Talk:Japanese/Grammar/Basic Particles

"Regarding the cat, the dog is eating"???
Tawagoto 23:45, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I think you missed a word in the romanji after "dondon" in the last sentence. --24.125.83.236 03:15, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * After "dandan" actually... But yes indeed, it missed the word "mainichi"... I added it to it. --Shinjitsu 21:52, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Wa and ga in one sentence?
「ねこは いぬが たべて います. 」 (Neko wa inu ga tabete imasu.) "Regarding the cat, the dog is eating (it)." While this sentence is acceptable, it would be better in most situations to use the particle を (wo) which is described below.

I don't think this sentence is acceptable at all. I've also discussed it with a NATIVE speaker who also thinks that using both wa and ga in one sentence, like is done here, will cause Japanese people to frown their eyebrows and think "what on earth is he talking about?" (just like she did at first! ;-) ). Also it is not acceptable in this case, because if something or somebody is busy eating something, the particle を (wo) should be used, since it's an 'active' verb, acting on the subject (the cat). So: ねこ を いぬが たべて います. --Shinjitsu 21:58, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Update: I have posed the question also to another native speaker (who happens to be my Japanese teacher). He gave me the following reaction:

(Quote:) Yes, it is possible to put both wa and ga in one sentence, just the given example here is NOT correct. A good example would be:


 * Watashi wa anata ga suki desu. ("I like you", or literally "as for me, like you.")

The given example in the module (Neko wa inu ga tabete imasu.) however is WRONG and also the translation is NOT correct. To make this sentence correct, the particle を (wo) must be used behind the topic where the verb is acting on: Inu wa neko wo tabete imasu. "The dog is eating the cat".

What is also possible is: Neko wo inu ga tabete imasu. "The cat is being eaten by the dog". In this case it is stressed that it's the DOG who is eating the cat (and not somebody/something else).

So, conclusion: it is okay to put wa and ga in one sentence, but one has to be careful how to use it. The given example in the module was NOT correct. A couple more CORRECT examples:


 * Watashi wa wasabi ga kirai desu. ("I dislike/hate wasabi" or "As for me, hate wasabi")


 * Anata wa eigo ga jouzu desu. ("Your English is good!" or "As for you, English good!")

(Unquote)

I hope this clears it up now. I will change the module a bit, 'coz now it contains an incorrect Japanese sentence with a wrong translation... Shinjitsu 09:04, 30 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm not a native speaker, a linguist, or a language teacher, but I still think I have something to contribute. I think we need to work on fostering an atmosphere of mutual respect.
 * I am happy to see the "neko wa" example sentence gone. I agree that it's rather awkward and I think that using 'wo' or the passive would be far more natural. However, I think the problem with this sentence is somewhat subtle and I am not entirely satisfied by your teacher's explanation. What exactly did you ask your teacher?
 * To me, the problem seems related to the fact that "neko" is animate, and once it is topicalized there is an expectation for it to also be the subject of the verb, so that the sentence shares the cat's point of view (cat as important actor), so to speak. After thinking about it, it seems to me that this expectation is somewhat relaxed if the topic is inanimate (or if the predicate does not imply action, as in your teacher's examples). For example, in a situation like this,
 * A-san: juusu wa (dou natta no)?   '(What happened to) the juice?'
 * B-san: mearii ga nonda yo. 'Mary drank it.'
 * I think B-san could also respond with
 * B-san: juusu wa mearii ga nonda yo.    'Mary drank the juice.'
 * While it's more natural not to repeat the topic, one definitely does find examples like this. This suggests to me that there is a grey area here, and a hierachy of sentences for which this kind of grammar might be more acceptable. I'm curious what your teacher has to say about this (please make sure he is not consciously restricting himself to educated "proper" Japanese, although if it is specifically unacceptable in that context I would certainly like to know that too).
 * ToothingLummox 18:08, 5 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello ToothingLummox. I don't know exactly where you are going with "fostering an atmosphere of mutual respect". Maybe you can explain this? Do you feel I was disrespectful? If that's the case, I never meant it that way. Reading something always sounds different from hearing something... If you know what I mean. Anyway... To the subject:
 * Here you are using the verb nomu (to drink). The subject on which this verb acts on is the juice (juusu). In this case, the particle wo should be used again. Your sentence (juusu wa mearii ga nonda yo) is not correct Japanese. This should be juusu wo mearii ga nonda yo. More examples here: http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jwb/cgi-bin/wwwjdic.cgi?1Q%B0%FB%A4%E0_1_
 * By the way, I did not only ask my Japanese teacher, but also my girlfriend, who happens to be Japanese. The sentence with the cat and dog didn't make any sense at all to her. She gazed at me with eyes like "what are you talking about?". So it does go a little further than just "awkward". It's simply not correct Japanese. I don't want to be disrespectful at all, but it's simply wrong! And this doesn't come from my teacher, but from my girlfriend, a native Japanese!
 * Also coming from my girlfriend: the use of passive tense is something that's very normal in for example Germanic languages like English, Dutch and German, but is totally uncommon in Japanese. They wouldn't say something like "the cat is being eaten by the dog", but simply "The dog is eating the cat". Therefore: Inu wa neko WO tabete imasu... If you want to stress out that it's the DOG eating the cat (and not something else) then it's Inu ga neko wo tabete imasu...
 * Is the dog drinking water? Then it's Inu wa mizu wo nonde imasu. So again, the use of wo.
 * Hope this makes it a bit more clear?
 * Regards, --Shinjitsu 05:24, 7 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi again. You seem awfully sure of yourself even though it's pretty clear that you are just starting to learn Japanese. Have you had a chance to run the juice example by your teacher? I'm pretty sure it's acceptable, at least in speech. I can even find examples of this kind of sentence (with an inanimate topic) in textooks and dictionaries. Also, my native speakers seem ok with it, although they are not authorities on Japanese grammar.


 * Similarly, your girlfriend is probably not an authority on Japanese grammar. While native speakers are good at identifying strange sentences, they are not so good at coming up with grammar explanations. Just imagine asking a native English speaker to explain the difference between "a" and "the".


 * In contrast, your teacher probably is an authority, and that's why it would be great to hear what he has to say on this. In his comments above, he just says that the cat sentence was bad, but doesn't offer a reason. He certainly doesn't say that the direct object (usually marked by を wo) can never be marked by は wa. That's why we should ask him about the juice sentence.


 * Using wa is a little tricky. One of the things it can do is mark something that was said before or that the speaker assumes the listener understands. It helps tie sentences together, kind of like the in English. For some sentences, using wa is only natural when the context is given. Compare
 * A:I saw the man wearing a hat today. (A assumes B knows about the man)
 * B:What man? (B doesn't know; B is confused)
 * with
 * A:I saw a man wearing a hat today. (A doesn't assume that B knows about the man)
 * B:What kind of hat? (B asks for more detail)
 * My point here is just that wa can be comparably subtle, so I want you to include the context when you ask your teacher. It can matter.


 * Also, I just want to quickly point out that the wa/ga grammar here isn't the passive tense. A passive sentence would be something like
 * neko wa inu ni taberareta.
 * The cat was eaten by a dog.
 * and I bet it's acceptable if you identify with the cat. Anyway, while I don't know whether the passive tense is more common in Germanic languages, the passive is common enough in Japanese.


 * Regarding respect, it's fine if I'm wrong and you correct me. But you have to actually read what I write first. I'm just trying to explore the grammar behind the problem with the cat sentence. Given that you have analyzed this grammar incorrectly on the module page ('Japanese doesn't use the passive tense at all' and 'wa and ga cannot be used in the same sentence') and then analyzed it incorrectly again above, I would think you would be more receptive to suggestions about what might actually be wrong with it.
 * Regards, ToothingLummox 14:39, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

だんだん まいにち
だんだん まいにち ふらんすごを　もっと　じょうず に　はなせます. I don't like to accept the above as an example. Probably it should be

"毎日だんだん、フランス語をもっと上手に話せるようになっています. "

まいにち だんだん、ふらんすごを もっと じょうず　に　はなせるようになっています or yet better: "毎日だんだん、フランス語をより上手に話せるようになっています. " or simply "毎日だんだん、フランス語が上達しています. "

"だんだん まいにち" is not in a normal Japanese sentence.

Though the below is OK. "だんだん、まいにち フランスご を まなぶこと が つらくなってきた. " This is because "だんだん" is an adverb for "つらくなる"(get painful), while まいにち is for まなぶ(learn). i.e. these two meanings are identical.

"フランスご を まいにち まなぶこと が だんだん つらくなってきた. " (It's gradually getting painful to learn French everyday.).--58.92.154.213 (talk) 16:51, 10 June 2009 (UTC)