日→英 翻訳・通訳 courses or certifications
mroe...@gmail.com
studying for about 6 years and I'm interested in taking some courses
specifically for this kind of work or finding a certification test
that I can work towards as a goal. I currently live in Japan, close
enough to Tokyo to use any resources that are there.
Can anyone suggest either physical classroom courses, correspondence
courses, or even text books that can help me? Also, can those of you
who are Japanese to English translators and interpreters let me know
what the certifications are that you hold and how you got them/ what
organization offers them etc. (any other relevant information you can
think of here).
I'm not necessarily going to become either a translator or
interpreter, but I would like some sort of certification/study history
to put on my resume here in Japan.
~Matthew Roerdink
Darren Cook
> interpreter, but I would like some sort of certification/study history
> to put on my resume here in Japan.
Not quite what you are asking, but the Japanese Proficiency Test seems
to have fairly good resume value. I'd assume 1-kyu (or being good enough
to pass 1-kyu) is a prerequisite for anyone doing J->* translation.
Darren
mroe...@gmail.com
On Jun 14, 3:41 pm, Darren Cook <dar...@dcook.org> wrote:
>
> Not quite what you are asking, but the Japanese Proficiency Test seems
> to have fairly good resume value. I'd assume 1-kyu (or being good enough
> to pass 1-kyu) is a prerequisite for anyone doing J->* translation.
>
> Darren
I have 2-kyu now and am working dilligently toward 1-kyu. I was just
wondering if there was anything else. Because just because you pass 1-
kyu does not mean you can actually communicate in Japanese... I know
lots of chinese folks that pass it just because they can read all the
kanji and that gets them a good enough percentage to pass.
Darren Cook
>> to have fairly good resume value. I'd assume 1-kyu (or being good enough
>> to pass 1-kyu) is a prerequisite for anyone doing J->* translation.
>
> wondering if there was anything else. Because just because you pass 1-
> kyu does not mean you can actually communicate in Japanese... I know
> lots of chinese folks that pass it just because they can read all the
> kanji and that gets them a good enough percentage to pass.
Everyone I've met who has passed 1-kyu has been good at Japanese. The
Chinese pass it because they come on a student visa and diligently study
at a school, not just because they are good at guessing the on-yomi.
Darren
Darren Cook
>> enough to pass 1-kyu) is a prerequisite for anyone doing J->*
>> translation.
>
> actually communicate in Japanese...
I forgot to write my main point in the other email: you don't need to be
good at communicating in Japanese to be a good translator. (IMHO; it was
argued over in a recent thread here.)
Darren
Matt Stanton
start learning Japanese (how to drive).
If I were you I'd focus all my energies on getting 1-kyu. It took me
five years to go from 2-kyu to 1-kyu, but once you've got it,
translation companies will give you a trial, and once you've passed a
few trials and started translating, you're there.
Sure, Chinese folks can get 1-kyu fairly easily (though they won't get
it if all they know is the kanji), but the same is not true for native
English speakers, so translation companies will really respect you if
you get it.
Peter Durfee
> I have 2-kyu now and am working dilligently toward 1-kyu. I was just
> wondering if there was anything else. Because just because you pass 1-
> kyu does not mean you can actually communicate in Japanese...
Your last sentence is spot-on, and IME the 日本語能力試験 has no value as a
way to land translation or interpreting jobs. I don't know of many companies
(at least those giving work to translators) that actively look for it. It
has great value as a motivational tool--that test is what keeps you seated
at your desk, with your kanji books open, studying toward a well-defined
goal--so I urge you to continue working toward your certificate. Just don't
expect the job offers to roll in afterward.
From time to time Simul Academy does offer J-E translation classes for
native English speakers in Tokyo. The earliest one would be offered next
would be October; contact me off-list if you want some more information on
that. There are plenty of Tokyo language schools with courses for Japanese
speakers who want to learn the skills, but the problems those learners face
aren't the same as the ones you need to grapple with as you pick this up.
The information on Tom Gally's website is still good to look at:
http://gally.net/translation/gettingstarted.htm
I think there were some other, similarly helpful pages for beginners out
there, but I can't remember them offhand. Anyone else?
--
Peter Durfee
du...@gol.com
Jon Fisher
>Can anyone suggest either physical classroom courses, correspondence
>courses, or even text books that can help me?
I can recommend the distance learning courses offered by the
University of
Sheffield as one good source of training. The MA Advanceed Japanese
Studies
course, for example, is geared towards deepening and broadening
knowledge
and understanding of the Japanese language and society and aimed at
people
with just the level of ability it sounds as though you have.
http://www.shef.ac.uk/seas/seasindex.html
Good luck,
Jon Fisher
Karen Boyette
their way to help students. Jon, did you complete the Sheffield MA?
I'm at the annotated translation stage.
Karen
Jon Fisher
translation stage, too, after having taken a certain amount of time
out for family reasons.
Incidentally, Matthew, if you DO want to get started translating, I
found that people were willing to give me a trial on the back of 2-kyu
(10 years ago) plus a clear sector specialism (in my case chartered
accountant + 5 years working in the financial sector in London) and
after a year on the Sheffield MA course I was confident of being able
to produce reliable quality work if I stuck to my specialism. (Still
not immune to putting an extra "e" in "Advanceed", though, I notice.
Oops).
HTH
Jon
mroe...@gmail.com
I will certainly take a look at that course. Do you think the American
vs. British English will screw me up at all? (Me being
American...don't judge me, I didn't vote for Bush.)
~Matt
Karen Boyette
problems regarding English usage, but you will, however, have some
adjusting to do if you are unfamiliar with the British university
system. Most of the differences will be made clear to you, but you may
have to ask about a few things. You may also want to acclimatise
yourself to British newspaper English. I didn't do this and I think it
hurt me on our newspaper translation tasks. If you have any burning
questions, feel free to contact me off list. (Also didn't vote for
Bush)
Good luck
Steve Venti
> Do you think the American vs. British English will screw me up at all?
> (Me being American...)
It won't screw you up at all, and the staff at SEAS is quite
accustomed to Americans whining about having their "English"
corrected. Have been ever since I took the course way back when it
first started. <g>
Seriously, though, you will probably receive an occasional comment on
your translation assignments that illustrates just how American and
British English have diverged in the expression of certain nuances but
nothing that will seriously challenge your will to complete the
course.
--
Steve Venti
The source of all unhappiness is other people.
--Wally
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
mroe...@gmail.com
Advanced Japanese Studies is definately the one I'd want to take and
from reading the website it sounds great... but I can't afford
1,650,000 yen per year for 3 years of PART TIME schooling!!! (or is
that supposed to be the tuition for the whole 3 years? If thats the
case then its not so bad...) I'm still in debt about 3,000,000 JPY for
my previous schooling!
The Simul Academy course looks ok too, a classroom environment might
help motivate me, but as I don't live in the city there would be a bit
of wasted travel time (my wife and I do plan on moving to the city
within the next few years tho...but not anytime real soon...)
Anyone living in Japan know the requirements for the 文部省 scholarship?
~Matt
Murdoch MacPhee
You can find most of them here:
<http://www.studyjapan.go.jp/en/toj/toj0302e.html>
FWIW,
Murdoch MacPhee
Steve Venti
> DAMN that University of Sheffield course is expensive! . . .
> I can't afford 1,650,000 yen per year for 3 years
It's not *per year,* it's that amount for the whole course.
Keith Wilkinson
for Japanese, mainly testing speed comprehension of
spoken business (and honorific) Japanese but also
testing speed of comprehension of written material.
If you can't understand the original
then you can't translate it ;-)
mroe...@gmail.com
> mroerd...@gmail.com wrote:
> > DAMN that University of Sheffield course is expensive! . . .
> > I can't afford 1,650,000 yen per year for 3 years
>
>
Well, thats a relief... I could probably talk the wife into letting me
do that then... I could also buy a car for that much tho...
On Jun 17, 6:27 pm, Keith Wilkinson <Keith.S.Wilkin...@gmail.com>
wrote:
I hate Keigo... they really need to just obliterate it from the
language. Not that I can't understand it... (I suck at speaking it
though) its just unnecessary in my opinion. Japanese people should
realize they waste too much time with it. Hell, most japanese people I
know can't even speak it properly! (But, I realize its not going away
and I'll just have to deal.)
Thanks again everyone for the help! I'll look into these over the next
month and decide what is the best route and go from there.
~Matt
Pamela Ikegami
On Jun 18, 2007, at 6:11 PM, mroe...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> I hate Keigo... they really need to just obliterate it from the
> language. Not that I can't understand it... (I suck at speaking it
> though) its just unnecessary in my opinion. Japanese people should
> realize they waste too much time with it. Hell, most japanese people I
> know can't even speak it properly! (But, I realize its not going away
> and I'll just have to deal.)
Oy. I really hope that comment was made tongue in cheek, but I'm
afraid it wasn't.
If you think keigo is unnecessary in Japanese then your understanding
of how Japanese society works is superficial, at best.
If you plan on being a successful business person in Japan you need
to suck it up and learn how to speak and write (email) keigo with a
decent level of proficiency. It's a basic business skill.
Best of luck,
Pam Ikegami
Tenga Wataru
> I hate Keigo... they really need to just obliterate it from the
> language. Not that I can't understand it... (I suck at speaking it
> though) its just unnecessary in my opinion. Japanese people should
> realize they waste too much time with it. Hell, most japanese people I
> know can't even speak it properly! (But, I realize its not going away
> and I'll just have to deal.)
Where are you from? Can we assume you represent a hitherto unknown
Superior Culture, one that has solved all or most of the issues we
ordinary folk are still struggling with, and that has thereby earned
the right to tell other cultures how to go about their lives?
wataru
Jacob Dunlap
>
> I hate Keigo... they really need to just obliterate it from the
> language. Not that I can't understand it... (I suck at speaking it
> though) its just unnecessary in my opinion. Japanese people should
> realize they waste too much time with it. Hell, most japanese people I
> know can't even speak it properly! (But, I realize its not going away
> and I'll just have to deal.)
If you "suck" at keigo, which you yourself admit, then how do you know
whether or not Japanese natives use it properly? I contend that keigo
is natural for native speakers of Japanese and is thus "wastes" no
more time than formulating a normal sentence.
Your statements seem to be coming from the assumption that keigo and
"normal" Japanese are two separate concepts, which is, in my opinion,
totally bogus. In general, I've found that the people who have the
most difficulty with the concept of keigo are the ones who treat it as
some flowery "addition" to the Japanese language when in reality it is
one of the fundamentals.
Jacob Dunlap
James Sparks
> If you "suck" at keigo, which you yourself admit, then how do you know
> whether or not Japanese natives use it properly? I contend that keigo
> more time than formulating a normal sentence.
While I totally agree with your basic opinion, I do disagree that it is
necessarily natural for natives, or rather, I say that there is a
continuum of naturalness based on age, education, and other factors.
When I worked in a department store in Japan, we were instructed to
tailor our speech to the customer. Older, female customers wearing
kimono were given the highest possible level of keigo (the highest
within the range of デパート用語, that is). Since I worked in the 寝具
売り場, many of the purchases were gifts, and we were instructed to ask
every customer ご進物ですか, to determine how to package and wrap the
purchase. I found that many college-age customers, and a few older
customers, did not understand this, and I had to diplomatically (so as
not to insult) rephrase it as 贈り物ですか. This happened with quite a
few of the stock phrases we used.
So, while keigo may be an integral part of the Japanese language and
culture, I'm not sure how natural it is for everyone. The same applies
to English, though. When you see average Joes interviewed by news
reporters, they self-consciously try to use higher-register English,
which often ends up coming out as "Yes, he gave to to she and I" and so
forth.
James Sparks
Karen Sandness
When I was simply learning Japanese out of a book, keigo did seem like
an unnecessary frill, even though I knew that it appeared in the
earliest recorded literature (ca. 700 AD), but once I started living in
Japan and later interacting with Japanese people in the States, I came
to see that keigo is as much an integral part of the language as
passive causatives.
Keigo is no decorative afterthought. It's ingrained in the language of
a society that places great importance on who ranks where in each
situation. If you are a fairly proficient speaker otherwise but choose
to ignore keigo, your misguided Western attempts at egalitarianism will
actually make people uncomfortable, whether you're too polite or too
rude for the situation.
Western commentators sometimes write as if the youth of Japan are
tossing out all the old traditions. My experience has been that young
Japanese still know who merits more polite language and who doesn't,
even in all-student groups, and if they violate these rules, they do so
for deliberate effect.
If you hate keigo, try reading up on the "rules" for it and then keep
your ears open.
Etiquettely yours,
Karen Sandness
Karen Sandness
actual forms that keigo should take. I've heard Japanese people
complain about mangled keigo from store clerks or other people in
service positions. These may be indications of linguistic change. The
keigo of today is not the keigo of 1,000 years ago, and I wouldn't be
surprised if educated people of the thirteenth century complained that
young servants didn't know the difference between 給う and 給える anymore.
Historical perspectively yours,
Karen Sandness
Marc Adler
> So, while keigo may be an integral part of the Japanese language and
> culture, I'm not sure how natural it is for everyone.
What do you mean by natural? I was surprised when I visited my
daughter's kindergarten class in Japan (and in Hawaii) that the teachers
made specific lessons designed to teach kids how to use the various
counters (匹、本、枚、etc.). I assumed this was something that Japanese
people just picked up. But they're teaching it in school! Seems pretty
unnatural ... or maybe not. If you expand your definition of "natural"
to include those aspects of the language that speakers sub- or
self-consciously attempt to use, then there's nothing more natural than
keigo.
In other words, to use your words, I think a case could be made that if
keigo is an integral part of the language, then it's natural. After all,
as in everything else, definitions of this type require a sliding
spectrum to be accurate, since languages exist in the mouths of native
speakers with wildly varying needs and uses of the language.
--
Marc Adler
Austin, TX
mroe...@gmail.com
one.
No, I do not pretend to think I can tell a culture to change (and I am
in no way from a superior culture... I already told you I was
American. I already put my foot in my mouth with that one). I'm sure
there are plenty of people who love and embrace Keigo. I didn't mean
to offend. I do have a good understanding of Japanese culture and I do
realize its necessary and I will learn it (and am doing so). As far as
knowing if people speak it correctly, they told me directly that they
don't (lots of 就職活動 related conversations).
ただ、めんどうくさいと思う人居ないのか？I mean, casual speech is just so much easier, more
efficient, and (in my humble opinion) prettier. It reflects vitality
and change. I guess I'm just more into tune with that.
I didn't realize that people would be so sensitive about the topic on
here. My apologies. I'll shut up now and try not to dig myself into a
deeper hole.
Marc Adler
> Western commentators sometimes write as if the youth of Japan are
> tossing out all the old traditions.
In fact, the strongest bastions of keigo and other rigidly hierarchical
aspect of Japanese culture and language can be found in groups which are
considered anti-social - bousouzoku, yakuza, etc. You'll never (ever
ever) find a bouzouzoku pe-pe- misusing "(r)u" forms when speaking to a
senpai. (Of course, the polite forms seem to be "dictionary form" + ッ
ス. Is that where コンチワッス comes from?)
Fred Uleman
because English has a keigo deficiency. <g>
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Fred Uleman
Anthony Bryant
On Jun 18, 2007, at 9:23 PM, Karen Sandness wrote:
> You're right in that individual speakers may be shaky concerning
> the actual forms that keigo should take. I've heard Japanese people
> complain about mangled keigo from store clerks or other people in
> service positions. These may be indications of linguistic change.
> The keigo of today is not the keigo of 1,000 years ago, and I
> wouldn't be surprised if educated people of the thirteenth century
> complained that young servants didn't know the difference
> between 給う and 給える anymore.
>
> Historical perspectively yours,
> Karen Sandness
I'm reminded of the "Kotoba Ojisan" series -- specifically the one on
"sama".
If you want a chuckle, check it out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-mV-YrgrX0
The one on "tondemogozaimasen" is also worth a look:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtFhedMSIb8
Heck, they're all great.
Tony
James Sparks
> I mean, casual speech is just so much easier, more
> efficient, and (in my humble opinion) prettier. It reflects vitality
> and change. I guess I'm just more into tune with that.
I think this is a very typical American attitude, as opposed to the
attitudes of people from other English-speaking countries. It is my
understanding that the blunt casualness of American speech is its
signature feature in other countries, and is sort of considered "cute."
We're can-do, no-nonsense people who love to use first names and are
often put off by formal speech. But this attitude can seem unfavorable
when viewed by other people. I had American friends in Japan who
seriously argued that they shouldn't have to use -さん suffixes on their
friends' names. They were applying American language customs and rules
to Japanese, which is silly, if not dangerous. (I'm not implying that
this applies to you.)
Marc Adler wrote:
> What do you mean by natural?
I mean natural in its usual sense. If something comes naturally to
someone, they can use or perform it effortlessly, without much thought.
I have met many Japanese for whom that does not apply to their use of
keigo, but again, in a continuum of degree.
> In other words, to use your words, I think a case could be made that
> if keigo is an integral part of the language, then it's natural.
This may be a semantic disagreement, but many things can be integral to
a language and yet not entirely natural to its native speakers. And it
has nothing to do with being taught or not. Japanese people almost
never have any trouble using counters, even if they do have to be taught
them. Therefore, the use of counters in Japanese could be said to be
very natural for virtually all Japanese. Many Japanese use keigo on a
daily basis (for work, etc.), and for them it is surely as natural as
the language they use to their spouses. Others struggle a bit with keigo.
James Sparks
marc...@gmx.yamaha.com
> I think this is a very typical American attitude, as opposed to the
> attitudes of people from other English-speaking countries. It is my
> understanding that the blunt casualness of American speech is its
> signature feature in other countries, and is sort of considered "cute."
Marc Adler
> ただ、めんどうくさいと思う人居ないのか？
If you don't _feel_ how awkward that sounds in this forum, in this
context, then you need to go back and hit the books, Matt.
>I mean, casual speech is just so much easier, more
> efficient, and (in my humble opinion) prettier. It reflects vitality
> and change. I guess I'm just more into tune with that.
It's only easier if you don't know it.
Also, you don't seem to be aware of what the 就職活動 handbooks are
talking about, which is pretty arcane stuff (obviously way above your
head), like the proper use of 伺う, etc.
Desu/masu is not included. (Oh my god, I'm actually laughing out loud!)
> I didn't realize that people would be so sensitive about the topic on
> here. My apologies. I'll shut up now and try not to dig myself into a
> deeper hole.
If people here can be called "so sensitive," it's only to the realities
of spoken Japanese, which you have yet to master. You should take this
as a reality check, and reconsider your view of keigo. It might be cool
to spout that kind of nonsense with your teenage anime-club buddies, but
in the real world of adult Japanese, keigo is just another facet of how
Japanese is actually spoken, and should be accepted as such.
Alan Siegrist
> > I think this is a very typical American attitude, as opposed to the
> > attitudes of people from other English-speaking countries. It is my
> > understanding that the blunt casualness of American speech is its
> > signature feature in other countries, and is sort of considered "cute."
>
> Going a little OT here but I have had to act as a mediator in several
> situations where this tendency has acted as a severe irritant to business
> negotiations between US, Australian, and NZ nationals. Australians and
> NZers are normally casual but in certain business situations the bluntness
> and (mistakenly) perceived lack of nicety and tact resulted in severe
> friction with the business group, and was a prime reason (IMO) for the
> failure of that particular deal.
I find this quite interesting. May I ask you for some more details? Are you saying that it was bluntness and lack of tact on the part of the Australians and NZers that caused the friction?
From my experience, I must say that Americans can be very blunt and tactless, sometimes shockingly so, in certain business situations, but this certainly depends on the person and the situation. This could have been more of an interpersonal difficulty than an international one.
Regards,
Alan Siegrist
Orinda, CA, USA
AlanFS...@Comcast.net
mroe...@gmail.com
> I'm reminded of the "Kotoba Ojisan" series -- specifically the one on
> "sama".
>
> If you want a chuckle, check it out:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-mV-YrgrX0
>
> The one on "tondemogozaimasen" is also worth a look:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtFhedMSIb8
>
> Heck, they're all great.
>
> Tony
I'm *scarcasm* totally *sarcasm* adding 切ございません and きたございません to my
vocabulary now! (note the sarcasm tags)
On Jun 19, 11:03 am, James Sparks <jspa...@alamedanet.net> wrote:
> mroerd...@gmail.com wrote:
> > I mean, casual speech is just so much easier, more
> > efficient, and (in my humble opinion) prettier. It reflects vitality
> > and change. I guess I'm just more into tune with that.
>
> I think this is a very typical American attitude, as opposed to the
> attitudes of people from other English-speaking countries. It is my
> understanding that the blunt casualness of American speech is its
> signature feature in other countries, and is sort of considered "cute."
> We're can-do, no-nonsense people who love to use first names and are
> often put off by formal speech. But this attitude can seem unfavorable
> when viewed by other people. I had American friends in Japan who
> seriously argued that they shouldn't have to use -さん suffixes on their
> friends' names. They were applying American language customs and rules
> to Japanese, which is silly, if not dangerous. (I'm not implying that
> this applies to you.)
I agree with the former paragraph completely. And I understand the
latter. I had serious problems with the さん with my friends.
(thankfully many of my friends are students of English and so they
understand where I was coming from). I think when first learning a
language and first being exposed to a new culture people can't help
but apply their own customs and culture rules... because they have
nothing else to go on. I'll admit, I make a lot of mistakes (with
polite speech and just japanese in general)... sometimes conciously
(realize just after I say it wrong) and I'm sure very often when I
don't notice it at all. But, I'm sure its not only Americans who make
these mistakes. People from any culture different from Japan are going
to apply what they know in any given situation... and when they don't
know enough about the target culture they will pull something from
their past experiences in their own. But, as we spend more time in
Japan, or studying Japanese, cultural differences get less strange. It
gets easier to call your co-worker 田中さん. And all that was once odd
becomes natural and normal.
So perhaps thats the reason I have a disliking for honorific and
humble speech. It just makes me uncomfortable. But I do remember
reading (and then reflecting on it and realizing how true it may be)
how Americans are polite by making everyone equal and comfortable
("Make yourself at home!" ... which Japanese people translate as
"Serve yourself, I'm not gonna do it for you"). Whereas, Japanese
people like to show politeness by making things seemingly more
complicated "see how hard I'm working to serve you, see how busy I am
for you" etc. to raise the target person up on a pedistal (Of which
Americans will think "God, why doesn't this woman just sit down and
relax? She's making me all nervous with her busybodyness! If you want
to be nice to me, sit down and relax and talk to me."). Know what I
mean?
Peter Durfee
> This may be a semantic disagreement, but many things can be integral to
> a language and yet not entirely natural to its native speakers. And it
> has nothing to do with being taught or not. Japanese people almost
> never have any trouble using counters, even if they do have to be taught
> them. Therefore, the use of counters in Japanese could be said to be
> very natural for virtually all Japanese. Many Japanese use keigo on a
> daily basis (for work, etc.), and for them it is surely as natural as
> the language they use to their spouses. Others struggle a bit with keigo.
It has everything to do with being taught. You can argue that keigo is a
larger chunk of the language, and more challenging to learn, than counters,
but for people who have learned it it's just as natural as １本 for a pencil
and 1羽 for a bird and so on.
Every single part of the language is a human-created code that has to be
learned, whether by absorbing it as a toddler or studying it in school.
There are no degrees of "naturalness" when it comes to these things.
--
Peter Durfee
du...@gol.com
Tokyo
marc...@gmx.yamaha.com
> >
> > Going a little OT here but I have had to act as a mediator in several
> > situations where this tendency has acted as a severe irritant to business
> > negotiations between US, Australian, and NZ nationals. Australians and
> > NZers are normally casual but in certain business situations the bluntness
> > and (mistakenly) perceived lack of nicety and tact resulted in severe
> > friction with the business group, and was a prime reason (IMO) for the
> > failure of that particular deal.
>
> I find this quite interesting. May I ask you for some more details?
> Are you saying that it was bluntness and lack of tact on the part of
> the Australians and NZers that caused the friction?
>
> From my experience, I must say that Americans can be very blunt and
> tactless, sometimes shockingly so, in certain business situations,
> but this certainly depends on the person and the situation. This
> could have been more of an interpersonal difficulty than an international one.
>
Interpersonal difficulties were present, to be sure, but were not the prime reason for the project ending the way it did. I knew all parties involved well, and all were genuine, likeable people. However, both sides appeared to be unaware of the non-linguistic cultural and behavioral gaps, and made assumptions based purely on a understanding of language, rather than the thinking behind it. The project itself was a success, but the business relationship failed (despite my best efforts).
This appears to be going OT, but I will say that all those involved were IT engineers, working in a high-stress environment with mission-critical software. Situations such as these tend to bring out the worst in people in any case, but it was an intriguing example of language actually getting in the way of "communication."
Regards,
-Marc, Shizuoka
Anthony Bryant
On Jun 18, 2007, at 10:03 PM, James Sparks wrote:
>
> mroe...@gmail.com wrote:
>> I mean, casual speech is just so much easier, more
>> efficient, and (in my humble opinion) prettier. It reflects vitality
>> and change. I guess I'm just more into tune with that.
>
> I think this is a very typical American attitude, as opposed to the
> attitudes of people from other English-speaking countries. It is my
> understanding that the blunt casualness of American speech is its
> signature feature in other countries, and is sort of considered
> "cute."
This reminds me of my favorite quotation from Robert A. Heinlein:
Moving parts in rubbing contact require lubrication to avoid excssive
wear. Honorifics and formal politeness provide lubrication where
people rub together. Often the very young, the untravelled, the
naive, the unsophisticated deplore these formalities as empty,
meaningless, or dishonest, and scorn to use them. No matter how pure
their motives, they thereby throw sand into the machinery that does
not work too well at best. -- Robert A. Heinlein
Tony
mroe...@gmail.com
that I know nothing? Why do you laugh and assume I'm some anime otaku?
Why pull ukagau out of your ass and assume that I don't know how to
use it? And why even joke about desu/masu?
When I expressed my opinion about MY not liking keigo, I wasn't
directly offending anyone. But here you come at me and assume I'm an
idiot when you know nothing about me or how much I've studied or what
my interests or goals are for studying. Wow, and I thought I was a
rude American.
Real world of adult Japanese huh? Well, I'm an adult and I coverse
with other adults in Japanese and WE (not just me) never feel the need
to use keigo... not at work, not when we're out, and not in my family.
Is that not part of the adult world?
On Jun 19, 11:28 am, Marc Adler <m...@adlerpacific.com> wrote:
Edward Lipsett
> Why do you immediately assume that just because I don't like Keigo
> that I know nothing?
OK, stop it right there.
The above sentence is perfectly correct and justified.
The comment that triggered it was, IMHO, unjustified.
Please, please, keep your comments under control, everyone, before this gets
out of hand. If anyone feels the urge to call anyone else something
impolite, please do it offlist.
If anyone can't live with this, contact me offlist and I'll explain why you
have no choice.
--
Edward Lipsett, one of three list owners
Intercom, Ltd.
Fukuoka, Japan
Tel: 092-712-9120
Fax: 092-712-9220
trans...@intercomltd.com
http://www.intercomltd.com
Matt Stanton
us have felt the same as he did at one time or another.
In fact, reading this thread was what made me realize that I don't
feel that way anymore. I now use keigo every day in my communications
with agencies and clients, and it no longer feels in the least bit
unnatural or unnecessary. Weird.
James Sparks
> It has everything to do with being taught.
Maybe you misunderstood what I was saying. Marc suggested that the use
of counters might be considered an example of "unnatural" because it had
to be taught in school, as opposed to being unconsciously picked up
through everyday use. I countered that whether or not a part of
language is natural to its native speakers has nothing to do with
whether that part was taught in school or picked up, and instead has to
do with how effortlessly speakers/writers can use that part.
> but for people who have learned [keigo] it's just as natural as １本 for a pencil
> and 1羽 for a bird and so on.
Yes, but here you have changed "teach" to "learn." Of course all
language is learned, but it most certainly is not all taught.
> Every single part of the language is a human-created code that has to be
> learned, whether by absorbing it as a toddler or studying it in school.
Exactly, but those two are quite different methods of learning.
> There are no degrees of "naturalness" when it comes to these things.
Hmmm, I'm not sure how you could defend that statement. There are
areas of English which come more naturally to me than others, and I
can't imagine that this is not universal. It definitely applied to the
use of keigo by Japanese customers where I worked, and the degrees of
naturalness of keigo among those customers was quite evident. Not
exactly a scientific study, but more than enough to convince me.
James Sparks
Jim Lockhart
> Real world of adult Japanese huh? Well, I'm an adult and I coverse
> with other adults in Japanese and WE (not just me) never feel the need
> to use keigo... not at work, not when we're out, and not in my family.
> Is that not part of the adult world?
You may be able to get away without using keigo among your friends and
among your family, but you won't in society in general. People will give
you more leeway the more accented and halting your Japanese is, but once
you become reasonable proficient, they won't.
And while the use of keigo may be optional among your family members
(fwiw, I use a degree of keigo towards my in-laws, and they do towards
me; and I imagine--haven't really paid attention--my kids use a degree
of it towards me), if you refuse to use keigo where appropriate, you
might alienate friends and embarrass family.
Maybe the use of the equivalent of keigo is disappearing in some northwestern
European countries and North America in conjunction with changes in
values, but it's not happening to the same extent in Japan. Nor is it
necessarily desirable--there's a lot to be said for being courteous,
showing and receiving respect, and all that sort of thing; and a
culture's maintaining that does not necessarily make it backwards.
Or, as Wataru Tenga asked, should "we assume you represent a hitherto
unknown Superior Culture, one that has solved all or most of the issues
we ordinary folk are still struggling with, and that has thereby earned
the right to tell other cultures how to go about their lives?"
And if we should, the please let us how your Superior Culture deals with
cultural imperialism.
--Jim Lockhart
Marc Adler
> You may be able to get away without using keigo among your friends and
> among your family, but you won't in society in general. People will give
> you more leeway the more accented and halting your Japanese is, but once
> you become reasonable proficient, they won't.
A friend of mine is trapped in the language-learning hole you describe.
His Japanese is pretty good, but far from perfect. He married a Japanese
woman, and his in-laws (and his wife) told him that he shouldn't worry
about using keigo with them. They are a very traditional family, almost
a throwback - the mother uses keigo with the father, etc. - and to hear
my friend speaking tameguchi with his father-in-law sounds very weird. I
told him that he should use keigo, but his in-laws told him he didn't
need to, so his response is: why bother?
Pamela Ikegami
On Jun 19, 2007, at 10:16 AM, Marc Adler wrote:
>
> A friend of mine is trapped in the language-learning hole you
> describe.
> His Japanese is pretty good, but far from perfect. He married a
> Japanese
> woman, and his in-laws (and his wife) told him that he shouldn't worry
> about using keigo with them. They are a very traditional family,
> almost
> a throwback - the mother uses keigo with the father, etc. - and to
> hear
> my friend speaking tameguchi with his father-in-law sounds very
> weird. I
> told him that he should use keigo, but his in-laws told him he didn't
> need to, so his response is: why bother?
He should bother because that's probably a tatemae response by his in-
laws, who are actually expecting him to make the effort and learn how
to wield the keigo properly. Or perhaps they are throwback enough to
believe a foreigner could never get it right anyway so why bother...?
Pam Ikegami
Marc Adler
> He should bother because that's probably a tatemae response by his in-
> laws, who are actually expecting him to make the effort and learn how
> to wield the keigo properly. Or perhaps they are throwback enough to
> believe a foreigner could never get it right anyway so why bother...?
Clearly the latter. They believe they're cutting him some slack.
Chris Moore
it out to the list and not a single person as my last couple posts
have…
All this talk about keigo and me with a question about a keigo phrase
I hear around town. I live in Nagoya and in many circumstances where
I could be considered a "guest" I often have questions asked of me
with "~te mieru" or as confirming statements as in "結婚してみ
えますか？どこに住んでみえますか？" etc.
My question is: is this phrase just part of the Nagoya dialect? I
don't remember having it introduced in beginner to intermediate
courses (my further study has been mostly self directed and I may
have missed it). It seems to replace irrashaimasu and orimasu as
appropriate, but is there circumstances where I should avoid it's
use? (aside from the obvious non-Nagoyans if it is indeed Nagoya-ben)
Thanks in advance
Chris Moore
Peter Durfee
> Maybe you misunderstood what I was saying. Marc suggested that the use
> of counters might be considered an example of "unnatural" because it had
> to be taught in school, as opposed to being unconsciously picked up
> through everyday use. I countered that whether or not a part of
> language is natural to its native speakers has nothing to do with
> whether that part was taught in school or picked up, and instead has to
> do with how effortlessly speakers/writers can use that part.
I think we're going to need to work out some accepted definitions for words
like "natural" if this discussion is going to go anywhere meaningful. I
don't see how it's less *natural* for an intelligent businessperson to use
keigo than it is for a young child to speak with his parents, unless we
start out by degining that *naturalness* as "requiring less structured
education to pick up."
> Yes, but here you have changed "teach" to "learn." Of course all
> language is learned, but it most certainly is not all taught.
More words that need defining. Someone--or some experience--is doing the
teaching, if learning is going on. And once that learning gets done the
lessons have been internalized and the language learned is spoken in a
"natural" fashion. If you define "teaching" as "imparting this knowledge in
a structured classroom setting," then that's something that would make me
rephrase my claims.
>> Every single part of the language is a human-created code that has to be
>> learned, whether by absorbing it as a toddler or studying it in school.
>
> Exactly, but those two are quite different methods of learning.
So what? Once learned, is lesson A somehow "less natural" than lesson B when
it comes out in fluent native speech?
>> There are no degrees of "naturalness" when it comes to these things.
>
> Hmmm, I'm not sure how you could defend that statement.
By defining "natural" as "nothing at all in language," since a human being
has to learn every linguistic form from other humans, rather than produce it
naturally from within. (Or "that which comes effortlessly from the mouth of
a native speaker who has learned that form," if you prefer that.) Your
customers who had trouble with keigo form X hadn't learned it; of course it
would not be a part of their language. It makes it no less natural a part of
language than any simpler part, unless we define natural as "easy to learn
in early childhood or outside of school."
Peter Durfee
du...@gol.com
Marc Adler
> It seems to replace irrashaimasu and orimasu as
> appropriate, but is there circumstances where I should avoid it's
> use? (aside from the obvious non-Nagoyans if it is indeed Nagoya-ben)
They might use it more than in other dialects, but みえる is
high-register keigo in standard Japanese. You might also hear the form
おみえ (as in ～～さんおみえです when a guest has arrived).
James Sparks
> I don't see how it's less *natural* for an intelligent businessperson to use
> keigo than it is for a young child to speak with his parents, unless we
> start out by degining that *naturalness* as "requiring less structured
> education to pick up."
Of course not, and I never said so. That is, I never said that the
action of speaking keigo is unnatural. What I did say is that for _some
native speakers_, speaking keigo does not come as naturally as speaking
other forms of Japanese. To put it another way, I'm not saying that
keigo is somehow intrinsically unnatural, but only that its use is not
always effortless, which of course is due to unfamiliarity.
> More words that need defining. Someone--or some experience--is doing the
> teaching, if learning is going on.
Come on, you're being argumentative here. A reasonable person knows
exactly what I meant, without any definitions involved. But if you
insist: We learn most of our native language without being taught, and
by teaching I mean the deliberate imparting of knowledge from someone
with that knowledge to someone who lacks it (whether in a classroom or
elsewhere). The rest is all copying, which to me is distinct from being
taught.
> Once learned, is lesson A somehow "less natural" than lesson B when
> it comes out in fluent native speech?
My very point was that naturalness does not depend on the method of
learning. It is a measure of effort. Something that comes naturally
requires little or no effort or thought.
Using chopsticks is natural to me, and it was never taught to me.
Driving a car is natural to me, and it was taught to me.
Walking on stilts is not natural to me, and it was never taught to me.
Speaking Italian is not natural to me, and it was taught to me.
See? The naturalness of an activity is not dependent on whether it was
taught or not. Nor are any of the above intrinsically natural or
unnatural. It is all relative to the doer.
> Your customers who had trouble with keigo form X hadn't learned it; of course it
> would not be a part of their language. It makes it no less natural a part of
> language than any simpler part, unless we define natural as "easy to learn
> in early childhood or outside of school."
But it was NOT natural to them! I didn't say anything about it not
being a natural part of the Japanese language (I don't even know what
that would mean).
By the same token, I know Japanese people for whom vulgar, yakuza-like
speech is very far from being natural. They would have to expend
tremendous effort in speaking that way, so to those people, vulgar
speech is unnatural. Similarly, many Japanese women would have
difficulty using rough male speech fluently, and many Japanese men would
have difficulty using effeminate speech fluently.
The speech itself isn't unnatural, though. It's a relative concept I
hope you can understand.
James Sparks
Tomoko Schum
も関西ではもっと一般的なように思います。 「何処に住んでみえますか」は、「何処に住んでおられますか」になり、「結婚してみ
えますか」は「結婚されてますか」となります。
友子
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Moore" <moor...@gmail.com>
To: <hon...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2007 9:56 AM
Subject: OT: keigo (shite mieru) was 日→英 翻訳・通訳 courses or
certifications
I'm not getting my messages to the list lately so I hope
this makes
it out to the list and not a single person as my last couple
posts
have...
Mika Jz
anyway.
Chris M asked:
> My question is: is this phrase just part of the Nagoya dialect?
> "結婚してみえますか？
> どこに住んでみえますか？"
Yes, the above sound awfully regional to me.
どこにお住まいですか？ どちらにお住まいですか？ お住まいはどちらです
か？
would be more standard.
I had to think a bit about the 結婚 question, as I couldn't quite fathom
a situation, other than perhaps some sort of a survey, that this gets
asked; in situations where keigo is called for; but on second thought,
some people are interested in politely knowing my citizenship status in
the US. Oh well, it must be a gaijin thing.
I agree with Marc on ○○さんがお見えです, by the way.
Mika Jarmusz
Salem, Oregon USA
Tomoko Schum
「お住まいはどちらですか」が最も一般的な言い方ですね。
友子
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mika Jz" <mjz-...@comcast.net>
To: <hon...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2007 10:55 AM
Subject: RE: keigo (shite mieru) was 日→英 翻訳・通訳
courses or certifications
Chris Moore
> I had to think a bit about the 結婚 question, as I couldn't
> quite fathom
> a situation, other than perhaps some sort of a survey, that
> this gets
> asked; in situations where keigo is called for; but on
> second thought,
> some people are interested in politely knowing my
> citizenship status in
> the US. Oh well, it must be a gaijin thing.
>
Well as translation doesn't at this point pay the bills for me, in my
other life I'm one of those goofy foreigners they bring into junior
high schools to help teach children how to play battleship and do
mock Eiken mensetsu tests and so on. When in the staff room teachers
often talk to me either with "してみえます" or even more common,
"してみえる". For example: 「モアさんは結婚してみえるんで
すね。奥様は日本人ですか？」「車で学校まで来てみえるんです
か？」 As these are people I see every day but don't get a lot
of time to interact with it's natural that they have various personal
questions about who I am and what I think of Japan and so on.
I like the sound of "shite mieru" because it seems to include inside/
outside deference but feels like there's a warm personal connection
that feels less present in irrashaimasu/irrasharu. This is mostly
conjecture though because again it's a case of 慣れ not
something I studied.
Speaking of school, it's time to go!
Chris Moore
Mika Jz
敬語には、Karenさんが言われたように、
相手との距離を「これこれぐらいにとらえてます。」と
相手に伝える作用がありますね。
下の例を見てみても、それぞれにニュアンスがこもってしまうようです。
（質問自体が 余計なお世話だから かもしれませんが。）
結婚されてます?
結婚されてるんですか?
結婚なさってるんですか？
ご結婚なさってます？
結婚されておられますか？
結婚されていらっしゃるんですか？
こうして並べてみると、かならずしも丁寧なほどよそよそしくなる、
距離が遠ざかる、というわけでもなさそう。
あえてよそよそしくするなら、「ばかていねいに」言えばいいわけで。
結婚してる？
これは近い。近すぎて邪魔か。
求人面接なら、
で、ご結婚は？
ご結婚の方は？
ぐらいかな？
ところで、ちょっとこれ、どうです？
結婚して（い）ますか？
距離感の 欠如が 異様に怖くないですか？
口調で距離感を補えば、
大丈夫なのかしら．．．。
私もはっきりいってあやふやなんで
あんまりつっこまれても困るんですが。
会話なら、
まだお独りですか？
あたりがいいかもしれませんね。
I enjoyed reading the observations on the ご進物 and the 暴走族のぺー
ぺーusing 敬語.
Mika Jz
> すね。奥様は日本人ですか？」「車で学校まで来てみえるんです
> か？」
> outside deference but feels like there's a warm personal connection
> that feels less present in irrashaimasu/irrasharu.
Reminds me of してはる in kansai-ben :-)
Stephen A. Carter
> All this talk about keigo and me with a question about a keigo phrase
> I hear around town. I live in Nagoya and in many circumstances where
> I could be considered a "guest" I often have questions asked of me
> with "~te mieru" or as confirming statements as in "結婚してみ
> えますか？どこに住んでみえますか？" etc.
>
> My question is: is this phrase just part of the Nagoya dialect?
Yes.
Here's a site that explains it a bit:
http://www.lang.nagoya-u.ac.jp/~mohso/kyozai96/nagoyaben/verb.html
--
Stephen A. Carter
sca...@hticn.com
Nagoya, Japan
Anthony Bryant
On Jun 19, 2007, at 9:43 AM, James Sparks wrote:
>
> Maybe you misunderstood what I was saying. Marc suggested that
> the use
> of counters might be considered an example of "unnatural" because
> it had
> to be taught in school, as opposed to being unconsciously picked up
> through everyday use. I countered that whether or not a part of
> language is natural to its native speakers has nothing to do with
> whether that part was taught in school or picked up, and instead
> has to
> do with how effortlessly speakers/writers can use that part.
Exactly, otherwise we would not have had "grammar" and "English"
classes in elementary school!
Tony
Steve Venti
>> . . . is this phrase just part of the Nagoya dialect?
My understanding is that it is a colloquial form of irassharu, and
that in addition to the Nagoya area, it gets used quite a bit south
and west of the Kiso River, as well, although I don't recall hearing
it as often in the Tokyo area. Does anyone know in which parts, if
any, of Japan this expression isn't used regularly?
--
Steve Venti
The source of all unhappiness is other people.
--Wally
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Moore
On 2007/06/20, at 7:45, Stephen A. Carter wrote:
>
> http://www.lang.nagoya-u.ac.jp/~mohso/kyozai96/nagoyaben/verb.html
>
Wow! Great link! Thanks.
Chris Moore
Mika Jz
> any, of Japan this expression isn't used regularly?
みえる いらっしゃいますか
「何をしてみえますか（何をしていらっしゃいますか）」
「眠ってみえます（眠っていらっしゃいます）」
「電話で○○さんみえますか（○○さん居ますか）」
など動詞について敬語的に使われることが多い。
さきほど、クリスさんの出された例が気に入った、
と言いましたが、
それはよそのお国の方言らしくていい、
というだけのことであって、
上記は、京阪神あたりでは使わないと思います。
どこから来たのかと聞かれますよ。
どの辺が境になっているのかはわかりませんが。
Steve Venti
> など動詞について敬語的に使われることが多い。
Right. But that was a link to a page about Mikawa-ben. So we know that
this expression is used all around Ise-wan, because it is a part of
Ise-ben, too. But what I am asking is, are there any parts of Japan
where this expression is NOT used on a daily basis?
I notice that Daijinrin gives （４）「来る」の尊敬語。おいでになる。「お客さんがお―・えです」, but
does not provide a sense that would be equivalent to the usages that
Mika-san enumerated.
That seems to imply that 「誰々さんがお見えです。」 is standard Japanese, but that
「何々をしてみえますか」 could possibly be limited to certain areas. I'm just
curious to know where it isn't used or might not be readily
understood.
Peter Durfee
> Come on, you're being argumentative here. A reasonable person knows
> exactly what I meant, without any definitions involved. But if you
> insist: We learn most of our native language without being taught, and
> by teaching I mean the deliberate imparting of knowledge from someone
> with that knowledge to someone who lacks it (whether in a classroom or
> elsewhere). The rest is all copying, which to me is distinct from being
> taught.
I am being "argumentative" (I thought this was a discussion thread?) because
these terms *do* need to be nailed down, or we get not-so-meaningful
statements like "keigo isn't as natural as counter markers." Thank you for
your paragraph here. :-)
It's clear that you're saying that keigo is a complex feature of the
language, and it's hard to learn it without structured instruction; there
aren't so many people who are effortlessly fluent in it, as compared to the
number of people who can use simpler forms without thinking much about them.
I agree with that. What I'm saying is that to a person who is effortlessly
fluent in the keigo part of the language, having learned it properly, it is
a part of Japanese that "comes naturally" to her. (I'm also saying that this
effortless fluency is different from "a natural part of the language." We're
professional writers here; we should pay close attention to things like
this. ;-)
I do think people pick up a fair amount of keigo from exposure to it in the
workplace, separately from any classroom lessons in it they might have had.
--
Peter Durfee
du...@gol.com
Tokyo
James Sparks
> It's clear that you're saying that keigo is a complex feature of the
> language, and it's hard to learn it without structured instruction;
At the risk of being argumentative <g>, I'd like to see the quote of my
post that made you think I was saying that. I don't think keigo is any
more complex than other parts of Japanese, and most definitely do not
believe it's hard to learn it without structured instruction. Keigo can
be absorbed (picked up) just as easily as any other part of the
language, given sufficient exposure. It's just that many or most
Japanese aren't exposed to keigo as much as to other parts of their
language.
> What I'm saying is that to a person who is effortlessly
> fluent in the keigo part of the language, having learned it properly, it is
> a part of Japanese that "comes naturally" to her.
At last, something we agree on! ;-)
> (I'm also saying that this
> effortless fluency is different from "a natural part of the language." We're
> professional writers here; we should pay close attention to things like
> this.
Please explain what you mean by "a natural part of the language." I'm
not being facetious; I really don't understand. Isn't the whole
language intrinsically natural, except for maybe foreign words that have
been recently introduced? That's the distinction I was trying to make
clear, that keigo isn't anymore unnatural by itself than ですます調, but
rather naturalness is correlated to exposure and familiarity. Since the
word natural seems to be a sticking point in our discussion, maybe I
should change to "familiar(ity)." In this context, the two are
synonymous to me, but maybe we can get along better with the latter
word. <g>
> I do think people pick up a fair amount of keigo from exposure to it in the
> workplace, separately from any classroom lessons in it they might have had.
Agreed.
James Sparks
Peter Durfee
> Please explain what you mean by "a natural part of the language." I'm
> not being facetious; I really don't understand. Isn't the whole
> language intrinsically natural, except for maybe foreign words that have
> been recently introduced?
I think every part of the language is equally natural. I think we agree
here.
> That's the distinction I was trying to make
> clear, that keigo isn't anymore unnatural by itself than ですます調, but
> rather naturalness is correlated to exposure and familiarity. Since the
> word natural seems to be a sticking point in our discussion, maybe I
> should change to "familiar(ity)."
Yeah, this is what was bothering me about the "natural" label. Exposure,
familiarity, and fluency are things we can talk about in the context of an
individual speaker, while "naturalness" makes me think of the linguistic
categorizations of the language as a whole. (The thing about recently
introduced foreign words would be an interesting thread to pursue, too. Does
a new word become a natural part of the language when two people use it
effortlessly in conversation with each other, when it's commonly understood
among a whole tribe of Shibuya schoolkids, when it appears in last year's 知
恵蔵, or what?)
Matt Stanton
use "...te mieru" all the time here, even though the local dialect is
generally more similar to Kansai-ben than Nagoya-ben.
Matthew Fitsko
On Jun 20, 12:09 pm, Peter Durfee <d...@gol.com> wrote:
> Yeah, this is what was bothering me about the "natural" label. Exposure,
> familiarity, and fluency are things we can talk about in the context of an
> individual speaker, while "naturalness" makes me think of the linguistic
> categorizations of the language as a whole.
If you'll allow me to jump into this lively argument between you and
James, I'd say that thinking about "the language as a whole" is where
things are going awry. I find it very difficult to divorce the
context, as you say, of individual speakers or groups from
considerations of "naturalness" about an aspect of the language. I
would say naturalness is a perception that is grounded in the context
of the speaker(s), and things get very tricky when you try to maintain
the Japanese language as a monolithic entity. The naturalness of keigo
is, I think Peter and James agree, largely dependent on the speaker's
age, education, business experience, etc.
Or to take up Peter's last question, gairaigo like the stuff that
litters political and economic discussions in the 文藝春秋, for example,
is presumably natural for their writers and readers, just as
neologisms that emerge from tribes of Shibuya schoolkids often become
very natural expressions for that group. However, I think I can safely
say that these two groups are all but mutually exclusive, and their
respective language subsets are highly unnatural for the other party.
This is also simply called jargon, argot, etc. Again, the naturalness
entirely depends on the speaker.
I agree that keigo is a fundamental aspect of Japanese, but that
doesn't mean it is natural (as opposed to intelligible) for all or
even most Japanese speakers. And keigo, too, is very layered. The NJS
in my house is in my opinion a highly adept keigo user and an absolute
sorceress for calling people up and getting things straightened out
with a polite phone call, but there are unplumbed depths of keigo
where even she is baffled.
I think I may just be repeating what Peter and James have already
hashed out, but that is my take on this subject.
Matthew Fitsko