ringo ga tabetai
John O'Conner
ringo wo tabetai.
Obviously "wo" is marking ringo as a direct object.
However, I have also heard this:
ringo ga tabetai.
Now, "ga" is marking ringo as the subject.
Why can this second construction be used. Is this incorrect?
******************************
John O'Conner
Email: JOCo...@novell.com
Of course, I speak for myself.
******************************
Reuben Muns
>Typically, if I want to eat an apple I say the following:
>ringo wo tabetai.
>Obviously "wo" is marking ringo as a direct object.
>However, I have also heard this:
>ringo ga tabetai.
>Now, "ga" is marking ringo as the subject.
>Why can this second construction be used. Is this incorrect?
It's the way to respond to a question like "What would you like to
eat". Note that this construction places the emphasis on "apple",
whereas with "wo" the emphasis is on the verb "wish to eat".
Reuben
Chris Brockett
wrote:
> Typically, if I want to eat an apple I say the following:
> ringo wo tabetai.
> Obviously "wo" is marking ringo as a direct object.
>
> However, I have also heard this:
> ringo ga tabetai.
> Now, "ga" is marking ringo as the subject.
>
> Why can this second construction be used. Is this incorrect?
>
This is something that usually comes up in first-year Japanese. Were you
skipping classes that day? <g>
Briefly (and cutting a lot of corners), there are several things going on
with these constructions.
1) The addition of /-ta-i/ to the verb stem /tabe-/ converts the verb into
an adjectival form. As a result, the thing that gets eaten can be
expressed grammatically either in relation to the verb or the adjectival
ending.
ringo o tabe- ta -i
| |
--------
ringo ga tabe- ta -i
| |
-------------
Syntacticians express this relationship in a somewhat more complex
fashion, but this will do for present purposes.
2) In the spoken language, /o/ and /ga/ indicate focus (emphasis) on /ringo/.
/ga/ typically has a stronger focus, usually indicating that /ringo/ is
THE single complete answer (to an imaginary question, as it were). Leaving
these particles out indicates no focus on /ringo/.
ringo tabetai
'I want to eat an apple.' (i.e., this is what I want to do)
ringo o tabetai
'I want to eat an APPLE.' (i.e., this is what I want to eat)
ringo ga tabetai
'an APPLE is what I want to eat.' (i.e., this is what I want to eat)
ringo tabetai hito, doozo
'anyone who wants an apple, go ahead'
ringo ga tabetai hito, doozo
'those people who want an APPLE, here you are'
In the written language, these distinctions are neutralized because the
particle (usually /ga/) must be put in. (This is one reason why it is very
hard to learn Japanese on the basis of the written language: important
communicative distinctions are lost in writing.)
Incidentally, the intuitions of linguistically-naive Japanese native
speakers may not always be too good on things like this. You might
consider your own shaky intuitions about stress and intonation patterns in
English to see what I mean. You need to talk to people who have thought a
lot about grammar and usage in a non-prescriptive fashion.
3) /Ringo o tabetai/ is the newer pattern and is mostly found in spoken
language. A couple of decades ago, if you encountered /ringo ___ tabetai/
in a Japanese language exam, the correct answer was considered to be /ga/,
and students were marked incorrect if they inserted /o/ in the slot. Many
older people (30+) are still likely to tell you that /o/ is wrong, or "not
good Japanese."
The above is very sketchy. I hope it helps.
Chris
--
Chris Brockett
"Linguist-at-large"
chri...@halcyon.com
J-kNight
Doumo konnichiwa(means like "hi" in Japanese)
>Typically, if I want to eat an apple I say the following:
>ringo wo tabetai.
>Obviously "wo" is marking ringo as a direct object.
>However, I have also heard this:
>ringo ga tabetai.
>Now, "ga" is marking ringo as the subject.
>Why can this second construction be used. Is this incorrect?
These are both correct. You know the "ha" and "ga" probably make anyone
confusing. The "wo" and "ga", these are like the "ha" and "ga" problem.
I GUESS( I mean I don't know correct English) the defference is:
vv
In Jpn. Ringo wo tabe tai desu.
In Eng. I would like to eat an apple.
vv
In Jpn. Ringo ga tabe tai desu.
In Eng. I want to eat an apple.
You must remember JUST I GUESS and I DON'T UNDERSTAND ENGLISH.
J-kNight
Who doesn't understand English, and guesses probably can teach Japanese,
however, do without telling the meaning in English.
Steve Frampton
: Typically, if I want to eat an apple I say the following:
: ringo wo tabetai.
: Obviously "wo" is marking ringo as a direct object.
: However, I have also heard this:
: ringo ga tabetai.
: Now, "ga" is marking ringo as the subject.
They are interchangable in this case. Normally "ga" is used, however.
----------------< LINUX: The choice of a GNU generation. >-----------------
Steve Frampton, Computer Services Operator <fram...@mail.flarc.edu.on.ca>
Frontenac-Lennox & Addington County RCSSB Kingston, Ontario CANADA
I am J.T
>>>>>> On Mon, 08 Jan 1996 12:16:59 -0800, John O'Conner <joco...@novell.com> said:
>John> Typically, if I want to eat an apple I say the following:
>John> ringo wo tabetai.
>John> Obviously "wo" is marking ringo as a direct object.
>John> However, I have also heard this:
>John> ringo ga tabetai.
>John> Now, "ga" is marking ringo as the subject.
>John> Why can this second construction be used. Is this incorrect?
>I think you are on very shaky ground with your statement above
>"Obviously 'wo' is ... a direct object [marker]".
>"wo" maps out a very complex relationship between "ringo" and
>"tabetai" that cannot be described completely accurately as "direct
>object marker".
>"ringo ga tabetai" is a correct construction, and in different
>contexts has different meanings from "ringo wo tabetai".
>If your problem with it is that "ga" is marking an object for a
>verbal, then let me point out that "tabetai" is no longer a verbal but
>rather an adjectival. It is conjugated "tabeta -i, -katta, -kunai,
>-kunakatta, -kute-" etc., and now takes the distal marker "desu"
>rather than a "-masu" ending.
>So, one way of looking at it is that with "wo", the ringo relates to
>the verbal root of tabetai, and with "ga" to the adjectival aspect.
>Regards,
>Kenton
By the way you linguistics wizards, I've live in Japan for 4 years
and have never heard anyone say "wo" I think you probably mean "o"
JT
john...@gol.com
Scott Reynolds
>
> John O'Conner (joco...@novell.com) wrote:
> : Typically, if I want to eat an apple I say the following:
> : ringo wo tabetai.
> : Obviously "wo" is marking ringo as a direct object.
>
> : However, I have also heard this:
> : ringo ga tabetai.
> : Now, "ga" is marking ringo as the subject.
>
> They are interchangable in this case. Normally "ga" is used, however.
They are not interchangeable. I advise you to consult any Japanese
grammar book. The sentence "ringo wo tabetai" would be considered
ungrammatical by most native speakers of Japanese.
__________________________________________________________________
Scott Reynolds s...@tezcat.com
Chuck Douglas
[heavy edit]
: By the way you linguistics wizards, I've live in Japan for 4 years
Well of course no one speaking modern Japanese says "wo." This is a romaji
convention to represent the particle the is pronounced "o" in modern Japanese
but used to be pronounced "wo." This is to distinguish it from the "o"
syllable.
I am sure this was painfully obvious to everyone else reading this thread.
We are unfortunately tied down to using ASCII terminals and have to use
such conventions.
--
Chuck Douglas -- chuc...@prairienet.org
"I don't pretend I have all the answers/Just the obvious ones"
--_Backbone_ by Baby Animals
Homepage now available at: http://jaka.nn.com/~chuckers
Sj Pover
JM>ringo wo tabetai.
JM>Obviously "wo" is marking ringo as a direct object.
JM>However, I have also heard this:
JM>ringo ga tabetai.
JM>Now, "ga" is marking ringo as the subject.
JM>Why can this second construction be used. Is this incorrect?
Hi John,
It is my understanding that the <verb stem>tai structure behaves
more like an adjective than like a verb and is inflected like an
adjective. Hence, ringo ga tabetai desu is correct and I suspect that
any construct involving <noun> ga <verb stem>tai has either a real
or implied copula at the end.
This results for me, is a translation somwhat along the lines of,
"An apple is what I want to eat."
I don't know if ringo wo tabetai desu is correct but it doesn't
_sound_ right. But then what do I know?!
I would be interested in hearing from native Japanese speakers
regarding this and what, if any shading of meaning exists between
ringo _ga_ tabetai and ringo _wo_ tabetai (not to mention ringo wa
tabetai) <grin>.
The more I study the less I understand. Looking forward to your
correstions.
---
* DeLuxe2/386 1.25 #10827 * I tried the rest but bought the best!!!!
I am J.T
I'm sorry Chuck I'm not that familar with the romaji . Most people
who study Japanese (in Japan) are probably not that familiar with the
wo romaji. We tend to learn the hiragana and katakana which is
pronounced "o" As you probably know the "wo" sound doesn't really
exist in the spoken language.
I also have never seen the sound "wo" in any romaji dictionaries here
in Japan. I have studied Japanese at a school for 3 years here in
Japan and have never come across this version of the particle "o"
Thanks for letting me know about this.
JT
Peter A. Bryzgalov
> Typically, if I want to eat an apple I say the following:
> Obviously "wo" is marking ringo as a direct object.
>
> Now, "ga" is marking ringo as the subject.
>
(according to my 4-year-long experience).
'ga' often indicates a subject. Some examples:
Watashi wa momo ga suki. - I like peaches.
Zou wa hana ga nagai. - An elephant has a long nose.
Kare no iu koto ga wakaranai. - I don't undestand what he's saying.
etc.
Best regards,
Peter
---
Peter Bryzgalov Internet : Pe...@bryzgalov.msk.ru
Fidonet : 2:5020/135.31
Natsumi Aratame
> John O'Conner <joco...@novell.com> wrote:
> JM>Typically, if I want to eat an apple I say the following:
> JM>ringo wo tabetai.
> JM>However, I have also heard this:
> JM>ringo ga tabetai.
> JM>Why can this second construction be used. Is this incorrect?
>
Both are correct. However, I sense the following connotation behind:
Ringo wo tabetai.
I would really like to eat an apple among others (more assertive, more
specific; I may not eat other choices, oranges, bananas, etc., if an
apple is not available).
Ringo ga tabetai.
I would like to eat an apple (less assertive, less specific; I may eat
other choices if apple is not available).
Since both ends with the verb(?) expressing one's desire, the difference
to me is not the meaning ("I want to eat an apple") they convey but that of
tone.
My wife is in the same opinion.
By the way, "wo" is also correct. When "o" is used as "te ni o ha"
(or particle) as in the above, it is the rule to write (in Japanese)
using the "o" character of wa i u e o. Otherwise, you will use the "o"
of a i u e o (in modern Japanese.) So "wo" and "o" have been used
historically to destinguish the two usage when romanized.
However, you can use o everywhere, and it IS correct too according to my
dictionary (Nihongo Daijiten, Kodansha).
Hope it helps.
Natsumi & Sumiko
I am J.T
>I agree that this is the case in speech. However I'm curious because I
>also sing in a Japanese choir and on occasion I have been instructed
>to sing "wo".
>Now it could be that this was a deliberate archaism. (For comparison,
>when singing English church music of certain composers of the 16th
>century it is standard to sing a word like "salvation" as four
>syllables: sal-vay-see-on.) In one case the lyrics were by Daigaku
>Horiguchi, a Meiji(?) era writer.
>However the reason given by the conductor (in Japanese) was "to aid
>intelligibility". This would only make sense if Japanese recognised
>"wo" from somewhere. Is "wo" only used in songs or is it sometimes used
>in speech (e.g. by people from the country, old people, actors in
>period films)?
>Cheers,
>Mark B.
I'm sure this is probably the case. I'm not disputing the extistence
of the Romaji "wo" I'm that it is totally irrelevant these days.
However, as you pointed out. In a choir the situation might be alot
different because you are singing the words. In this case I can
totally understand it.
Thanks alot.
_____ _____
| |
| |
___| . |
john...@gol.com ____________________________________________
Ben Bullock
> I advise you to consult "A Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar"(p348)by
> Seiichi Makino and Michio Tsutsui, (The Japan Times) for some examples
> of o/ga alternations and Kuno (1973) for a reasonably good explanation
> of what's going on. There are other explanations but I don't have the
> references in my head and these are OK for a start.
What is Kuno (1973)? If this is a book then please send me the details.
--
Ben Bullock @ KEK (national lab. for high energy physics, Tsukuba, Japan)
e-mail: b...@theory.kek.jp www: http://theory.kek.jp:80/~ben/
1-1 Oho, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305, Japan. tel: 0298 64 5403, fax: 0298 64 7831
travis reems
>: ringo wo tabetai.
>: Obviously "wo" is marking ringo as a direct object.
>
>: ringo ga tabetai.
>: Now, "ga" is marking ringo as the subject.
>
>
>-----------------
>Steve Frampton, Computer Services Operator
<fram...@mail.flarc.edu.on.ca>
>Frontenac-Lennox & Addington County RCSSB Kingston, Ontario CANADA
Your Name
["ringo o tabetai" vs "ringo ga tabetai"]
>> They are interchangable in this case. Normally "ga" is used,
>>however.
Scott Reynolds <s...@tezcat.com> responded:
>They are not interchangeable. I advise you to consult any Japanese
>grammar book. The sentence "ringo wo tabetai" would be considered
>ungrammatical by most native speakers of Japanese.
I advise you to consult "A Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar"(p348)by
Seiichi Makino and Michio Tsutsui, (The Japan Times) for some examples
of o/ga alternations and Kuno (1973) for a reasonably good explanation
of what's going on. There are other explanations but I don't have the
references in my head and these are OK for a start.
Just a hunch, but I suspect the basis of the alternation has as much to
do with discourse (the flow of the conversation) as reference. So if
someone asks "nani o tabetai?" then "ringo o tabetai" is more likely
than "ringo ga tabetai" (not that this is impossible, mind, nor that
there are not other alternatives). This doesn't explain the form of the
original question, but it might help a little.
If you want to say "nani o/ga tabetai?" but are really worried about
which to use, try something else like "nanika tabetai no?" You'll
probably still get the answer you want. :)
john reeves
(jre...@extro.ucc.su.oz.au)
Charles Eicher
> Just a hunch, but I suspect the basis of the alternation has as much to
> do with discourse (the flow of the conversation) as reference. So if
> someone asks "nani o tabetai?" then "ringo o tabetai" is more likely
> than "ringo ga tabetai" (not that this is impossible, mind, nor that
> there are not other alternatives). This doesn't explain the form of the
> original question, but it might help a little.
>
> If you want to say "nani o/ga tabetai?" but are really worried about
> which to use, try something else like "nanika tabetai no?" You'll
> probably still get the answer you want. :)
>
> john reeves
> (jre...@extro.ucc.su.oz.au)
Un, excuse me, but wouldn't that be 'nanika meshiagarimasu ka' or 'nanika
tabemasu ka'...? I was taught that it is extremely rude to directly
inquire as to someone's desires, and so you should never use the -tai form
when asking if someone desires something, so you should ask indirectly,
possibly using exalted forms. So, it would be proper to ask 'will you eat
something?' rather than 'do you WANT to eat something?'.. In this case,
your "nani o tabetai?" would be a rather rare statement.
It seems, mr. reeves, you have been reading the wrong pages of "A
Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar", which has a separate section on
-tai forms (page 442), with extensive notes on o vs ga. For example, it
says "In general, the choice between o and ga seems to depend on degree of
desire. That is, when the degree of desire is high, ga is preferred, when
low, o is used." And there are exceptions of course, like "mizu o nomitai
ga.. [nomemasen]" where you must use o because it would sound odd if you
used ga. And the book goes on for at least another page and a half with
exceptions and further rules.
----------------
Charles Eicher
cei...@inav.net
----------------
Yoko
is natural. But becuase of an original verb, people also use "o". I
think "ga" is used for an emotional or singling out situation. But this
is juse tendency.
When a verb is a Chinese compound, "o" is more common.
e.g. Hondana o koobai shitai (I want to buy a bookcase).
In written Japanese particle "o" is written by "wo". We used to have "o"
and "wo". But today "wo" is pronounced "o". e.g. "Otoko" was used to
be "wotoko"
Yoko
is...@binah.cc.brandeis.edu
>Steve Frampton wrote:
>>
>> John O'Conner (joco...@novell.com) wrote:
>> : Typically, if I want to eat an apple I say the following:
>> : ringo wo tabetai.
>> : Obviously "wo" is marking ringo as a direct object.
>>
>> : However, I have also heard this:
>> : ringo ga tabetai.
>> : Now, "ga" is marking ringo as the subject.
>>
>
>grammar book. The sentence "ringo wo tabetai" would be considered
>ungrammatical by most native speakers of Japanese.
>Scott Reynolds s...@tezcat.com
I am a native Japanese speaker.
"ringo wo tabetai" is perfectly correct.
"ringo wo tabetai" and "ringo ga tabetai" can have slightly different
meanings.
"ringo wo tabetai" simply means "(I) want to eat an apple."
"ringo ga tabetai" can also be used that way, but in some case it
implies that "(I) want to eat an apple, rather than an orange."
"ringo" in this case is not the subject in the sense of Europian language.
It is said that the subject is often omitted in a sentence of Japanese.
In Europian languages it seems that subject-verb is the minimal unit of
a sentence, but I read somewhere that in Japanese the connection between
the subject and the verb is not that strong and "ga", "wo", "ha(wa)", etc.
are used to specify the relationship between the noun and the verb, and/or
between several nouns.
Haruhiko
David Luke
|> Your Name (user...@postoffice.sandybay.utas.edu.au) wrote:
|>
|> > I advise you to consult "A Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar"(p348)by
|> > Seiichi Makino and Michio Tsutsui, (The Japan Times) for some examples
|> > of o/ga alternations and Kuno (1973) for a reasonably good explanation
|> > of what's going on. There are other explanations but I don't have the
|> > references in my head and these are OK for a start.
|>
If I remember right, the details are:
Kuno, Susumu. "Structure of the Japanese Language", University of
Tokyo, 1971.
The title and author are right, anyway. It's been a few years since I've
seen this.
The quick summary is that Kuno considers things that act like objects in an
English sentence to be objects, rather than subjects. In other words, "ringo"
in "ringo ga tabetai", "Nihongo" in "Nihongo ga wakaru", "Eigo" in "Eigo ga
dekinai", etc. are considered to be "ga-marked direct objects". He makes an
argument as to why this is a better analysis than to consider them as subjects,
which is what they look like from the "ga marks subjects, wo marks objects"
point of view.
Personally, while I'm not a linguist and can't argue his reasoning on his
level, I tend to think there is merit to viewing these things that Kuno
calls "objects" as subjects. I think it's a reflection of the tendency in
the Japanese language towards objectivity and distance -- "Hanako is
likable", vs. the active "I like Hanako" (related, IMO, to the greater
frequency of passive usage in Japanese vs. English).
It also seems to be changing. There seems to be a trend towards phrases
like "ringo wo tabetai", "Hanako wo suki da", etc. My theory (backed up
by no research, only personal experience) is that this is a result of the
"Westernization" of Japanese thinking, the tendency to be more direct and
active rather than passive and detached.
Just my 2.1 yen worth...
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Luke Last year I resolved to stop procrastinating,
lu...@in-system.com but I never got around to working on it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Naoto Horii
kg...@cactus.lle.rochester.edu (Kenton Green) wrote:
] >>>>> On Mon, 08 Jan 1996 12:16:59 -0800, John O'Conner
<joco...@novell.com> said:
] John> Typically, if I want to eat an apple I say the following:
] John> ringo wo tabetai.
] John> Obviously "wo" is marking ringo as a direct object.
]
] John> However, I have also heard this:
] John> ringo ga tabetai.
] John> Now, "ga" is marking ringo as the subject.
]
] John> Why can this second construction be used. Is this incorrect?
]
] I think you are on very shaky ground with your statement above
] "Obviously 'wo' is ... a direct object [marker]".
]
] "wo" maps out a very complex relationship between "ringo" and
] "tabetai" that cannot be described completely accurately as "direct
] object marker".
]
] "ringo ga tabetai" is a correct construction, and in different
] contexts has different meanings from "ringo wo tabetai".
]
] If your problem with it is that "ga" is marking an object for a
] verbal, then let me point out that "tabetai" is no longer a verbal but
] rather an adjectival. It is conjugated "tabeta -i, -katta, -kunai,
] -kunakatta, -kute-" etc., and now takes the distal marker "desu"
] rather than a "-masu" ending.
]
] So, one way of looking at it is that with "wo", the ringo relates to
] the verbal root of tabetai, and with "ga" to the adjectival aspect.
]
] Regards,
]
] Kenton
Bulls-eye, Kenton-san.
The most common english translation for "Ringo wo tabetai" would be "I'd
like to eat the apple"
Such a sentence would be used in a context where the apple in question
has usually been referred to earlier in the conversation. Ringo has thus
a very "object"-ish flavor here.
With "Ringo ga tabetai", ringo qualifies the tabetai.
This sentence could roughly be translated as "I feel like eating an
apple", and the sentence makes sense without any need for a prior
reference to an apple.
Cheers,
Naoto
L.C. Scholz
In article <DL032...@inssun.ins.u-tokyo.ac.jp> Mark Barton
wrote:
>Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 04:56:48 GMT
>From: Mark Barton <mba...@icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp>
>Sender: ne...@inssun.ins.u-tokyo.ac.jp
>Newsgroups: sci.lang.japan
>Subject: wo vs o
>
>>From: Chuck Douglas, chuc...@prairienet.org
>years
>>: and have never heard anyone say "wo" I think you probably
mean "o"
>>: JT
>>: john...@gol.com
>
>>Well of course no one speaking modern Japanese says "wo." This
is a
>romaji
>>convention to represent the particle the is pronounced "o" in
modern
>Japanese
>>but used to be pronounced "wo." This is to distinguish it from
the
>"o"
>>syllable.
>>
>>I am sure this was painfully obvious to everyone else reading
this
>thread.
>>We are unfortunately tied down to using ASCII terminals and have
to
>use
>>such conventions.
>
>I agree that this is the case in speech. However I'm curious
because I
>also sing in a Japanese choir and on occasion I have been
instructed
>to sing "wo".
>
>Now it could be that this was a deliberate archaism. (For
comparison,
>when singing English church music of certain composers of the
16th
>century it is standard to sing a word like "salvation" as four
>syllables: sal-vay-see-on.) In one case the lyrics were by
Daigaku
>Horiguchi, a Meiji(?) era writer.
>
>However the reason given by the conductor (in Japanese) was "to
aid
>intelligibility". This would only make sense if Japanese
recognised
>"wo" from somewhere. Is "wo" only used in songs or is it
sometimes used
>in speech (e.g. by people from the country, old people, actors in
>period films)?
>
>Cheers,
>
>Mark B.
I have also noticed that Japanese POP/rock & roll singers
sometimes say wo. I thought that it was to help the musical
phrasing rather than the verbal intelligibility. Cannot remember
the artists (young women) but it had subtitles in Kanji/kana so I
am sure of the lyrics.
Thirty years experience may unfortunately be one year repeated thirty times.
Scott Reynolds
>
> In article <30F405...@tezcat.com>, Scott Reynolds <s...@tezcat.com> writes:
> >They are not interchangeable. I advise you to consult any Japanese
> >grammar book. The sentence "ringo wo tabetai" would be considered
> >ungrammatical by most native speakers of Japanese.
> I am a native Japanese speaker.
> "ringo wo tabetai" is perfectly correct.
>
> "ringo wo tabetai" and "ringo ga tabetai" can have slightly different
> meanings.
> "ringo wo tabetai" simply means "(I) want to eat an apple."
> "ringo ga tabetai" can also be used that way, but in some case it
> implies that "(I) want to eat an apple, rather than an orange."
Thank you for your explanation. I am aware that there are cases
in which "ringo wo tabetai" is not unacceptable. Unfortunately,
statements such as "I am a native Japanese speaker. 'ringo wo
tabetai' is perfectly correct" imply that this is the normal
way to say "I want to eat an apple" in Japanese. But it isn't.
As you point out later in your post, what "ringo wo tabetai"
really means is something like "AN APPLE is what I want to eat"
(i.e., not an orange). I worded my post too strongly, I suppose,
but I really wanted to emphasize that "wo" and "ga" are NOT
interchangeable in sentences of this type.
My advice to the people learning Japanese who brought this up
would be, when in doubt, use "ga."
What do others think?
__________________________________________________________________
Scott Reynolds s...@tezcat.com
Benjamin Barrett
In article <4d6iv3$6...@news-e1a.megaweb.com> L.C. Scholz wrote:
>I have also noticed that Japanese POP/rock & roll singers
>sometimes say wo. I thought that it was to help the musical
>phrasing rather than the verbal intelligibility. Cannot remember
>the artists (young women) but it had subtitles in Kanji/kana so I
>am sure of the lyrics.
>Thirty years experience may unfortunately be one year repeated thirty
> times.
>
(I don't know if it's imitation of the English wo-o-oh in singing or not)
but in songs, it's written with a katakana u followed with a small katakana
o, so it isn't (or shouldn't) be related to wo.
yoroshiku
Benjamin Barrett
Naoto Horii
] chuc...@prairienet.org (Chuck Douglas) wrote:
]
] >J.T (john...@gol.com) wrote:
] >[heavy edit]
] >: By the way you linguistics wizards, I've live in Japan for 4 years
] >: and have never heard anyone say "wo" I think you probably mean "o"
] >: JT
] >: john...@gol.com
]
] >Well of course no one speaking modern Japanese says "wo." This is a
romaji
] >convention to represent the particle the is pronounced "o" in modern
Japanese
] >but used to be pronounced "wo." This is to distinguish it from the
"o"
] >syllable.
]
] >I am sure this was painfully obvious to everyone else reading this
thread.
] >We are unfortunately tied down to using ASCII terminals and have to
use
] >such conventions.
]
]
] I'm sorry Chuck I'm not that familar with the romaji . Most
people
] who study Japanese (in Japan) are probably not that familiar with the
] wo romaji. We tend to learn the hiragana and katakana which is
] pronounced "o" As you probably know the "wo" sound doesn't really
] exist in the spoken language.
] I also have never seen the sound "wo" in any romaji
dictionaries here
] in Japan. I have studied Japanese at a school for 3 years here in
] Japan and have never come across this version of the particle "o"
] Thanks for letting me know about this.
] JT
]
] john...@gol.com
Th "wo" character was *really* pronounced "wo" in the past. I don't
really know when the sound "wo" merged with "o" - ages ago, probably -,
but even now it would be quite acceptable to pronounce "Ringo wo taberu"
instead of "Ringo o taberu"
There are actually three of these "w-" vowels - "wo", "wi" and "we",
which were quite different from the "o", "i" and "e" - but you are
unlikely to encounter anything other than the "wo" in modern Japanese.
The character codes are:
Hiragana-wo: JIS 2472 を
Katakana-wo: JIS 2572 ヲ
Hiragana-wi: JIS 2470 ゐ
Katakana-wi: JIS 2570 ヰ
Hiragana-we: JIS 2471 ゑ
Katakana-we: JIS 2571 ヱ
Even though the pronounciations are indistinguishable, it would be as
erroneous in Japanese to write "o" were a "wo" would be required as, say,
writing a simple "a" were an "a-grave" would be required in French or
substituting an "s" for a "scharfes Ess/beta" in German.
..Naoto
Reuben Muns
>By the way you linguistics wizards, I've live in Japan for 4 years
>and have never heard anyone say "wo" I think you probably mean "o"
No, they mean "wo". Although it's pronounced "o", it's written with
the hiragana "wo". Ditto the particle pronounced "wa" -- it's written
with the hiragana "ha". Cf the English word "Wednesday" -- spelled
"historically" rather than "phonetically".
Reuben
Unknown
>Reuben
Yes I have since learned this since joining this newsgroup however, in
my four years in Japan I have never seen it written as wo or ha in
romaji. The romaji is usually written the way it sounds O and WA.
Why is it that most of the people in this newsgroup use the WO romaji
instead of O.. Just curious, .
Chris Brockett
> rm...@primenet.com (Reuben Muns) wrote:
>
> >john...@gol.com (I am J.T) wrote:
>
> >>By the way you linguistics wizards, I've live in Japan for 4 years
> >>and have never heard anyone say "wo" I think you probably mean "o"
>
> >No, they mean "wo". Although it's pronounced "o", it's written with
> >the hiragana "wo". Ditto the particle pronounced "wa" -- it's written
> >with the hiragana "ha". Cf the English word "Wednesday" -- spelled
> >"historically" rather than "phonetically".
>
> >Reuben
>
> Yes I have since learned this since joining this newsgroup however, in
> my four years in Japan I have never seen it written as wo or ha in
> romaji. The romaji is usually written the way it sounds O and WA.
> Why is it that most of the people in this newsgroup use the WO romaji
> instead of O.. Just curious, .
>
To understand what is going on, it is useful to distinguish between
TRANSLITERATION and TRANSCRIPTION.
Use of letter sequences such as "wo" for /o/, "ha" for /wa/ and "ou" for
/oo/ is called TRANSLITERATION. It takes the formal values of the symbol
system of one written language and transfers those mechanistically into
the symbol system of another without reference the contextual
pronunciation of symbol in the source language. By "formal values," I mean
where isolated symbols appear in a kana table.
Use of forms like /o/, /wa/ and /oo/ is called TRANSCRIPTION. It takes the
values of words as they are pronounced in speech and converts them into a
system by which that pronunciation can be represented in another symbol
set. Linguists normally use some form of transcription system, the media
another, and non-linguistic scholarly writings yet another.
The use of TRANSLITERATION on this newsgroup is something that has sprung
up more or less spontaneously on the net over the last several years. As
far as I can make out, its prevalence appears to result from a mix of
factors:
i. Familiarity with Japanese word processors, since "wo," "ha" and
"ou" are the alphabetic symbol sequences have to be typed in in order to
get the right output (force of habit);
ii. Unfamiliarity with standard transcription systems, owing to a
large population of net-users who are either self-taught in Japanese, or
learned in Japan without learning regular Roman transcriptions;
iii. An ideological position that the Japanese written language is
the real Japanese ("transferred nationalism"); and
iv. Related to iii., a desire to show that the writer would really
like to be using Japanese script on the computer, but is being forced to
use Roman script;
v. The emergence of digitized dictionaries that use transliteration
rather than transcription, partly as a result of pressures from i. through
iv. above.
Someone should do a study of this from the perspective of complexity
theory and emergent self-organizing systems. <g>
Cheers,
Chris Brockett
Gerald B Mathias
(for those who think the latter is some new, loose grammar, the
_Kokubunpoo_ written for jukensei which I bought in 1957 says both are
correct) suggest that one or the other (I don't think everyone has agreed
which) represents what Kuno might have called "exhaustive listing" vs.
"neutral description." That is, one names what it is that you want to eat,
the other expresses what you want to do.
If that is the case, then of the two questions
nani-ga tabetai
nani-o tabetai
one (the one that asks what you want to eat, since both would be bizarre
in the sense of "what do you want to do?") should be far more natural
than the other.
They seem equally natural to me. If so, the difference in meaning has to
be more subtle than what was suggested.
Bart Mathias
Takuji Tanaka
: On Fri, 12 Jan 1996, Russ Vanderpool wrote:
: > X ga *tai da is grammatically correct.
: ^^
: Actually, no, it isn't. You don't use "da" with an adjective. The direct
: form of an adjective is just the adjective. The distal form uses "desu".
: For example:
: tabetai is direct
: tabetai desu is distal
Japanese use "da" with an adjective. But they introduce "onbin" (sorry,
I do not know the English word for this.) to do that.
tabetain da
^
TANAKA Takuji
Takuji Tanaka
(---snip---)
: There are actually three of these "w-" vowels - "wo", "wi" and "we",
: which were quite different from the "o", "i" and "e" - but you are
: unlikely to encounter anything other than the "wo" in modern Japanese.
: The character codes are:
: Hiragana-wo: JIS 2472 を
: Katakana-wo: JIS 2572 ヲ
: Hiragana-wi: JIS 2470 ゐ
: Katakana-wi: JIS 2570 ヰ
: Hiragana-we: JIS 2471 ゑ
: Katakana-we: JIS 2571 ヱ
I never heard "wi" and "we". I guess you mean "yi" and "ye", don't you?
TANAKA Takuji
Reuben Muns
>Yes I have since learned this since joining this newsgroup however, in
>my four years in Japan I have never seen it written as wo or ha in
>romaji. The romaji is usually written the way it sounds O and WA.
>Why is it that most of the people in this newsgroup use the WO romaji
>instead of O.. Just curious, .
Probably because that's the way these two kana are usually entered
into Japanese word processors, such as JWP.
Reuben
Reuben Muns
>is...@binah.cc.brandeis.edu wrote:
>>
>> meanings.
>> "ringo wo tabetai" simply means "(I) want to eat an apple."
>> "ringo ga tabetai" can also be used that way, but in some case it
>> implies that "(I) want to eat an apple, rather than an orange."
>As you point out later in your post, what "ringo wo tabetai"
>really means is something like "AN APPLE is what I want to eat"
>(i.e., not an orange). I worded my post too strongly, I suppose,
>but I really wanted to emphasize that "wo" and "ga" are NOT
>interchangeable in sentences of this type.
If you will kindly re-read the original post versus your reply, you
will note that you have it backwards. The "ga" form is the apples vs.
oranges form. The "wo" form is a simple statement of fact.
Reuben
Mark Crispin
> Mark Crispin (m...@CAC.Washington.EDU) wrote:
> : You don't use "da" with an adjective.
> Japanese use "da" with an adjective. But they introduce "onbin" (sorry,
> I do not know the English word for this.) to do that.
>
> tabetain da
> ^
Yes, of course. But this is a different grammatical pattern. The use of
"n" (or "no") followed by a copula (desu, da, de) permits the use of a
verb or adjective, and denies the use of a noun (or rather, it changes the
meaning; "inu desu" => "it's a dog" vs. "inu no desu" => "it's the
dog's").
The distal copula is irregular in that it permits either a noun or an
adjective. Normally, adjectives are bunched with verbs, not nouns.
-- Mark --
DoD #0105, R90/6 pilot, FAX: (206) 685-4045 ICBM: N 47 39'35" W 122 18'39"
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Scott Reynolds
> X ga *tai da is grammatically correct.
Are you also going to claim that sentences like "akai da" or
"samui da" are correct?
"X ga *tai da" is NOT grammatically correct.
__________________________________________________________________
Scott Reynolds s...@tezcat.com
Don Kirkman
>Mark Crispin (m...@CAC.Washington.EDU) wrote:
>: On Fri, 12 Jan 1996, Russ Vanderpool wrote:
>: > X ga *tai da is grammatically correct.
>: ^^
>
>: Actually, no, it isn't. You don't use "da" with an adjective. The direct
>: form of an adjective is just the adjective. The distal form uses "desu".
>: For example:
>: tabetai is direct
>: tabetai desu is distal
>
>
>Japanese use "da" with an adjective. But they introduce "onbin" (sorry,
>I do not know the English word for this.) to do that.
>
> tabetain da
> ^
Good catch! And of course tabetain da <-- teabetai no desu. But I
guess I don't understand Mark's willingness to use "desu" but not "da,"
since they're forms of the same verb that differ primarily in social
connotation.
---
Don Kirkman
If I had a life I'd be having a mid-life crisis
Don Kirkman
>Naoto Horii (N...@oto.Horii.Be) wrote:
>(---snip---)
>: There are actually three of these "w-" vowels - "wo", "wi" and "we",
>: which were quite different from the "o", "i" and "e" - but you are
>: unlikely to encounter anything other than the "wo" in modern Japanese.
>
>I never heard "wi" and "we". I guess you mean "yi" and "ye", don't you?
No, there are slots in the syllabary (kana) table for:
ya yi yu ye yo
and for
wa wi wu we wo
Some pronunciations have dropped out (changed), though, so it isn't
surprising you haven't heard them.
Andrew Dopieralski
>Japanese use "da" with an adjective. But they introduce "onbin" (sorry,
>I do not know the English word for this.) to do that.
> tabetain da
> ^
>TANAKA Takuji
Would this be the informal equivelant of 'X o tabetain desu ga'?
Sj Pover
year. She was a young woman in her 20's born and educated in Japan.
I thought I noticed a slight "w" beginning to her pronunciation of
the particle "wo". I didn't hear it all the time and only when she
was speaking artificially slowly and distinctly. (The only way I can
understand spoken Japanese <G>)
Does anyone have any thoughts on this, or was I hearing things?
Also, is it my imagination or does the proper pronunciation of Japanese
involve far less lip movement than English?
---
* DeLuxe2/386 1.25 #10827 * I tried the rest but bought the best!!!!
Reuben Muns
>I never heard "wi" and "we". I guess you mean "yi" and "ye", don't you?
I hope someone can answer this question. The Okinawans in the
early 1950's pronounced several words with "ye" which were
pronounced with "e" in Japan. For example movie -- "yeiga". The
kana used was the kana "e" with a hook in it (in the katakana
version). When I mentioned this in an article several months ago,
another reader corrected me by saying this kana was "we". Sure
enough, when I checked a table of kana, this kana was listed uner
the "wa" series.
Reuben
Scott Reynolds
> If you will kindly re-read the original post versus your reply, you
> will note that you have it backwards. The "ga" form is the apples vs.
> oranges form. The "wo" form is a simple statement of fact.
Listen, Reuben, you go ahead and use sentences like "ringo wo
tabetai" when you speak Japanese. You will thereby sound like
the typical foreigner with bad Japanese but no one will correct
you because as a foreigner you are not supposed to be able to
speak Japanese.
My wife, who is a native speaker of Japanese and a linguist, has
confirmed for me what I already knew. Namely that:
(1) The cases in which the "ringo wo tabetai" construction is
acceptable are very limited. Cases in which this utterance sounds
idiomatic are very much the exception (though some such cases DO
exist).
(2) One of those cases is to say "AN APPLE is what I want to eat"
(in preference to some other food).
__________________________________________________________________
Scott Reynolds s...@tezcat.com
Reuben Muns
>Listen, Reuben, you go ahead and use sentences like "ringo wo
>tabetai" when you speak Japanese. You will thereby sound like
>the typical foreigner with bad Japanese but no one will correct
>you because as a foreigner you are not supposed to be able to
>speak Japanese.
Au contraire. When I was working regularly with Japanese, we were
familiar with each other enough that they could (and did) correct
my Japanese. Besides which, we didn't spend our time hanging
around eating apples.
Reuben
Ben Bullock
> Th "wo" character was *really* pronounced "wo" in the past. I don't
> really know when the sound "wo" merged with "o" - ages ago, probably -,
> but even now it would be quite acceptable to pronounce "Ringo wo taberu"
> instead of "Ringo o taberu"
Some people I know use the "wo" pronunciation rather than the "o" one.
(I'll just wait for someone with a Japanese wife who says this isn't
possible to come along now :-).)
> There are actually three of these "w-" vowels - "wo", "wi" and "we",
> which were quite different from the "o", "i" and "e" - but you are
> unlikely to encounter anything other than the "wo" in modern Japanese.
>
> The character codes are:
>
> Hiragana-wo: JIS 2472 を
> Katakana-wo: JIS 2572 ヲ
>
> Hiragana-wi: JIS 2470 ゐ
> Katakana-wi: JIS 2570 ヰ
>
> Hiragana-we: JIS 2471 ゑ
> Katakana-we: JIS 2571 ヱ
I am interested where "ye" comes in. I noticed that the old name for
"ebisu", the one of the `shichifukujin' who comes from Japan is
"yebisu". In fact there is even a brand of beer in Japan called
"yebisu" which is written like this. Also, the old name for Tokyo was
"yedo" (not "edo") and the old name for the yen was "yen" not "en".
Probably there are hundreds more examples.
Now, I have seen this "ye" written like this katakana "we" above but
on the other hand I cannot find a kana for "ye". [I noticed this
because recently I took on the task of typing in all the kana for the
`kana origin' page of my alternative FAQ (see homepage address below
to access this).]
So, what's the story with `we' and `ye'? Is there a kana for "ye"?
--
Ben Bullock @ KEK (national lab. for high energy physics, Tsukuba, Japan)
e-mail: b...@theory.kek.jp www: http://theory.kek.jp:80/‾ben/
1-1 Oho, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305, Japan. tel: 0298 64 5403, fax: 0298 64 7831
Matthew Hurst
>There was a substitute teacher in my Japanese class for a while last
>year. She was a young woman in her 20's born and educated in Japan.
>I thought I noticed a slight "w" beginning to her pronunciation of
>the particle "wo". I didn't hear it all the time and only when she
>was speaking artificially slowly and distinctly. (The only way I can
>understand spoken Japanese <G>)
>
>Does anyone have any thoughts on this, or was I hearing things?
I noticed exactly the same thing with a Japanese (female) taking a
conversation class I was in. I only noticed it when she spoke
slowly. Other times I have asked a native speaker when I have heard a
distinct 'w' in 'wo' about it and they've denied pronouncing it.
Matt
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Matthew Hurst www: http://www.cogsci.ed.ac.uk/~matth
Human Communication Research Centre tel: +44 (0)131 650 4439
University of Edinburgh fax: +44 (0)131 650 4587
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
--
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Matthew Hurst www: http://www.cogsci.ed.ac.uk/~matth
Human Communication Research Centre tel: +44 (0)131 650 4439
University of Edinburgh fax: +44 (0)131 650 4587
Andrew Dopieralski
>My wife, who is a native speaker of Japanese and a linguist, has
>confirmed for me what I already knew. Namely that:
>(1) The cases in which the "ringo wo tabetai" construction is
>acceptable are very limited. Cases in which this utterance sounds
>idiomatic are very much the exception (though some such cases DO
>exist).
>(2) One of those cases is to say "AN APPLE is what I want to eat"
>(in preference to some other food).
>__________________________________________________________________
>Scott Reynolds s...@tezcat.com
Scott is absolutely correct. It sounds very funny in most cases to use 'ringo
o tabetai', so be careful. Of course, you do always have the 'I'm an
american' excuse...
John Reeves
>In article <4d23oh$n...@franklin.cc.utas.edu.au>, John Reeves wrote:
>
>> Just a hunch, but I suspect the basis of the alternation has as much to
>> do with discourse (the flow of the conversation) as reference. So if
>> someone asks "nani o tabetai?" then "ringo o tabetai" is more likely
>> than "ringo ga tabetai" (not that this is impossible, mind, nor that
>> there are not other alternatives). This doesn't explain the form of the
>> original question, but it might help a little.
>>
>> If you want to say "nani o/ga tabetai?" but are really worried about
>> which to use, try something else like "nanika tabetai no?" You'll
>> probably still get the answer you want. :)
>>
>> john reeves
>> (jre...@extro.ucc.su.oz.au)
>
>Un, excuse me, but wouldn't that be 'nanika meshiagarimasu ka' or 'nanika
>tabemasu ka'...? I was taught that it is extremely rude to directly
>inquire as to someone's desires, and so you should never use the -tai form
>when asking if someone desires something, so you should ask indirectly,
>possibly using exalted forms. So, it would be proper to ask 'will you eat
>something?' rather than 'do you WANT to eat something?'.. In this case,
>your "nani o tabetai?" would be a rather rare statement.
I thought about that, and intially included these and other alternatives, then
deleted them. Perhaps I shouldn't have.
>It seems, mr. reeves, you have been reading the wrong pages of "A
>Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar", which has a separate section on
>-tai forms (page 442), with extensive notes on o vs ga. For example, it
>says "In general, the choice between o and ga seems to depend on degree of
>desire. That is, when the degree of desire is high, ga is preferred, when
>low, o is used." And there are exceptions of course, like "mizu o nomitai
>ga.. [nomemasen]" where you must use o because it would sound odd if you
>used ga. And the book goes on for at least another page and a half with
>exceptions and further rules.
>
>----------------
> Charles Eicher
>cei...@inav.net
>----------------
I was just trying to give a concise, authoratitive list of instances - which I
found in seconds, contrary to the earlier suggestion that no grammar book deal
with such a monstrosity... I don't like the explanations in this dictionary
much, though, hence the reference to Kuno. Kuroda also has some interesting
things to say on this, but I can't remember the reference. And there are other
opinions, too. I'll try and write a summary of approaches to the problem.
john
Ben Bullock
> Reuben Muns wrote:
>
> > If you will kindly re-read the original post versus your reply, you
> > will note that you have it backwards. The "ga" form is the apples vs.
> > oranges form. The "wo" form is a simple statement of fact.
>
> tabetai" when you speak Japanese. You will thereby sound like
> the typical foreigner with bad Japanese but no one will correct
> you because as a foreigner you are not supposed to be able to
> speak Japanese.
There's at least one native speaker on this thread confirming Reuben's
view that this is grammatically correct. I've asked several native
speakers who also all agree with him.
> My wife, who is a native speaker of Japanese and a linguist, has
> confirmed for me what I already knew. Namely that:
This is somewhat tangential, but it's interesting to me that so many
people who talk absolute nonsense on this group use the justification
of being married to a Japanese woman to back themselves up. The two
are very heavily correlated. I'll never forget the guy who said
"Japanese has very few verb endings" bringing up his wife as
justification.
In fact I noticed this a long time ago, and became convinced that I
would NEVER, EVER mention on this group any relationship with a
Japanese woman that I might have, in order that I wouldn't look like
someone who does not know what he is talking about :-).
--
Ben Bullock @ KEK (national lab. for high energy physics, Tsukuba, Japan)
e-mail: b...@theory.kek.jp www: http://theory.kek.jp:80/~ben/
John Reeves
>tta...@uoguelph.ca (Takuji Tanaka) wrote:
>
>>Mark Crispin (m...@CAC.Washington.EDU) wrote:
>>: On Fri, 12 Jan 1996, Russ Vanderpool wrote:
>>: > X ga *tai da is grammatically correct.
>>: ^^
>>
>>: Actually, no, it isn't. You don't use "da" with an adjective. The direct
>>: form of an adjective is just the adjective. The distal form uses "desu".
>>: For example:
>>: tabetai is direct
>>: tabetai desu is distal
>>
>>
>>I do not know the English word for this.) to do that.
>>
>> tabetain da
>> ^
>guess I don't understand Mark's willingness to use "desu" but not "da,"
>since they're forms of the same verb that differ primarily in social
>connotation.
>Don Kirkman
>If I had a life I'd be having a mid-life crisis
- almost certainly related to the "Can I say da ka?" question.
BTW what about "...-tai da kara..." ??
(and yes, I know "...-tai kara..." also occurs)
john
Mark Barton
>>Naoto Horii (N...@oto.Horii.Be) wrote:
>
>> Th "wo" character was *really* pronounced "wo" in the past. I don't
>> really know when the sound "wo" merged with "o" - ages ago, probably -,
>> but even now it would be quite acceptable to pronounce "Ringo wo taberu"
>> instead of "Ringo o taberu"
>
>Some people I know use the "wo" pronunciation rather than the "o" one.
>(I'll just wait for someone with a Japanese wife who says this isn't
>possible to come along now :-).)
>
>> There are actually three of these "w-" vowels - "wo", "wi" and "we",
>> which were quite different from the "o", "i" and "e" - but you are
>> unlikely to encounter anything other than the "wo" in modern Japanese.
>>
>> The character codes are:
>>
>> Katakana-wo: JIS 2572 身
>>
>> Hiragana-wi: JIS 2470 怯
>> Katakana-wi: JIS 2570 申
>>
>> Hiragana-we: JIS 2471 窃
>> Katakana-we: JIS 2571 呻
>
>I am interested where "ye" comes in. I noticed that the old name for
>"ebisu", the one of the `shichifukujin' who comes from Japan is
>"yebisu". In fact there is even a brand of beer in Japan called
>"yebisu" which is written like this. Also, the old name for Tokyo was
>"yedo" (not "edo") and the old name for the yen was "yen" not "en".
>Probably there are hundreds more examples.
>
>Now, I have seen this "ye" written like this katakana "we" above but
>on the other hand I cannot find a kana for "ye". [I noticed this
>because recently I took on the task of typing in all the kana for the
>`kana origin' page of my alternative FAQ (see homepage address below
>to access this).]
>
>So, what's the story with `we' and `ye'? Is there a kana for "ye"?
The above list is in error - what has been labelled "we" is actually
"ye".臔
I recognise the katakana "ye" from the Yebisu beer label of course :-)
but for completeness I confirmed the hiragana with a Japanese colleague.
Apparently the characters "we" and "yi" either never existed or have
been forgotten too long ago to matter because I've never seen them, even
in
listings that give "wi" and "ye".
Cheers,
Mark B.
KAGESAWA Masataka
Scott Reynolds <s...@tezcat.com> writes:
> Reuben Muns wrote:
> > If you will kindly re-read the original post versus your reply, you
> > will note that you have it backwards. The "ga" form is the apples vs.
> > oranges form. The "wo" form is a simple statement of fact.
> Listen, Reuben, you go ahead and use sentences like "ringo wo
> tabetai" when you speak Japanese. You will thereby sound like
> the typical foreigner with bad Japanese but no one will correct
> you because as a foreigner you are not supposed to be able to
> speak Japanese.
I'm afraid that both Reuben and Scott are correct. But they
are talking about different situtaion. There are many problems
in this "ringo ga tabetai" and if you could explain "ga" (and
"no") completely then you would be a great lingist of Japanese.
The point is the context of this sentence. Consider
the following examples:
(1) One afternoon, Shinji was working at his office and stopped
working to look around. He found a poster on which an apple is
discribed. Suddenly he wanted to eat an apple and said
"I want to eat an apple".
In this case, it should be "ringo ga tabetai" not
"ringo wo tabetai", I think. So in this case, it is nonsence
to discuss which is better "ringo ga tabetai" or "ringo wo
tabetai" because we only say "ringo ga tabetai". In this
situation I agree with Scott.
(I understand that Reuben says that even in this case, some
Japanese would say "ringo wo tabetai". But at least in my
feeling, I can not say "ringo wo tabetai" in this case)
(2) A couple of minutes later, Misato, a co-worker of Shinji,
had recieved a set of nice fruits. She liked to eat some of them
and asked to Ritsuko, who is another co-worker, which they have:
Misato: Kudamono moratta no. Nanika tabenai?
Ritsuko: Iiwa ne.
Aa, sakki Shinji ga ringo wo tabetai tte itteta wa. (*1)
Misato: Sou. Ja, ringo wo tabe mashou ka.
(Translation)
Misato: I've just recieved nice fruits! Why don't we have some?
Ritsuko: That's good. Oh, a while ago I heard Shinji saying
that he wanted to eat an apple.
Misato: OK. Then let's eat apples.
(*1) can be "sakki ringo ga tabetai tte Shinji ga itteta wa" or
"sakki dareka ringo ga tabetai tte itteta wa".
In this case, both "ringo ga tabetai" and "ringo wo tabetai" are
correct. The difference between them are the very thing that is
pointed out by Reuben. So I agree with Reuben in this case.
I can find some other examples:
(3) Looking down an orange, Shinji said:
Shinji: I said that what I wanted to eat was an apple.
Shinji: Boku ha ringo wo tabetai tte itta noni.
Shinji: Boku ha ringo ga tabetai tte itta noni.
I think that the former is better in this situation.
This example comfirms the second proposition insisted by
Scott. But remark that
Buku ha "Ringo ga tabetai" tte ittan da.
(I said "I want to eat an apple")
is completely correct.
(4) Other case in which you can not say "ringo ga tabetai".
Misato: Dare ga ringo wo tabetai tte itta kke?
Shinji: Boku desu. Boku ga ringo wo tabetai tte ii mashita.
Misato: Who said to want eating an apple?
Shinji: I said. I said that I wanted to eat an apple.
You can say "Boku ga ringo ga ..." or "Dare ga ringo ga ....",
but they are something unstable, I think. At least when
you are writing, you should avoid these expressions.
I don't think that the Japanese say words that can be omitted
(because they are obious or easy to see). Japanese language
is so flexible that we can image verious situation from only
one sentence. It means that when you talk about Japanese
language, you have to explain your context more clearly than
when you talk about Western languages.
For instance, if I would have asked you what the meaning
of English word "take" is, then what would you answer?
--
KAGESAWA, Masataka
Hiroshi Amari
Scott Reynolds (s...@tezcat.com) wrote:
: Thank you for your explanation. I am aware that there are cases
: in which "ringo wo tabetai" is not unacceptable. Unfortunately,
: statements such as "I am a native Japanese speaker. 'ringo wo
: tabetai' is perfectly correct" imply that this is the normal
: way to say "I want to eat an apple" in Japanese. But it isn't.
"ringo wo tabetai" is perfectly natural.
: As you point out later in your post, what "ringo wo tabetai"
: really means is something like "AN APPLE is what I want to eat"
: (i.e., not an orange). I worded my post too strongly, I suppose,
: but I really wanted to emphasize that "wo" and "ga" are NOT
: interchangeable in sentences of this type.
In many instances, they are interchangeable. I have little distinction
between ga and wo in terms of the stength in preference.
Rather, the following seems an important difference to me.
"ringo wo kudasai" is natural.
"ringo ga kudasai" is wrong. (Someone else may have pointed it out.)
I really do not see much difference between
"mizu ga nomitai" and "mizu wo nomitai."
: My advice to the people learning Japanese who brought this up
: would be, when in doubt, use "ga."
: What do others think?
Depends on what follows "ga" or "wo."
--
Hiroshi Amari
John Reeves
>>It seems, mr. reeves, you have been reading the wrong pages of "A
>>Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar", which has a separate section on
>>-tai forms (page 442), with extensive notes on o vs ga. For example, it
>>says "In general, the choice between o and ga seems to depend on degree of
>>desire. That is, when the degree of desire is high, ga is preferred, when
>>low, o is used." And there are exceptions of course, like "mizu o nomitai
>>ga.. [nomemasen]" where you must use o because it would sound odd if you
>>used ga. And the book goes on for at least another page and a half with
>>exceptions and further rules.
thankyou. I read this last night and it was very interesting, especially the
bit about when ga is just plain wrong. I think the reason I initially turned
to
the "o" entry may have been because I recognised this is an instance of a
broader problem concerning "stative transitive predicates (STP)," a category
which includes hoshii, suki, wakaru, hanaseru and others. However, STPs are
not
all alike and you were right to direct me to the "-tai" entry.
The "degree of desire" explanation does seem to fit the few (written) instances
I was able to find, but I can't help but feel a little dubious about it. This
is partly because it is impossible to test and partly because it completely
fails to account for (admittedly not very common) instances such as "Ni'hongo o
wakaru" and "Yehgo o hanaseru" (NB Yehgo=Eigo).
I still think the choice (when there is a choice) has more to do with the flow
of the conversation than marginal semantic differences, although my earlier
observation now seems terribly uninteresting. I suspect that the many theories
proposed to account for the alternation are attempting to account for a
difference that doesn't exist. :)
john
Takuji Tanaka
: : which were quite different from the "o", "i" and "e" - but you are
: : unlikely to encounter anything other than the "wo" in modern Japanese.
: : The character codes are:
: : Hiragana-wo: JIS 2472 を
: : Katakana-wo: JIS 2572 ヲ
: : Hiragana-wi: JIS 2470 ゐ
: : Katakana-wi: JIS 2570 ヰ
: : Hiragana-we: JIS 2471 ゑ
: : Katakana-we: JIS 2571 ヱ
: I never heard "wi" and "we". I guess you mean "yi" and "ye", don't you?
: TANAKA Takuji
I checked my dictionary after some responds about this post. And I found
they are listed under the 'wa' row. I have thought they belong to the 'ya'
row during my over-30 years life as a Japanese. What a shame!!
I appologize to post wrong information and thank you all for having me have
correct knowledge.
TANAKA Takuji
Gerald B Mathias
: I am interested where "ye" comes in. I noticed that the old name for
: "ebisu", the one of the `shichifukujin' who comes from Japan is
: "yebisu". In fact there is even a brand of beer in Japan called
: "yebisu" which is written like this. Also, the old name for Tokyo was
: "yedo" (not "edo") and the old name for the yen was "yen" not "en".
: Probably there are hundreds more examples.
: Now, I have seen this "ye" written like this katakana "we" above but
: on the other hand I cannot find a kana for "ye". [I noticed this
: because recently I took on the task of typing in all the kana for the
: `kana origin' page of my alternative FAQ (see homepage address below
: to access this).]
: So, what's the story with `we' and `ye'? Is there a kana for "ye"?
There were originally kana (man'yôgana) for "ye"; the only one that
I am sure of at the moment was identical to the kanji for "E" in "Edo,"
but there is an "ei" (JIS [*, 5B2A) that was also "ye" I believe--as
you know, one kana per "sound" is a relatively modern development.
The distinction between "e" and "ye" was lost by the time of the
development of sôgana/hiragana and katakana; many people think the
"ye" pronunciation won out (and that is the one used in southern
dialects, to a large degree), to change to "e" during the Edo period.
Kana spelling got very slipshod about 1000 years ago. For instance,
the famous poet/linguist(?) Fujiwara no Teika used the "o"/"wo" kana
distinction to indicate accent difference!
The kokugakusha of the Edo period investigated the spelling of the
Nara period and it came to be reinstated as "rekishiteki kanadukai"
and is what was taught--until about 1950--in Japanese schools.
However, there was no attempt to revive the "e"/"ye" distinction in
spelling, nor that for the difference between the "kô" and "otsu"
varieties of the vowels "i" "e" and "o."
"Wa," "wi," and "wo" (vs. "ha, hi, ho" and "i, o") were also revived
as spelling distinctions, something like distinguishing "right" and
"rite" in English, or "knew" and "new."
Bart Mathias
Reuben Muns
>In fact I noticed this a long time ago, and became convinced that I
>would NEVER, EVER mention on this group any relationship with a
>Japanese woman that I might have, in order that I wouldn't look like
>someone who does not know what he is talking about :-).
Reminds me of when I first started trying to learn Japanese in
1952 as an Air Force lieutenant on Okinawa. I used to spend a lot
of my free time talking to the owners of a small store in Katena.
One day as we were chatting, an army sergeant strolled up and
began to speak to us -- in fluent woman's Japanese. The Okinawans
and I just exchanged amused glances.
Reuben
Nigel Wheatley
>chuc...@prairienet.org (Chuck Douglas) wrote:
>>J.T (john...@gol.com) wrote:
>>[heavy edit]
>>: By the way you linguistics wizards, I've live in Japan for 4 years
>>: and have never heard anyone say "wo" I think you probably mean "o"
>>: JT
>>: john...@gol.com
>>Well of course no one speaking modern Japanese says "wo." This is a romaji
>>convention to represent the particle the is pronounced "o" in modern Japanese
>>but used to be pronounced "wo." This is to distinguish it from the "o"
>>syllable.
> I'm sorry Chuck I'm not that familar with the romaji . Most people
>who study Japanese (in Japan) are probably not that familiar with the
>wo romaji. We tend to learn the hiragana and katakana which is
>pronounced "o" As you probably know the "wo" sound doesn't really
>exist in the spoken language.
> I also have never seen the sound "wo" in any romaji dictionaries here
>in Japan. I have studied Japanese at a school for 3 years here in
>Japan and have never come across this version of the particle "o"
The other reason for doing it that way is that you type "wo" on an
ASCII keyboard for a Japanese word processer to produced the correct
kana, for reasons which are hidden in the history of Japanese
orthography.
One proper name which retains "wo", at least in its usual (i.e.,
out-dated) English transliteration, is Iwo-jima.
Nigel
L.C. Scholz
In article <4d6n9p$7...@news-e1a.megaweb.com> Benjamin Barrett
wrote:
>Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996 15:26:04
>From: Gog...@gnn.com (Benjamin Barrett)
>Newsgroups: sci.lang.japan
>Subject: Re: wo vs o
>
>
snipped
>
>(I don't know if it's imitation of the English wo-o-oh in singing
or not)
>but in songs, it's written with a katakana u followed with a
small
> katakana
>o, so it isn't (or shouldn't) be related to wo.
>
>yoroshiku
>Benjamin Barrett
I meant the object marker "o", that is why I mentioned the
subtitles.
.
Reuben Muns
>This post is pretty stupid, but I may as well give some kind of
>reasoned response to it rather than just be insulting.
Trying to reform? If you really want to do something different,
try giving a reasoned response WITHOUT being insulting (as
opposed to "just being insulting").
Reuben
John O'Conner
> <snip>
> Also, is it my imagination or does the proper pronunciation of Japanese
> involve far less lip movement than English?
I don't think it's your imagination at all. In my opinion, speaking
Japanese requires less lip movement than speaking English.
Unfortunately, I have no scholarly proof of this; it's just a personal
observation.
--
John O'Conner
Email: JOCo...@novell.com
Of course, I speak for myself.
Ben Bullock
> Of course, there is a big difference between the words 'gyaru' and 'ga-
> ru', at least in Kansai, and at least in young people's language. A
> ga-ru is a girl, a gyaru (or often ko-gyaru, or little gyaru) is a
> particular type of girl -- flashy, "slutty" (? how do you translate
> kebai?), into fast money and good times.
This post is pretty stupid, but I may as well give some kind of
reasoned response to it rather than just be insulting. I don't see
too much evidence of "gyaru" and "ga-ru" having two types of different
meaning. The word "ga-ru" is an old-fashioned version of "girl" which
was in use even before the second world war, as seen in words like
"moga" for "modern girl". The "gyaru" version is more modern and it's
more closely based on the English pronounciation. The "ga" sound in
Japanese is more like the first sound of "garland" than "girl", hence
the replacement.
Maybe I can ask you to go to some other newsgroup like
"soc.culture.japan" or "alt.sex.masturbation" if you want to ramble on
about slutty Japanese women. Thanks.
Mark Barton
>
>: : Hiragana-wo: JIS 2472 Ç•
>: : Katakana-wo: JIS 2572 Éí
>
>: : Hiragana-wi: JIS 2470 ÇÓ
>: : Katakana-wi: JIS 2570 Éê
>
>: : Hiragana-we: JIS 2471 ÇÔ
>: : Katakana-we: JIS 2571 Éë
For people's interest I have found an example of the use of the hiragana
"wi" character in the lyrics to an old song:
ìÒè\î ç‘ÇÃǪÇÃèàèóÇÕîxïaÇ’ÇðÇhiÇÕç×ǩǡLJ
É|ÉvÉâÇÃÇÊǧNJêlÇýí ÇÁÇ ïýì¼ÇŠâàÇ¡ÇŸóßÇ¡ÇŸÇÓLJÅB
28sai no sono musume wa, haibyou-yami de hi wa hosokatta
popura no you ni hodou ni sotte tatte wita.
She was 28, that young woman, and due to lung disease her calves became
very thin,
like a poplar. Not passing anybody (?), she stood by the footpath.
The above is from a set of songs called Arishihi no Uta, from poems by
Chuuya Nakahara, a Meiji era poet. I didn't realize until I did some
research
today that this splendidly gloomy set of poems was sadly appropriate -
he died at 30.
The lyrics in the back of the score give us lots of other curiosities
like kefu
for kyou (today) and omohu/omohanai/omohimasu for omou/omowana/omoimasu.
Cheers,
Mark B.
John O'Conner
Muneo Saito
>
>In article <60.2317.42...@canrem.com> sj.p...@canrem.com (Sj Pover) writes:
>>There was a substitute teacher in my Japanese class for a while last
>>year. She was a young woman in her 20's born and educated in Japan.
>>I thought I noticed a slight "w" beginning to her pronunciation of
>>the particle "wo". I didn't hear it all the time and only when she
>>was speaking artificially slowly and distinctly. (The only way I can
>>understand spoken Japanese <G>)
>>
>>Does anyone have any thoughts on this, or was I hearing things?
>
>I noticed exactly the same thing with a Japanese (female) taking a
>conversation class I was in. I only noticed it when she spoke
>slowly. Other times I have asked a native speaker when I have heard a
>distinct 'w' in 'wo' about it and they've denied pronouncing it.
I am a native Japanese speaker. I know at least 3 persons who differentiate
"WO" from "O". They are all from Kyushu probably Kumamoto pref. I also
noticed that those people often use the Z sound in place of J., e.g., they pronounce
"zeimusu" instead of "jeimusu" for "James".
Back in my school days, in the 60'S, my teacher of JP classics (he was probably
over 70 years old at that time) could differentiate many historical pronounciations,
e.g. UNDOUKAI was pronounced like UNDOUQUAI, SHITAMAHU was like SHITAFU
(weak F) instead of modern SHITAMAU.
It should be noted that modern JP was somehow artificially made. You cannot
find WA-gyou no "wI", "wU", "wE" and "wO" in NHK's standard JP, but you can
in some dialects.
Cheers,
Muneo
Gerald B Mathias
: One proper name which retains "wo", at least in its usual (i.e.,
: out-dated) English transliteration, is Iwo-jima.
Which is "iootoo" in Japanese!
Bart Mathias
Nuko Info Systems
: In article <JFRIEDL.96...@shibuya.omron.co.jp>, jfr...@omron.co.jp
: (Jeffrey Friedl) wrote:
: > The sound is very subtle, like the difference between "yada" and "iya da",
: > a mistake that seems common when one learns the phrase by hearing it.
: > I've notice that the 'w' of "wo" can be heard in some songs (for example,
: > the "ai wo sono mama" line from SAS's "manatsu no kajitu").
: >
: > Indeed, I have never been able to get a native to admit that the 'wo' is
: > any different than 'o'. Perhaps it's something a western ear is atuned to
: > (just like it's not attuned to "yada"/"iyada").
: Intersting. . .ever notice how, when being very polite, people will
: accentuate the "su" in "desu"? Instead of "Sou dess" it becomes "sou
: de-su" with the "u" in "su" really enunciated. This was strikingly obvious
: to me, yet several Japanese friends told me that this was absolutely untrue
: and I must be imagining it! Wouldn't it be odd if non-Japanese speakers
: could easily distinguish sounds being made by native Japanese speakers,
: that they themselves can't distinguish?!?
: --
: Dr. Kenneth W. DeLong | Phone 510-423-1506
It's not just odd, it's true. My Japanese tutor could never tell what the
difference between pronouncing shigoto as plain "shigoto" and "shingoto"
was. One of my Japanese friends has an Iranian boyfriend who also noticed
the same thing you noticed. When he used to point it out to her she
wouldn't agree, but when I started pointing it out to her too she started
thinking and finally did agree.
Rajesh
Kenneth W. DeLong
> The sound is very subtle, like the difference between "yada" and "iya da",
> a mistake that seems common when one learns the phrase by hearing it.
> I've notice that the 'w' of "wo" can be heard in some songs (for example,
> the "ai wo sono mama" line from SAS's "manatsu no kajitu").
>
> Indeed, I have never been able to get a native to admit that the 'wo' is
> any different than 'o'. Perhaps it's something a western ear is atuned to
> (just like it's not attuned to "yada"/"iyada").
Intersting. . .ever notice how, when being very polite, people will
accentuate the "su" in "desu"? Instead of "Sou dess" it becomes "sou
de-su" with the "u" in "su" really enunciated. This was strikingly obvious
to me, yet several Japanese friends told me that this was absolutely untrue
and I must be imagining it! Wouldn't it be odd if non-Japanese speakers
could easily distinguish sounds being made by native Japanese speakers,
that they themselves can't distinguish?!?
--
Dr. Kenneth W. DeLong | Phone 510-423-1506
Lawrence Livermore National Lab | Fax 510-423-1488
L-395 | del...@llnl.gov
Livermore, CA 94550
Asonde kuraseru nara, sore wa sore de iin ja nai!!
Check out the FROG Web page at http://www.ca.sandia.gov/ultrafrog
Jeffrey Friedl
|> >I thought I noticed a slight "w" beginning to her pronunciation of
|> >the particle "wo". I didn't hear it all the time and only when she
|> >was speaking artificially slowly and distinctly.
|>
|> conversation class I was in. I only noticed it when she spoke
|> slowly. Other times I have asked a native speaker when I have heard a
|> distinct 'w' in 'wo' about it and they've denied pronouncing it.
The sound is very subtle, like the difference between "yada" and "iya da",
a mistake that seems common when one learns the phrase by hearing it.
I've notice that the 'w' of "wo" can be heard in some songs (for example,
the "ai wo sono mama" line from SAS's "manatsu no kajitu").
Indeed, I have never been able to get a native to admit that the 'wo' is
any different than 'o'. Perhaps it's something a western ear is atuned to
(just like it's not attuned to "yada"/"iyada").
Jeffrey
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeffrey Friedl <jfr...@omron.co.jp> Omron Corp, Nagaokakyo, Kyoto 617 Japan
See my Jap<->Eng dictionary at http://www.wg.omron.co.jp/cgi-bin/j-e
and http://enterprise.ic.gc.ca/cgi-bin/j-e
Reuben Muns
>Intersting. . .ever notice how, when being very polite, people will
>accentuate the "su" in "desu"? Instead of "Sou dess" it becomes "sou
I have heard the "su" accented (and slightly drawn out). But not
for politeness' sake. The times I've heard it is when the speaker
is emphasizing that the answer is positive.
Reuben
C.J. Savoie
> who study Japanese (in Japan) are probably not that familiar with the
> wo romaji. We tend to learn the hiragana and katakana which is
> pronounced "o" As you probably know the "wo" sound doesn't really
> exist in the spoken language.
Yes it does, but rarely. Usually it is used for emphasis.
Ex. Ie! sore *WO* shitai.
Also, it is used when reading a passage from a book or newspaper or when giving
dictation.
Sometimes people use it for emphasis or to be fashionable, as a matter of
personal habit, as well.
In kyuushu, we use the "ba" part of the former "woba" from which wo came from in
Eastern Japan. This provides the emphasis in conversation in these western
dialects. Here, it sounds a bit "snobby" or "toukyoupoi" to pronounce "wo"...
To omoimasu.
Ja na---=
Chris
ku...@alt.wakewakaran.gougaku.nagabanashi
Sj Pover
women vs the language of men:
I the difference is JUST sound, I mean the femal's language should
sound like softer than the male's. I think, but might be you can't
hear the difference. The difference probably appears at the end of
the sentence, or choosing way of the word.
I'm sorry, I may have been unclear. There are certain words and
phrases my language instructor says woman _do not use_.
As a simple example, "boku". He says that not even amongst themselves,
(how does he know that?), close women friends would not refer to
themselves as "boku".
As another example, just the other day we were talking about ways to
ask someone to do something for you, (for example to pass the salt),
and there were two different affirmative replies; one for women,
(ee, ii wa yo), one for men, (aa, ii yo). He was quite adamant
about who used which reply.
As a question between friends, a man may end a question "..... da ka"
but a woman never would. She would say something like "..... da no?" or
".....desu ka".
I find these differences facinating and am curious about generational
differences, geographic differences, how these conventions have
changed over time, and so on.
As a non-native speaker, I am not habituated to these speech patterns
and none of them _sound_ wrong regardless of who says them. In my
mother's day, there were words and phrases women (or at least nice
women) didn't use, but I think this was different as they were almost
exclusively swear words that men might use amongst themselves but not
in the company of women. This is not the case with the gender-specific
language of Japanese.
As an aside, I read of a culture, on an isolated island where the men
spoke a _completely different_ language than the women. Everybody
understood both languages but they never spoke the language of the other.
Anthropologists had a theory that in the distant past the island had
been invaded and taken over by (presumably male) warriors of a different
culture who spoke a different language than the locals. They killed off
all the men and boys they found and intermarried with the women. The
two groups somehow continued speaking their original languages and
passed along this gender-specific speech pattern to their offspring.
omoshirokunai desu ne?
I was hoping people would have theories and/or facts regarding Japanese
language gender differences. For example, if someone is posting an
opinion in Japanese, and the name is not given, how easy would it be
to figure out whether the author is a man or a woman? I know in English
it would be damn difficult, if not impossible.
SJ
---
* DeLuxe2/386 1.25 #10827 * I tried the rest but bought the best!!!!
Sj Pover
RM>del...@llnl.gov (Kenneth W. DeLong) wrote:
>Intersting. . .ever notice how, when being very polite, people will
>accentuate the "su" in "desu"? Instead of "Sou dess" it becomes "sou
RM>I have heard the "su" accented (and slightly drawn out). But not
RM>for politeness' sake. The times I've heard it is when the speaker
RM>is emphasizing that the answer is positive.
It really becomes noticable to my ear when you append a "yo" as in
"ii desu yo" for example but not so much with "ne" as in "ii desu ne".
Mark Barton
>> The sound is very subtle, like the difference between "yada" and "iya da",
>> a mistake that seems common when one learns the phrase by hearing it.
>> I've notice that the 'w' of "wo" can be heard in some songs (for example,
>> the "ai wo sono mama" line from SAS's "manatsu no kajitu").
>>
>> Indeed, I have never been able to get a native to admit that the 'wo' is
>> any different than 'o'. Perhaps it's something a western ear is atuned to
>> (just like it's not attuned to "yada"/"iyada").
>
>Intersting. . .ever notice how, when being very polite, people will
>accentuate the "su" in "desu"? Instead of "Sou dess" it becomes "sou
>de-su" with the "u" in "su" really enunciated.
Yes, I often hear this when Japanese are speaking on the phone.
>This was strikingly obvious
>to me, yet several Japanese friends told me that this was absolutely untrue
>and I must be imagining it!
This is a very common reaction to any detailed question about phonetics.
Native speakers know how to speak their own language fluently,
but it doesn't follow that they have any intellectual knowledge of it.
Another classic example along the same lines is the three or more
different pronunciations of syllabic n. Many Japanese speakers do not
realize
that the two n's in "shinbun" are completely護different - one with the
lips closed and one with the lips apart - and are amazed if you point it
out.
>Wouldn't it be odd if non-Japanese speakers
>could easily distinguish sounds being made by native Japanese speakers,
>that they themselves can't distinguish?!?
It's very odd when you first notice it and think about it, but it's also
utterly commonplace, and works in reverse too, although not so much with
Japanese and English because the number of sounds in English is so much
greater. From the point of view of a speaker of Hindi for example there
are probably two different t sounds in English.
Cheers,
Mark B.
Yoshiya NISHIMURA
"Ga-ru" and "gyaru" are two different Japanese words. "Ga-ru" is phonetic
imitation of the English word "girl". "Gyaru" is, I believe, imitation of
"gal". As Mr. Bullock wrote, "gyaru" is a pretty new word, even newer than
Mr. Bullock described. My oldest memories of usage of the word "gyaru" are
fourteen times of refrain of "gyaru" in one of Sawada Kenji's song (I have
forgotten the rest and the title) and "Kimi wa hikari no orenji gyaru" in
a TV commercial song (I have forgotten the advertiser name and the title).
Both were around fifteen years ago, I think. It is more recent that "gyaru"
began to be used frequently in magazines (mainly for men) and tabloid
journalism. I think it has been for five to ten years.
Though all of English-Japanese and English-English dictionaries I checked
said "gal" is a slang for "girl", the Japanese words "ga-ru" and "gyaru" are
used in completely deferent ways and meanings. The meaning of "Gyaru" is
what Mr. Kelly wrote. I feel a little different nuance but I cannot explain
better than him due to my poor English ability. Anyway, he is correct here
and Mr. Bullock is wrong. "Gyaru" is never used for a female child. (If you
call a middle school girl a child, "magogyaru" means a middle school girl
who acts like a "gyaru", but she would not seem a child). "Kogyaru" means
a high school girl who acts like a "gyaru". "Gyaru" is still considered
as a slang, but the usage is never limited in Kansai.
"Ga-ru" WAS and IS the "eigo" (English) for "shoujo", and is most unlikely
used alone, e.g., you cannot say "Asoko ni hitori no "ga-ru" ga iru" (you can
say "Asoko ni hitorino "gyaru" ga iru", although I think you should not say
this in public since "gyaru" is not a refined word). But "ga-ru" is used
combined with other words, like "modan ga-ru" (modern girl), "depa-to ga-ru"
(girl working at a department store), "ga-ru furendo" (girl friend).
Another issue. "Kya/gya" is used when we imitate English sound "ka/ga"
when "a" is pronounced as the sound in cat. Therefore, we do not imitate girl
with "gyaru" or garland with "gya-rando", but imitate cat with "kyatto",
gamble with "gyamburu" and gal with "gyaru". This is a general rule in
Japanese, though I have no idea how native English speakers hear this
imitation. Some exceptions are "karenda-" for calendar, "kanada" for Canada,
"gasu" for gas, "kamera" for camera, and so on. I do not know why these words
are exceptions, nor do I know from what language we imported these words.
Thank you for reading. I would appreciate if you correct my English.
Ben Bullock
> Though all of English-Japanese and English-English dictionaries I checked
> said "gal" is a slang for "girl", the Japanese words "ga-ru" and "gyaru" are
> used in completely deferent ways and meanings. The meaning of "Gyaru" is
> what Mr. Kelly wrote. I feel a little different nuance but I cannot explain
> better than him due to my poor English ability. Anyway, he is correct here
> and Mr. Bullock is wrong.
Thanks for correcting me.
> Thank you for reading. I would appreciate if you correct my English.
I'll send a correction by e-mail. Thanks for your input here.
Ben Bullock
> ma...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Matthew Hurst) writes:
> |> >I thought I noticed a slight "w" beginning to her pronunciation of
> |> >the particle "wo". I didn't hear it all the time and only when she
> |> >was speaking artificially slowly and distinctly.
> |>
> |> I noticed exactly the same thing with a Japanese (female) taking a
> |> conversation class I was in. I only noticed it when she spoke
> |> slowly. Other times I have asked a native speaker when I have heard a
> |> distinct 'w' in 'wo' about it and they've denied pronouncing it.
>
> a mistake that seems common when one learns the phrase by hearing it.
> I've notice that the 'w' of "wo" can be heard in some songs (for example,
> the "ai wo sono mama" line from SAS's "manatsu no kajitu").
Is there really a difference between the pronunciation of `wo' and `o'
in Japanese? It is very surprising to me if this is so, because no
linguists and no Japanese people seem to have heard of it.
As for the difference between "yada" and "iya da", what you have is a
devoiced vowel at the beginning of a word because the word is a low to
high pitch word. High to low pitch words don't have this.
For example, using capitals to denote high pitch and small letters to
denote low pitch, "iSHI" (= stone) has a devoiced initial vowel,
whereas "Ishi" (= will, intention) does not. Similarly for "iCHI"
(=one) and "Ichi" (= location).
You can find more details in the book "Japanese pronunciation guide
for English speakers" as mentioned on my afaq books page.
> Indeed, I have never been able to get a native to admit that the 'wo' is
> any different than 'o'. Perhaps it's something a western ear is atuned to
> (just like it's not attuned to "yada"/"iyada").
I'm not atuned to this. The only time I heard "wo" was when someone
spoke very slowly and deliberately to me and then it was most likely
that they did this deliberately to make clear what they were saying.
Ben Bullock
> Intersting. . .ever notice how, when being very polite, people will
> accentuate the "su" in "desu"? Instead of "Sou dess" it becomes "sou
> de-su" with the "u" in "su" really enunciated. This was strikingly obvious
> to me, yet several Japanese friends told me that this was absolutely untrue
> and I must be imagining it! Wouldn't it be odd if non-Japanese speakers
> could easily distinguish sounds being made by native Japanese speakers,
> that they themselves can't distinguish?!?
That you noticed this does not seem particularly odd to me. What is
odd is that the native speakers you mention did not know the
difference. There is a section in one of the "Nihongo notes" books by
Nobuko and Isamu Mizutani, who are certainly native speakers of
Japanese, that explains that in very polite speech one should
enunciate vowels that are usually devoiced, and actually gives this
"desu" example as well. Unfortunately I borrowed the book from the
library so I can't dig up the reference for you.
Steven D. Emmet
distinct in her speech...she tells me the 'wo' is the grammatically correct
usage...of course i speak 'tokyo-ben'...and tell her she's 'inaka-mono'...but
i do think she's correct on this one...steve
>Is there really a difference between the pronunciation of `wo' and `o'
>in Japanese? It is very surprising to me if this is so, because no
>linguists and no Japanese people seem to have heard of it.
>As for the difference between "yada" and "iya da", what you have is a
>devoiced vowel at the beginning of a word because the word is a low to
>high pitch word. High to low pitch words don't have this.
>For example, using capitals to denote high pitch and small letters to
>denote low pitch, "iSHI" (= stone) has a devoiced initial vowel,
>whereas "Ishi" (= will, intention) does not. Similarly for "iCHI"
>(=one) and "Ichi" (= location).
>You can find more details in the book "Japanese pronunciation guide
>for English speakers" as mentioned on my afaq books page.
>> Indeed, I have never been able to get a native to admit that the 'wo' is
>> any different than 'o'. Perhaps it's something a western ear is atuned to
>> (just like it's not attuned to "yada"/"iyada").
>I'm not atuned to this. The only time I heard "wo" was when someone
>spoke very slowly and deliberately to me and then it was most likely
>that they did this deliberately to make clear what they were saying.
>--