perennial problems", by Jay Rubin. It's not only very
informative, but also quite funny.
Hope this helps,
Eric
--
Eric Aardoom
Delft University of Technology Phone: +31-(0)15-782845
Faculty of Electrical Engineering Fax: +31-(0)15-786190
Mekelweg 4, P.O.Box 5031, 2600 GA Delft Email: aar...@muresh.et.tudelft.nl
The Netherlands
Jeffrey Friedl
|> Can anyone recomend a good overview of the uses of particles? A book,
|> a magazine article, a journal article, whatever. I am interested in
|> something that could help me get a feel for when and where particles
|> should be used...
Tad Perry posted an excellent introduction to particles and verbs a year or
two ago. If he doesn't repost in a few days, I'll post the copy I've kept.
*jeffrey*
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeffrey E.F. Friedl Omron Corporation, Nagaokakyo (Kyoto), Japan
jfr...@nff.ncl.omron.co.jp [ DoD##4 N8XBK 92 CB-1 400 ]
See my WWW Jap/Eng dictionary at http://www.cs.cmu.edu:8001/cgi-bin/jdic
Rafael Santos
>|> cger...@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu (Chris Gerteis) writes:
>|> Can anyone recomend a good overview of the uses of particles? A book,
>|> a magazine article, a journal article, whatever. I am interested in
>|> something that could help me get a feel for when and where particles
>|> should be used...
>
>Tad Perry posted an excellent introduction to particles and verbs a year or
>two ago. If he doesn't repost in a few days, I'll post the copy I've kept.
See also in the FAQ, there is a book called "Particles Plus", section 5.3.1
These are the anonymous FTP sites/filenames where you can get the FAQ for
sci.lang.japan (and probably other related useful stuff)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
rabico.univap.br , file /pub/Japan/language/FAQSLJ01-94.Z
ftp.uwtc.washington.edu , file /pub/Japanese/FAQ.sci.lang.japan.txt
ftp.cc.monash.edu.au , file /pub/nihongo/sci.lang.japan.FAQ
ftp.funet.fi , file /pub/culture/japan/info/ [NOT AVAILABLE YET]
kuso.shef.ac.uk, file /pub/faq/sljfaq
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
IMPORTANT: The first FTP site (rabico.univap.br) is experimental, and
exceedingly slow. The only good point is that the first version will be
always there - good for ftp redistribution. I hope it will become non-
experimental one day.
The file(s) can be distributed freely to other sites. Please let me know
of other FTP sites that carry this FAQ.
Rafael.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There's an extremely small but nonzero chance that, through a process known as
'tunneling', this message may spontaneously disappear from its present location
and reappear at any random place in the Universe, including newsgroups and your
private mail. I am not responsible for any inconvenience that may result.
Jeffrey Friedl
|> >two ago. If he doesn't repost in a few days, I'll post the copy I've kept.
Tad sent me mail saying to just post it, so here it is:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE QUICK AND DIRTY GUIDE TO JAPANESE
by Tad Perry
PREFACE
Many students of Japanese just want to communicate. Sure, they want to
say things correctly as often as possible, but they also want to get
into the language quickly and start mixing it up early. This QUICK AND
DIRTY GUIDE TO JAPANESE was meant to help you do just that. It makes
no pretense of being complete, but tries to pack the most *useful
information* necessary to achieve the *goal of using Japanese* in the
*shortest possible space*. This article therefore only covers *two*
things: Particles (those wa, ga, wo, de, ni and he thingies) and verb
conjugations.
This is my reasoning on this: you can build a vocabulary of nouns,
just by looking in a dictionary or asking a native speaker. They
almost never inflect (in any true meaning of the word) and are easy.
Plus we won't be worrying about those strange noun-like things that
can act like adjectives. So *you* can take care of the nouns yourself
as you see fit.
On the other hand, the verbs and adjectives inflect so I'll try to
present the most compact rules conceivable for allowing you to
manipulate every verb you ever encounter and hopefully you can take it
from their. The less mental overhead for remembering how to do it, the
less painful it will be. After knowing the conjugation rules pat, you
can get new vocabulary out of a dictionary or ask a native speaker.
Now that you have a bunch of nouns and a bunch of verbs and adjectives
(that you can inflect), you need to know how to piece them together.
That's where learning about the particles come in. Remember, this is
a *Quick and Dirty* guide so don't expect these generalizations to
*always* work, just expect them to work in as many cases as possible
based on what I know.
Now, in compiling this, I noticed that the descriptions are pretty
comprehensive. So why aren't these things presented this way in class?
Well, an educational institution obviously has a financial stake in
dragging out your language learning as long as possible (and confusing
you along the way), now doesn't it? The also feel obligated to teach
you every little detail so you feel like you're getting your money's
worth. In the case of this guide, return comments such as: "You made
generalization X, but for got to mention exceptions Y and Z." won't
be appreciated very much. This is a *quick and dirty* guide, remember?
So be forewarned that their are exceptions all over the place, but
that I have tried to be as accurate as space allows. And space is the
primary concern here. Please don't forget that.
PARTICLES
Word Order
Before talking about particles let's get into word order. In general,
standard word order for Japanese when using an action verb is:
[SUBJECT]+TIME+PLACE/IMPLEMENT+INDIRECT OBJECT+OBJECT+ACTION VERB
"Ashita, gakkou de sensei ni purezento wo agemasu."
("[I'm] going to give a present to [my] teacher tomorrow.")
For an existence verb it is:
[SUBJECT]+TIME+LOCATION+EXISTENCE VERB
"Takahashi wa, ima honsha ni iru."
("Takahasi is in the main office right now.")
For a motion verb it is:
[SUBJECT]+TIME+ORIGIN+ROUTE+DESTINATION+MOTION VERB
"Ashita, paatii ni iku."
("I'm going to a party tomorrow.")
SUBJECTs are put in brackets to stress that they are very often
deleted. In general, if a new subject is introduced where another had
been previously understood, signal the change by placing "wa" after
the subject. If a subject is understood, but for some reason not
deleted (that's rare) use "ga" or nothing. Often you can move a
subject out after the verb when things start piling up before the
verb. Like: "Ashita boku ga kooen de utau." (I'm singing at the park
tomorrow.) often becomes: "Ashita kooen de utau, boku." For more on
SUBJECTs, see the longer description in the next section, "Subjects
and Deletion". Knowing how to delete is a key to sounding natural.
TIME is usually followed by "ni". In general, use "ni" for specific
points in time or specific spans of time. So "jyuu gatsu [ni]"
(October), "san gatsu mikka [ni]" (March 3rd) take "ni". A word like
"ashita" (tomorrow) that can only be understood by context (it changes
depending on when you say it). These types of words are called
"deictic" time words and don't take "ni". "Ashita iku" ("I'm going
tomorrow."), but: "sanji ni iku" ("I'm going at 3.") Even if you have
trouble making the distinction between these two types of time words,
don't worry: Japanese people can understand what you mean even if you
get it backwards.
PLACE/IMPLEMENT is followed by "de". By PLACE, I mean the location
that a volitional *action* occurred. If you're eating at home, that's
"ouchi de shokuji suru". If you're eating with chopsticks, that's
"ohasi de taberu". The place you do something or the thing you use to
do something takes "de". If you're going somewhere by car, you say
"kuruma de iku". It's not that hard to understand really. (See
INDIRECT OBJECT for why DESTINATIONs are different.) Verbs of motion
that tell DESTINATION, or ones of existence that tell the LOCATION of
something take "ni". (DESTINATIONs can also take "he".) Try to
distinguish PLACE from LOCATION by thinking of it this way: PLACE is
WHERE SOMETHING IS DONE, LOCATION is WHERE SOMETHING OR SOMEONE IS.
Use "kara" ("from") after an ORIGIN and "wo" after a ROUTE. "Gakkoo
kara, kooen wo totte, ouchi ni kaeru." (Lit. "I'm going home from
school through the park.") There's usually an intermediate verb in
this type of usage.
OBJECT is followed by "wo" or nothing. "Hon wo yonde iru" (I'm reading
a book.) This is a really simple one in most cases. I really don't
know many Japanese learners who can't understand this.
INDIRECT OBJECT is followed by "ni". By INDIRECT OBJECT, I mean a sort
of secondary object that some verbs take. "Kono hon wo anata ni
ageru." ("I'm going to give this to you.") You have "this book" and
you have "to you". The "this book" part is the OBJECT. The "to you"
part is the INDIRECT OBJECT. "Wo" and "ni" are used to distinguish
these two.
VERB doesn't take any particles, but it needs to be inflected. There's
a big section at the end on how you do that, and useful colloquial
English equivalents of what those inflections mean.
To boil this section down, remember it this way:
SUBJECT+wa/ga/nothing (delete subject if possible, show changes with "wa")
TIME+ni/nothing (use nothing if it's a deictic time word)
PLACE/IMPLEMENT+de (is the place where you *do* or where you *are*?)
LOCATION+ni (is the place where you *are* or where you *do*?)
ORIGIN+kara
ROUTE+wo (is this a place on the way to where you're going?)
DESTINATION+ni/he (use "ni" over "he" but be aware that both are okay.)
INDIRECT OBJECT+ni (use this if you're out of choices :-)
DIRECT OBJECT+wo
After understanding the descriptions given earlier, these nine lines
are the key to knowing what particle to use 90% of the time. Even if
these rules cause you to make a mistake you're definitely being
understood.
Subjects and Deletions
Usually, you don't have to worry about whether to use wa or ga,
because most subjects can usually be deleted. "You can't get something
wrong, if you left it out in the first place." That's my philosophy.
So we'll work on the parts of sentences that you can delete, starting
with subjects.
If you turn to a Japanese and suddenly make a statement:
"Ashita paatii ni iku."
("[I'm] going to the party tomorrow.")
The listener will assume the subject is you. So don't bother supplying
any subject. To do so, is in fact, not natural; a Japanese wouldn't
normally do it.
If you turn to a Japanese and suddenly ask a question:
"Ashita paatii ni iku?"
("[Are you] going to the party tomorrow?")
The listener will assume the subject is himself or herself. Easy! Most
one-on-one conversations where you or the listener is the subject
*don't need an explicit subject*. No chance of screwing up wa/ga here.
If you suddenly turn to a Japanese and want to make a statement or ask
a question about some other person altogether, use "wa" after that
person's name or title the first time you mention that person:
"Shachoo wa, ashita paatii ni iku?"
("Is the shachoo going to the party tomorrow?")
Let's just say the "wa" introduces a change in subject. This time it
signals a change from the default "you the listener" to the "shachoo".
After you establish that you're talking about the president you can
go back to dropping subjects again:
"Sono ato wa, kaeru ka na?"
("Is he going home after that?"--again some vagueness added with
"ka na" ("I wonder"). Don't be too forward making assumptions
about other people. This trick also stops the listener from
thinking the question is back to being about themself. There's a
strong tendency for questions to erase understood info and you
have to signal that things are unchanged. Usually you play with
the verb a little bit to get this across. Note that the change in
time being talked about was also signaled with a "wa".)
Note that this tendency to delete in Japanese parallels the point
where an English native speaker would use plain pronouns like, I, you,
he, she, they. When you start a comment about yourself, you use "I"
(Japanese delete). When you ask about the listener, you use "you"
(Japanese delete). When you've first established someone and then keep
going with that person, you use "he" or "she" (Japanese delete). See?
Simple.
Deleting other Established Info
Just like with subjects any info that's been established can be
deleted, and any changes in established info can be signalled using
"wa":
"Ashita paatii ni iku?"
("[Are you] going to the party tomorrow?")
"Un, anata wa?"
("Yeah, how about you?"--info about "paatii ni" and "iku" unchanged,
therefore deleted. Subject changed to original questioner, so the
change is signaled with "wa".)
"Un-n, ikanai"
("No, I'm not going."--info about "paatii ni" still deleted, "iku"
comes back as "ikanai" because it has changed form.)
"Sono ato no eiga wa?"
("How about the movie afterwards?"--the established info "paatii"
changed to "eiga" so we use "wa" to establish the change in
understood information. Understood info that *hasn't* changed is
still left out, like the subject "boku" and the action "iku".)
"Un-n, ikanai."
This is pretty much how deletions work whether it be subjects or
something else. In general, always go for deletions if possible. This
section also serves the purpose of giving you a feel for "wa".
Particle Ga
In general, you don't need it. In the instances where you do, you
can slowly build a feel for it. Basically, you need it in situations
where you're not expressing a change in subject, but where you want
to state the subject even though it is established info. Usually,
this is to add emphasis or avoid ambiguity.
"Shacho wa, ashita paatii ni iku?"
("Is the shachoo going to the party tomorrow?")
"Un-n, ikanai mitai."
("No, it doesn't look like it."--throw in a "mitai" because you
don't wan't to act too sure of the actions of others in Japanese.
We're not really covering that though, it's just a side note.)
"Nande?"
("Why not?")
"Sore ga wakaranai"
("I don't know why not."--there's no real ambiguity in this case,
and "wakaranai" alone would have worked, but it is a case where
you're not changing an understood subject to another, you're
restating the understood subject as such for some emphasis. If
you're stating an established subject, for whatever reason, use
"ga". But you could've deleted, and if you were following my
explanation you should have. This one sentence also helps dispell
the huge MYTH that "wa" is for negative sentences.)
Particle Mo
Use mo when you're adding more info on a list of established info. It
may be used alone when marking subjects and objects, and can follow
other particles (like ni, de, and he). Put it this way: if "wa" clears
the understood info and replaces it, "mo" adds extra info on top of
what's already there without clearing out anything.
"Ashita paatii ni iku?"
("[Are you] going to the party tomorrow?")
"Un, iku yo."
("Yeah, I'm going, how about you?"--note what was deleted and why.)
"Boku mo iku."
("I'm going too."--add yourself to the understood subject.)
Mo is easy, so we won't waste any more time with it. Just trying to be
complete and it only took a few lines to do.
VERB CONJUGATIONS
Another thing that many Japanese learners need is an easy method of
arriving at all the verb conjugations and a highly reduced set of
rules for how to get them right on the different types of verbs.
That's easy enough really because there are only three major verb
types: -ru verbs, -u verbs, and -aru verbs (a polite type not much
used except for "gozaru/gozaimasu"). People really hate Eleanor Jordan
for this kind of naming, but in language learning you take what's easy
and go with it; there's no need to worry about theoretical linguistics
here. Also note that I changed romanization styles at this point to
one that makes the changes in verbs appear much more uniform.
-Ru verbs are those that end in -ru like taberu and ireru. "-u" verbs
end in u, ku, gu, bu, mu, nu, su, tu, or [a,i,u,o]+ru (rarely e+ru
because those are almost always -ru verbs like taberu. I only know of
three like that: keru/kick, heru/decrease and heru/elapse--there are
probably more, but I have a feeling they would also only be two
syllables like these). So the only real overlap worth worrying about
is "i+ru". If you memorize two forms for each of these (like:
ireru/irete and hairu/haitte) you can keep them straight.
-Ru Verbs
Everything's done by dropping or replacing -ru with something else.
Just remember the different uses of each conjugation.
drop -ru to add things like -masu, -yasui (easy to): tabe
(tabeyasui (easy to eat))
replace with "-te" for gerund: tabete
(gerund is for "and"-ing verbs (eat and go, "tabete iku") and simple
orders (eat that, "are tabete")
replace with "-ta" for past tense: tabeta
replace with "-tara" for meaning "if": tabetara
(if I/someone eats)
replace with "-tari" for meaning "do things like": tabetari
(I did things like eating--tabetari sita. not used much)
replace with "-reba" for another "if": tabereba
(if I/someone eats. A little different from "-tara" but don't worry
about that now, they're pretty much interchangeable.)
replace with "-yoo" for "let's": tabeyoo
(let's eat)
replace with "-ro" for rude orders: tabero
(eat dammit!)
replace with "-nai" for negative: tabenai
replace with "-rareru" for "can": taberareru <- these are now -ru verbs
(I can't eat this! kore taberarenai yo! Good in cafeteria's.)
replace with "-saseru" for "make (someone) do": tabesaseru <- now a -ru verb
("Kore tabesasenai de yo!" Don't make me eat this. A negative request
equal in level to "tabete" is "nai" plus "de")
replace with "-rareru" for passive "was X-ed": taberareru <- now a -ru verb
(looks exactly like "can" for this type verb. "Raion ni tabesaserareta."
I was eaten by a lion. Use "ni" for "by" to show the agent.)
replace with "-saserareru" for "be made to": tabesaserareru
(this follows from just putting two separate types above together.
My mom made me eat chicken. "Okaasan ni chikin wo tabesaserareta."
Putting it in passive makes you seem like you didn't want to and you
feel sorry for yourself.)
-U Verbals
-RU verbs are by far the easiest to conjugate: you drop -ru and add
something else. Simple. -U verbs aren't that easy but almost.
Typically you drop -u and add something else. The problem is that
there might be a phonetic change (such as when ha becomes pa, or ta
becomes da) for some of the types. See the other chart for
simple-English meanings of the conjunctions, this one just tries to
keep the conjunction rules clear.
First, there are some -u verbs that end in -ru. We have to get that
out of the way right now. Real -ru verbs (where -ru gets dropped)
always end in "iru" or "eru", if you see one that ends:
"aru" (exist)
"uru" (sell)
- or -
"oru" (break)
It's guaranteed *not* to be a -ru verb. It's probably a -u verb. (With
the exception of super-polite oddballs like gozaru/gozaimasu, but
effectively, you can forget about those and assume anything ending
"aru", "uru" or "oru" is an -u verb.) Verbs like "iru" (exist or need
depending on context) can be either type. In fact, "need" is an -u
verb (gerund is itte) and and "exist" is a -ru verb (gerund is ite).
If you hear one of these, (like "hairu") be sure to ask what the
gerund ("haitte") or past tense ("haitte") is too, so you can remember
what type it is. So far I've only met three verbs that ended "-eru"
that were -u verbs instead of -ru verbs. These are: keru/kette (kick),
heru/hette (decrease), and heru/hette (elapse). Except for these
"iru/eru" verbs, every other type of verb is obvious by hearing only
one form.
Including -u verbs which might happen to end in -ru, these are all the
types there are:
-su
-ku (these two types conjugate similarly)
-gu
-bu (these three types conjugate similarly)
-mu
-nu
-ru (these three types conjugate similarly)
-tu
-vowel+u
-su is the only one that is well-behaved, -(s)u will change simply to
-s(a), -s(i), -s(e), -s(o) in all cases with no odd behavior to
remember.
Here are the replacements:
replace -u with -i to add "-masu", "-yasui", etc.
(works straight across, no phonetic changes in any of the types)
hanasu -> hanasi (talk)
kiku -> kiki (walk)
oyogu -> oyogi (swim)
yobu -> yobi (call)
nomu -> nomi (drink)
sinu -> sini (die)
tukuru -> tukuri (make)
matu -> mati (wait)
harau -> harai (pay)
Replace -u with -ite for do "X and Y" and for simple commands.
(types not following the rule, but acting similarly, are grouped)
hanasu -> hanasite (talk)
kiku -> kiite (walk) (replace entire -ku)
oyogu -> oyoide (swim) (replace entire -gu, be sure to use -ide)
yobu -> yonde (call) (replace entire -bu, be sure to use -nde)
nomu -> nonde (drink) (replace entire -mu, be sure to use -nde)
sinu -> sinde (die) (replace entire -nu, be sure to use -nde)
tukuru -> tukutte (make) (replace entire -ru, be sure to use -tte)
matu -> matte (wait) (replace entire -tu, be sure to use -tte)
harau -> haratte (pay) (replace -u, be sure to use -tte)
Replace -u with -ita for past tense.
(types not strictly following the rule, but acting similarly, are grouped)
hanasu -> hanasita (talk)
kiku -> kiita (walk) (replace entire -ku)
oyogu -> oyoida (swim) (replace entire -gu, be sure to use -ida)
yobu -> yonda (call) (replace entire -bu, be sure to use -nda)
nomu -> nonda (drink) (replace entire -mu, be sure to use -nda)
sinu -> sinda (die) (replace entire -nu, be sure to use -nda)
tukuru -> tukutta (make) (replace entire -ru, be sure to use -tta)
matu -> matta (wait) (replace entire -tu, be sure to use -tta)
harau -> haratta (pay) (replace -u, be sure to use -tta)
(In fact, I query search and replaced "e" with "a" on the gerunds to
get this if that helps any. The rule breakers are breaking the rule
uniformly now.)
Replace -u with -itara for "if". (Or, just add "ra" to the past.)
(types not strictly following the rule, but acting similarly, are grouped)
hanasu -> hanasitara (talk)
kiku -> kiitara (walk) (replace entire -ku)
oyogu -> oyoidara (swim) (replace entire -gu, be sure to use -idara)
yobu -> yondara (call) (replace entire -bu, be sure to use -ndara)
nomu -> nondara (drink) (replace entire -mu, be sure to use -ndara)
sinu -> sindara (die) (replace entire -nu, be sure to use -ndara)
tukuru -> tukuttara (make) (replace entire -ru, be sure to use -ttara)
matu -> mattara (wait) (replace entire -tu, be sure to use -ttara)
harau -> harattara (pay) (replace -u, be sure to use -ttara)
Replace -u with -itari for "do things like X". (Or just add "ri" to past.)
(types not strictly following the rule, but acting similarly, are grouped)
hanasu -> hanasitari (talk)
kiku -> kiitari (walk) (replace entire -ku)
oyogu -> oyoidari (swim) (replace entire -gu, be sure to use -idari)
yobu -> yondari (call) (replace entire -bu, be sure to use -ndari)
nomu -> nondari (drink) (replace entire -mu, be sure to use -ndari)
sinu -> sindari (die) (replace entire -nu, be sure to use -ndari)
tukuru -> tukuttari (make) (replace entire -ru, be sure to use -ttari)
matu -> mattari (wait) (replace entire -tu, be sure to use -ttari)
harau -> harattari (pay) (replace -u, be sure to use -ttari)
Replace -u with -eba for "if"
(works straight across, no phonetic changes in any of the types)
hanasu -> hanaseba (talk)
kiku -> kikeba (walk)
oyogu -> oyogeba (swim)
yobu -> yobeba (call)
nomu -> nomeba (drink)
sinu -> sineba (die)
tukuru -> tukureba (make)
matu -> mateba (wait)
harau -> haraeba (pay)
Replace -u with -oo for "let's do X".
(works straight across, no phonetic changes in any of the types)
hanasu -> hanasoo (talk)
kiku -> kikoo (walk)
oyogu -> oyogoo (swim)
yobu -> yoboo (call)
nomu -> nomoo (drink)
sinu -> sinoo (die)
tukuru -> tukuroo (make)
matu -> matoo (wait)
harau -> haraoo (pay)
Replace -u with -e for rude orders "do X dammit".
(works straight across, no phonetic changes in any of the types)
hanasu -> hanase (talk)
kiku -> kike (walk)
oyogu -> oyoge (swim)
yobu -> yobe (call)
nomu -> nome (drink)
sinu -> sine (die)
tukuru -> tukure (make)
matu -> mate (wait)
harau -> harae (pay)
Replace -u with -anai for negative. (This is now an adjective.)
(works straight across, only one phonetic change in one type)
hanasu -> hanasanai (talk)
kiku -> kikanai (walk)
oyogu -> oyoganai (swim)
yobu -> yobanai (call)
nomu -> nomanai (drink)
sinu -> sinanai (die)
tukuru -> tukuranai (make)
matu -> matanai (wait)
harau -> harawanai (pay) (stick a wa in there, not just an "a". Makes
it easier to say, too. Lucky us!)
Replace -u with -eru for "can do X". This is now a -ru verb.
(works straight across, no phonetic changes in any of the types)
hanasu -> hanaseru (talk)
kiku -> kikeru (walk)
oyogu -> oyogeru (swim)
yobu -> yoberu (call)
nomu -> nomeru (drink)
sinu -> sineru (die)
tukuru -> tukureru (make)
matu -> materu (wait)
harau -> haraeru (pay)
Replace -u with -aseru for "make (someone) do X". This is now a -ru verb.
(works straight across, only one phonetic change in one of the types)
hanasu -> hanasaseru (talk)
kiku -> kikaseru (walk)
oyogu -> oyogaseru (swim)
yobu -> yobaseru (call)
nomu -> nomaseru (drink)
sinu -> sinaseru (die)
tukuru -> tukuraseru (make)
matu -> mataseru (wait)
harau -> harawaseru (pay) (Don't forget to throw a wa in there!)
Replace -u with -areru for "X is done (often to someone)". This is now
a -ru verb. (works straight across, only one phonetic change in one of
the types)
hanasu -> hanasareru (talk)
kiku -> kikareru (walk)
oyogu -> oyogareru (swim)
yobu -> yobareru (call)
nomu -> nomareru (drink)
sinu -> sinareru (die)
tukuru -> tukurareru (make)
matu -> matareru (wait)
harau -> harawareru (pay) (Don't forget to throw a wa in there!)
Replace -u with -aserareru for "be made to do X by someone". Same
result as just doing the two conjunctions separately but is taught
in most books as a specific conjunction. This is now a -ru verb.
(works straight across, only one phonetic change in one of the types)
hanasu -> hanasaserareru (talk)
kiku -> kikaserareru (walk)
oyogu -> oyogaserareru (swim)
yobu -> yobaserareru (call)
nomu -> nomaserareru (drink)
sinu -> sinaserareru (die)
tukuru -> tukuraserareru (make)
matu -> mataserareru (wait)
harau -> harawaserareru (pay) (Don't forget to throw a wa in there!)
Now that was long, but it was mostly cut-and-paste because even these
are well-behaved when you organize them correctly. When you boil down
what needs to be done to these verbs to conjugate them correctly, the
information required is really minimal--even for the oddballs. That's
all you need to be able to conjugate almost every verb in Japanese.
Most books say that their are only two irregular verbs in all of
Japanese: suru and kuru. Those you have to learn separately, but they
kind of make sense. In fact, though, there's a third one: iku. The
reason is that unlike kiita for kiku, you don't say iita, you say
itta. You don't say, iite, you say itte. But it's regular in it's
irregularity because it acts like tsukuru for some weird reason.
kuru ("will come", or "comes (often, everyday, etc.)")
ki (to add "-masu", note that "-yasui" isn't used)
kite (casual command: "come here")
kita (past tense: "someone came")
kitara (add ra to past) ("if(once) someone comes", some connotation of when)
kitari (ad ri to past) ("do things like come")
kureba ("if someone comes", no connotation of when)
koyoo ("let's come", no, it can't possibly mean orgasms)
koi (rude request: "come here you")
konai (negative: "won't come" or "doesn't come (very much)")
korareru ("can come")
kosaseru ("make (someone) come")
korareru (passive--no example comes to mind)
kosaserareru ("be made to come (by someone)")
suru ("will do", or "does (often, everyday, etc.)")
si (to add "-masu", or "-yasui")
site (casual command: "do this")
sita (past tense: "someone did")
sitara (add ra to past) ("if(once) someone does", some connotation of when)
X sitari (ad ri to past) ("do things like doing X")
sureba ("if someone does", no connotation of when)
X siyoo ("let's do X")
siro (rude request: "do this dammit")
sinai (negative: "won't do" or "doesn't do (very much)")
dekiru (really "seru") ("can do"--"someone I can love": "ai seru hito")
saseru ("make (someone) do")
sareru ("be done (by someone"))
saserareru ("be made to do (by someone)")
A cool trick to remember suru is that many of the conjugations match
what you would get if you conjugated a lone "su", so it's kind of like
"hanasu". Hanasita--sita. Hanaseru--seru. Hanasaseru--saseru.
Adjectives
These aren't that hard. They always end in [a,i,u,o]+i. They *never*
end in e+i that would be a noun. Basically you replace "i" with a form
of "ka" to inflect.
yasashii ("It's nice")
yasashiku nai ("It's not nice")
yasashikatta ("It was nice")
yasashikattara ("If it's nice.")
yasashikattari (possible I suppose but not heard often)
yasashikereba ("If it's nice.")
Other inflections follow what a "ka+u" verb would do. If you can
conjugate "kau" (to buy) you can conjugate every Japanese adjective.
Just note that you don't say: "atsukaseru" for "make something hot"
you say "atsuku suru". For a command, say: "yasashiku natte" ("be
nice").
-----
Collin Park
: by Tad Perry
[...]
"quick" sure; but i hardly think it "dirty". I've been taking classes
for nearly a year, and had not been told about this exception:
[...]
: It's guaranteed *not* to be a -ru verb. It's probably a -u verb. (With
: the exception of super-polite oddballs like gozaru/gozaimasu, but
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
These exceptions I mean. I couldn't figure out "nasaru/nasaimasu"
until I read this guide. In fact it did not even occur to me to
look up "nasaru" in the dictionary because I "knew" that the root
verb "had to" be "nasau"!
Tad, thanks for a great paper.
[...]
: what type it is. So far I've only met three verbs that ended "-eru"
: that were -u verbs instead of -ru verbs. These are: keru/kette (kick),
: heru/hette (decrease), and heru/hette (elapse). Except for these
also "kaeru" (return)...
"nakanaka jouzu ni natte inai" collin
Not a statement of YHP, Hewlett-Packard, or anyone else.
Norman Diamond
>: THE QUICK AND DIRTY GUIDE TO JAPANESE
>: by Tad Perry
>"quick" sure; but i hardly think it "dirty".
I agree. For example, it has the sample phrase "paatii ni iku" but no
comparison to "paatii de iku."
--
<< If this were the company's opinion, I would not be allowed to post it. >>
A program in conformance will not tend to stay in conformance, because even if
it doesn't change, the standard will. Force = program size * destruction.
Every technical corrigendum is met by an equally troublesome new defect report.
Ron Guest
The author complained that courses don't teach his simplified method, and the reason simply is that if you want to understand native speakers you need to know a lot more than the simplest sentence structures. Even when a Japanese speaker is trying to 'dumb down' his/her speaking, what is in that guide will not be enough.
If you are content to speak in basic Japanese and expect an answer in English, then the guide would be very helpful. But it is really limited in use if you really want to understand spoken (or written) Japanese.
--
Ronald Guest
ron....@rss.dl.nec.com | More to this life...
Gerald B Mathias
: : THE QUICK AND DIRTY GUIDE TO JAPANESE
: : by Tad Perry
: Tad, thanks for a great paper.
: [...]
: : what type it is. So far I've only met three verbs that ended "-eru"
: : that were -u verbs instead of -ru verbs. These are: keru/kette (kick),
: : heru/hette (decrease), and heru/hette (elapse). Except for these
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I'd be willing to bet that Tad has a newer version that fixes both of these
(the original engendered a list of several more ...er- verbs, as I recall).
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
: also "kaeru" (return)...
Carol C. Kankelborg
Guest) writes:
>I agree with people who say that posting is helpful. But you should
>know that it is mostly helpful for your speaking. The Japanese do not
>limit themselves to such a small set of sentence structures in their
>speech.
>
>The author complained that courses don't teach his simplified method,
>and the reason simply is that if you want to understand native speakers
>you need to know a lot more than the simplest sentence structures. Even
>what is in that guide will not be enough.
>
>If you are content to speak in basic Japanese and expect an answer in
>English, then the guide would be very helpful. But it is really limited
>in use if you really want to understand spoken (or written) Japanese.
This may be the case, but for me it was helpful in showing me what lies
ahead in studying Japanese. You can't learn everything at once, but it
helps to have a "bigger picture" framework on which to hang the things
you are learning. This is especially true for someone who is primarily
familiar with Romance and Germainic languages and who is trying to learn
Japanese.
--
Carol C. Kankelborg
Amdahl Corp. cs...@eng.amdahl.com or cs...@cd.amdahl.com
The above opinions are uniquely mine.
Tad Perry
Ron Guest <ron....@rss.dl.nec.com> wrote:
>
> I agree with people who say that posting is helpful. But you should
> know that it is mostly helpful for your speaking. The Japanese do not
> limit themselves to such a small set of sentence structures in their
> speech.
Well, actually.... Getting a Japanese to use a full sentence under any
circumstance may prove rather difficult :-) I would claim that the
guide does in fact cover most of the structures that a Japanese might
use when speaking. I guess you'd have to go measure it to prove it
though.
> The author complained that courses don't teach his simplified method,
> and the reason simply is that if you want to understand native
> speakers you need to know a lot more than the simplest sentence
> structures. Even when a Japanese speaker is trying to 'dumb down'
> his/her speaking, what is in that guide will not be enough.
Well, I'm the author and what I really complained about was that
courses don't make things as easy as they can be. My experience with
the language is that it is very straightforward and easy to grasp
structurally although it is very different. What I mean is that very
few rules and exceptions really need to be memorized to know what's
going on.
I would never claim that the guide I produced covered everything. But
I would claim that for it's extremely compact size it covers an awful
lot. Certainly it covers more than just "the simplest sentence
structures". So, while it might not be completely comprehensive, there
really isn't that much left of the language structurally that isn't
touched on somewhere in that guide. It goes from word order, to
choosing a particle, to what to delete, to how to inflect for your
purpose. I don't know exactly what complex structure that doesn't
cover. Plus the beauty about Japanese is that complex sentences aren't
that common in the spoken language anyway.
> If you are content to speak in basic Japanese and expect an answer in
> English, then the guide would be very helpful. But it is really
> limited in use if you really want to understand spoken (or written)
> Japanese.
I disagree here. Once you really understand what's in the guide you
can grasp a great deal of what you read or hear. The real question
is whether you know enough kanji to be able to read and if your
listening ability is up to decoding what you hear. Those are skills
--
+---------------------------------------+
| Tad Perry Internet: t...@eskimo.com |
| Compuserve: 70402,3020 |
| Niftyserve: GBG01266 |
Ron Guest
|> In article <30ebei$4...@puma.rss.dl.nec.com>,
|> Ron Guest <ron....@rss.dl.nec.com> wrote:
|> > If you are content to speak in basic Japanese and expect an answer in
|> > English, then the guide would be very helpful. But it is really
|> > limited in use if you really want to understand spoken (or written)
|> > Japanese.
|>
|> I disagree here. Once you really understand what's in the guide you
|> can grasp a great deal of what you read or hear. The real question
|> is whether you know enough kanji to be able to read and if your
|> listening ability is up to decoding what you hear. Those are skills
I am not criticizing you. But I speak, read, listen,
and write Japanese on a daily basis for real life business. I do not
consider myself fluent, but I have quite a bit of very real experience with
a very wide range of native speakers/writers.
For example, the posting didn't really explain the -tai form of a verb,
though you did use it once. You didn't explain the -nagara form. And you did
not discuss the -mashou form and deshou at all. And these are very common
(I would say much more essential than many forms you did mention).
The posting doesn't address the ways you can ask people to do things. You
don't use 'nasai' or 'kudasai' a single time! What about 'hou ga ii desu
ne.' These are all words/phrases that are need on a daily basis in Japan
and in communicating in Japanese. And if you use the wrong form of asking
someone how to do something, you can cause a lot of friction.
Other things missing were how to combine adjectives (-kute),
how to modify a sentence properly so it can be used to modify a noun
For example, it is commonly necessary to take something like "The book that
Mr. Tanaka bought yesterday" and use it as part of a sentence.
"The book that Mr. Tanaka bought yesterday has a lot of useful information
on Biotechnology." Are you saying your posting explains how to do that?
Are you saying that "real" Japanese never say or write something like that?
I don't see your point.
All of the things I mentioned would be covered early on in a book/class on
Japanese. And they are all things/forms I hear/read on a daily basis. They
are not some strange and rare forms. Yes, most Japanese sentences are not
too long. But they are not necessarily simple, and the shorter length is
often just the result of the fact Kanji allows denser communication of
information.
In your posting you claimed that "an educational institution
obviously has a financial stake in dragging out your language learning
as long as possible (and confusing you along the way), now doesn't it?"
I simply don't think that is true. For sure, some Japanese classes and
books are not well done, and so make things harder than they really are.
Again, I am not critizing you, or the posting. It is useful, and I agree
with the technical material that is there.
If it only claimed to give some basics about sentence structure, basics
on a couple of particles, and a list of some verb conjugation, then I would
not have posted anything. But your claim in the posting that everything not covered in it is not really necessary for effective communication is
hyperbole. And your claim that "educational" institutions are trying to
make the language too difficult is a little unreasonable.
Normally I don't respond a second time to a posting, because it often
starts a boring cycle. But there is a lot missing from your posting
if you want to speak/read/write at a Japanese adult level and I don't see
how you can disagree with that.
Michael Turner
> The author complained that courses don't teach his simplified method,
> and the reason simply is that if you want to understand native speakers
> you need to know a lot more than the simplest sentence structures. Even
> when a Japanese speaker is trying to 'dumb down' his/her speaking, what
> is in that guide will not be enough.
Absolutely. It's well known that Japanese infants have to go to cram
schools for years before they are able to understand much of anything
their parents try to tell them . After all, their parents are native
speakers of Japanese, and it takes long time to learn the necessary
sentence structures!
All sarcasm aside: young children do an awful lot of effective
communication before they manage their first relative clause.
To say that a Japanese speakers can't "dumb down" Japanese enough
to get around someone else's inability to quite grok a relative
clause construction (for example) is tantamount to saying that they
can't communicate with their children. (I'm sure that, like parents
everywhere, they can't communicate with their children anyway, but
you know what I mean.)
If what you mean by "understand native speakers" is "evesdrop on
convoluted discussions of office politics", you certainly have a
point. But the gist I got was that the QUICK AND DIRTY GUIDE was
about quickly getting past the babe-in-the-woods stage. I saw no
claims that seemed to exceed this ambition. Please quote the passage
I missed.
-Michael
Tad Perry
Ron Guest <ron....@rss.dl.nec.com> wrote:
>
> If it only claimed to give some basics about sentence structure,
> basics on a couple of particles, and a list of some verb conjugation,
> then I would not have posted anything. But your claim in the posting
> that everything not covered in it is not really necessary for
> effective communication is hyperbole. And your claim that
> "educational" institutions are trying to make the language too
> difficult is a little unreasonable.
Most of the article is tongue in cheek anyway, as was that claim. I
didn't think anyone would really consider I meant it 100%. There is
no doubt however that many things could be made easier in classes.
>Normally I don't respond a second time to a posting, because it often
>starts a boring cycle. But there is a lot missing from your posting
>if you want to speak/read/write at a Japanese adult level and I don't see
>how you can disagree with that.
I can't disagree with it at all. What I can disagree with is your
portrayal of how trivial it is. Twice you have posted with the
viewpoint that the guide is interesting but more or less trivial
(that's my characterization of your apparent attitude, not a word you
have actually used). It does much less than cover everything and it
does much more than cover "some basics about sentence structure,
basics on a couple of particles, and a list of some verb
conjugation". You see what I mean? There really is a lot there for
the confused learner.
Like the particles. They can really confuse some people, and I think
one of the best things about the guide is describing what particles to
use. C'mon. The section on particles describes more than "a couple of
particles". I don't see how you can disagree with that.
Another thing it does well is boil down the rules for verb conjugation
to a very manageable level. So it's not just "some verb
conjugation". That's about all the verb conjugation there is in
Japanese. I don't mean that I listed every compound like "-nagara" or
"-tai" that can attach to a verb stem. I do mean that every verb form
derived from the dictionary form and clear rules to arrive at those
forms are present.
Natsu Sakimura
seem to be able to find it. Could someone please send it to me,
or post it here again?
Natsu
Tad Perry
Okay. Since I've made some revisions to it anyway and had it bounce
as mail to one person who requested it. Here it is. Judge for yourself.
Was it worth my time to produce? Is it worth your time to study?
----cut here---
THE QUICK AND DIRTY GUIDE TO JAPANESE
by Tad Perry
PREFACE
Many students of Japanese just want to communicate. Sure, they want to
say things correctly as often as possible, but they also want to get
into the language quickly and start mixing it up early. This QUICK AND
DIRTY GUIDE TO JAPANESE was meant to help you do just that. It makes
no pretense of being complete, but tries to pack the most *useful
information* necessary to achieve the *goal of using Japanese* in the
*shortest possible space*. This article covers four basic things: word
order, particles, how to deletions work, and verb conjugation. That
pretty much covers what you need to know to make a Japanese sentence
that sounds more or less natural.
What you need is very brief grammatical rules that are presented
clearly so you don't get confused. Memorize the grammar! I've reduced
it to the absolute lowest common denominator so that it's not
overwhelming but it still needs to be memorized.
After you get the rules down pat, you need a vocabulary. Again this is
just a matter of memorization. For nouns you can look in a dictionary
or ask a native speaker. They almost never inflect (in any true
meaning of the word) and are therefore easy to remember and
manipulate. For verbs, it is usually possible to derive all
inflections (you must know the rules for inflection though) after
memorizing just one form. Sometimes you need to know two forms. You'll
learn more about this later in this guide.
As for rules on inflecting verbs and adjectives, I've tried to put
together the most compact rules conceivable for allowing you to
manipulate every verb you ever encounter and hopefully you can take it
from there. The less mental overhead for remembering how to do
inflect, the less painful it will be for you. But it still requires a
certain amount of memorization. After you know the conjugation rules
pat, you can add new verbs to your vocabulary almost as easily as
nouns: look in a dictionary or ask a native speaker.
Now that you have a bunch of nouns and a bunch of verbs and adjectives
(that you can inflect), you need to know how to piece them together.
That's where word order, particles and deletions come in. Remember,
this is a *Quick and Dirty* guide so don't expect these
generalizations to *always* work, just expect them to work in as many
cases as possible based on what I know, and trust me that you'll at
least be understood if your pronunciation is acceptable.
Now, in compiling this guide, I noticed that the descriptions are
pretty comprehensive. So why aren't these things presented this way in
class? There are several reasons. First of all, I assume you are
intelligent and motivated enough to use the information yourself. No
drills, no tests. I present most facts exactly ONCE and move on. So pay
attention. Also, an educational institution obviously has a financial
stake in dragging out your language learning as long as possible (and
confusing you along the way), now doesn't it? They also feel
obligated, since you are paying them, to teach you every little detail
so you feel like you're getting your money's worth. But in this guide
I don't go into every detail and exception. That's why correspondence
with the author with comments such as: "You made generalization X, but
forgot to mention exceptions Y and Z." won't be appreciated very
much. This is a *quick and dirty* guide, remember? So be forewarned
that there are exceptions. Even so, I have tried to be as accurate as
possible, but compactness takes precedence over detail. Got it? Okay,
let's go.
WORD ORDER
Before talking about particles let's get into word order. In general,
standard word order for Japanese when using an action verb is as shown
below. SUBJECTs are put in brackets to stress that they are very often
deleted.
[SUBJECT]+TIME+PLACE/IMPLEMENT+INDIRECT OBJECT+OBJECT+ACTION VERB
"[Watakushi wa] ashita gakkou de sensei ni purezento wo agemasu."
("[I'm] going to give a present to [my] teacher tomorrow.")
For an existence verb it is:
[SUBJECT]+TIME+LOCATION+EXISTENCE VERB
"Takahashi wa ima honsha ni iru."
("Takahasi is in the main office right now.")
For a motion verb it is:
[SUBJECT]+TIME+ORIGIN+ROUTE+DESTINATION+MOTION VERB
"[Watakushi wa] ashita paatii ni iku."
("[I'm] going to a party tomorrow.")
IMPORTANT: Word order before the verb and the particles that nouns
take depend on the verb type: action, existence or motion.
PARTICLES
SUBJECT
In general, if a new subject is introduced where another had
been previously understood, signal the change by placing "wa" after
the subject. If a subject is understood, but for some reason not
deleted (that's rare) use "ga" or nothing. Often you can move a
subject out after the verb when things start piling up before the
verb. Like: "Ashita boku ga kooen de utau." (I'm singing at the park
tomorrow.) often becomes: "Ashita kooen de utau, boku." For more on
SUBJECTs, see the longer description in the next section, "Subjects
and Deletion". Knowing how to delete is a key to sounding natural.
TIME
A time word or time phrase is usually followed by "ni". In general,
use "ni" for specific points in time or specific spans of time. So
"jyuu gatsu [ni]" (October), "san gatsu mikka [ni]" (March 3rd) take
"ni". A word like "ashita" (tomorrow) that can only be understood by
context (it changes depending on when you say it). These types of
words are called "deictic" time words and don't take "ni". "Ashita
iku" ("I'm going tomorrow."), but: "sanji ni iku" ("I'm going at 3.")
Even if you have trouble making the distinction between these two
types of time words, don't worry: Japanese people can understand what
you mean even if you get it backwards.
PLACE/IMPLEMENT
By PLACE, I mean the location that a volitional *action* occurrs. If
you're eating at home, that's "ouchi de shokuji suru". By implement, I
mean a tool or item you use to perform an action. If you're eating
with chopsticks, that's "ohasi de taberu". The place you do something
or the thing you use to do something takes "de". If you're going
somewhere by car, you say "kuruma de iku". It's not that hard to
understand really.
DESTINATION
In Japanese, a DESTINATION is not an indirect object. You must think
of it as a destination belonging to a verb of motion. Verbs of motion
that give a DESTINATION, or ones of existence that tell the LOCATION
of something take "ni". (DESTINATIONs can also take "he".) Try to
distinguish PLACE from LOCATION by thinking of it this way: PLACE is
WHERE SOMETHING IS DONE, LOCATION is WHERE SOMETHING OR SOMEONE
EXISTS.
ORIGIN and ROUTE
Use "kara" ("from") after an ORIGIN and "wo" after a ROUTE. "Gakkoo
kara, kooen wo totte, ouchi ni kaeru." (Lit. "I'm going home from
school through the park.") There's usually an intermediate verb in
this type of usage. This covers the seemingly odd construction in
Japanese of "mado wo magaru". You see you turn *through* the corner.
It's not the ORIGIN. It's not the DESTINATION. It's along the way.
Therefore it's the ROUTE you take. Therefore, you need "wo"
OBJECT
Objects are followed by "wo" or nothing. "Hon wo yonde iru" (I'm
reading a book.) This is a really simple one in most cases. I really
don't know many Japanese learners who can't understand this concept.
INDIRECT OBJECT
Indirect objects are followed by "ni". By INDIRECT OBJECT, I mean a
sort of secondary object that some verbs take. "Kono hon wo anata ni
ageru." ("I'm going to give this book to you.") You have "this book"
and you have "to you". The "this book" part is the OBJECT. The "to
you" part is the INDIRECT OBJECT. "Wo" and "ni" are used to
distinguish these two. In English, a preposition tends to come before
the indirect object. (Like the "to" before "you" in this example.)
This is the one that in Japanese needs to take "ni".
VERB
Even a verb can take particles. You can use "yo" for exclamations and
"ka" for questions. Most people find this easy. But the real problem
with verbs is that they need to be inflected. There's a big section at
the end of this guide that gives the rules on how to inflect Japanese
verbs. Useful colloquial English equivalents of what those inflections
mean are also given.
IMPORTANT:
To boil this section down, remember it this way:
SUBJECT+wa/ga/nothing (Delete subject if possible, show changes with "wa".)
TIME+ni/nothing (Use nothing if it's a deictic time word.)
PLACE/IMPLEMENT+de (A place where you *do* something or a thing you use.)
LOCATION+ni (A location where someone or something *is*.)
ORIGIN+kara
ROUTE+wo (Part of the path you follow to get somewhere.)
DESTINATION+ni/he (Use "ni" over "he" but be aware that both are okay.)
INDIRECT OBJECT+ni (Use this if you're out of choices. It's often right!)
DIRECT OBJECT+wo
After understanding the descriptions given earlier, these nine lines
are the key to knowing what particle to use 90% of the time. Even if
these rules cause you to make a mistake you're definitely being
understood.
DELETIONS
Usually, you don't have to worry about whether to use wa or ga,
because most subjects can usually be deleted. "You can't get something
wrong, if you leave it out in the first place." That's my philosophy.
So we'll work on the parts of sentences that you can delete, starting
with subjects.
If you turn to a Japanese and suddenly make a statement:
"Ashita paatii ni iku."
("[I'm] going to the party tomorrow.")
The listener will *naturally* assume the subject is you. So don't
bother supplying any subject. To do so, in fact, is not natural; a
(Japanese people delete). When you ask about the listener, you use
"you" (Japanese people delete). When you've first established someone
and then keep going with that person, you use "he" or "she" (Japanese
people delete). See? Simple. So don't go around using "watakushi",
"anata", "kare" and "kanojo" all the time. Okay? Use them the first
time only and then get rid of them.
Deleting other Established Info
Just like with subjects, any info that's been established can be
"Un-n, ikanai."
Particle Ga
philosophy you would have. This one sentence also helps dispell
the huge MYTH that "wa" is for negative sentences. Wipe that myth
from your mind. As a mental exercise, stop and think about why
negative sentences and changes in subject often go hand in hand. In
that you're admitting other possible subjects that might be
construed at that point, but you need to point out the subject that
*you're* talking about to avoid confusion. When you can get your
head around this concept, you will have come to understand "wa"
and "ga".)
Particle Mo
Use mo when you're adding more info on a list of established info. It
may be used alone when marking subjects and objects, and can follow
other particles (like ni, de, and he). Put it this way: if "wa" clears
the understood info and replaces it, "mo" adds extra info on top of
what's already there without clearing out anything.
"Ashita paatii ni iku?"
("[Are you] going to the party tomorrow?")
"Un, iku yo. Kimi wa?"
("Yeah, I'm going. Are you?"--note what was deleted and why.
Look at deletions in the English, too. See any similarities?)
"Boku mo iku."
("I'm going too."--add yourself to the understood subject.)
Mo is easy, so we won't waste any more time with it. Just trying to be
complete and it only took a few lines to do.
VERB CONJUGATIONS
Another thing that many Japanese learners need is an easy method of
arriving at all the verb conjugations and a highly reduced set of
rules for how to get them right on the different types of verbs.
That's easy enough really because there are only three major verb
types: -ru verbs, -u verbs, and -aru verbs (a polite type not much
used except for "gozaru/gozaimasu"). People really hate Eleanor Jorden
for this kind of naming, but in language learning you take what's easy
and go with it; there's no need to worry about theoretical linguistics
here. Also note that I changed romanization styles at this point to
one that makes the changes in verbs appear much more uniform.
-Ru verbs are those that end in -ru like taberu and ireru. There is
always an "i" or an "e" before "ru". "-u" verbs end in u, ku, gu, bu,
mu, nu, su, tu, or [a,i,u,e,o]+ru. See the overlap? It's where "i" or
"e" comes before "ru". Luckily, an ambiguous verb is *usually* a -ru
verb. But to be sure, you should memorize two forms for all "e+ru" and
"i+ru" verbs (e.g. ireru/irete and hairu/haitte), so you can keep them
straight. So here's the process of picking up a new verb. You look in
the dictionary or ask a native speaker.
Q. How do you say "kick"?
A. "keru"
If it had ended in u, ku, gu, bu, mu, nu, su or tu that would be all
the information you need to come up with every inflection. But this
one is "e+ru" so you need to know if it's a -ru verb or an -u verb.
Check by asking for another form.
Q. Do you say "kemasu" or "kerimasu"?
A. You say "kerimasu".
Well, now you know it's an -u verb. If you drop -ru to add -masu,
that's always a -ru verb. If you change -u to -i that's always an -u
verb. Once you know which it is you can make all the inflections you
need just from knowing "keru".
-Ru Verbs
For these verbs, everything is done by dropping or replacing -ru with
something else. Just remember the different uses of each conjugation.
drop -ru to add extensions like -masu (polite), -yasui (easy to): tabe+X
("Tabeyasui". This is easy to eat.)
replace with "-te" for gerund: tabete
(The gerund form is for "and"-ing verbs (eat and go, "tabete iku") and
also for simple orders: Eat that. "Are tabete".)
replace with "-ta" for past tense: tabeta
(I ate it.)
replace with "-tara" for meaning "if": tabetara
(If I/someone eats. often has the feel of "once". once it happens, then...)
replace with "-tari" for meaning "do things like": tabetari
(I did things like eating--"tabetari sita". not really used much)
replace with "-reba" for another "if": tabereba
(If I/someone eats. Much more like an "if" than "-tara" but don't worry
to much about the difference, they're pretty much interchangeable.)
replace with "-yoo" for "let's": tabeyoo
(Let's eat.)
replace with "-ro" for rude orders: tabero
(Eat dammit!)
replace with "-nai" for negative: tabenai
(Note that to order someone *not* to do something you add "de" here.
Don't eat that! "Are tabenai de yo!")
replace with "-rareru" for "can": taberareru <- these are now -ru verbs
(I can't eat this! "kore taberarenai yo!" Good in cafeteria's.)
replace with "-saseru" for "make (someone) do": tabesaseru <- now a -ru verb
("Kore tabesasenai de yo!" Don't make me eat this. A negative request
equal in level to "tabete" is "nai" plus "de", remember?)
replace with "-rareru" for passive "was X-ed": taberareru <- now a -ru verb
(Looks exactly like "can" for this type verb. "Raion ni taberareta."
I was eaten by a lion. Use "ni" for "by" to show the agent of a passive verb.)
replace with "-rareru" for potential "can do X": taberareru <- now a -ru verb
(Looks exactly like passive for this type verb. "natto taberaru?"
Can you eat natto? Get used to this question!!)
replace with "-saserareru" for "be made to": tabesaserareru <- a -ru verb
(This follows from just putting two separate types above together.
My mom made me eat chicken. "Okaasan ni chikin wo tabesaserareta."
Putting it in passive makes you seem like you didn't want to and you
feel sorry for yourself.)
-U Verbals
-RU verbs are by far the easiest to conjugate: you drop -ru and add
something else. Simple. -U verbs aren't that easy but almost.
Typically you drop -u and add something else. The problem is that
there might be a phonetic change (such as when ha becomes pa, or ta
becomes da) for some of the types. See -ru verbs above for simple
English examples of what the conjunctions mean. This part will cover
the conjunction rules for -u verbals only.
Remember, there are some -u verbs that end in -ru. Real -ru verbs
(where -ru gets dropped) always end in "iru" or "eru". Anything else,
like "aru"/be located, "oru"/break and "uru"/sell, must be an -u verb.
For "iru" and "eru" you need to know two forms to be sure. If you see
one that ends in "iru" or "eru", and -u changes to add -masu, or the
"t" doubles to get a gerund (hairu->haitte), then you're dealing with
an -u verb. Otherwise, it's a -ru verb.
There are other verbs that end in -ru that aren't either type. These
are always super-polite oddball verbs like gozaru/gozaimasu and
nasaru/nasaimasu. You can effectively forget about these because they
are only a handful and you can see them coming a mile away. Usually,
just assume anything ending "aru", "uru" or "oru" is an -u verb.)
IMPORTANT: Except for "iru/eru" verbs, every other type of verb
can be identified by hearing only one form.
Including -u verbs which might happen to end in -ru, these are all the
types there are:
-su
-ku (these two types conjugate similarly)
-gu
-bu (these three types conjugate similarly)
-mu
-nu
-ru (these three types conjugate similarly)
-tu
-vowel+u
-su is the only one that is well-behaved. That is, -u will change to
-a, -i, -e or -o depending on the conjugation with no odd behavior to
remember.
Here are the replacements:
replace -u with -i to add extensions like "-masu", "-yasui", etc.
(works straight across, no phonetic changes in any of the types)
hanasu -> hanasi (talk)
kiku -> kiki (walk)
oyogu -> oyogi (swim)
yobu -> yobi (call)
nomu -> nomi (drink)
sinu -> sini (die)
tukuru -> tukuri (make)
matu -> mati (wait)
harau -> harai (pay)
Replace -u with -ite for do "X and Y" and for simple commands.
(types not strictly following the rule, but acting similarly, are grouped)
hanasu -> hanasite (talk)
kiku -> kiite (walk) (replace entire -ku, be sure to use -ite)
oyogu -> oyoide (swim) (replace entire -gu, be sure to use -ide)
yobu -> yonde (call) (replace entire -bu, be sure to use -nde)
nomu -> nonde (drink) (replace entire -mu, be sure to use -nde)
sinu -> sinde (die) (replace entire -nu, be sure to use -nde)
tukuru -> tukutte (make) (replace entire -ru, be sure to use -tte)
matu -> matte (wait) (replace entire -tu, be sure to use -tte)
harau -> haratte (pay) (replace -u, be sure to use -tte)
Replace -u with -ita for past tense.
(types not strictly following the rule, but acting similarly, are grouped)
hanasu -> hanasita (talk)
kiku -> kiita (walk) (replace entire -ku, be sure to use -ita)
oyogu -> oyoida (swim) (replace entire -gu, be sure to use -ida)
yobu -> yonda (call) (replace entire -bu, be sure to use -nda)
nomu -> nonda (drink) (replace entire -mu, be sure to use -nda)
sinu -> sinda (die) (replace entire -nu, be sure to use -nda)
tukuru -> tukutta (make) (replace entire -ru, be sure to use -tta)
matu -> matta (wait) (replace entire -tu, be sure to use -tta)
harau -> haratta (pay) (replace -u, be sure to use -tta)
(In fact, I query search and replaced "e" with "a" on the gerunds to
arrive at the past tense. This is good to know because the rule
breakers are now breaking the rules in a predictable fashion.)
Replace -u with -itara for "if". (Or, just add "ra" to the past.)
(types not strictly following the rule, but acting similarly, are grouped)
hanasu -> hanasitara (talk)
kiku -> kiitara (walk) (replace entire -ku, be sure to use -itara)
oyogu -> oyoidara (swim) (replace entire -gu, be sure to use -idara)
yobu -> yondara (call) (replace entire -bu, be sure to use -ndara)
nomu -> nondara (drink) (replace entire -mu, be sure to use -ndara)
sinu -> sindara (die) (replace entire -nu, be sure to use -ndara)
tukuru -> tukuttara (make) (replace entire -ru, be sure to use -ttara)
matu -> mattara (wait) (replace entire -tu, be sure to use -ttara)
harau -> harattara (pay) (replace -u, be sure to use -ttara)
Replace -u with -itari for "do things like X". (Or just add "ri" to past.)
(types not strictly following the rule, but acting similarly, are grouped)
hanasu -> hanasitari (talk)
kiku -> kiitari (walk) (replace entire -ku, be sure to use -itari)
Most books say that there are only two irregular verbs in all of
Japanese: suru and kuru. Those you have to memorize separately, but
they kind of make sense when you look at them. In fact, though,
there's a third irregular verb: iku. The reason is that unlike kiita
ADJECTIVES
These aren't that hard. They always end in [a,i,u,o]+i. They *never*
end in e+i that would be a noun. Basically you replace "i" with a form
of "ka" to inflect.
yasashii ("It's nice")
yasashiku nai ("It's not nice")
yasashikatta ("It was nice")
yasashikattara ("If it's nice.")
yasashikattari (possible I suppose but not heard often)
yasashikereba ("If it's nice.")
These inflections follow what a "ka+u" verb would do. If you can
conjugate "kau" (to buy) you can conjugate every Japanese adjective.
Just note that you don't say: "atsukaseru" for "make something hot"
you say "atsuku suru". For a command, say: "yasashiku natte" ("be
nice").
Sometimes when you look in a dictionary or ask for an adjective you,
you will find something that doesn't look like an adjective at
all. It's a noun! If you come up with a noun for a word when you
expected an adjective (like "kirei" for "pretty"), just remember that
you use adjectival noun + na + noun to make it work. So, "kirei na
ojoosan" is "pretty girl". Everything else is like a noun. "Kirei da".
"Kirei ja nai", etc.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tad Perry Internet: t...@eskimo.com
CompuServe: 70402,3020
NIFTY-Serve: GBG01266
------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
Natsu Sakimura
Now, I am going to sit and read it!
Thanks a lot again.
Natsu
dpmac...@csupomona.edu
Me too. From the sound of the discussion, it seems to be a good
guide.
By the way, my e-mail address is:
Thanks.
Darwin