hoshii and hoshigatte-iru ???
abc
how does the hoshigatte come from the hoshii ? Is it the te-form of the
i-adjective hoshii ? But why gatte not katte ?
Is it applied to other (i/na) adjectives such as akai, suki ?
thanks.
Tomoyuki Tanaka
"-garu" means "to appear as"
"hosigaru" means "to appear to want", "seem to want", ...
the same for
uresigaru
iyagaru
omosirogaru
...
--------------------------------------------------------------------
s.l.j (TT topics) FAQ: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/japan/language-TT
http://www.cs.uu.nl/wais/html/na-dir/japan/language-TT.html
http://www.lib.ox.ac.uk/internet/news/faq/archive/japan.language-tt.html
--
;;; TANAKA Tomoyuki ("Mr. Tanaka" or "Tomoyuki")
;;; http://www.cs.indiana.edu/hyplan/tanaka.html
Sean Holland
>hello
>
>how does the hoshigatte come from the hoshii ? Is it the te-form of the
>i-adjective hoshii ? But why gatte not katte ?
>Is it applied to other (i/na) adjectives such as akai, suki ?
>
-garu is used only after words that refer to FEELINGS. In the first
place, it shows that the feelings are strong, and are happening now.
tabetagaru: really wants to eat.
hoshigaru: wants badly
iyagaru: feels a strong repulsion to...
It is rarely used in the first or second person. It's use is almost
always in the third person, when the speaker is attributing the feelings
to someone else.
You'll often hear people described as "samugariya" and so on. The
"feeling" word samui + gari (stem of garu) + ya, which usually stands for
a shop but here it stands for a person. So a "samugariya" is someone who
feels cold easily. Hazukashigariya would be someone who easily has
feelings of shyness and embarassment. And so on.
Probably the most common use -garu is when the speaker is attributing
desire to someone else. Tabetagatteiru. He wants to eat. Once you have
added -tai to a verb stem to express desire, the thing you have left
operates just like an "-i adjective".
--
Sean
Due to spam filtering, mail from hotmail or prodigy will not reach me.
muchan
> In article <36B82D...@yahoo.com>, abc <a...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >hello
> >
> >how does the hoshigatte come from the hoshii ? Is it the te-form of the
> >i-adjective hoshii ? But why gatte not katte ?
> >Is it applied to other (i/na) adjectives such as akai, suki ?
>
> "-garu" means "to appear as"
>
> "hosigaru" means "to appear to want", "seem to want", ...
>
> the same for
> uresigaru
> iyagaru
> omosirogaru
> ...
It seems me that TT the native speaker is confusing of "-sou" and "-garu"...
muchan
Philip Brown
>
> -garu is used only after words that refer to FEELINGS. In the first
>place, it shows that the feelings are strong, and are happening now.
> tabetagaru: really wants to eat.
> hoshigaru: wants badly
> iyagaru: feels a strong repulsion to...
>
> It is rarely used in the first or second person. It's use is almost
>always in the third person, when the speaker is attributing the feelings
>to someone else.
so what's the "best" way to say "I really want to eat xxx"?
I heard that "tabetai" isn't really used by adults.
--
[trim the no-bots from my address to reply to me by email!]
--------------------------------------------------
Secret nONsONaTIAL monologue...
H52QdPK4iQPijBgQeMKIUQOCjRg0IN6IYWMGhJszBevIARHGjBuLZTaKCZNx4x0xb0CsWYlQ
jpwxINDAPKMRBB0xYgiqEVMGj0qWbsIQnOMyD4g5ITcaBOGRDYg6C+OwWalAAQ
Gerald B Mathias
: hello
: how does the hoshigatte come from the hoshii ? Is it the te-form of the
: i-adjective hoshii ? But why gatte not katte ?
: Is it applied to other (i/na) adjectives such as akai, suki ?
Sean has already answered this nicely. Let me take care of a couple of
loose ends:
The te-form of an i-adjective is made with -kute, not -katte. Unlike the
case with verbs, the -ta/-te alternation doesn't work with adjectives.
(With na-adjectives, it comes out -datta/-de.)
You probably can't use -garu with *all* adjectives that express feelings.
As Sean demonstrates with iya-garu, na-adjectives are OK sometimes, but I
for one would be chicken to experiment with suki-garu, kirai-garu, etc.
Perhaps "express feelings" can be defined clearly enough so that one could
say all i-adjectives that express feelings are OK?
Bart
Prince Richard Kaminski
Philip Brown wrote:
> so what's the "best" way to say "I really want to eat xxx"?
>
> I heard that "tabetai" isn't really used by adults.
Why not? Sounds OK to me.
gyouza tabetai na!
Sean Holland
<dobun...@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote:
Maybe the thing adults aren't supposed to do is pull at the clothing of
their companion crying "Tabetai! Tabetai! Tabetai!" when they pass a
gyouza restaurant.
Prince Richard Kaminski
Sean Holland wrote:
>
> In article <36B8AABD...@NOSPAMhotmail.com>, Prince Richard Kaminski
> <dobun...@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Philip Brown wrote:
> >
> >> so what's the "best" way to say "I really want to eat xxx"?
> >>
> >> I heard that "tabetai" isn't really used by adults.
> >
> >Why not? Sounds OK to me.
> >
> >gyouza tabetai na!
>
> Maybe the thing adults aren't supposed to do is pull at the clothing of
> their companion crying "Tabetai! Tabetai! Tabetai!" when they pass a
> gyouza restaurant.
Hmmmm. I didn't realise that was what my friends were objecting to. I
thought they just didn't like gyouza.
abc
>
> In article <36B82D...@yahoo.com>, abc <a...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >hello
> >
> >how does the hoshigatte come from the hoshii ? Is it the te-form of the
> >i-adjective hoshii ? But why gatte not katte ?
> >Is it applied to other (i/na) adjectives such as akai, suki ?
>
>
> "hosigaru" means "to appear to want", "seem to want", ...
>
> the same for
> uresigaru
> iyagaru
> omosirogaru
> ...
I see. Then how is it different to -soudesu ? eg, omoshirosoudesu.
thanks
abc
Tomoyuki Tanaka
>>
>> -garu is used only after words that refer to FEELINGS. In the first
>>place, it shows that the feelings are strong, and are happening now.
"the feelings are strong" --- incorrect
"and are happening now." --- also incorrect
>> tabetagaru: really wants to eat.
>> hoshigaru: wants badly
>> iyagaru: feels a strong repulsion to...
>>
>> It is rarely used in the first or second person. It's use is almost
>>always in the third person, when the speaker is attributing the feelings
>>to someone else.
again, incorrect.
the first and second person uses are pretty common.
Tomoyuki Tanaka
>>
>> "-garu" means "to appear as"
>>
>> "hosigaru" means "to appear to want", "seem to want", ...
this definition above comes from my Jp->Jp dictionary.
(in response to the twit's comment)
>>
>> the same for
>> uresigaru
>> iyagaru
>> omosirogaru
>> ...
>
>I see. Then how is it different to -soudesu ? eg, omoshirosoudesu.
completely different.
i'll write this later.
Sean Holland
obviously confused. Samuel Martin (THE authority in English language
explanations of Japanese), in A Reference Grammar of Japanese, says:
"The verbalized desideratives have a strong meaning 'desires', 'is
eager to', and in sentences of of straightforward reference they are
seldom, if ever, used of one's own desires."
In case TT can't understand English sentences with capitalization and
punctuation, the term "verbalized desideratives" refers verbs of the form
-tagaru.
In article <79auig$5f4$1...@mark.ucdavis.edu>, ez07...@catbert.ucdavis.edu
(Tomoyuki Tanaka) wrote:
--
Sean Holland
(Tomoyuki Tanaka) wrote:
> completely different.
> i'll write this later.
After you study Japanese grammar for a couple of years?
muchan
the same. First we'd check the change of gramatical functionality by adding
'-sou" and "-garu", before looking into the meanings.
omoshiroi adjective
omoshiro-sou(-na) adjective of different group
omoshiro-sou(-ni) adverb (in my grammer)
omoshiro-gar-u verb
So "hoshii" + "-garu" ===> "hoshi-garu" is creation of compound verb from
adjective.
Now the meanings. It's good idea to contrast "-sou(-na)" and "-gar-u".
"(ADJ)-sou(-na)" means "appear to be (ADJ)". Without knowing the reality
inside, from the outside it looks like being the state od adjective. I think
this explanation is valid of all cases.
"-garu" is not so simple. I'd make some groups.
Group A:
(N-ga) hoshii (N-ga) hoshi-sou(-na) (N-o) hoshi-garu
(V-shi)-tai (V-shi)-ta-sou(-na) (V-shi)ta-garu
tanoshii tanoshi-sou(-na) tanoshi-garu
ureshii ureshi-sou(-na) ureshi-garu
kanashii kanashi-sou(-na) kanashi-garu
itai ita-sou(-na) ita-garu
kayui kayu-sou(-na) kayu-garu
May be this group can be subgrouped to three, they are "internal State of Mind",
wanting, feeling, or sensing.
"-sou(-na)" add the meaning, that not knowing the reality, if someone feels,
it appears so outside".
"-garu" is kind of action of "expressing the state of mind".
ureshi-sou-ni warau (smile as if being very happy, smile happily)
sonna-ni kanashi-garu koto nai-yo (you don't need to feel so sad...)
Group B:
kowai kowa-sou(-na) kowa-garu
I can't easily find other example. But this case is interesting.
Watashi-wa hebi-ga kowai
(I'm scared of snakes. I fear snakes.)
Mori-ni-wa kowai ookami-ga ite...
(In the wood, there is terrible wolf and...)
Kono sensee-wa kowai
(This teacher is tough)
Kono sensee-wa kowa-sou
(This teacher looks tough)
Nani-o sonna-ni kowagatte iru-no?
(What are you fearing so?)
(A-wa) B-ga kowai. A is the person who feels fear of B
A-ga/wa B-o kowa-garu. A is the person who feels fear of B
kowai N terrible N
kowa-sou-na N N, which looks terrible
Group C:
tsuyoi tsuyo-sou(-na) tsuyo-garu
I can't easily find other example. But this case is not State of Mind.
ChiyonoOoumi-wa tsuyoi.
(ChiyonoOoumi IS strong)
Kondo-no aite-wa tsuyo-sou-da
(The next adversary looks strong)
Aitsu-wa tada tsuyo-gatte-iru dake-sa
(He is just pretending to be strong.)
Group D:
takai taka-sou(-na) N/A
yasui yasu-sou(-na) N/A
tsumetai tsumeta-sou(-na) :)
oishii oishi-sou-(-na) :)
There are adjective which "-garu" doesn't fit. "tsumeta-garu" "oishi-garu"
sounds me gray zone, maybe get copyright praise. :)
"taka-gari" is "hawk hunting"... (not "-garu" of this thread.)
"hirogaru" "hirogeru" is different kind. Not the "-garu" of this thread, but
etymologically, it may related.
After thinking so far, going back to group A, (State of Mind), "-garu" doen't
necessary to mean "expressing" the state of mind.
heiki-sou-na kao-o shite-ite-mo, kokoro-no naka-wa totemo kanashigatte-iru
(making the face as if everything's OK, but in his heart deeply sad.)
Not necessary "expressing", but just "having the feeling of" the state of mind,
then I can say the function of "-garu" for group A is just "making verbs from
adjectives."
and group B, (kowa-garu) can be just a subgroup of group A.
Not that simple, is it?
muchan
Tomoyuki Tanaka
>
>Group A:
> (N-ga) hoshii (N-ga) hoshi-sou(-na) (N-o) hoshi-garu
> (V-shi)-tai (V-shi)-ta-sou(-na) (V-shi)ta-garu
interesting post.
in "hosii" + "-garu" ==> "hosigaru"
i can't tell if "hosii" is an adj or a verb.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
attachment of -sou is pretty simple.
it seems to attach to anything.
ookisou (ni mieru)
ame ga furi sou da
on the other hand, -garu does not attach to all adjs describing
feelings / state of mind.
hazukasigaru is ok
but (can't think of a good example.)
<keiyoudousi> -garu
kinodoku-garu is ok
but sinapai-garu is not
--------------------------------------------------------------------
i think -garu has the connotation of "tendency".
hazukasii just describes the present state of mind.
whereas
hazukasigaru suggests "tend to ..."
hence
hazukasigari is someone with that tendency.
sabisigari is the same as sabisinbou.
Ansm123
Sean Holland <seho...@islandnet.com> wrote:
> I'd recommend completely ignoring TT's opinions on this, as he is
> obviously confused. Samuel Martin (THE authority in English language
> explanations of Japanese), in A Reference Grammar of Japanese, says:
>
> "The verbalized desideratives have a strong meaning 'desires', 'is
> eager to', and in sentences of of straightforward reference they are
> seldom, if ever, used of one's own desires."
>
(snip)
> In article <79auig$5f4$1...@mark.ucdavis.edu>, ez07...@catbert.ucdavis.edu
> (Tomoyuki Tanaka) wrote:
(snip)
> > "the feelings are strong" --- incorrect
> > "and are happening now." --- also incorrect
> >
> >>> tabetagaru: really wants to eat.
> >>> hoshigaru: wants badly
> >>> iyagaru: feels a strong repulsion to...
> >>>
> >>> It is rarely used in the first or second person. It's use is almost
> >>>always in the third person, when the speaker is attributing the feelings
> >>>to someone else.
> >
> > again, incorrect.
> > the first and second person uses are pretty common.
Examples of the use in the first and second person are as follows:
Watashi ga konnani hoshigatte iru noni katte kurenai.
Anata wa iranai to itte iru keredo, hontou wa hoshigatte irunodeshou?
In both case, 'watashi=I' or 'anata=you' desire to do something in fact, but
the desire appears somewhat netagive. Can TT or anyone else find other
examples?
Annie
Annie
<ans...@aol.com>
Tomoyuki Tanaka
Ansm123 <ans...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>Sean Holland <seho...@islandnet.com> wrote:
>
>> >>> It is rarely used in the first or second person. It's use is almost
>> >>>always in the third person, when the speaker is attributing the feelings
>> >>>to someone else.
>> >
>> > again, incorrect.
>> > the first and second person uses are pretty common.
thanks for the examples of the use in the first and second
person (below).
Holland was wrong, but i see that he was relying on an
incorrect assertion in a book.
>Examples of the use in the first and second person are as follows:
>
>Watashi ga konnani hoshigatte iru noni katte kurenai.
>
>Anata wa iranai to itte iru keredo, hontou wa hoshigatte irunodeshou?
>
>In both case, 'watashi=I' or 'anata=you' desire to do something in fact, but
>the desire appears somewhat netagive. Can TT or anyone else find other
>examples?
>
great point.
(1) the main connotation of -garu is that the feeling is deemed
negatively.
hosii is just "want"
hosigaru is "wanting when that desire is inappropriate"
e.g. the wartime slogan "hosigarimasen katumadeha"
(note another first person use)
sabisigari(ya) is someone who feels lonely too much.
(2) another connotation of -garu is that the feeling is not genuine
e.g. kinodoku-garu ... concern which may not be wholly genuine.
(3) third connotation of -garu is "tendency" (see previous post).
Gerald B Mathias
: I agree with Holland.
: Sean Holland <seho...@islandnet.com> wrote:
: > I'd recommend completely ignoring TT's opinions on this, as he is
: > obviously confused. Samuel Martin (THE authority in English language
: > explanations of Japanese), in A Reference Grammar of Japanese, says:
: >
: > "The verbalized desideratives have a strong meaning 'desires', 'is
: > eager to', and in sentences of of straightforward reference they are
: > seldom, if ever, used of one's own desires."
I very often agree with Holland and usually with "THE authority," but I'm
going to have to ask Sam, if as he says (still p. 358), "Ano hon o
yomi-ta-gatte iru" means "He is eager to read that book" ("strong
meaning"), how should one express "He sort of half-heartedly wants to read
that book, without "-ta-garu."
: Examples of the use in the first and second person are as follows:
: Watashi ga konnani hoshigatte iru noni katte kurenai.
: Anata wa iranai to itte iru keredo, hontou wa hoshigatte irunodeshou?
: In both case, 'watashi=I' or 'anata=you' desire to do something in fact, but
: the desire appears somewhat netagive. Can TT or anyone else find other
: examples?
Martin (same page) has two similar ones: "Watasi ga sonna koto o
si-ta-garu to omoimasu ka" and "Watasi ga iki-ta-gatta mon da kara turete
itte kuremasita."
Bart
Gerald B Mathias
: tsumetai tsumeta-sou(-na) :)
: oishii oishi-sou-(-na) :)
: There are adjective which "-garu" doesn't fit. "tsumeta-garu" "oishi-garu"
: sounds me gray zone, maybe get copyright praise. :)
As a matter of fact, it was in consideration of "tsumetagaru" that I
suggested yesterday that it might be necessary to carefully define
"adjective expressing feeling." I wanted to leave that out.
I like the analysis muchan presents. There are a lot more adjectives;
let's see how they fit.
Bart
Tomoyuki Tanaka
> (1) the main connotation of -garu is that the feeling is deemed
> negatively.
>
so it follows naturally that the -garu attribution is more
often to he/she than to I/you.
but this needs not be included in a language reference book,
for the same reason a language reference needs not say:
--- the word "stupid" is usu. refering to the second and
third person.
--- the word "cold" is used more often in the summertime
compared to wintertime.
Gerald B Mathias
: in "hosii" + "-garu" ==> "hosigaru"
: i can't tell if "hosii" is an adj or a verb.
Only the morphological distinction makes any sense. Morphologically, it's
easy: If it goes ...(r)u, ...ta/da, ...te/de, ...(i)masu/(i)masen, it's a
verb. If it goes ...i, ...katta, ...kute, ...ku (nai), it's an
i-adjective.
Semantics, types of adverbial modification, etc., don't work--too many
cross-overs.
Bart
Tomoyuki Tanaka
this -garu thing reminded me of the wonderful neologism of
almost two decades ago: oisinbou.
when i first learned the title of this comic book series, i was
really impressed by its cleverness for at least a few weeks.
what is clever/unusual/inventive about it?
if you can make intelligent/intersting comments on the matter,
you'll get "TT's SLJ prize" given to insightful SLJ
commentators. past recipients include BB and Oatmon.
Mike Fester
: >
: > (1) the main connotation of -garu is that the feeling is deemed
As in "It sure is cold today"?
Tommy-gyou, maybe you should just slink away from this thread...
Mike
Don Kirkman
<79bqc2$3sk$1...@mark.ucdavis.edu>:
>In article <36B962E6...@promikra.si>, muchan <muc...@promikra.si> wrote:
>>Group A:
>> (N-ga) hoshii (N-ga) hoshi-sou(-na) (N-o) hoshi-garu
>> (V-shi)-tai (V-shi)-ta-sou(-na) (V-shi)ta-garu
> interesting post.
> in "hosii" + "-garu" ==> "hosigaru"
> i can't tell if "hosii" is an adj or a verb.
Nanige naku, nanika kakanai de irarenai.
-Garu: A suffix added to nouns, bases of adjectives and adverbs. It
may be considered as a contraction of -ge and aru. In the colloquial it
forms a **verb** of the first conjugation, in bungo it follows the
irregular conjugation of ari. [Henderson, Handbook of Japanese Grammar]
TT, perhaps one way to tell if it's an adjective or a verb is to look
for the adjectival -ii or the verbal -u/aru?
Thanks for the detailed stuff, Sean, Bart, and Muchan.
--
Don
Jean Christophe Helary
>
> In article <36B962E6...@promikra.si>, muchan <muc...@promikra.si> wrote:
> >
> >Group A:
> > (N-ga) hoshii (N-ga) hoshi-sou(-na) (N-o) hoshi-garu
> > (V-shi)-tai (V-shi)-ta-sou(-na) (V-shi)ta-garu
>
> interesting post.
>
> in "hosii" + "-garu" ==> "hosigaru"
> i can't tell if "hosii" is an adj or a verb.
According to a japanese teacher I just asked, hoshigaru is a doshi and not a
keiyoshi. So I guess you can say it is a verb and not an adjective.
I am not sure, but I think an easy way to decide whether a construct is
keiyoshi or doshi is to check its rentaikei the doshi ends in "u", the
keiyoshi in "i".
Besides, --- + garu is a verb that can be only used for the third person
(he-she-it and plural). So it is a special verb.
Yours,
Jean Christophe Helary
Sean Holland
(Tomoyuki Tanaka) wrote:
>
> thanks for the examples of the use in the first and second
> person (below).
>
> Holland was wrong, but i see that he was relying on an
> incorrect assertion in a book.
>
Why did you snip the part of the post you are responding to in which the
poster said she agreed with me? You have no honor.
Another thing: I was using an authority to back up my assertion. Other
authorities also back it up.
Sean Holland
<hel...@eskimo.com> wrote:
(snip)
>
>Besides, --- + garu is a verb that can be only used for the third person
>(he-she-it and plural). So it is a special verb.
>
However, the vast majority of occurences are third person. The other uses
are rare. This is one of the points that TT either didn't understand or,
as he often does, he simply decided that my post said something other than
it said. No matter though. Reasoning with him is about as fruitful as
arguing with a cat.
muchan
> In article <36B962E6...@promikra.si>, muchan <muc...@promikra.si> wrote:
> >
> >Group A:
> > (N-ga) hoshii (N-ga) hoshi-sou(-na) (N-o) hoshi-garu
> > (V-shi)-tai (V-shi)-ta-sou(-na) (V-shi)ta-garu
>
> interesting post.
>
> in "hosii" + "-garu" ==> "hosigaru"
> i can't tell if "hosii" is an adj or a verb.
>
How about "suki"?It means your gramatical view is influenced English (or other
language) which treat these 'meaning' with verb. "hoshii" is a state of mind, not
action, and clearly having adjective shape and from in Japanese. Just you don't
find well-coresponding word in English.
hoshii ---> hoshi-garu
but
wanting <-- to want
so two language has different direction of etymological development of the
words.
"suki" is mre interesting.
watasi-wa B-ga suki. (Japanese) : (about me) B makes me feel "liking"
I likes B. (English)
Je aime B (French) : same syntax as English
(a mi,) me gusta B (Spanish) : B makes-me-feel-"liking"
mi piace B (Italian) : B makes-me-feel-"liking"
A mi je vsec (Slovenian) : B is "what-feel-liking" to me
So japanese is not quite isolated even compared to some of Romance languages...
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> attachment of -sou is pretty simple.
> it seems to attach to anything.
> ookisou (ni mieru)
> ame ga furi sou da
>
anything? but noun, conjunction...
> on the other hand, -garu does not attach to all adjs describing
> feelings / state of mind.
>
> hazukasigaru is ok
> but (can't think of a good example.)
>
??? without example, how you know it "does not"? ???
> <keiyoudousi> -garu
> kinodoku-garu is ok
> but sinapai-garu is not
>
I wonder if "shinpai-na" is <keiyoudoushi>... although, as you know, Isuspet and don't use the gramatical term <keiyoudoushi>. I feel shame
to use it in gakkoo bunpoo terinology... hazukashikuttetsukatterarenaiyo.
> i think -garu has the connotation of "tendency".
> hazukasii just describes the present state of mind.
> whereas
> hazukasigaru suggests "tend to ..."
> hence
> hazukasigari is someone with that tendency.
>
> sabisigari is the same as sabisinbou.
I don't think so... "-garu" makes adjective to verb, and -gari isturn this verb to noun, so
mano-kaki, is the one who always writes something, i.e. writer,
samishi-gari(-ya), is the one who feels lonly,
hazukashi-gari(-ya), is the one who easily to feel shame, i.e. the shy person.
"tendency" nuance is not in "-garu" added to the adjective, but in a
process of making noun from verb.
muchan
muchan
> Tomoyuki Tanaka wrote:
> >
> > In article <36B962E6...@promikra.si>, muchan <muc...@promikra.si> wrote:
> > >
> > >Group A:
> > > (N-ga) hoshii (N-ga) hoshi-sou(-na) (N-o) hoshi-garu
> > > (V-shi)-tai (V-shi)-ta-sou(-na) (V-shi)ta-garu
> >
> > interesting post.
> >
> > in "hosii" + "-garu" ==> "hosigaru"
> > i can't tell if "hosii" is an adj or a verb.
>
> According to a japanese teacher I just asked, hoshigaru is a doshi and not a
> keiyoshi. So I guess you can say it is a verb and not an adjective.
>
But TT is wondering about "hoshii", which is adjective.
> I am not sure, but I think an easy way to decide whether a construct is
> keiyoshi or doshi is to check its rentaikei the doshi ends in "u", the
> keiyoshi in "i".
>
keiyoushi-no rentaikei? ah, may be it (the term) existed in School Grammer..but "rentai shuushoku" (modifying the Noun) is the basic
function of
adjective.
> Besides, --- + garu is a verb that can be only used for the third person
> (he-she-it and plural). So it is a special verb.
>
It can be 2nd person:
nani kowagatteruno? (what are you scared of?)
It can be 1st person:
ara watashi, nani kowagatteta-no kashira... (oh, what was I scared of...?)
muchan
muchan
> In article <19990204114749...@ng-fa1.aol.com>,
> Ansm123 <ans...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >Sean Holland <seho...@islandnet.com> wrote:
> >
> >> >>> It is rarely used in the first or second person. It's use is almost
> >> >>>always in the third person, when the speaker is attributing the feelings
> >> >>>to someone else.
> >> >
> >> > again, incorrect.
> >> > the first and second person uses are pretty common.
>
> thanks for the examples of the use in the first and second
> person (below).
>
> Holland was wrong, but i see that he was relying on an
> incorrect assertion in a book.
>
> >Examples of the use in the first and second person are as follows:
> >
> >Watashi ga konnani hoshigatte iru noni katte kurenai.
> >
> >Anata wa iranai to itte iru keredo, hontou wa hoshigatte irunodeshou?
> >
> >In both case, 'watashi=I' or 'anata=you' desire to do something in fact, but
> >the desire appears somewhat netagive. Can TT or anyone else find other
> >examples?
> >
>
> great point.
>
> (1) the main connotation of -garu is that the feeling is deemed
> negatively.
>
> hosii is just "want"
> hosigaru is "wanting when that desire is inappropriate"
>
> e.g. the wartime slogan "hosigarimasen katumadeha"
> (note another first person use)
>
> sabisigari(ya) is someone who feels lonely too much.
>
> (2) another connotation of -garu is that the feeling is not genuine
>
> e.g. kinodoku-garu ... concern which may not be wholly genuine.
>
> (3) third connotation of -garu is "tendency" (see previous post).
and again Tanaka Tomoyuki following himself
> so it follows naturally that the -garu attribution is more
> often to he/she than to I/you.
>
> but this needs not be included in a language reference book,
> for the same reason a language reference needs not say:
>
> --- the word "stupid" is usu. refering to the second and
> third person.
>
> --- the word "cold" is used more often in the summertime
> compared to wintertime.
>
I have to think he is playing comedy of himself...
He took himself one of situation the word is used,
// 'cold' is more often used in winter
then put HIS connotation as if it's included in the word,
// 'cold' 's connotatation would be so 'winter'
then say it's not in the dictionary becuase need not say...
I found his connotations fits only in a situation where the word used,
and not involved in the word itself, so connotation were not needed.
Or more properly criticising, he should write a example sentence, and
should add his connotation on "the Example", not the word itself.
Problem, or cause of the comedy is, he just think one example situation of
word and expand the intrepretation too generally. I won't buy a dictionary
if written by TT. :)
muchan
Sean Holland
>It can be 2nd person:
> nani kowagatteruno? (what are you scared of?)
>
>It can be 1st person:
> ara watashi, nani kowagatteta-no kashira... (oh, what was I scared
of...?)
>
In the 1st person use such as your example, wouldn't you say that there
is a kind of distancing from yourself, making the "first" person a kind of
"third" person, as if you stepped outside yourself, looked at yourself,
and made a comment?
Muchan, do you agree with Samuel Martin, Anthony Alfonso and other
non-native authorities on Japanese that the -tagaru form is rare (meaning
"infrequent") in the 1st and 2nd person?
muchan
> >It can be 2nd person:
> > nani kowagatteruno? (what are you scared of?)
> >
> >It can be 1st person:
> > ara watashi, nani kowagatteta-no kashira... (oh, what was I scared
> of...?)
> >
> In the 1st person use such as your example, wouldn't you say that there
> is a kind of distancing from yourself, making the "first" person a kind of
> "third" person, as if you stepped outside yourself, looked at yourself,
> and made a comment?
> Muchan, do you agree with Samuel Martin, Anthony Alfonso and other
> non-native authorities on Japanese that the -tagaru form is rare (meaning
> "infrequent") in the 1st and 2nd person?
>
> --
> Sean
Frequent or infrequent is "statistics"... :)
There are verbs gramaticaly used only with 3rd person, (like English "to rain" of
"It rains". or this case is "impersonal" verb.) but hoshigaru, is not such kind of verb.
Or we can think "descriptive words" are rarely/infrequently used to oneself,
then it's not just result of statistic, but result of human behavour, that we
don't see ourselves descriptively/objectively. I put a example of self-description,
and Sean rejected it as kind of "third" person...
My answer? I don't want to agree. :)
(1) 2nd person is quite normal and frequent. Nani-hoshigatteru-no? is just
normal as nani-ga hoshii-ka itte-goran? (hoshigaru, is surely descriptive in these
example, too. the speaker see that "2nd person" wants something.
(2) 1st person is nothing abnormal. Another example:
(watashi-ga)
Konna-ni hosshigateru-no-o shitteru-kuse-ni, dooshite kurenai-no-yoo!
I should stop these example, since someone, who's watching the chance to attack me
might start campagn that now I'd be sexist... :( but above example, I couldn't wrote
in male speach... (and Gee, this is quoted unpleasant way, again...)
muchan
Sean Holland
Yes, but the examples you give are both of "hoshigaru". I asked about
"-tagaru"? Is the frequency distribution the same? Both Alfonso is his
"Japanese Language Patterns" and Martin in "A Reference Grammar of
Japanese" feel it important to point out to students of Japanese that
non-third person use of the form is rare. Are they wrong?
>Sean Holland wrote:
--
muchan
the most unusual kind of dictionary. And found deeper observation on "-garu".
( I feel almost proud of having done a similar analyze by my own. )
This is one of two books I recommend the most strongly to intermediate or
advanced learners and native speakers of Japanese, i.e. everyone who can read
this book. (this is not the first time I mention about the book, but once again,)
Morita Yoshiyuki "Kiso-Nihongo-Jiten" (Kadokawa-shoten)
ISBN4-04-022100-1 C0581 P4400E 4400yen
just for reference, the other book is :)
Oono Susumu "Iwanami Kogo-Jiten" (Iwanami-shoten)
It's long but I'd try to translate. (It's probably copyright violation... I hope
Kadokawa will Tolerate me, because of my ad above... shhhhhhhh )
PS. (before translation, so PreScript?):
He says "3rd" person. (Sean, hooo-tto-shita?) though I wrote I don't
(want to) agree. well, still I hold my own opinion.
muchan
*****
-GARU suffix (conjugate in verb's pattern)
Following (i-)adjective, (na-) adjective, and Hope "-tai", describes that 3rd person
(human or animal) feels so, or appearing so. Doesn't follows Negative "-nai", but
"-nai" follows "-garu" like "-gara-nai" and negate the whole.
Analyze 1:
Major words having "-garu" are:
(1) adjective which express feeling. and Hope "-tai"
ayashi-garu, urameshi-garu, urayamashi-garu, urusa-garu, ureshi-garu, okashi-garu,
oshi-garu, osoroshi-garu, omoshiro-garu, kawai-garu, kuyashi-garu, kemuta-garu,
koisi-garu, kokoromotona-garu*, kowa-garu, sabishi-garu, jiretta-garu,
tanoshi-garu, hazukashi-garu, hoshi-garu, muzukashi-garu, mendoo-kusa-garu,
mezurashi-garu, mottaina-garu*,
aware-garu, iya-garu, okkuu-garu, kinodoku-garu, zannen-garu, hushigi-garu,
hubin-garu, huben-garu, meewaku-garu, daiji-garu**, .... shi-ta-garu
( * In "kokoromotona-garu", and "mottaina-garu", "-garu" follows Negative
"-nai". But in these words, negative "-nai" is etymological part of the
adjective words and there are not coresponding affirmative adjective.
** "daiji-garu" sounds me odd, personaly... -- muchan )
(2) adjective which express sense
atsu-garu, ita-garu, kusugutta-garu, kurushi-garu, kemutta-garu, samu-garu,
mabushi-garu
(3) adjective which express property
era-garu, tsuu-garu, tsuyo-garu
With above words, the words of (1) and (2), which express feeling or sense,
is understood as subjective of speaker (or subjective of questioner in
interrogative sentence) when used without "-garu". The feeling of "urayamashii"
(envy -- muchan) is a subjective to the speaker. There's no need to explicitly
say "watashi-wa urayamashii". Even if using theme word like
"kare-wa urayamashii."
still the one who feel envy is the speaker, and "kare" (he) is merely a object
of feeling envy. To make "him" the subject*** of feeling envy, we need to
put "-no" to make noun phrase saying "kare-wa urayamashii-no-da", or putting
suffix "-garu", which turns it to verb saying "kare-wa urayamashi-garu".
"-garu" changes the subjectivity of 1st person subject to the objective
description of 3rd person subject.
(*** in older thread on <s.l.j>, we made a term Actor for that. -- muchan)
By changing adjective to verb, it change (1) from subjective feeling/sense to
objective description of state. (exchange of person) (2) from momentary
feeling/sense to description of continuous state. If only say "kurushii", it tells
speaker's momentary feeling but "kurushi-garu" is a 3rd person's objective
description of state with certain range of time.
Analyze 2
The words with "-garu" have two patterns, intransitive like, and transitive like
[1] A-wa C-wo ....-garu
kare-wa shiken-ni shikujitta-no-wo kuyashi-garu.
(He resent that he missed the examination.)
kanojo-wa nan-de-mo urawamashi-garu
(She envies everything.)
kodomo-wa hentoosen-no shijutsu-wo iya-garu
(Children hate the operation of tonsillitis.)
hito-no hippai-wo omoshirogaru-no-wa yoku-nai koto-da.
(It's not good thing to enjoy someone's fault.)
There is an object to feel so, and the object is the cause of the feeling.
"shiken-ni shikujitta-no-wo kuyashi-garu" is "shikujitta-no-DE ( BECAUSE
he missed ) kuyashi-garu". The characteristic of the pattern [1] is the Cause
of feeling is put as Object. Adjective of feeling (Group 1) takes this pattern.
[2] A-wa ....-garu
This pattern is for sense (Group 2) or property (Group 2) and verb with
Hope "-tai" (of Group 1). In this case, the cause of feeling is not in conscious
as the object of the feeling. When you say "kurushi-garu" (to suffer, to be
choked), you don't usually say "iki-ga tsumatto-no-wo kurushigaru" (to suffer
the choking).
Analyze 3
"-garu", like "kanashi-garu, ureshi-garu, iya-garu", etc., means "shikiri-ni
sonoyou-ni kanjiru". ( "shikirini" can mean both eagerly, strongly or frequently,
continuously... I think both, or all cases fits in this context. "feel so very
strongly/eagerly/frequently/continuously". -- muchan).
What a person feel is expressed in his behavior, and there is a case like
"kawai-garu", which emphasize the action against the object of the feeling.
There are still cases like performance of "waza-to sono-youna huri-o suru"
(intentionally pretend to feeling so). This is contextual meaning given by words
like "wazato (intentionally) / ikanimo (as if) / ...huri-o suru (pretend)/
... shite-miseru (make a air of or try to appear)". But the Property adjective
(group 3) with "-garu" means pretension, and the Sense adjective (group 2)
with "-garu" tends to fall to be pretension.
Related word "-buru"
Like "era-buru", "mottai-buru", "-buru" adds nuance of "pretending as if..".
"-buru" follows a Noun with positiv-evaluation, and express "play as if positive
Noun", so the word with "-buru" becomes a negative-evaluation.
"-garu" doesn't follow a Noun. It follows the stem of adjective expressing
feeling or sense, (and majority is negative-evaluated adjective) and seeing
the person who ("sikiri-ni" strongy/frequently/continuously) feel so with
eyes of sympathy.
Gerald B Mathias
: -Garu: A suffix added to nouns, bases of adjectives and adverbs. It
: may be considered as a contraction of -ge and aru. In the colloquial it
: forms a **verb** of the first conjugation, in bungo it follows the
: irregular conjugation of ari. [Henderson, Handbook of Japanese Grammar]
Makes me feel vindicated a little for never (in spite of pretending to be
a scholar) looking at Henderson!
Does he attempt to provide genuine examples of it added to nouns, or of an
occurrence in bungo?
Bart
Dave
> > "-garu" means "to appear as"
> >
> > "hosigaru" means "to appear to want", "seem to want", ...
> >
> > the same for
> > uresigaru
> > iyagaru
> > omosirogaru
> > ...
>
> It seems me that TT the native speaker is confusing of "-sou" and "-garu"...
He seems to be correct if you ask me. of course I'm only 2nd year uni so you
don't need to listen to me.
--
from Dave
http://members.xoom.com/DStevenson/
* 2/1 added Kinkaku-ji v1.0 *
* 5/1 updated Photo Studio *
* 5/1 added personal gallery *
Charles Eicher
> (1) the main connotation of -garu is that the feeling is deemed
> negatively.
As usual, you are totally wrong. I have checked several grammar references
and dictionaries, and I can find nothing to indicate that -garu has any
negative connotations. You are obviously thinking of "gamashii" or "gachi."
'-garu" COULD be construed as negative, for example, in specific
situations where a disjunctive coordinate conjunction is used. For example:
田中くんは弁護士になりたがっているが。。「馬鹿ものです／目的が悪いです」
> hosii is just "want"
> hosigaru is "wanting when that desire is inappropriate"
Wrong. "hoshigaru" means "shows signs of wanting" and nothing more.
> e.g. the wartime slogan "hosigarimasen katumadeha"
> (note another first person use)
That doesn't sound like "first person" to me. It could easily be argued
that the slogan is a speaking about the Japanese people in the third
person.
Authoritative data is available from "A Handbook of Japanese Usage" by
Francis Drohan: "-garu is not used with first-person subjects." It doesn't
get much simpler than that. "-garu" is used to indirectly refer to other
people's apparent desires, since it is impolite to refer to them directly.
> sabisigari(ya) is someone who feels lonely too much.
sabishigari(ya) simply means "someone who seems to be affected by loneliness."
> (2) another connotation of -garu is that the feeling is not genuine
>
> e.g. kinodoku-garu ... concern which may not be wholly genuine.
That is ridiculous. It merely means "appears to pity".. Whether this was
genuine or not would have to be determined by context, it couldn't be
determined to carry any specific 'ingenuine" meaning from the 'garu'
compound verb. Someone could seem concerned, they could genuinely be
concerned or not.
> (3) third connotation of -garu is "tendency" (see previous post).
Incorrect. You are obviously thinking of "-gachi".. Do you ever get
anything right?
----------------
Charles Eicher
cei...@inav.net
----------------
Charles Eicher
smat...@med.keio.ac.jp (shuji matsuda) wrote:
> In article <ceicher-ya0240800...@enews.newsguy.com>,
> cei...@inav.net (Charles Eicher) wrote:
>
> >'-garu" COULD be construed as negative, for example, in specific
> >situations where a disjunctive coordinate conjunction is used. For
> example:
> >
> >田中くんは弁護士になりたがっているが。。「馬鹿ものです／目的が悪いです」
>
> こういうの、やめましょうよ。
> 嫌いなのは分かるけど、あなたが下品に見えますよ。
そういう印象が分かるけど、私は三、四年間に田中に苦しめられた。田中がやめる時、
私もやめる。その時まで、田中の馬鹿な考えを立ち向かうつもりだ。
Ansm123
> I very often agree with Holland and usually with "THE authority," but I'm
> going to have to ask Sam, if as he says (still p. 358), "Ano hon o
> yomi-ta-gatte iru" means "He is eager to read that book" ("strong
> meaning"), how should one express "He sort of half-heartedly wants to read
> that book, without "-ta-garu."
>
How do you know that the 'third person' sort of half-heartedly wants to read
that book?
He is eager to read that book, then 'I'(=the speaker) have come to know that he
wants to read that book from his attitude, his manner or his sayings, I guess.
When he sort of half-heartedly wants to read that book, maybe expressed as
follows:
Kare wa ano hon wo chotto yomitai mitai(rashii) desuyo.
(He seems to wants a bit to read that book.)
Kare ha ano hon wo yomitai to itte imasu.
(He says that he wants to read that book.)
Kare no yousu kara mite, ano hon wo yomitai youna ki ni natte iru mitai desu.
(Judging from his manners, he seems to feel like to want to read that book.)
...Sorry for this stiff English sentence.
What I want to say is: the word that suggests how the speaker has come to know
'his' sense of 'want' will be added when 'he sort of half-heartedly wants to
do'.
> : Examples of the use in the first and second person are as follows:
>
> : Watashi ga konnani hoshigatte iru noni katte kurenai.
>
> : Anata wa iranai to itte iru keredo, hontou wa hoshigatte irunodeshou?
>
> : In both case, 'watashi=I' or 'anata=you' desire to do something in fact,
but
> : the desire appears somewhat netagive. Can TT or anyone else find other
> : examples?
>
> Martin (same page) has two similar ones: "Watasi ga sonna koto o
> si-ta-garu to omoimasu ka" and "Watasi ga iki-ta-gatta mon da kara turete
> itte kuremasita."
>
> Bart
Annie
<ans...@aol.com>
shuji matsuda
>'-garu" COULD be construed as negative, for example, in specific
>situations where a disjunctive coordinate conjunction is used. For
example:
>
>田中くんは弁護士になりたがっているが。。「馬鹿ものです／目的が悪いです」
こういうの、やめましょうよ。
嫌いなのは分かるけど、あなたが下品に見えますよ。
--
shuji matsuda smat...@med.keio.ac.jp
Don Kirkman
<79hu9i$i...@news.Hawaii.Edu>:
>Don Kirkman (new...@abac.com) wrote:
Sheez, I'm going to have to go back to lurking--can't nobody put nothin'
past youse guys. It's fun, though, to see if Henderson's opinion is
anywhere close to what's posted here on some of the sticky points.
Here's the entire set of examples he gives, but since they're mostly
limited to phrases it's hard for me to get a feel for how some of them
would work in a context.
Tsuujin-garu 'seems to think he knows his way about'
saishi-garu 'consider himself a wit'
[nouns]
Anna ni asonde kurashitai na to urayamashigaru '"Wouldn't I like to
live playing around like that!" he says, enviously.'
He notes that at the time he wrote in the 1940s there was a tendency to
substitute -garu for -buru ('to assume the airs of . . .') but notes
that strict grammarians object to it.
[adverbs, adjectives]
okashi-garu 'feel that something is funny'
ita-garu 'experience a feeling of pain'
ikitagaru 'feel a desire to go'
iya-garu '(apparently) feel a dislike'
samu-garu 'feel cold'
samu-gari 'a person who is sensitive to cold'
atarashi-garu 'be fond of novelty (have a feeling for newness)'
--
Don
muchan
> > (note another first person use)
>
> That doesn't sound like "first person" to me. It could easily be argued
> that the slogan is a speaking about the Japanese people in the third
> person.
> Authoritative data is available from "A Handbook of Japanese Usage" by
> Francis Drohan: "-garu is not used with first-person subjects." It doesn't
> get much simpler than that. "-garu" is used to indirectly refer to other
> people's apparent desires, since it is impolite to refer to them directly.
>
As a person, Charles is much more sympatic to me, but here I don't agree.
"Hoshi-gari-masen, katsu-made-wa" is clearly first person. Grammer book can say
the tendency that "-garu" is used as 3rd person, because of it's objective descriptivity,
but if it says, "not used with first person subject", it is overstatement. mistake.
muchan
Tomoyuki Tanaka
>> > e.g. the wartime slogan "hosigarimasen katumadeha"
>> > (note another first person use)
>
> don't agree. "Hoshi-gari-masen, katsu-made-wa" is clearly
> first person. Grammer book can say the tendency that "-garu" is
> used as 3rd person, because of it's objective descriptivity, but
> if it says, "not used with first person subject", it is
> overstatement. mistake.
don't stop there.
please comment on the other incorrect statements made by
<alt.skullfuck.charles-eicher>.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
alt.flame.charles-eicher news:alt.flame.charles-eicher
alt.skullfuck.charles-eicher news:alt.skullfuck.charles-eicher
Charles Eicher
> > > e.g. the wartime slogan "hosigarimasen katumadeha"
> > > (note another first person use)
> >
> > That doesn't sound like "first person" to me. It could easily be argued
> > that the slogan is a speaking about the Japanese people in the third
> > person.
> > Authoritative data is available from "A Handbook of Japanese Usage" by
> > Francis Drohan: "-garu is not used with first-person subjects." It doesn't
> > get much simpler than that. "-garu" is used to indirectly refer to other
> > people's apparent desires, since it is impolite to refer to them directly.
> >
>
> As a person, Charles is much more sympatic to me, but here I don't agree.
> "Hoshi-gari-masen, katsu-made-wa" is clearly first person. Grammer book
can say
> the tendency that "-garu" is used as 3rd person, because of it's
objective descriptivity,
> but if it says, "not used with first person subject", it is
overstatement. mistake.
I usually don't argue with a native speaker, but every source I have
indicates that using -garu is restricted to the third person. I'm not
saying that it is impossible to create grammatically correct sentences with
that structure. But it just doesn't make sense. Its like referring to
oneself in the third person. Its like if I went to a restaurant and I said
to the waiter "Charles wants some tea." and the waiter would think I was
referring to someone else sitting at the table. Speaking of ones own
feelings in terms of third-person-observable language, like "charles is
showing signs of being cold" just don't make sense to me. It is too
"detached" rather than "indirect" (like other structures like "to
omoimasu"). I suppose if you wanted that sense of detachment, it would
work, but that's too weird for me. It is essentially denying one's own
ability to feel one's own feelings. Weird.
I'll quote 2 other sources.
Kodansha's "Effective Japanese Usage Guide"
「したい」と強く思っているようすや、「欲しい・悲しい・うれしい・寒い」など感
情や感覚がことばや態度に表われているとき使います。話に加わっていない第三者よ
うすに使い、「私は～がる（ーがっている）」や「あなたは～がる」とは使いません。
-garu is used to describe a third person's wants, desires, emotions, or
physical sensations which have been expressed either verbally or by his
behavior. It is not used in first or second person situations.
A Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar:
garu: an auxilliary verb attached to a psychological/physiological
adjective meaning a person other than the speaker shows signs of.. Notes:
There is a group of adjectives which, in the present tense, usually
requires the first person (or a person with whom the speaker can empathise)
as a subject. If the subject of a sentence in which these adjectives occur
is not the first person (or one with whom the speaker can empathise), then
garu is attached to the adjective. Note the accompanying change of
particles from ga to o.
OK, you can see why I'm sticking with the 3rd person only on this
structure. I don't have a copy of Martin's Reference Grammar to check this
in (others have said that Martin says 1st and second person are ok).
Oh, BTW, muchan, I am curious about one of your examples from the other
"hoshigaru" thread. You used an example "oishisou" and I recall my teacher
saying that "oishii" is an exceptional adjective, it can't be used with
"sou".. If I recall correctly, she said that things can't look delicious,
they can only taste delicious, so you can't say something "looks
delicious." Taste not a visual sense, so you cannot report it seems
delicious unless you actually taste it, and then, you'd just say it IS
delicious. That always puzzled me, but I just accepted it. Maybe I
misunderstood...?
Mutsumi Mai Sagawa
Ansm123 wrote in message <19990204114749...@ng-fa1.aol.com>...
>Examples of the use in the first and second person are as follows:
>
>Watashi ga konnani hoshigatte iru noni katte kurenai.
I think that the situation where "-garu" is correctly used with "watashi"
is when the "watashi" is picturing her/himself from someone else's view,
which means, in the sentence above, the phrase "watashi ga konnani
hoshigatte irunoni" sounds to me like it indicates "soshite sore wo anata wa
mite irunoni", and then "katte kurenai." So, when the "watashi" said
"hoshigatte iru", s/he wasn't really talking about herself looking at
her/him from inside, but from outside, as "anata" did.
And as for "hoshigarimasen, katsumade wa", this was a kind of slogan of a
wartime, and if you might notice, the number of syllables of the phrase are
seven and five, right, same as the last two lines of Haiku. I gather this is
some kind of poetic (not really) or dramatic expression which was made to
energize Japanese people's will to persevere poverty a little bit more, so
it might be inappropriate as an example to show the correctness of -garu in
the daily usage. Or, -garu might be used to refer to the first person in the
future or the past, as in:
"Ano toki watashiha, nazeka sore wo hoshigatte ita."
or
"watashi wa zettai ni sonna mono wa hoshigaranai."
I can't think of any example of -garu used in a positive sentence referring
to the future.
>
>Anata wa iranai to itte iru keredo, hontou wa hoshigatte irunodeshou?
>
This sentence sounds a bit strange to me. I'd say "hoshii n(o) deshou"
instead of "hoshigatte irunodeshou"
>In both case, 'watashi=I' or 'anata=you' desire to do something in fact,
but
>the desire appears somewhat netagive. Can TT or anyone else find other
>examples?
I don't think -garu has a negative connotation. A little girl who is "Teddy
Bear wo hoshigatte iru" can be very pretty and a smart guy who is "watashi
to aitagatte iru" is surely welcome!!
Lei Tanabe
Gerald B Mathias wrote in message <79d0or$m...@news.Hawaii.Edu>...
>Ansm123 (ans...@aol.com) wrote:
>: I agree with Holland.
>
>: Sean Holland <seho...@islandnet.com> wrote:
>
>: > I'd recommend completely ignoring TT's opinions on this, as he is
>: > obviously confused. Samuel Martin (THE authority in English language
>: > explanations of Japanese), in A Reference Grammar of Japanese, says:
>: >
>: > "The verbalized desideratives have a strong meaning 'desires', 'is
>: > eager to', and in sentences of of straightforward reference they are
>: > seldom, if ever, used of one's own desires."
>
>I very often agree with Holland and usually with "THE authority," but I'm
>going to have to ask Sam, if as he says (still p. 358), "Ano hon o
>yomi-ta-gatte iru" means "He is eager to read that book" ("strong
>meaning"), how should one express "He sort of half-heartedly wants to read
>that book, without "-ta-garu."
Well, whether half-heartedly or full-heartedly, we can only assume his mind.
We can't say "kare wa ano hon o yomitai" but "yomi-ta-gatte iru".
And I don't think it has specially "strong meaning".
"-ta-garu" is "-tai" plus "-garu".
"-tai" means "want to" and "-garu" is something like "-to omou",
"-noyouni mieru", "-noyouni hurumau", "-no huriosuru".
Some "-garu" examples:
kawaigatteita inu ga shinde shimatta.
anoko wa itsumo okashi o hoshigaru.
anohito wa ikigatte iru.
anata, kowagatteru no.
omoshirogatte chotto karakattadakeda.
>: Examples of the use in the first and second person are as follows:
>
>: Watashi ga konnani hoshigatte iru noni katte kurenai.
>
>: Anata wa iranai to itte iru keredo, hontou wa hoshigatte irunodeshou?
>
>: In both case, 'watashi=I' or 'anata=you' desire to do something in fact,
but
>: the desire appears somewhat netagive. Can TT or anyone else find other
>: examples?
>
>Martin (same page) has two similar ones: "Watasi ga sonna koto o
>si-ta-garu to omoimasu ka" and "Watasi ga iki-ta-gatta mon da kara turete
>itte kuremasita."
anata ga hoshigatteita hon o mitsuketa yo.
kore wa watashi ga hoshigatteita no janai.
kare wa ano hon o yomitagatte iru.
watashi wa ano hon o yomitai.
anata wa ano hon wo yomitagatte iru.
I think only in the first person, the desire in "hoshi-garu" and "-ta-garu"
appears negative.
Lei
Sean Holland
(snip)
>OK, you can see why I'm sticking with the 3rd person only on this
>structure. I don't have a copy of Martin's Reference Grammar to check this
>in (others have said that Martin says 1st and second person are ok).
But rare, oh so rare!!!
>Oh, BTW, muchan, I am curious about one of your examples from the other
>"hoshigaru" thread. You used an example "oishisou" and I recall my teacher
>saying that "oishii" is an exceptional adjective, it can't be used with
>"sou".. If I recall correctly, she said that things can't look delicious,
>they can only taste delicious, so you can't say something "looks
>delicious." Taste not a visual sense, so you cannot report it seems
>delicious unless you actually taste it, and then, you'd just say it IS
>delicious. That always puzzled me, but I just accepted it. Maybe I
>misunderstood...?
"Oishisou" is, as I recall, the very word with which I learned the -sou
construction. I was looking at a picture of food on a menu and said
"oishii" while pointing at one of the pictures. The woman I was with asked
if I'd eaten there before....and you can imagine the rest. So your teacher
seems to have an odd idea there, or maybe you did misunderstand. I've
heard "oishisou" a couple of zillion times from native speakers. It's
illogical to say that something is delicious if you haven't tasted, but
food can sure look delicious.
Prince Richard Kaminski
Charles Eicher wrote:
> I usually don't argue with a native speaker,
So now you are arguing with two instead? Getting a bit overconfident
these days, no? I wonder why that is. Did you perhaps manage to scrape
through your Nihongo 2 kyuu which you took in December?
Prince Richard Kaminski
Charles Eicher wrote:
> Oh, BTW, muchan, I am curious about one of your examples from the other
> "hoshigaru" thread. You used an example "oishisou" and I recall my teacher
> saying that "oishii" is an exceptional adjective, it can't be used with
> "sou".. If I recall correctly, she said that things can't look delicious,
> they can only taste delicious, so you can't say something "looks
> delicious." Taste not a visual sense, so you cannot report it seems
> delicious unless you actually taste it, and then, you'd just say it IS
> delicious. That always puzzled me, but I just accepted it. Maybe I
> misunderstood...?
You certainly misunderstood, and you certainly haven't watched any food
programmes on Japanese TV, where the word "oishisou" is used practically
every time someone lays their eyes on a dish.
Tomoyuki Tanaka
what your teacher told you seems perfectly fine.
in all subjects, in the beginning stages teachers need to tell
students oversimplifications. e.g. if you square a number, the
result is always non-negative.
it's only a problem when
(1) so called "authorities" write such oversimplifications in
their books.
(2) pig-headed bigots like <alt.skullfuck.charles-eicher> can't
see beyond the oversimplifications.
In article <79pvig$v1l$1...@news.loxinfo.co.th>,
yoong <sm...@loxinfo.co.th> wrote:
>I'm not good in Japanese but as I study from my teacher there are
>
>^-^ subject ha verb(ta form)garu
> Adj i
> Adj na
>My teacher told me that it used to express the feeling of the 3rd person
>that whenever some situation happened the 3rd person 'll always want
>to...... Like:
> ^-^ otooou ha okashi o miru to, itsumo hoshigarimasu.
> ^-^ imooto ha chichi ga tabagko o suu to iyagarimasu.
>^-^ imooto ha depaato e iku to, itsumo okashi o kaitagarimasu.
>
>It's a little bit difference from.....gatteiru, as i learned.
>
>Yoong ^-^
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
In article <36BF582E...@promikra.si>, muchan <muc...@promikra.si> wrote:
>> > e.g. the wartime slogan "hosigarimasen katumadeha"
>> > (note another first person use)
>
> As a person, Charles is much more sympatic to me, but here I
> don't agree. "Hoshi-gari-masen, katsu-made-wa" is clearly
> first person. Grammer book can say the tendency that "-garu" is
> used as 3rd person, because of it's objective descriptivity, but
> if it says, "not used with first person subject", it is
> overstatement. mistake.
don't stop there.
please comment on the other incorrect statements made by
<alt.skullfuck.charles-eicher>.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
alt.skullfuck.charles-eicher
news:alt.skullfuck.charles-eicher
http://www.dejanews.com/dnquery.xp?QRY=alt.skullfuck.charles-eicher
http://search2.go2net.com/crawler?general=alt.skullfuck.charles-eicher
alt.flame.charles-eicher
news:alt.flame.charles-eicher
http://www.dejanews.com/dnquery.xp?QRY=alt.flame.charles-eicher
http://search2.go2net.com/crawler?general=alt.flame.charles-eicher
Gerald B Mathias
: It seems to me I heard somewhere that Gerald B Mathias wrote in article
: <79hu9i$i...@news.Hawaii.Edu>:
: >Don Kirkman (new...@abac.com) wrote:
: >: -Garu: A suffix added to nouns, bases of adjectives and adverbs. It
: >: may be considered as a contraction of -ge and aru. In the colloquial it
: >: forms a **verb** of the first conjugation, in bungo it follows the
: >: irregular conjugation of ari. [Henderson, Handbook of Japanese Grammar]
: >Makes me feel vindicated a little for never (in spite of pretending to be
: >a scholar) looking at Henderson!
: >Does he attempt to provide genuine examples of it added to nouns, or of an
: >occurrence in bungo?
: Sheez, I'm going to have to go back to lurking--can't nobody put nothin'
: past youse guys. It's fun, though, to see if Henderson's opinion is
: anywhere close to what's posted here on some of the sticky points.
: Here's the entire set of examples he gives, but since they're mostly
: limited to phrases it's hard for me to get a feel for how some of them
: would work in a context.
: Tsuujin-garu 'seems to think he knows his way about'
: saishi-garu 'consider himself a wit'
Just goes to show you--I should have either gotten myself a Henderson or
re-read my Martin *before* I put my foot in my mouth. Martin lists the
same "tuu-garu," and adds "edokko-garu, beppin-garu, shinposhugi-garu." I
wonder how productive this denominal usage is? Can I say, "Ore-no
oshiego-wa ore-no itsumo sensee-gatte-ru-no-o iya-da-to itte-yagaru"?
^^^
Now if someone comes up with a classical "ka-ha ihi-wo hosi-gari." or the
like, I'm really gonna have smashed eyeballs!
Bart
yoong
long or in bad grammar, I'm sorry ^-^
I'm not good in Japanese but as I study from my teacher there are
^-^ subject ha verb(ta form)gatteiru
Adj i
Adj na
This form is used with 3rd person only. It's used to express the 3rd person
feeling-need-want that the speaker see or know from OUTSIDE(from 3rd
person's acting, face, speaking.....) of the 3rd person. Because the
speaker don't know exactly what is in 3rd person mind, so he/she used
....gatte-iru form
which I understand that it's mean " It's look like....., It's seem
like........ " in English. I think maybe hte japanese don't want to says
something that they NOT SURE ABOUT because there is a chance to make him or
that person he 's talking to or someone else in trouble. That's why Japanese
TV's weather forecast always end their word with.......to omoimasu,
..........deshou, ........darou,......kamoshiremasen and so on. Beside the
same with the another form i write above, it help SOFTENED the sentence
(feeling) of the speaker too. i mean it's make the sentence more polite and
gentle too . ..........to omoimasu ^-^
I'm not sure it's right or not, sorry.
yoong
Lei Tanabe wrote in message ...
yoong
^-^ subject ha verb(ta form)garu
Adj i
Adj na
My teacher told me that it used to express the feeling of the 3rd person
that whenever some situation happened the 3rd person 'll always want
to...... Like:
^-^ otooou ha okashi o miru to, itsumo hoshigarimasu.
^-^ imooto ha chichi ga tabagko o suu to iyagarimasu.
^-^ imooto ha depaato e iku to, itsumo okashi o kaitagarimasu.
It's a little bit difference from.....gatteiru, as i learned.
Yoong ^-^
muchan wrote in message <36BF582E...@promikra.si>...
>> > e.g. the wartime slogan "hosigarimasen katumadeha"
>> > (note another first person use)
>>
>> That doesn't sound like "first person" to me. It could easily be argued
>> that the slogan is a speaking about the Japanese people in the third
>> person.
>> Authoritative data is available from "A Handbook of Japanese Usage" by
>> Francis Drohan: "-garu is not used with first-person subjects." It
doesn't
>> get much simpler than that. "-garu" is used to indirectly refer to other
>> people's apparent desires, since it is impolite to refer to them
directly.
>>
>
>As a person, Charles is much more sympatic to me, but here I don't agree.
>"Hoshi-gari-masen, katsu-made-wa" is clearly first person. Grammer book
can say
>the tendency that "-garu" is used as 3rd person, because of it's objective
descriptivity,
>but if it says, "not used with first person subject", it is overstatement.
mistake.
>
>muchan
>
Gerald B Mathias
: Gerald B Mathias wrote in message <79d0or$m...@news.Hawaii.Edu>...
: >Ansm123 (ans...@aol.com) wrote:
: >: I agree with Holland.
: >
: >: Sean Holland <seho...@islandnet.com> wrote:
: >
: >: > explanations of Japanese), in A Reference Grammar of Japanese, says:
: >: >
: >: > "The verbalized desideratives have a strong meaning 'desires', 'is
: >: > eager to', and in sentences of of straightforward reference they are
: >: > seldom, if ever, used of one's own desires."
: >
: >I very often agree with Holland and usually with "THE authority," but I'm
: >going to have to ask Sam, if as he says (still p. 358), "Ano hon o
: >yomi-ta-gatte iru" means "He is eager to read that book" ("strong
: >meaning"), how should one express "He sort of half-heartedly wants to read
: >that book, without "-ta-garu."
: Well, whether half-heartedly or full-heartedly, we can only assume his mind.
: We can't say "kare wa ano hon o yomitai" but "yomi-ta-gatte iru".
: And I don't think it has specially "strong meaning".
: [...]
It's great to have a native speaker more or less agree with me, except
that not long after I posted the above I had somewhat modified my view to
one much like what Annie expresses in her first post to this thread.
Namely, although "-ta-garu" does not in and of itself have any "strongly"
component, for someone to *look* like he/she wants to do something, the
desire would sort of have to bubble over, like a strong desire.
Still, examples like the following support my first rant:
: >: Examples of the use in the first and second person are as follows:
: >
: >: Anata wa iranai to itte iru keredo, hontou wa hoshigatte irunodeshou?
Again I'm inclined to agree with Annie (2nd post, if I remember right)
that "hoshiindeshoo" works better with 2nd person (ignoring the question
of whether a nihongo-no dekinai mono has the right to side with one native
speaker over another). But what if we changed "Anata" to "Kanojo" or
something? Wouldn't it mean "she probably really wants it," rather than
"it probably looks as if she strongly wants it"?
Bart
muchan
Since I'm on the net, TT was the biggest noise maker on the Japanese related
newsgroups. I wrote private E-mails to him, and much more numbers of Usenet
messages, criticizing his behavior on the net. He replied me with complete silence,
touhu-ni kasugai, I didn't get any response from him for quite a long time.
He always crosspost his messages on his <alt.t-t>, it works as if it's his private
reply adress, so that he doesn't need to read the newsgroups he makes noises.
(I'd use "contaminate", but today, I choose to be a little discrete.) Many times
he added that he wouldn't read the reply if not cross-posted to his newsgroup.
And he accutualy didn't. It didn't matter him, wheather people on the net feel
him noisy or wheather they were bothered by them very much. (Having thick
tsura-no kawa is a nessecity to be a tough poster on the Usenet. I'd give him
a crown on the regard of it. At least he has some <special quality> that nobody
on the Usenet has.)
But he must have a routine of searching archive with keyword like "racism".
I once happened to have written a message on <s.l.j>, including the keyword
"racism" in its text. He reacted so fast, asking me if I was a Japanese.
Since I have been writing daily on <s.l.j> for more than a year that time,
every reader, who visit there sometimes knew I was a Japanese. I concluded,
that TT never read <s.l.j>. I continued to post to criticeze his concrete
net-behaviors, but excluding crossposting his private newsgroup. Uma-no
mimi-ni... He never replied them on <s.l.j>.
Well, the situation seems to have changed a little. Now TT is reading <s.l.j>
at least "hoshi-garu" thread, and posts and replies around Charles Eichier's.
So I'm sure he'll be reading this message, too. Now is the first time for me
to express my great thanks to TT, from whom I learned so much, what I
shouldn't do on the net, who I shouldn't be. Tazan-no ishi-o motte...,
but I wonder if I'd appreciate of further learning of this kind.
To make this message less flame-like and enough informative to the readers of
<s.l.j>, I put some Japanese phrases. I think each of them can be found on
TT's old "nihon-no kotowaza" threads, which was the proof, that he made at
least some contributions in the short history of <s.l.j>, if you never noticed one.
muchan
muchan
> Oh, BTW, muchan, I am curious about one of your examples from the other
> "hoshigaru" thread. You used an example "oishisou" and I recall my teacher
> saying that "oishii" is an exceptional adjective, it can't be used with
> "sou".. If I recall correctly, she said that things can't look delicious,
> they can only taste delicious, so you can't say something "looks
> delicious." Taste not a visual sense, so you cannot report it seems
> delicious unless you actually taste it, and then, you'd just say it IS
> delicious. That always puzzled me, but I just accepted it. Maybe I
> misunderstood...?
Oishisou is in very common usage.
Something looks delicious. even before taste it. I wonder who would
think "things can't looks delicious". If you just accepted it, you can naw
disaccept it. :)
BTW. I'm not arguing with Charles, even though someone (or "sometwo")
wants to make argue from our discussion.
muchan
muchan
> that not long after I posted the above I had somewhat modified my view to
> one much like what Annie expresses in her first post to this thread.
> Namely, although "-ta-garu" does not in and of itself have any "strongly"
> component, for someone to *look* like he/she wants to do something, the
> desire would sort of have to bubble over, like a strong desire.
> Bart
About "strongly" of "-garu"...
My traslation of Morita didn't get much reaction. He use adverb "shikirini"
as implicite/explicite description of "-garu". "shikirini" is according to the
dictionary, (1) frequently, (2) continuously, consistently (3) eagerly, strongly.
It's sure that if one action (of wanting) is taken (or felt) only once in a moment
you don't use "shikirini". It must be consistent in time, either frequently over
time, or continuously over a timespan. The 3rd person, (or rarely the person
herself) who observes it, feel the eagerness/strength indirectly from the
consistency.
So "shikirini" explicitely says it's consistent action, and implicitely says
it's with strong/eager feeling, because it's consistent.
This above observation fits quite well with "-garu". IMO. thus answering
the theme of Annie - Lei - Bart's discussion.
muchan
Paul Guertin
> cei...@inav.net (Charles Eicher) wrote:
> >Oh, BTW, muchan, I am curious about one of your examples from the other
> >"hoshigaru" thread. You used an example "oishisou" and I recall my teacher
> >saying that "oishii" is an exceptional adjective, it can't be used with
> >"sou"..
>
> "Oishisou" is, as I recall, the very word with which I learned the -sou
> construction.
"Oishisou" was used in my Japanese language class as well. A quick check
in _Shin Nihongo No Kiso II_ shows "Kono ryouri wa oishisou desu" as one
of the model sentences (lesson 43, p.180).
Paul Guertin
p...@sff.net
Charles Eicher
That is a great post, muchan, and you are obviously more generous in your
assessment of TT than I am. But that is perhaps only natural, considering
I've been harassed by TT for several years now. However, my reply is not
about that ongoing feud.
The problem with TT is that he makes this newsgroup into a hostile place.
for example, when some simple novice questions appeared, he responds in the
thread with remarks like:
TT> what's your prof's email adrs?
TT> would your prof consider getting answers from Usenet "cheating"?
TT> this definition above comes from my Jp->Jp dictionary.
TT> (in response to the twit's comment)
TT> please comment on the other incorrect statements made by
TT> <alt.fxhyyshpx.charles-eicher>.
This sort of attitude makes slj a hostile place. If I wasn't already well
familiar with TT's attitude, I would not feel comfortable posting questions
in this forum. I've developed a very thick skin myself, after dealing with
his harassments. But what about newcomers to the group? If students do not
feel free to ask "stupid" questions and make mistakes, they can not learn.
We usually learn more from our mistakes than from our successes. I
personally don't have any problem making mistakes in a public forum,
although it is a bit disconcerting having someone like TT who wants to keep
track of my every little goof. I don't know why he would derive some sort
of pleasure from this, I guess that there are some people who have such a
poorly developed sense of self that they can only derive pleasure from
oppressing others. But this is not a personal issue. I am more concerned
for the students coming into this newsgroup expecting a scholarly
discourse, and instead, finding TT's insanity (or even being directly
insulted by him, as in my quoted examples), and they are being driven away.
If it were not for the advice and friendship of many slj contributors,
perhaps I would never have reached my current level of fluency. I know that
at many times, slj was vital in raising topics that helped me to maintain
my motivation to continue my studies. It is a shame if even ONE usenet
participant is denied this sort of experience, after being scared away by
TT. It is more than a shame, it is evil.
I have noticed a common attitude amongst the long-term participants in slj.
We all know firsthand the difficulties of learning the language and we do
our best to help make it an easier process for those that follow us. This
natural process cannot exist in an environment of negativity that TT
creates. From his attitude, it is clear that TT despises students of the
Japanese language. He prefers people to experience the fantasyland Japan of
his fake FAQs, rather than helping them to learn the language and
experience it for themselves firsthand. If he ever DOES jump in to assist
someone with a language quesiton, it is only to stroke his own ego, and to
make oblique insults against someone. This is despicable.
TT must decide whether he wants to be part of the problem or part of the
solution. Many have begged TT to refrain from his offensive behavior, but
it is futile. Perhaps, muchan, you can teach us another kotowaza, the one
about "there is no medicine to cure a fool"...?
Charles Eicher
>
>Charles Eicher wrote:
>
>> Oh, BTW, muchan, I am curious about one of your examples from the other
>> "hoshigaru" thread. You used an example "oishisou" and I recall my teacher
>> saying that "oishii" is an exceptional adjective, it can't be used with
>> they can only taste delicious, so you can't say something "looks
>> delicious." Taste not a visual sense, so you cannot report it seems
>> delicious unless you actually taste it, and then, you'd just say it IS
>> delicious. That always puzzled me, but I just accepted it. Maybe I
>> misunderstood...?
>
>Oishisou is in very common usage.
>Something looks delicious. even before taste it. I wonder who would
>think "things can't looks delicious". If you just accepted it, you can naw
>disaccept it. :)
Ah, I think I remember the issue correctly now, my mistake. The "exceptional
adjective" was "kirei" not "oishii." This makes a whole lot more sense.
Something either IS or ISN'T pretty, it can't "seem pretty." We gather visual
evidence to evaluate whether something's external appearance is pretty, it can't
present its appearance to "seem" pretty, or else we'd just say it IS pretty.
>BTW. I'm not arguing with Charles, even though someone (or "sometwo")
>wants to make argue from our discussion.
Agreed. There is a whole different quality to our "arguments" than others would
presume. If I "argue" with you, it is only in an attempt to come to
understanding of difficult language issues, and you clearly understand this. It
is possible to disagree (or even have heated arguments) with a postive goal in
mind. That is how scholarly discourse works. I wish certain people would learn
this.
Sean Holland
(snip long true post)
>TT must decide whether he wants to be part of the problem or part of the
>solution. Many have begged TT to refrain from his offensive behavior, but
>it is futile. Perhaps, muchan, you can teach us another kotowaza, the one
>about "there is no medicine to cure a fool"...?
>
In muchan's post he started "uma no mimi ni...". Do you know that one?
Uma no mimi ni nembutsu. I think it pretty much describes what any attempt
to reason with TT would be.
Jani Patokallio
> Ah, I think I remember the issue correctly now, my mistake. The "exceptional
> adjective" was "kirei" not "oishii." This makes a whole lot more sense.
Err... Despite the sneaky i at the end, "kirei" is a na-adjective, so you
can't use the "-soo" construction anyway. "utsukushii", on the other hand,
might be your mystery adjective: "utsukushisoo" sounds rather bizarre.
Cheers,
-j.
Gerald B Mathias
Think before you write (i.e., don't do as I do).
There is nothing wrong with putting a -soo- on a na-adjective. You
yourself have probably used words like "genki-soo-da-ne, shinsetsu-soo-na
warai," etc.
Bart
Jani Patokallio
> Jani Patokallio (jpat...@iki.fi) wrote:
> : Err... Despite the sneaky i at the end, "kirei" is a na-adjective, so you
> : can't use the "-soo" construction anyway. "utsukushii", on the other hand,
> : might be your mystery adjective: "utsukushisoo" sounds rather bizarre.
>
> Think before you write (i.e., don't do as I do).
Yes, I just realized that I didn't think. And now I can't even cancel
my message and pretend that it never existed, because you replied and
quoted it. Sigh...
> There is nothing wrong with putting a -soo- on a na-adjective. You
> yourself have probably used words like "genki-soo-da-ne, shinsetsu-soo-na
> warai," etc.
But "kireisou" would, indeed, appear to be dame.
ObDigression: Jack Seward's _The Japanese_ mentions the days when he was
still studying Japanese and had just learned about the "-soo" construct.
So one day, a proud mom was showing her newborn baby to all the neighbors
and Seward happened by. In fact, the baby was rather ugly, but being
a polite gaijin, Seward decided to call him cute and also practice what he
had just learned. "Kawaisoo nee!"
Cheers,
-j.
Mike Wright
>
> muchan <muc...@promikra.si> wrote:
>
> > To make this message less flame-like and enough informative to the
> > readers of <s.l.j>, I put some Japanese phrases. I think each of
> > them can be found on TT's old "nihon-no kotowaza" threads, which was
> > the proof, that he made at least some contributions in the short
> > history of <s.l.j>, if you never noticed one.
>
> Mr. Tanaka. I understand that TT wants to rant about his own topics
> which most of us are sick to death of, but he has also contributed to
> the language discussions here sometimes over the last several years.
Somehow this reminds me of a comment I saw recently on a TV news interview:
"He was always very friendly and helpful. When my mother was ill he came over
and sat with her while I went out shopping. I was really shocked when I heard
that he had killed all those children."
So, everyone has a little good in them.
--
Mike Wright
http://www.mbay.net/~darwin/language.html
_____________________________________________________
"China is a big country, inhabited by many Chinese."
-- Charles de Gaulle
Charles Eicher
<b...@hayamasa.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> muchan <muc...@promikra.si> wrote:
>
> > To make this message less flame-like and enough informative to the
> > readers of <s.l.j>, I put some Japanese phrases. I think each of
> > them can be found on TT's old "nihon-no kotowaza" threads, which was
> > the proof, that he made at least some contributions in the short
> > history of <s.l.j>, if you never noticed one.
>
> There was someone who posted `nihon no kotowaza' but that wasn't
> Mr. Tanaka. I understand that TT wants to rant about his own topics
> which most of us are sick to death of, but he has also contributed to
> the language discussions here sometimes over the last several years.
I understand this, but this is also part of the problem. Tanaka's
"contributions" are more likely to be incorrect than correct. Tanaka may be
a native nihonjin, but he has never achieved the level of native fluency.
By his own statements, he studied Japanese in the US, on weekends, just as
the jr-hi students his own age in Japan were entering their most intensive
language studies. I could go on and on about all the egregious errors he
has made, which confuses students. I don't keep track of other people's
errors (unlike TT) but I'd have to estimate his accuracy rate at about 20%.
Lei Tanabe
Charles Eicher wrote in message <79s3ub$2...@edrn.newsguy.com>...
>Ah, I think I remember the issue correctly now, my mistake. The
"exceptional
>adjective" was "kirei" not "oishii." This makes a whole lot more sense.
>Something either IS or ISN'T pretty, it can't "seem pretty." We gather
visual
>evidence to evaluate whether something's external appearance is pretty, it
can't
>present its appearance to "seem" pretty, or else we'd just say it IS
pretty.
Be careful not to oversimplify the matter.
Actually "kireisou" is possible.
Case 1: "kirei" means "clean" and so "kireisou" means "look clean".
Case 2: Someone explains say a painting and you image the appearance and
can say "kireisou", i.e. "sound pretty".
Case 3: In the case you are blind.
I think generally "sou" is used when you actually don't know what the
reality is.
You can't say "oishisou" when you are eating. You can't say "tanoshisou"
when you are involved in the amusement. You can't say "urusasou" when you
hear the sound. You can't say "haresou" when there isn't a cloud in the
sky.
Using "sou", you express your observation/imagination about something out of
your knowledge, whatever you can't/haven't actually experience/d yourself.
This naturally includes others' feeings.
And I think "-garu" behaves similarly.
It's usually used in the third person and only some special cases in the
first/second person.
Note all subjects of the above examples are not *I* except "tanoshisou" one.
Lei
Sean Holland
>My traslation of Morita didn't get much reaction. (snip)
Sorry about that. My reaction was to save it so I can read it over
several times. Thanks for doing it.
shuji matsuda
seho...@islandnet.com (Sean Holland) wrote:
> In muchan's post he started "uma no mimi ni...". Do you know that one?
>Uma no mimi ni nembutsu. I think it pretty much describes what any
attempt
>to reason with TT would be.
Similar ones:
uma no mimi ni nenbutsu.
kaeru no tsura ni shouben.
noren ni ude oshi.
nuka ni kugi.
honeori zon no kutabire mouke.
--
shuji matsuda smat...@med.keio.ac.jp
jre...@my-dejanews.com
> >in (others have said that Martin says 1st and second person are ok).
>
> But rare, oh so rare!!!
and now it's time to throw in my $0.02... it's also almost time to go home, so
I'll probably over-simplify a little.
My understanding of '-garu' is that, when used with 'perception' adjectives*
, it is used to explicitly deny direct 'perceptional'** knowledge of the
statement being made.
*(Muchan's groups 1 and 2)
** sensory, psychological, emotional or whatever
So, a speaker of 'sono ko wa ame ga hoshigatte ita' wouyld be explicitly
denying privelleged information about the child's desires.
However, I'm fairly sure that it's GRAMMATICALY possible to drop the '-garu'
(or fail to add it?) in all cases, even SEMANTICALLY this would often be
highly presumptuous, even rude, to the extent that most native speakers would
never produce such sentences in most normal contexts.
A good illustration of the difference between gramatical and semantic
impossibility is "round square" or "marui shikakkei".
Both "round" and "marui" are perfectly good adjectives.
Both "square" and "shikakkei" are perfectly good nouns.
In both English and Japanese, adjectives precede nouns in noun phrases.
So both "The round square is red" and "marui shikakkei ga akai" are perfectly
GRAMATICALLY possible sentences.
They are also both SEMANTICALLY bizarre.
With some imagination, it is possible to come up with in contexts in which
people might actually say such weird sentences. Someone might be trying to
distinguish a square with ninety degree corners from one with slightly rounded
corners.
More interestingly, Muchan has shown that there are contexts in which a
speaker might actually want to explicitly deny direct perceptional knowledge
of his or her own internal state, thereby leading him or her to produce 1st
person sentences with '-garu'. Such instances may be rare, but this is a
result of the SEMANTICS of '-garu' and does not IMO have anything to do with
the grammar of first, second or third person subjects.
Another extreme, but far more common, example is the case of the omniscient
author, who - having direct, priveledged access to the psychological states
of all the characters in the story - can report how people feel directly
without having to qualify his/her (its?) certainty. Conversely, if '-garu'
does appear in the narrative, then this contributes towards constructing the
author as an observer, maybe even a participant.
Instances like 'tsuyo-garu' are new to me, and I have no comment here, except
to thank everyone who has pointed them out. I'll keep a look out for them!
john
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
muchan
and I need some concentration to get the point. :)
> various people have been saying things like:
>
> > >in (others have said that Martin says 1st and second person are ok).
> >
> > But rare, oh so rare!!!
>
> and now it's time to throw in my $0.02... it's also almost time to go home, so
> I'll probably over-simplify a little.
>
> My understanding of '-garu' is that, when used with 'perception' adjectives*
> , it is used to explicitly deny direct 'perceptional'** knowledge of the
> statement being made.
>
> *(Muchan's groups 1 and 2)
> ** sensory, psychological, emotional or whatever
>
I don't get why "deny", where "deny". I'd rathr think "explicitly describe",or "objectively describe" and it fits to my observation very
well, both
afirmative and negative. (so the word "deny" in redundant, or understating)
--- well, my writing style is also/(pseudo-) theoretical. That people didn't get
my point?
> So, a speaker of 'sono ko wa ame ga hoshigatte ita' wouyld be explicitly
> denying privelleged information about the child's desires.
>
Probably "ame-o" : Object-o hoshigaru Guitar-ga hoshii.
Guitar-o hoshi-gartte-iru.
"denying" ??? who denys what???
> However, I'm fairly sure that it's GRAMMATICALY possible to drop the '-garu'
> (or fail to add it?) in all cases, even SEMANTICALLY this would often be
> highly presumptuous, even rude, to the extent that most native speakers would
> never produce such sentences in most normal contexts.
>
with "-garu" it's verb, without "-garu" it's adjective. So just dropp "-garu"often makes gramatically impossible sentence. (like changing
"-o" and "-ga"
in above example.) Dropping "-garu". (and pharase ajusted grammatically),
it lose the "meaning" of "-garu". (See my translation of Morita)
> A good illustration of the difference between gramatical and semantic
> impossibility is "round square" or "marui shikakkei".
>
> Both "round" and "marui" are perfectly good adjectives.
> Both "square" and "shikakkei" are perfectly good nouns.
> In both English and Japanese, adjectives precede nouns in noun phrases.
> So both "The round square is red" and "marui shikakkei ga akai" are perfectly
> GRAMATICALLY possible sentences.
> They are also both SEMANTICALLY bizarre.
>
"-garu" with 1st person Subject is Semanticlly rare. You want to say?I agree it.
> With some imagination, it is possible to come up with in contexts in which
> people might actually say such weird sentences. Someone might be trying to
> distinguish a square with ninety degree corners from one with slightly rounded
> corners.
>
So "square circle" is more impossible than "round squere". you want to say? :)I agree it. :)
> More interestingly, Muchan has shown that there are contexts in which a
> speaker might actually want to explicitly deny direct perceptional knowledge
> of his or her own internal state, thereby leading him or her to produce 1st
> person sentences with '-garu'. Such instances may be rare, but this is a
> result of the SEMANTICS of '-garu' and does not IMO have anything to do with
> the grammar of first, second or third person subjects.
>
"deny"???
About the last sentence I agree 100%. Or you're paraphrasing my stand point
on this thread. thanks.
> Another extreme, but far more common, example is the case of the omniscient
> author, who - having direct, priveledged access to the psychological states
> of all the characters in the story - can report how people feel directly
> without having to qualify his/her (its?) certainty. Conversely, if '-garu'
> does appear in the narrative, then this contributes towards constructing the
> author as an observer, maybe even a participant.
>
Yes. Making the narator a "observer", the "objective description of mind of state"becomes natural (semantic) context.
> Instances like 'tsuyo-garu' are new to me, and I have no comment here, except
> to thank everyone who has pointed them out. I'll keep a look out for them!
>
> john
>
With John, I need to behave with a little "kashikogatting". :)
I hope we'll find more natural everyday speach style to discuss, so that
everyone will understand.
muchan
muchan
> Gerald B Mathias wrote:
> > (snip... so that Jani can "cancel" it:)
> > Think before you write (i.e., don't do as I do).
>
> Yes, I just realized that I didn't think. And now I can't even cancel
> my message and pretend that it never existed, because you replied and
> quoted it. Sigh...
>
> > There is nothing wrong with putting a -soo- on a na-adjective. You
> > yourself have probably used words like "genki-soo-da-ne, shinsetsu-soo-na
> > warai," etc.
>
> But "kireisou" would, indeed, appear to be dame.
>
"Kirei-sou" is indeed bezzare, but (in John's way of terminology) it's
semanticly bizzare, as Charles wrote. We can make special context, that
"Kirei-sou" fits. like
ikken-shite kirei-sou-ni mieru-keredo, kono hana-ni-wa osoroshii doku-ga aru.
(At the first sight, this flower looks beutiful, but it contains terrible poison.)
Bizzareness of "it looks beautiful" is reduced dramatically, in a situation of
"at the first sight", "for a moment", "looking from far away", etc.
So "kirei-sou" is not gramaticaly incorrect, or un-used phrase, but just used in
rare occation. So I wouldn't put "don't use!" in my textbook, if I ever write it.
muchan
P.S. for fun:
in my "book" if I ever write it. is a nice phrase. I remember similar phrase
like "according to my dictionary" but meaning "IMSO" (in my strong opinion).
My mother often said
"sonna kotoba-wa watashi-no jisho-ni arimasen!"
(such word doesn't exist in my dictionary!) to imply her opinion striongly.
It comes from Napoleon's words, of course.
Napoleon (the 1st) said: There is no word of "impossible" in my dictionary!
Napoleon (the 2nd) said: Thee is no word of "impossible" in my dictionary, too.
Napoleon (the 3rd) said: Thee is no dictionary in my house!. :)
In fact, There is no napoleon the 2nd in my French history book. :)
jre...@my-dejanews.com
> John Reeves's writing style (rather thinking style?) is very accademic/
> theoretical and I need some concentration to get the point. :)
sorry, like I said, I was in a hurry, so I just wrote the way I think.
Usually when I write on USENET I make an effort to avoid using too many
technical words. But I was a Semiotics/ Linguistics major at uni (Japanese
minor) and so I tend to use the concepts I learnt as a student to analyze the
real-life problems that tend to come up on s.l.j ... and my posts also have a
tendency to degenerate into essays :(
BTW, I often have difficulty understanding your posts, too - mainly because
your insights are often quite unique. Still, I've been reading your posts
for about four years now, and experience has taught me that figuring out
exactly what you mean is usually worth the effort :)
> > My understanding of '-garu' is that, when used with 'perception' adjectives
> > it is used to explicitly deny direct 'perceptional' knowledge of the
> > statement being made.
> I don't get why "deny", where "deny".
Maybe "deny" is a little colourful - I mean, nobody's accusing anyone of
anything :). How about "make it clear that it is not the case that..."??
>I'd rathr think "explicitly describe",or "objectively describe" [snip]
Or "precisely", "scientifically"... yeah? Because we live in a world where
people don't generally have direct access to the contents of other people's
heads, it is only reasonable that our language reflects this. In fact, it
would be UNreasonable to go around claiming to know what other people are
thinking. Or to "deny" knowledge of what's in one's own head.
Question: if Gibson (the little boy from the opening episode of "The X-Files"
who has the ability to read people's minds) were to say "sono ko wa ame ga
hoshii", would that sound natural? even objective?
Closer to everyday reality, if an "omniscient author" describes the
perceptions of a third person without "-garu" does that sound natural?
My guesses are yes and yes. Which is why I'm trying to seperate grammar and
semantics.
> > So, a speaker of 'sono ko wa ame o hoshigatte ita' wouyld be explicitly
> > denying privelleged information about the child's desires.
> "denying" ??? who denys what???
Maybe "dis-claiming" would be a better word. So the sentence above could be
(clumsily) paraphrased as "that child wants candy (not that I can read her
mind or anything)"
> > However, I'm fairly sure that it's GRAMMATICALY possible to drop the '-garu'
> > (or fail to add it?) in all cases, even SEMANTICALLY this would often be
> > highly presumptuous, even rude, to the extent that most native speakers
> > would never produce such sentences in most normal contexts.
> >
> with "-garu" it's verb, without "-garu" it's adjective.
agreed
> So just dropp "-garu"often makes gramatically impossible sentence. (like
> changing "-o" and "-ga" in above example.)
BUT if we tidy up appropriately (swap "o" for "ga", and ... are there any
other changes needed?) then do we still have a GRAMATTICALLY correct
sentence?? Even if the sentence may be strange, outrageous etc??
> Dropping "-garu". (and pharase ajusted grammatically),it lose the "meaning" of
> "-garu".
which was my point all along: "-garu" changes the _meaning_ of a phrase, it
is not something which is either _grammatically_ necessary nor is it
something which is ever _grammatically_ wrong. If a sentence with "-garu"
sounds strange or inappropriate, I am saying that this is because there is
something strange about the _meaning_ of the sentence.
The point of all this is not just nit-picking - I'm trying to get a better
understanding of how "-garu" works and what it means.
> (See my translation of Morita)
yeah, thanks for that - read with much interest.
> "-garu" with 1st person Subject is Semanticlly rare. You want to say?I agree
> it.
whew. Looks like we all agree for once :)
> So "square circle" is more impossible than "round squere". you want to say?:)
> I agree it. :)
twice, even :)
> > More interestingly, Muchan has shown that there are contexts in which a
> > speaker might actually want to explicitly deny direct perceptional knowledge
> > of his or her own internal state, thereby leading him or her to produce 1st
> > person sentences with '-garu'. Such instances may be rare, but this is a
> > result of the SEMANTICS of '-garu' and does not IMO have anything to do with
> > the grammar of first, second or third person subjects.
> About the last sentence I agree 100%. Or you're paraphrasing my stand point
> on this thread. thanks.
Yeah. I was basically restating your position, adding the grammar/semantics
distinction to try and clear things up, for me at least :) Of course, others
have made similar points, too.
> > Another extreme, but far more common, example is the case of the omniscient
> > author, who - having direct, priveledged access to the psychological states
> > of all the characters in the story - can report how people feel directly
> > without having to qualify his/her (its?) certainty. Conversely, if '-garu'
> > does appear in the narrative, then this contributes towards constructing the
> > author as an observer, maybe even a participant.
> >
>
> Yes. Making the narator a "observer", the "objective description of mind of
> state" becomes natural (semantic) context.
... pause .... re-read ... pause ... YES :)
> With John, I need to behave with a little "kashikogatting". :)
like, totally sumimasen.
> I hope we'll find more natural everyday speach style to discuss, so that
> everyone will understand.
right on :)
Gerald B Mathias
: However, I'm fairly sure that it's GRAMMATICALY possible to drop the '-garu'
: (or fail to add it?) in all cases, even SEMANTICALLY this would often be
: highly presumptuous, even rude, to the extent that most native speakers would
: never produce such sentences in most normal contexts.
: A good illustration of the difference between gramatical and semantic
: impossibility is "round square" or "marui shikakkei".
: Both "round" and "marui" are perfectly good adjectives.
: Both "square" and "shikakkei" are perfectly good nouns.
: In both English and Japanese, adjectives precede nouns in noun phrases.
: So both "The round square is red" and "marui shikakkei ga akai" are perfectly
: GRAMATICALLY possible sentences.
: They are also both SEMANTICALLY bizarre.
Most people (including some illustrious linguists I could name) seem to
want to keep semantics and grammar separate, but I don't think there's any
reason we should.
The purpose of language is semantic, and I doubt that a "grammar" which is
not based on semantics can be very successful
Bart
muchan
jre...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> Muchan wrote:
>
> BTW, I often have difficulty understanding your posts, too - mainly because
> your insights are often quite unique. Still, I've been reading your posts
> for about four years now, and experience has taught me that figuring out
> exactly what you mean is usually worth the effort :)
>
:) bothe my writing style and thinking style (and even my errouneous spelling) are ideosyncratic (sp?) that often noone understands even
when I thought I
reached the point of discussion, in the early stage of thread... :( then I rewrite
and rewrite to every occation, and finaly get people getting the point...
It's a precise learning process of myself, indeed.
I have a simple credo about philosophy:
Those who really know what they are saying, can say it in easy language.
-- so the philosopher who writes a complecated text, are probably not
understanding himself enough.
In other word, "the truth can be expressed simply". optimistic. :)
> > > My understanding of '-garu' is that, when used with 'perception' adjectives
> > > it is used to explicitly deny direct 'perceptional' knowledge of the
> > > statement being made.
>
> > I don't get why "deny", where "deny".
>
> Maybe "deny" is a little colourful - I mean, nobody's accusing anyone of
> anything :). How about "make it clear that it is not the case that..."??
>
"Not the one who feels, but as a observer from outside." OK.
> >I'd rathr think "explicitly describe",or "objectively describe" [snip]
>
> Or "precisely", "scientifically"... yeah? Because we live in a world where
> people don't generally have direct access to the contents of other people's
> heads, it is only reasonable that our language reflects this. In fact, it
> would be UNreasonable to go around claiming to know what other people are
> thinking. Or to "deny" knowledge of what's in one's own head.
>
my "objectively" is read as "scientifically"? then my next trial."-garu" describes the feeling as an observation from outside.
> Question: if Gibson (the little boy from the opening episode of "The X-Files"
> who has the ability to read people's minds) were to say "sono ko wa ame ga
> hoshii", would that sound natural? even objective?
>
> Closer to everyday reality, if an "omniscient author" describes the
> perceptions of a third person without "-garu" does that sound natural?
>
> My guesses are yes and yes. Which is why I'm trying to seperate grammar and
> semantics.
>
My answer is yes and yes. It's quite normal that narator/writer of noveluses 'direct' adjective without observing '-garu', for describe the
feeling of
his personage. just like omniscient god's view. yes.
> > > So, a speaker of 'sono ko wa ame o hoshigatte ita' wouyld be explicitly
> > > denying privelleged information about the child's desires.
>
> > "denying" ??? who denys what???
>
> Maybe "dis-claiming" would be a better word. So the sentence above could be
> (clumsily) paraphrased as "that child wants candy (not that I can read her
> mind or anything)"
>
"I see he wants candy" <-- "He shows he wants candy"<-- "He must be wanting candy" <-- "He (actually) wants candy"
<-- (simply) "He wants candy"
(hard to descibe what "<--" means above. :) I'm a philosopher who don't know
what I'm talking.
> > > However, I'm fairly sure that it's GRAMMATICALY possible to drop the '-garu'
> > > (or fail to add it?) in all cases, even SEMANTICALLY this would often be
> > > highly presumptuous, even rude, to the extent that most native speakers
> > > would never produce such sentences in most normal contexts.
> > >
> > with "-garu" it's verb, without "-garu" it's adjective.
>
> agreed
kono-ko-wa ame-ga hoshii(-ni chigai-nai) anta, ame-ga hoshi-n-desho. waktte-ru-n-da-kara...
presumptuous, yes. rude, not-neccessary. "native speakers would never produce
such sentences in most normal contexts"? ever, ever... :) in normal presumptuous
context. no problem.
> > So just dropp "-garu"often makes gramatically impossible sentence. (like
> > changing "-o" and "-ga" in above example.)
>
> BUT if we tidy up appropriately (swap "o" for "ga", and ... are there any
> other changes needed?) then do we still have a GRAMATTICALLY correct
> sentence?? Even if the sentence may be strange, outrageous etc??
>
> > Dropping "-garu". (and pharase ajusted grammatically),it lose the "meaning" of
> > "-garu".
>
> which was my point all along: "-garu" changes the _meaning_ of a phrase, it
> is not something which is either _grammatically_ necessary nor is it
> something which is ever _grammatically_ wrong. If a sentence with "-garu"
> sounds strange or inappropriate, I am saying that this is because there is
> something strange about the _meaning_ of the sentence.
>
> The point of all this is not just nit-picking - I'm trying to get a better
> understanding of how "-garu" works and what it means.
>
Sure it's not nit-picking. The "meaning" is important. as any "stickers" inJapanese grammer.
> > (See my translation of Morita)
>
> yeah, thanks for that - read with much interest.
Glad to hear that.
> > "-garu" with 1st person Subject is Semanticlly rare. You want to say?I agree
> > it.
>
> whew. Looks like we all agree for once :)
The discussion between you and me, is rather "how" to say It.("It" being what we are agreing...)
> > So "square circle" is more impossible than "round squere". you want to say?:)
> > I agree it. :)
>
> twice, even :)
>
"triangle circle" sounds even more impossible than "square circle".Three times, even? :)
> > > More interestingly, Muchan has shown that there are contexts in which a
> > > speaker might actually want to explicitly deny direct perceptional knowledge
> > > of his or her own internal state, thereby leading him or her to produce 1st
> > > person sentences with '-garu'. Such instances may be rare, but this is a
> > > result of the SEMANTICS of '-garu' and does not IMO have anything to do with
> > > the grammar of first, second or third person subjects.
>
> > About the last sentence I agree 100%. Or you're paraphrasing my stand point
> > on this thread. thanks.
>
> Yeah. I was basically restating your position, adding the grammar/semantics
> distinction to try and clear things up, for me at least :) Of course, others
> have made similar points, too.
I know a Mexican girl, who was my shcool mate when I learned French.She was very emotionaly dinamic, but I observed that she was actually
"acting" the emotion. That she feels/thinks in her "in this situation,
I should feel like that and I'll express it in this way!" and so her
"emotional raction" seemed me always somehow theatrical.
In other word, I observed "cool self" behind each of her behavior.
Once I said it to her, when we were alone together. She gave me a
"misterious smile" of agreeing me, which shows she was a very
good actress at the moment, too. Does it make sense in this context?
> > > Another extreme, but far more common, example is the case of the omniscient
> > > author, who - having direct, priveledged access to the psychological states
> > > of all the characters in the story - can report how people feel directly
> > > without having to qualify his/her (its?) certainty. Conversely, if '-garu'
> > > does appear in the narrative, then this contributes towards constructing the
> > > author as an observer, maybe even a participant.
> > >
> >
> > Yes. Making the narator a "observer", the "objective description of mind of
> > state" becomes natural (semantic) context.
>
> ... pause .... re-read ... pause ... YES :)
> > With John, I need to behave with a little "kashikogatting". :)
>
> like, totally sumimasen.
>
Or I'd correct myself, it's rathr "kashiko-butting" than "-gatting". :)How do you explain the difference, semanticly or linguistically? :)
muchan
Philip Brown
>...
>Oh, BTW, muchan, I am curious about one of your examples from the other
>"hoshigaru" thread. You used an example "oishisou" and I recall my teacher
>saying that "oishii" is an exceptional adjective, it can't be used with
>"sou".. If I recall correctly, she said that things can't look delicious,
>they can only taste delicious, so you can't say something "looks
>delicious."
Some teachers get fanatical about strange things. I can easily imagine an
english teacher getting irritated with the construct
"I see what you mean"
in reference to an aural description :-)
[or saying "I hear what you're saying" in response to being shown
a graph? ;-)]
--
[trim the no-bots from my address to reply to me by email!]
--------------------------------------------------
Secret nONsONaTIAL monologue...
H52QdPK4iQPijBgQeMKIUQOCjRg0IN6IYWMGhJszBevIARHGjBuLZTaKCZNx4x0xb0CsWYlQ
jpwxINDAPKMRBB0xYgiqEVMGj0qWbsIQnOMyD4g5ITcaBOGRDYg6C+OwWalAAQ