dolly was definitely the best teacher for english speakers learning japanese. she's able to logically explain the nuances of japanese in a way that native speakers cant because to them, the rules dont need to be explained. her editing style is antiquated and a little unsettling but the knowledge here is invaluable. rest in peace sensei!
Note for myself! は：non-logical, topic-marking particle - What is marked by は is sth we already know, and we’re distinguish it from other things we already know that might possible be the case but aren’t. - What’s important is NOT the topic itself, but what we have to say about the topic (what follows after は). が presents new information -> throws the emphasis onto the thing itself (aka what comes before が) は reminds us of an old topic -> throws the emphasis onto the new thing we have to say about that topic (aka what comes after は). The rest is about more advanced cases of using は when we usually don’t expect it, and the implication of those unusual usage.
I've been struggling with learning Japanese on my own, for the past few years. But these first few videos of yours have helped me to understand the structure of the language in a way I've never been able to do before. So thank you!
"experience and context are what is needed to interpret precisely what は is doing in any given case, but we also need to have these basic principles in order to be able to interpret correctly. one can learn by pure experience of course but understanding the principles certainly makes it quicker, easier, and more accurate" after finding these videos, i feel like i can apply this mindset to all of learning Japanese
Absolutely superb explanation skills. I feel like I have ascended into grammar heaven. I'm gonna buy the book the moment I get back from my trip. Keep up the good work!
Thank you so much! I got my accent by fiddling with the settings under "tone and intonation". Sounds better than standard "toneless robotic" I think, though not everyone likes it. PS in case this gives anyone the wrong idea, I am not using a "synthesized voice" as some people have suggested except insofar as the whole of me - including my thoughts, my jokes, my heart etc. are "synthesized". Not only organic beings have hearts!
sensei I love your jokes very much! Started taking a Japanese course beginning of this year and was puzzled by how there are many seemingly arbitrary rules and exceptions in the language. Your series proved that that's not the case :) Thank you and keep up the good work!
Your videos have been so informative. I'm just now two months into learning Japanese and this is something that has been plaguing my understanding of sentence structure. It's so clearly presented and follows a pattern that makes sense. Thank you for the time and effort you put into these. The scripts must be difficult to write! とても助かりました。ありがとうございます。
About 5:55 mark Another way you can perceived this is the fact that the only particle that could be used before iru or aru is ga or ni. The reason being is that this is a pattern that is derived from ~ni~ga iru
Hmm. I am always a little dubious of Japanese grammar being taught as "patterns" as it tends to disguise the actual logic of the language. For example I have heard the term "wa/ga pattern" used to dodge the issue of what the が is actually doing in コーヒーが好きです (koohii ga suki desu). I take it you are not saying that we can never use は before いる / ある because that certainly isn't the case. So is your suggestion that 昔々 mukashi mukashi, being a time-expression logically implies a に? I would agree that it does in a certain sense, even though it is never (as far as I recall) used in this context (or in relative time expressions in general which I think mukashi counts as - long ago [relative to now]"). However it isn't really true to say that は can't be used in before いる / ある even when following a に. For example a recent book has the title 宇宙に命はあるのか (Uchuu ni Inochi wa Aru no ka) "Is there Life in Space/the Universe?". Here I think は is used to throw emphasis onto ある - "does life _exist_ ?" It can be used because life itself is a known thing. So I think we are safer looking at it in terms of the functions of the particles rather than in terms of patterns.
Neat. There goes several years of not understanding these particles (though, admittedly, I only really started studying Japanese 3 months ago). This helped a lot in tying together all that information I had heard about the particles for such a long time in a way that actually made sense. Thanks.
I'm so glad this helped you. This is considered pretty complex material, but if you see how it actually works I think it can be tackled at quite an early stage. Happy to hear you've started studying Japanese in earnest! Ganbatte ne!
I'd say I'm probably on the border between Beginner & Intermediate right now, having finished Tae Kim's Guide up to Advanced Topics, then ditching it for IMABI, which is much more in-depth. My main problem at the moment is vocabulary (which I'm attempting to remedy through iKnow!) + only knowing a few hundred kanji (which I was previously trying to remedy through WaniKani, but have given up on for a while); I've made sure that the main focus of my learning for the rest of this year is grammar, because in the end, it's the most difficult - and the most important - part of Japanese. But the one thing that never clicked for me with Japanese grammar was 「は」and「が」. But that makes a lot more sense now! The other thing that has been hard for me to get a proper handle on is「に」, mostly because of its sheer versatility. I understood how it was used in certain patterns before I began to understand the nature of the particle itself. Anyway, thanks so much!
Unlike wa, ni really does have some functions that don't seem to be connected to a single core function (at least I haven't been able to work it out if they are). I might be doing something on how it works (in various cases) later if people want it. I mostly only do articles and videos where I think I have something new, or too-little-known, to bring to the table. But if I can help with anything I will. I would say in terms of more general advice that at your stage I would consider it really important (if you aren't already) to start exposing yourself as heavily as possible to real Japanese material. You've done a lot of theory work, but theory only takes one so far. It's definitely time to start getting behind the wheel for some real experience. I do this kind of theory explanation because it gives a good basis for processing real experience but in the end it is only an adjunct to that experience. That is the real teacher.
Mm, yeah. Actually reading, watching or listening to actual Japanese 'source' material is the next big thing I have to do to progress with Japanese. Feels like I've hit a roadblock that has massively slowed down my progress. I should mention that every day I do listen to songs, anime, visual novels and I can read the occasional sentence fragment, but that's more passive consumption. It doesn't seem to be doing much for progress, but it's at least keeping my motivation up, if nothing else. Oh, and since 2012, I've listened to (and watched) literally thousands of hours worth of anime...but that doesn't really count. The original reason I started learning Japanese is because I bought a light novel that nobody was ever going to translate in Japanese by an author whose work I loved (「僕らはどこにも開かない」), but it seems like it's going to be a long time before I can attempt that. I'm also in my final year of high school at the moment, and there is a ton of work/assignments/study I have to do for it, so it's been hard to work up the motivation to try and start reading/watching something. Do you have any recommendations on where I should start?
Actually anime can help a lot. It is where I got my early experience. But English subtitled anime is next-door to useless because the brain is hardwired to take the line of least resistance. Japanese subtitled anime, on the other hand is really useful. It's a bit of a grind at first though (I started when I knew considerably less than you do now and it was tough, but really helpful). It's actually a lot easier now because there are several sites that supply ready J-subbed anime (I had to jump through all kinds of hoops to get it). Whether this is right for you is something only you can find out but it's worth giving it a try. I did a short article recently giving sources for finding J-subbed anime: learnjapaneseonline.info/2017/05/09/learn-japanese-with-anime-new-free-resources/ You could try browsing these sites and see what takes your fancy.
Grammar in general is usually boring at school, but I actually enjoy watching your videos. Your book is expected to be delivered at my house on Friday so I can't wait!
At 10:05 you say GA does not necessarily mark new information and it can mark old information (where we would expect WA to be used). Could you elaborate a little bit more in this point perhaps with an example? ありがとう！
Organic Japanese with Cure Dolly Thank you. I rewatched those two videos a few times but I’m still a bit fuzzy. Would 私が本を買った be an example of GA marking old information since it’s a statement answering the (implied or stated) question 誰が本を買った?
@@kaitoran3149 With 私 it can't be an unknown entity can it? Because the listener knows who "I" is when you speak. But it can be "new information" in the sense that the listener doesn't know that you are the one who bought the book. With 私は you would be casting the _book_ as the new information because one element of any communication must be the salient or "new" part. So what you did, though the listener is not expected to know this, is bought a book (as opposed to buying something else or doing something else altogether). With no 私 it is just straightforwardly saying "I bought a book".
Amazing content, thank you so much! As a begginner, should I watch the "lesson" series first or can I watch your videos in chronological order? Once again, great content. Thank you very much. I will buy your book soon.
I would recommend starting with the lesson series because it builds from the very basics in order: ua-cam.com/play/PLg9uYxuZf8x_A-vcqqyOFZu06WlhnypWj.html
Cure dolly, I love your explanation. It helps me learn a lot, thank you very much. Can you please translate this sentence once 釣りが趣味です。今日は、沖にある堤防で釣りをします。堤防までは、船で行きます。
I am not familiar enough with his approach to speak in depth, but first of all, I very much like his idea of de-dogmatizing AJATT - treating it as an "approach" rather than a "system" (I think this is very much in the spirit of Khatzumoto-san's original work, but it tends to have attracted a lot of dogmatic humans in its later years). I obviously have no argument with mass immersion as that is exactly what I advocate myself. I have explained the differences between my approach (structure + direct, organic immersion with Anki as a pinning + Kanji-recall tool) vs the AJATT-based approaches - usually involving Heisig, a lot of Anki sentences [indirect immersion], and some degree of "blind listening" - the organic approach doesn't use any of those because it doesn't need them (though there is no harm incorporating some "blind listening" _if_ you find it helpful) and there is a play-off between not using Heisig and not using sentences (because we need to be learning kanji as part of vocabulary and sentence-fronted cards don't work for that - and in any case we don't use indirect immersion through isolated sentences, though we can use sentences as part of J-J definitions). So the detailed differences between the approaches are a little (not very) complex. In the end it boils down to what suits you best. There are elements of the AJATT approach that some people just don't take to/can't use and the same with the Organic approach. If neither approach wholly suits you, it can be worthwhile to do a little tinkering to combine elements that work for you. So, I have no objection to people mix-n'-matching the parts that work best for them, and with the deliberate replacement of the "system" concept with the "approach" concept, I guess Matt-san would feel the same. What I would say (and I imagine he would too) is that there are some areas where you must be careful of mixing because each approach has its own ecology - that is.places where it doesn't do A _because_ it does do B. So if you aren't doing Heisig you can't _also_ base your Anki around sentence cards (unless you are covering kanji by some other method like WaniKani). So the primary thing is knowing how an approach covers the main bases - which are structure, kanji, vocabulary and immersion. AJATT-based approaches don't do structure - if they are non-dogmatic they might throw in some old-skool Eihongo "grammar" (the nearest approach to structure available in books or on the internet) but that isn't inherent in the system). If you don't do structure seriously, then you more or less _need_ sentence-fronted cards. If you don't "do kanji" - that is you treat them simply as an aspect of vocabulary - then you _have_ to use kanji-fronted vocabulary cards. This is why I try to explain at every stage _why_ we do what we do. Because there is no harm in swapping bits of one engine with another but you need to know how each engine works in order to know which parts you can safely swap without rendering the engine inoperable.
My comment concerns the Lion/Tiger example found at 11:35 where the particle "wa" occurs three times in a single sentence. If I understand Sensei correctly, the "wa" particle functions normally in the first instance, i.e., it marks "Africa" as the topic. But, in the second two instances, "wa" replaces the "ga" particle and imbues the respective subjects (Lions and Tigers) with the attribute of contrast. While this "works", it seems to be it would be cleaner to say the author of the sentence simply changed the subjects (Lions and Tigers) to "subtopics" by marking them with "wa" rather than "ga." If that is so, everything makes perfectly good sense -- the "wa" particle is not required to perform any new function.
I agree completely. I certainly did not mean to imply (and hope I did not give the impression) that は under any circumstances replaces the が particle in the sense of doing anything like what it does (there are of course cases where one or the other may be used which can give rise to this very common misunderstanding and it is one that I work hard to eliminate). I hope I have made this amply clear in my other videos (this was really intended as a follow-up to my basic introduction to は and assumes that people are already familiar with what I said there). In the case of both the lions and the tigers a full analysis would read ライオンは (∅が) いる - _mutatis mutandis_ for the tigers, since we cannot have a subject-predicate construction without the subject being marked visibly or invisibly by が. This does indeed, as you say, involve reading the は-marked nouns as sub-topics which is precisely what is meant by saying "as for lions, they exist" etc. The sub-topic is ライオン ("lions") and the subject of the predicate いる ("exist") is ∅が ("they"). I do intend my more advanced lessons to be taken in the light of my more basic ones, so I sometimes take some aspects of the preliminary teaching as read. I certainly apologize if this causes any confusion. Currently I am teaching Japanese from scratch in a course of numbered lessons which I hope will make the fact that they are to be taken sequentially clearer than it was before. Here is the one on は: ua-cam.com/video/U9_T4eObNXg/v-deo.html
Thank you. I am a beginning student who believes understanding why a rule exists can be just as important, if not more important, than the rule itself . After sampling numerous instruction videos (from various content providers), I concluded that your videos were significantly more helpful than any of the others. In a nutshell, your lessons have help me understand how Japanese actually works. Most other instructors simply rely on students mimicking their example. While that approach may work for other students, it does not work for me. Once again, thanks for providing such outstanding content.
Thank you so much for your kind words. The method of instruction you mention is too prevalent in my view and falls between two stools. You _can_ learn language by mimicking but _not_ in a few hours' instruction a week. If you want to learn without near-total immersion you need to understand the structure (and if you want to learn _with_ near-total immersion you still make life a lot easier by getting the structure in advance). That, at least is my view. And to be brutally honest, _most_ students of Japanese (including those who pass exams) never become competent in the language. And I do largely blame the methods of instruction - though there are a few other reasons too. Most instructors give people a lot of fish. My teaching philosophy is: "Don't give people fish. Teach them _how_ to fish."
15:30 "as for this year, please treat me well" i didn't get why this is an unfortunate choice of words then you explain some people might thinking like "why he is asking for me to treat him well this year, is that mean i am not treating him well last year?" i thought japanese are easily offended but its really because their language and culture are very subtle about meaning/subject/context, if i live in japan, people definitely will think i'm an insensitive person.
The thing is that of the two non-logical topic-markers, は implies that the comment on the topic is different from the comment on an implied other topic (if there is one) while も implies it is the same. So 今年も implies "this year, like last year" and 今年は implies "this year, unlike last year".
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 wow that's just simply a really great explanation, thank you. you already explain it at 15:54, i need to put more attention, hahaha.
So does this mean that は either emphasizes what follows OR acts as a "は of distinction"? Because in 雨は 降っている it wouldn't really make sense to emphasize that it's falling since we weren't expecting rain to do anything else but for rain to not do anything at all. So that makes it sound as if the "は of distinction" emphasizes what it marks, just like が? Also, with 姫は美しかったです why do we need the topic at all? Isn't it already clear who we're talking about?
Yes you are right. は is not necessarily distinguishing and emphasizing the comment at the same time. The second question is interesting and it is one of those cases where we really need to get used to what sounds natural in Japanese. 昔々姫がいました。美しかったです is possible (it is clear who was beautiful and it is a grammatical use of the zero pronoun) but it lacks the fairy-tale ring and sounds a bit bald. Structure is no substitute for immersion; only a tool for making it easier. For deeper information on topic-comment structure please see this two-part series: ua-cam.com/video/_nXHpkTTfGs/v-deo.html
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Cure Dolly-sensei, thank you for responding to me! I watched the two other videos you linked and I’m still a bit puzzled. From what I can see, a sentence like 私は本を買った 1. distinguishes 私 from other topics, and 2. places the emphasis on 本を買った. It’s saying: (1) What I did was: (2) buy the book. So in this case は both distinguishes its topic, as well as emphasize the comment. But then we have a sentence like 雨は 降っている Here は once again distinguishes 雨 from other topics, but it doesn’t emphasize the comment 降っている, which isn’t new information at all. We were expecting something to fall, just not rain. So I get the impression that there are 2 different types of distinguishing はs and that this second type seems (to my eyes) have the same function as が. In the book store example of your more recent video 私が本を買った emphasizes 私 as the one who bought the book. And 雨は 降っている distinguishes 雨 as the thing that is falling (as opposed to 雪). I fail to see the difference. Both seem to emphasize the subject/topic rather than the action.
@@fynriel2678 A point I made in both videos is that you actually need to be familiar with what is natural in any given case. は can perform a distinguishing function, it can stress what follows, or both, or neither. A lot depends on context and common sense and also on having an idea what is the natural "neutral" way of saying something (the less "neutral" way will usually be making a point based on particle choice while the more "neutral" one often won't be). For example 雨が降っている is "neutral". The が is not making any point. It is just the usual way of saying it. 雨は降っている is not "neutral". It is clearly saying that rain is falling but something else isn't. Language is not math. English is full of ambiguities that are only resolved by context and so is Japanese ua-cam.com/video/gcbbSW-KuTQ/v-deo.html - languages inherently are. Structure is there to help us understand things - see what is happening and why but it is not and cannot be a substitute for experience in the language. Nothing can.
Her example combines the two particles, in order to show the difference: 姫がいました、姫はかわいいしかったです - (が ≈ a princess you have yet to be informed about) existed, (は ≈ in relation to the aforementioned princess), she was cute. Translation: Princess existed, in relation to the aforementioned princess, she was cute.
Oh wow I was stuck and didnt want to study and happen to stumble upon a rap vid and good ass anime. Then I discovered your channel, thank you for making this easier to understand.
Hello, I've been learning Japanese for a while but I'm still a beginner and have really struggled with the は and が concepts, even after watching hours of YT videos and reading online. However, after watching your first 4 videos, something has definitely clicked! The ∅が explanation really helped me understand the difference between subject and topic. And the direction of emphasis for は and が explanation was amazing too. ありがとうございます! I have one question: you mentioned that が is always in every sentence, even if it's invisible (∅が).Please could you clarify the sentence "アフリカはライオンはいるけど、トラはいない". Has the が after lion and tiger been replaced (for emphasis/distinguishing purposes)? Or is there an invisible ∅が I'm missing. To me, the lion and tiger are the "do-er/be-er" in this sentence.
The structure of this sentence is a pure は-marked topic (アフリカは) followed by a compound sentence consisting of two logical clauses both with a zero が-marked subject. In both clauses the ∅が immediately follows the は.
I am sorry. Some of my video classes are based on articles on KawaJapa, but this one isn't. I will be starting a "from scratch" grammar series soon and it will have a book to go with it eventually - but as I will be writing the book alongside making the videos, that won't be out for quite a long time. I think the best memory aid here is the charts I made for the video, so you could take screenshots of the different charts. I am so sorry I don't have a more satisfactory written form at this stage.
Hi, I am having trouble understanding the differentiating function of は: You say that when I say "Yamada-kun wa ...", I am specifically talking about Yamada-kun and not about something else, right? But isn't true for everything else too? When I say (in English): "The door opened." can't I also say that I am specifically talking about the door but not the book, not the refrigerator etc. or I am specifically talking about the action of opening but not getting broken, not closing. So, isn't this "differentiating" function is a default feature of communication? When we are trying to communicate something, we are communicating specifically that thing, right? Can't we say this for "ga" too, for example? Like, in "Mukashi mukashi hime ga imashita.", isn't it true that we are specifically talking about the princess, not the prince, not the king, not the "strange fellow who is always chewing gum"? What makes "wa" different? If by "differentiating function" we mean that we are not only saying that the statement is true for the mentioned topic but also it is not true for other possible topics (as in the case of "kotoshi wa yoroshiku onegaishimasu"), I cannot understand how this is related to its main function and the functions revolves around it. Hypothetically, we could say something about a topic without necessarily implying that that said thing is not true for other topics. For example, if I said "Mukashi mukashi hime ga imashita. Hime wa kawaikatta.", the fact that princess is the topic does not necessitate it to be to only topic that "was cute". This does not have to imply that princess's maid or queen is not cute. Don't get me wrong. I am not saying that it does not imply that. I am saying that this is not a function that necessarily derives from its main function (which is marking the topic). It may be so in Japanese, but it could be not so. In summary, my question is this: If by "differentiating function" you mean the thing I explained in my first paragraph ("specifically talking about something but not another thing"), why do we even mention it and act like it is a special thing for wa whereas it is true for almost every piece of information that is conveyed im any language? If by "differentiating function" you mean the other thing (that we are not only saying that statement is true for the topic but it is false for other topics), why would that be a function that is strongly connected to its main function whereas the main function can apply without it? Or is it just not-very-strongly-related, an extra function? Thanks.
The point here is not topics, but comments. は is a topic marker and it implies that the _comment_ on that topic is _different_ from the comment on another implied topic (if there is one). も, the other topic marker does the reverse and implies that the comment on this topic is the _same_ as the comment on another topic. So 今日も頑張る implies "today, as usual (i.e. same comment as other days applies to today) I'll try hard." 今日は頑張る tends to imply that today I'll try hard in contrast to most days when I am pretty idle. More on all this in this two-parter: ua-cam.com/video/_nXHpkTTfGs/v-deo.html
The video really made me understand much better about both particles, which I had some questions about. But still now remains one of my questions: (Watashi wa) Ringo ga suki -> in this sentence is there a zero-pronoun with ga? So is it possible to have ga twice in a sentence? OR Is ringo really the subject and does “suki” not really mean: ‘to like’ but rather something like: being likeable??
Yes, it is exactly as you say. Suki is an adjectival noun (so it needs da grammatically, but that does get left off sometimes), _not a verb meaning "like"_ and it describes the apple so the apple is the ga-marked subject, just as the flower is in hana ga kirei da. There is no zero pronoun in the sentence because ringo ga suki da is a complete logical clause in itself. If watashi wa is added this merely introduces a topic on which the logical clause then becomes a comment. Since wa handles non-logical topic-comment relations (as opposed to logical subject-predicate relations) by itself, no zero pronoun or zero-ga is implied. Suki-da as you say does mean something closer to "be likeable". You'll find a full run-down on that here: ua-cam.com/video/vk3aKqMQwhM/v-deo.htmlm7s
Sensei, is it correct to say that the "wa" particle is more appropriate to use when one wishes to make a statement of fact, and the "ga" particle is more appropriate to use when one wishes to express a personal opinion? Consider these two sentences: "Sakana wa oishi desu" and "Sakana ga oishi desu." Both mean "Fish are delicious." But, the first example appears to be describing "
The subtler implications of the は vs が particles are quite complex and usually context-dependent. The best way to learn them is by experience. Once you are able to read Japanese one should read a lot - and expose oneself to it in as many media as possible - that way one gradually develops a "feel" for the implications in different cases. In this case, for example. in sakana wa oishii desu the wa could have a differentiating function, implying "as for the the _fish_ that is delicious (but the asparagus leaves something to be desired". It is also more likely than ga to be used to mean "as for fish (in general rather than any particular fish), it is delicious". Again it can be laying stress on the comment of which it is the topic "as for the fish, it is _delicious_ " Japanese is a very context-dependent language. Without context we often can't know what the zero-pronoun might be and similarly we often can't know what wa vs ga might imply in a given case.
Kara is a conjunction which means that you place it between two logical clauses (clauses that could be complete sentences in themselves). It "belongs" to the first of the clauses (clause X) and marks it as the _cause_ or _reason_ for the second clause (clause Y). When it isn't being used as a conjunction it means "from" and still has a variant of the same sense here - _from_ clause X, clause Y follows. However this really needs a lesson of its own!
This is very informative. Thank you so much. I fell like it'll help me a lot. I do have a question. I thought it might be covered in this video. Why is が always used with すき to say something is liked, but は is never used? I know that ~がすきです is usually giving new information. But what about if you've already stated it before, and you are stating out again at a different time? (I hope that makes sense.) Edit: Nevermind; this is perfectly explained in your next video. Thank you!
It is a different thing altogether. I made a video about these "pitfalls" (elements that look and sound identical but are actually different). It is No.2 ua-cam.com/video/Qf7IGkrnnjY/v-deo.html
In the example 今年はよろしくお願いいたします, can it be said to people who I just met or should I use a different particle? And I may not have understood it completely but would the sentence アフリカはライオンはいるけど虎がいない be the same as the one in the video? Since the は has already singled out the lion which in a way singles out the tiger too.
I think it would only be safe to say that if you met on New Year's day! If you had even a short acquaintance in the old year it would sound a bit odd. You could use が in that position with the tiger without breaking any grammar rules but it sounds more natural and symmetrical to use both はs. The second が carries a slight possible indication that the hearer doesn't know what a tiger is.
so for the first example, if we were talking to someone who didn't know yamada-kun, how would we go about saying the same thing? 私の友達は頭の中で山田くんが3rd earをgrowing？
What we are doing with 私の友達は in a sentence like this is making Yamada-kun into a known entity because while Yamada-kun himself is unknown the fact that I may have a friend is familiar/common enough to function as a known entity that we can mark with は. And yes that strategy can be adopted. The use of 中 here is an interesting example of the fact that even simple-seeming words do not in fact occupy the same area of the meaning spectrum as equivalent English words. You couldn't say what you said there because 中 is not a direct equivalent to English "middle" - that is only part of its meaning-spectrum. It also means "inside" and in this case it would sound more as if you were saying "inside his head". More on the meaning-spectrum here: ua-cam.com/video/CpiELpGR-VU/v-deo.html
@@lynkkx Well this is the next thing - (and if this feels worrying, please don't worry - part of the reason I stick to simple sentences early on is so that we can tackle these things when we have more experience) - Japanese doesn't use the same expression strategies as English - so just plugging Japanese words into an English-structured sentence often doesn't work. I think we would have to use 額 (forehead) here, either alone or as 額の真中 "dead center of (his) forehead". Conventional teaching tends to lead us to believe that language is a sort of code and that we can just use the same coding as English and expect the same results. This is why I always say that structure is a support to immersion. You can't learn Japanese from structure alone. The only way to know how to say many things is to have some experience. Structure can teach you how to understand things when you hear them - not necessarily how to say them - you end up constructing Eihongo (the mirror image of Japlish). However there is a trick you can use to know how to say things even without experience. I taught it in this video: ua-cam.com/video/1FdhiQH8TS8/v-deo.html
PS - the TLDR here is stick to making very simple, straightforward sentences at this stage. You can't really learn to construct Japanese at any depth without experience.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 yeah I guess I really just have to take things alot slower than I want, my brain works a lot off logic and fixed structures which is why I used to love all types of math so much back in school, I always see things as a puzzle that has a logical way of being put together.. So converting an english structure into japanese is what comes natural to me, but I am working on that. I still remember some concept I learned somewhere where to learn something you have to empty your glass before filling it up again. So I basically have to forget english and learn japanese as japanese from scratch.
I've been wondering what kind of emphasis differences ga vs wa would make in questions like 会議はいつですか vs 会議がいつですか. Am I correct in thinking that the former has an English equivalent of "Speaking of the meeting, when is it?" while the latter would be something like "When is THE meeting?" Interestingly enough, I find it easier to grasp wa than ga. I don't really "get" that sense of emphasis when I see a ga sentence, I just know it's supposed to be there because I learned it.
Hmm I would have to say that 会議はいつですか is the usual and natural way of saying it. I am not even sure that 会議がいつですか sounds like natural Japanese. Have you seen an actual example of it? The problem with it is that は here sets the topic which is a meeting (which the listener must be assumed to know of or the question is pointless) and then asks a question. が among other things stresses the _doing_ of the verb and also may single the subject out from among other things (私がアメリカ人です implies "I am the one who is American"). Since this is a non-statement question が really has no function here. Unlike ○○がありますか which is quite legitimate and used more often than ○○はありますか. What is the difference? Well this is a statement-question. We are making a positive statement about the subject (that it exists) and then asking if it is true. Thus the は・が distinctions that apply to non-question statements apply here too. In fact が is the most neutral form and は will imply some emphasis ("does it actually exist?" - or something like "how about a ○○, is there one of those?") But in an open, non-statement question (one to which you can't answer "yes" or "no") が is generally out of place. I'd be interested to see if you have an example of the use of 会議はいつですか and what the context might be. Non-Japanese cultural note: in much of the world you should never ask a closed question about something you need information on. For example "Does this bus go to Baguio?" You will always get "yes" because you obviously _want_ the bus to go to Bagio so the nice, "polite" answer is "yes" and that is what you will get regardless of where the bus actually goes. You must ask an open question like "where can I get a bus to Baguio?" and then if the nearest bus does you will get a cheerful "Oh, it's right here" and if it doesn't you will get information on where to go, or at least "I'm not sure, maybe you should ask..."
I haven't seen it used anywhere, I was just wondering what would happen if you'd replace the wa with a ga in a question like that. If 会議が sounds unnatural in this case, what would the zero particle stand for then? Thank you for the in-depth answer. I really appreciate the work you put behind your videos
Thank you so much೭੧(❛▿❛✿)੭೨ The zero particle here is in fact が. Logically the が-function is operative here. We are using the copula です to couple 会議 with いつ which is technincally a noun so the normal copula function (which requires が) is the logical structure of the sentence. Cf. our lesson on the copula: ua-cam.com/video/iV5rjLeFIXo/v-deo.html Looking at it another way, we could change the question-word to "where" and subject to a girl and we have "where is she?" we can't say "where is her?" so we know that the logical particle is が. Cf our lesson on that subject: ua-cam.com/video/DHH_e0q8b7A/v-deo.html However the logical presence of が doesn't mean that its explicit use in the sentence is natural. Depending on what we are trying to say, using が in place of は in a logical が-sentence can be unnatural.
Thank you! I might have added that a third way to know that the zero particle is が is simply that every sentence _must_ have a logical が - and that が must belong to a noun or pronoun. So the が must belong to 会議 (or rather its invisible "it"). In other words, the sentence in English is "As for the meeting, when is it?" The が-marked subject is "it". 会議は (∅が) いつですか.
Hello, I had a few questions about the usage of GA and WA in certain situations and what using one rather than the other implies, especially in sentences with question words. -For example, I understand the sentence "それは何ですか” as using WA to bring attention to some-thing, SORE, and asking "it is what?" about it. My question is, what could the Zero Pronoun be implied to be? What kind of answer can NANI be asking about in this case, or any case in general. What is the extent of the use of NANI in asking questions? For example, if I wanted to ask what something (for example SORE) is in the sense of describing what it is or doing, not what the "name" of SORE is, what COULD technically be used and what is used mostly. -I also wonder about whether GA could even be used in subjects that are being asked about. The nature of these sentences and the meaning/definition of NANI is confusing to me. Does the role of NANI, subject or predicate, change anything or is it always known to be what is being inquired about, such as its use as the grammatical subject in "何がしている？" versus its use in the sentence "していることは何ですか”. Could GA be used in the sentence "それが何ですか？” Sorry for the difficult questions. I feel like a very hard part of Japanese figuring out the most common way of structuring certain sentences and how possibly sentences can be structured. Also as you said, the use of "unexpected" structure/particles is hard to learn as well.
In それは何ですか (in this case 何 is pronounced なん) the subject is of course それ so it is それは∅が何ですか (as for THAT, what is IT). 何 is has just about the same range as "what" in English and other common questions are それはどういうものですか - "as for that, how-say thing is it?" which is roughly equivalent to "what kind of thing is that?" Obviously more specific questions would be asked more specifically, such as "あのものの使い道は何ですか" (that thing's use-road is what?) = "what is that thing used for?" 何がしている is not correct Japanese. It means "what is doing?", which is just as ungrammatical in English. You may mean 何をしている which is structurally ∅が何をしている "what (are you, is she etc) doing? The subject, of course, is the zero actor defined by context. The use of "unexpected" particles is not hard to learn. Learning it in the abstract from lists, textbooks etc is not difficult. It is impossible. Learning it from immersion is the correct and only effective way: ua-cam.com/video/3UDW5wTYbzM/v-deo.html
Organic Japanese with Cure Dolly Thank you for the response. I seemed to be confused about how in a some verbs can be both transitive and intransitive. For example, in your sentences “本が読める” and “私が本を読める,” the verb means two completely different things in relation to the subjects. The first sentence means “the book is readable”, but the second definitely doesn’t mean “I am readable,” it is more closely related to the English potential “can read”. I assumed that there was no strict rule on what can be the subject of a verb, so I thought “何がしている” could be interpreted as “what is doing/being done”. I realize that is improper English but as we have come to learn, improper English literal meanings don’t imply that the Japanese it comes from is improper. To broaden the question further, in English we could say “what is happening” or “what is doing that (ex: what is falling from the sky)”. For the second sentence I would guess that one could say “that which is falling is what” in Japanese but I feel like there would be a better way to phrase it. It is apparent in English that you can technically phrase sentences in a lot of different ways with the emphasis placed in slightly different places, but usually only in literature and more nuanced discourse is there a decision made in structure choice as to intentionally change the meaning of what is being said. And so for Japanese, I’ve been trying to learn the limits as to how certain words can be used and what kind of sentence structures are technically grammatically correct. Thanks for the help
This might be a bit late, but I have a question. In the sentence about lions existing but not tigers (アフリカはライオンはいるけど、トラはいない。) I don’t understand why the last ‘ha/wa’ wasn’t replaced with ‘ga’, since it’s new information.
Remember that は marks what it is attached to - not what follows it - so tigers _per se_ are not new information because we already know that tigers exist just as we know that Africa exists and lions exist. This makes it a valid candidate for は, though we wouldn't have to use it in all circumstances. We use it here to indicate the fact that the comment on the sub-topic "tigers is _different_ from the comment on the sub-topic lions.
Ah ok, that makes a bit more sense. So, if you were, say, talking about an extinct animal that the listener had not heard of before (to include in an argument about why we should protect endangered animals or something) would you use ‘ga’?
@@HelloHello-wi3vp In this respect (but in this respect only) は and が are a bit like "the" and "a". "The" represents something we already know about. So "the hat" means "the hat you know about" and "a hat" means some hat you don't know about. However included in the "the" group are things in general. In English we don't usually use "the" for them but we do sometimes. So we can use either no article "dinosaurs are extinct" or the "the dinosaur is extinct". We all know what dinosaurs in general are. If we say "a dinosaur died" or "some dinosaurs died" we are talking about particular dinosaurs that we are assumed not to know specifically about. Now when we introduce something the listener has never heard of at all - like the peltroftosaur. We wouldn't say "a peltroftosaur" because the implication is that while we don't know the individual peltroftosaur in question we do know what a peltroftosaur is. So we would have to introduce it more fully "An animal called a peltroftosuar" or something of that sort. Similarly in Japanese we wouldn't simply plonk it in with が if the listener had no idea what it was. We would say something like ペルトロフトソールという動物 (an animall called a peltroftosaur).
Organic Japanese with Cure Dolly Thank you for explaining that! I really appreciate it, and I also thank you for answering my questions. Your answer was very clear and made sense, so I think I’ll get the hang of it with a little more practice. :)
When I try and review a lot of the things I learn on this channel people don't seem to understand the usage of the invisible が particle (And I don't really understand it either) and frequently correct my usages of it to be は even when I use direct examples from the videos themselves. How can I grasp the usages if I've been through both videos twice and still am being corrected? Additionally, if people haven't seen these videos, would they even be aware of the existence of an invisible が particle at all? I still don't really understand 0が in the slightest, and I can't get anyone to tell me it's useful at all.
The first thing I would recommend is to watch the first three lessons of my "from scratch" series which goes over this whole thing very carefully ua-cam.com/play/PLg9uYxuZf8x_A-vcqqyOFZu06WlhnypWj.html Most people will not recognize the zero particle. Most people also cannot explain how Japanese is structured (even if they know it by instinct). In the first two videos I do use が where は would be more natural in order to demonstrate the actual structure. In the third video I introduce は and show how we should use that.
sensei i was hunted again by double が structure, can you explain this sentence? あのごろ、私のほうが背が高かったのにな i understood what the sentence is trying say but as you can see it has two がs どうすればいいのですか、先生
In 私のほうが背が高かった, the first が is the が of the sentence and it refers to me: I am the subject and the predicate is 背が高かった. The second が is part of the common phrase 背が高かった which means "(my) back was tall". The subject of this (subordinate) phrase is "back" and the predicate is "tall". For the use of ほう, please see this video: ua-cam.com/video/ma1yZwt1XAc/v-deo.html
Literally it means something like "This year please be good to me". Very literally, "This year goodly (I) implore". However, usually we would use the inclusive particle も rather than the exclusive particle は. With も it means "this year once again please be good to me". With は it tends to imply "This year please be good to me (and don't treat me the way you treated me last year)". However, it could work if you have no history with the person concerned. It is a very common New Year's greeting.
Thank you so much for making these videos! I have 1 question. How can I say the word imply in Japanese? When I am trying to explain to my Japanese friends that "A means B but it also subtly implies C" or perhaps, "this word Suggests B (but doesn't outright mean it) " .Thank you so much.
I'm reminded of a chapter in Jay Rubin's 'Making Sense of Japanese' where he remarked that modern literature, both Japanese and English, has a peculiar habit of introducing characters and other topics as though the reader should somehow already be familiar with them, to give the readers the feeling that they are living in the made-up world of the story. Just as a modern English novel can start with 'The two-by-four lay soaked in blood on the floor' instead of 'A two-by-four lay soaked in blood on the floor', a modern Japanese novel may similarly start with a wa-marked topic apropos of nothing. 'Hime wa imashita' - 'As for the princess, she existed' could be a perfectly legitimate opening sentence in modern Japanese literature. What two-by-four? What princess? Read on to find out.
Yes that is absolutely true. Of course it doesn't change the fact that both "the" and は have the meaning and implications that they have, just that those precise implications are being leveraged for what are (by non-literary - or even earlier literary communication purposes) unconventional effects. Of course they have become conventional in modern literature, but without changing their effect - only making it less unexpected. I would say it can be compared with "cold opens" in films. Interestingly it is also used that way in metaphorical expressions. "Kicking the bucket" or "throwing someone under the bus". What bucket? What bus? - just the conventional one that you throw people under. I don't suppose it even goes anywhere. It just stands parked somewhere in the linguistic aethyr waiting for people to be thrown under it.
@@itshj6476 You could, if you wanted to put emphasis on what comes before the particle が. In this case, your name. You'd do this if you needed to clear up the fact that you are the one who is called HJ. 私がｈｊです。meaning: "I am the one whose name is HJ."
Oh dear. That was a slip. I wonder how that got through. お願いいたします is pronounced as it is spelled (onegai-itashimasu - not onegai-shimasu). It is a very polite form of onegaishimasu. いたす (itasu) is a humble (kenjougo) form of する. お願いします itself is kenjougo (very humble Japanese) though it is so commonly used that it doesn't have the force of keigo (extra-polite Japanese). Using itashimasu in place of shimasu makes it extra-polite Japanese. It certainly should not have been on the board because it is confusing - and more advanced than anything I was trying to teach. 申し訳ございません (moushiwake gozaimasen - extremely humble apology)*:ﾟ*｡⋆ฺ(*´◡`)
どういたしまして。By the way, if you want a mnemonic for いたす as the humble form of する, you can see it as humbly describing one's own actions as いたずら - mischief. There is no real connection between the two words (as far as I know) but it makes a fun mnemonic.
Oops! First comment sent before finished . . . here is the rest. . . . But, the first example appears to be describing "delicious taste" as a characteristic of fish, whereas the second example seems (to me, at least) more like a statement of personal opinion.
So if I were to say "There are tigers in Africa but not lions." (a false statement) and you were to correct me "No, there are *lions* in Africa, not *tigers* ", would you use ga? Me: "Africa wa tora [wa] iru kedo, lion [wa] inai." You: "iie, *lion* [ga] iru kedo *tora* [ga] inai." Is this how you would correct my statement?
Thank you so much for your kind appreciation of the content. As for the me-ness of me, life is hard for a poor android. Humans can go to the beauty parlor but I have to wait for an upgrade that may never come. All the video lessons have full subtitles (not auto-generated ones) so if my voice is difficult for you, you may find them helpful.
The princess sentences are rather confusing. The way you present は and が make it seem like the は statement will come first to let us know what the topic is - the princess existing isn’t particularly interesting information, it’s just tell us of the topic. This would make it seem like は would be used. And that the が comes second to denote that we’re getting more useful information directly linked to the subject: the princess was beautiful. In fact it would almost seem like the zero pronoun would be fitting here and use no は or が at all, since the subject is clear by now. So why are they switched? The explanations just seemed to call the the other particle that wasn’t used.
By "interesting information" I mean information that the listener does not know and the speaker is trying to convey. The term "salient information" is better but I can't rely on viewers to understand the word. The zero particle could have been used in the second sentence but my purpose was to show when は can be used. It can be used in the second sentence but not the first. You can't introduce someone with は because she is unknown at that point. You can thereafter refer to her using は. が tends to point backward to its marked noun as the salient information. は, while marking the topic tends to point forward to the comment as the salient information.
Organic Japanese with Cure Dolly The first time I read this when you replied I was pretty much entirely lost, though coming back and reading it again I think I get it. が is for important information, and can introduce something new, は is for recalling something the listener knows and points the conversation to talk about that thing. Like how the second sentence merely says the princess exists, and は signals we’re about to start actually talking about them. Am I correct?
@@HyperLuigi37 Yes that's right. It does take a little getting to grips with because it's not quite like anything in English. I'm going to do another video on this in the next few weeks.
The best explanation of wa and ga I've ever heard. I love our late sensei. May she always be at peace.
dolly was definitely the best teacher for english speakers learning japanese. she's able to logically explain the nuances of japanese in a way that native speakers cant because to them, the rules dont need to be explained. her editing style is antiquated and a little unsettling but the knowledge here is invaluable. rest in peace sensei!
"We don't want to talk about Sakura-chan and we don't want to talk about that strange fella who is always chewing gum" I love your explanations!
Glad they hit the spot(*＾▽＾)／
Note for myself!
は：non-logical, topic-marking particle
- What is marked by は is sth we already know, and we’re distinguish it from other things we already know that might possible be the case but aren’t.
- What’s important is NOT the topic itself, but what we have to say about the topic (what follows after は).
が presents new information -> throws the emphasis onto the thing itself (aka what comes before が)
は reminds us of an old topic -> throws the emphasis onto the new thing we have to say about that topic (aka what comes after は).
The rest is about more advanced cases of using は when we usually don’t expect it, and the implication of those unusual usage.
I've been struggling with learning Japanese on my own, for the past few years. But these first few videos of yours have helped me to understand the structure of the language in a way I've never been able to do before. So thank you!
"experience and context are what is needed to interpret precisely what は is doing in any given case, but we also need to have these basic principles in order to be able to interpret correctly. one can learn by pure experience of course but understanding the principles certainly makes it quicker, easier, and more accurate"
after finding these videos, i feel like i can apply this mindset to all of learning Japanese
On New Years 2021, I definitely plan on saying 今年はよろしくお願いします
I bought the book and read it in one session. Worth every penny.
Thank you! I'm so happy it helped you.
Absolutely superb explanation skills. I feel like I have ascended into grammar heaven. I'm gonna buy the book the moment I get back from my trip. Keep up the good work!
Thank you so much!
This is the clearest explanation I've ever seen of wa and ga.
Thank you!
Aside from this being a fantastic explanation of Japanese grammar in itself, this stuff is also pure general linguistics gold
あのコメント読みないけど、いつもありがとうCure Dolly先生
Whoa, you are so smart. I'm so glad I found your channel and I love your accent.
Thank you so much! I got my accent by fiddling with the settings under "tone and intonation". Sounds better than standard "toneless robotic" I think, though not everyone likes it. PS in case this gives anyone the wrong idea, I am not using a "synthesized voice" as some people have suggested except insofar as the whole of me - including my thoughts, my jokes, my heart etc. are "synthesized". Not only organic beings have hearts!
sensei I love your jokes very much! Started taking a Japanese course beginning of this year and was puzzled by how there are many seemingly arbitrary rules and exceptions in the language. Your series proved that that's not the case :) Thank you and keep up the good work!
Thank you so much! I am very happy that I am able to help you. Please ask me if you ever have any questions.
Your videos have been so informative. I'm just now two months into learning Japanese and this is something that has been plaguing my understanding of sentence structure. It's so clearly presented and follows a pattern that makes sense. Thank you for the time and effort you put into these. The scripts must be difficult to write! とても助かりました。ありがとうございます。
Absolutely wonderful explanation
The more I watch your videos the more I love you, sensee! You are trully gifted on teaching.
Thank you.
Your explanation is so clear, and examples are just brilliant, after this video I have zero questions about using and understanding wa and ga!
Wonderful! It takes a bit of time to master the final details, but that is much easier if you have the fundamental principles in place.
About 5:55 mark
Another way you can perceived this is the fact that the only particle that could be used before iru or aru is ga or ni.
The reason being is that this is a pattern that is derived from ~ni~ga iru
Hmm. I am always a little dubious of Japanese grammar being taught as "patterns" as it tends to disguise the actual logic of the language. For example I have heard the term "wa/ga pattern" used to dodge the issue of what the が is actually doing in コーヒーが好きです (koohii ga suki desu).
I take it you are not saying that we can never use は before いる / ある because that certainly isn't the case. So is your suggestion that 昔々 mukashi mukashi, being a time-expression logically implies a に?
I would agree that it does in a certain sense, even though it is never (as far as I recall) used in this context (or in relative time expressions in general which I think mukashi counts as - long ago [relative to now]").
However it isn't really true to say that は can't be used in before いる / ある even when following a に. For example a recent book has the title 宇宙に命はあるのか (Uchuu ni Inochi wa Aru no ka) "Is there Life in Space/the Universe?". Here I think は is used to throw emphasis onto ある - "does life _exist_ ?" It can be used because life itself is a known thing.
So I think we are safer looking at it in terms of the functions of the particles rather than in terms of patterns.
KawaJapa CureDolly ah I see ty for the insight
Neat.
There goes several years of not understanding these particles (though, admittedly, I only really started studying Japanese 3 months ago).
This helped a lot in tying together all that information I had heard about the particles for such a long time in a way that actually made sense. Thanks.
I'm so glad this helped you. This is considered pretty complex material, but if you see how it actually works I think it can be tackled at quite an early stage.
Happy to hear you've started studying Japanese in earnest! Ganbatte ne!
I'd say I'm probably on the border between Beginner & Intermediate right now, having finished Tae Kim's Guide up to Advanced Topics, then ditching it for IMABI, which is much more in-depth. My main problem at the moment is vocabulary (which I'm attempting to remedy through iKnow!) + only knowing a few hundred kanji (which I was previously trying to remedy through WaniKani, but have given up on for a while); I've made sure that the main focus of my learning for the rest of this year is grammar, because in the end, it's the most difficult - and the most important - part of Japanese.
But the one thing that never clicked for me with Japanese grammar was 「は」and「が」. But that makes a lot more sense now! The other thing that has been hard for me to get a proper handle on is「に」, mostly because of its sheer versatility. I understood how it was used in certain patterns before I began to understand the nature of the particle itself.
Anyway, thanks so much!
Unlike wa, ni really does have some functions that don't seem to be connected to a single core function (at least I haven't been able to work it out if they are). I might be doing something on how it works (in various cases) later if people want it. I mostly only do articles and videos where I think I have something new, or too-little-known, to bring to the table. But if I can help with anything I will.
I would say in terms of more general advice that at your stage I would consider it really important (if you aren't already) to start exposing yourself as heavily as possible to real Japanese material. You've done a lot of theory work, but theory only takes one so far. It's definitely time to start getting behind the wheel for some real experience.
I do this kind of theory explanation because it gives a good basis for processing real experience but in the end it is only an adjunct to that experience. That is the real teacher.
Mm, yeah. Actually reading, watching or listening to actual Japanese 'source' material is the next big thing I have to do to progress with Japanese. Feels like I've hit a roadblock that has massively slowed down my progress. I should mention that every day I do listen to songs, anime, visual novels and I can read the occasional sentence fragment, but that's more passive consumption. It doesn't seem to be doing much for progress, but it's at least keeping my motivation up, if nothing else. Oh, and since 2012, I've listened to (and watched) literally thousands of hours worth of anime...but that doesn't really count.
The original reason I started learning Japanese is because I bought a light novel that nobody was ever going to translate in Japanese by an author whose work I loved (「僕らはどこにも開かない」), but it seems like it's going to be a long time before I can attempt that.
I'm also in my final year of high school at the moment, and there is a ton of work/assignments/study I have to do for it, so it's been hard to work up the motivation to try and start reading/watching something.
Do you have any recommendations on where I should start?
Actually anime can help a lot. It is where I got my early experience. But English subtitled anime is next-door to useless because the brain is hardwired to take the line of least resistance. Japanese subtitled anime, on the other hand is really useful. It's a bit of a grind at first though (I started when I knew considerably less than you do now and it was tough, but really helpful).
It's actually a lot easier now because there are several sites that supply ready J-subbed anime (I had to jump through all kinds of hoops to get it). Whether this is right for you is something only you can find out but it's worth giving it a try. I did a short article recently giving sources for finding J-subbed anime:
learnjapaneseonline.info/2017/05/09/learn-japanese-with-anime-new-free-resources/
You could try browsing these sites and see what takes your fancy.
Grammar in general is usually boring at school, but I actually enjoy watching your videos.
Your book is expected to be delivered at my house on Friday so I can't wait!
Thank you so much for ordering it! I am happy that you enjoy my videos!
At 10:05 you say GA does not necessarily mark new information and it can mark old information (where we would expect WA to be used). Could you elaborate a little bit more in this point perhaps with an example? ありがとう！
For a much more detailed investigation of this, please see this two-part series: ua-cam.com/video/_nXHpkTTfGs/v-deo.html
Organic Japanese with Cure Dolly Thank you. I rewatched those two videos a few times but I’m still a bit fuzzy. Would 私が本を買った be an example of GA marking old information since it’s a statement answering the (implied or stated) question 誰が本を買った?
@@kaitoran3149 With 私 it can't be an unknown entity can it? Because the listener knows who "I" is when you speak. But it can be "new information" in the sense that the listener doesn't know that you are the one who bought the book. With 私は you would be casting the _book_ as the new information because one element of any communication must be the salient or "new" part. So what you did, though the listener is not expected to know this, is bought a book (as opposed to buying something else or doing something else altogether). With no 私 it is just straightforwardly saying "I bought a book".
Excellent teacher!❤
Amazing content, thank you so much! As a begginner, should I watch the "lesson" series first or can I watch your videos in chronological order? Once again, great content. Thank you very much. I will buy your book soon.
I would recommend starting with the lesson series because it builds from the very basics in order: ua-cam.com/play/PLg9uYxuZf8x_A-vcqqyOFZu06WlhnypWj.html
If you watch my hero academia, Allmight says clearly: 私"が"きた. So the emphesis is on "him" being there: Keep calm everyone, for "I" am here.
This is so beautiful
Cure dolly, I love your explanation. It helps me learn a lot, thank you very much. Can you please translate this sentence once 釣りが趣味です。今日は、沖にある堤防で釣りをします。堤防までは、船で行きます。
Fishing is my hobby. Today, I will be fishing at the offshore bank. We will go to the bank by boat.
What do you think of Matt vs. Japan and MIA?
I am not familiar enough with his approach to speak in depth, but first of all, I very much like his idea of de-dogmatizing AJATT - treating it as an "approach" rather than a "system" (I think this is very much in the spirit of Khatzumoto-san's original work, but it tends to have attracted a lot of dogmatic humans in its later years). I obviously have no argument with mass immersion as that is exactly what I advocate myself.
I have explained the differences between my approach (structure + direct, organic immersion with Anki as a pinning + Kanji-recall tool) vs the AJATT-based approaches - usually involving Heisig, a lot of Anki sentences [indirect immersion], and some degree of "blind listening" - the organic approach doesn't use any of those because it doesn't need them (though there is no harm incorporating some "blind listening" _if_ you find it helpful) and there is a play-off between not using Heisig and not using sentences (because we need to be learning kanji as part of vocabulary and sentence-fronted cards don't work for that - and in any case we don't use indirect immersion through isolated sentences, though we can use sentences as part of J-J definitions).
So the detailed differences between the approaches are a little (not very) complex. In the end it boils down to what suits you best. There are elements of the AJATT approach that some people just don't take to/can't use and the same with the Organic approach. If neither approach wholly suits you, it can be worthwhile to do a little tinkering to combine elements that work for you.
So, I have no objection to people mix-n'-matching the parts that work best for them, and with the deliberate replacement of the "system" concept with the "approach" concept, I guess Matt-san would feel the same.
What I would say (and I imagine he would too) is that there are some areas where you must be careful of mixing because each approach has its own ecology - that is.places where it doesn't do A _because_ it does do B.
So if you aren't doing Heisig you can't _also_ base your Anki around sentence cards (unless you are covering kanji by some other method like WaniKani).
So the primary thing is knowing how an approach covers the main bases - which are structure, kanji, vocabulary and immersion.
AJATT-based approaches don't do structure - if they are non-dogmatic they might throw in some old-skool Eihongo "grammar" (the nearest approach to structure available in books or on the internet) but that isn't inherent in the system). If you don't do structure seriously, then you more or less _need_ sentence-fronted cards.
If you don't "do kanji" - that is you treat them simply as an aspect of vocabulary - then you _have_ to use kanji-fronted vocabulary cards.
This is why I try to explain at every stage _why_ we do what we do. Because there is no harm in swapping bits of one engine with another but you need to know how each engine works in order to know which parts you can safely swap without rendering the engine inoperable.
My comment concerns the Lion/Tiger example found at 11:35 where the particle "wa" occurs three times in a single sentence. If I understand Sensei correctly, the "wa" particle functions normally in the first instance, i.e., it marks "Africa" as the topic. But, in the second two instances, "wa" replaces the "ga" particle and imbues the respective subjects (Lions and Tigers) with the attribute of contrast. While this "works", it seems to be it would be cleaner to say the author of the sentence simply changed the subjects (Lions and Tigers) to "subtopics" by marking them with "wa" rather than "ga." If that is so, everything makes perfectly good sense -- the "wa" particle is not required to perform any new function.
I agree completely. I certainly did not mean to imply (and hope I did not give the impression) that は under any circumstances replaces the が particle in the sense of doing anything like what it does (there are of course cases where one or the other may be used which can give rise to this very common misunderstanding and it is one that I work hard to eliminate). I hope I have made this amply clear in my other videos (this was really intended as a follow-up to my basic introduction to は and assumes that people are already familiar with what I said there). In the case of both the lions and the tigers a full analysis would read ライオンは (∅が) いる - _mutatis mutandis_ for the tigers, since we cannot have a subject-predicate construction without the subject being marked visibly or invisibly by が.
This does indeed, as you say, involve reading the は-marked nouns as sub-topics which is precisely what is meant by saying "as for lions, they exist" etc. The sub-topic is ライオン ("lions") and the subject of the predicate いる ("exist") is ∅が ("they").
I do intend my more advanced lessons to be taken in the light of my more basic ones, so I sometimes take some aspects of the preliminary teaching as read. I certainly apologize if this causes any confusion. Currently I am teaching Japanese from scratch in a course of numbered lessons which I hope will make the fact that they are to be taken sequentially clearer than it was before. Here is the one on は:
ua-cam.com/video/U9_T4eObNXg/v-deo.html
Thank you. I am a beginning student who believes understanding why a rule exists can be just as important, if not more important, than the rule itself . After sampling numerous instruction videos (from various content providers), I concluded that your videos were significantly more helpful than any of the others. In a nutshell, your lessons have help me understand how Japanese actually works. Most other instructors simply rely on students mimicking their example. While that approach may work for other students, it does not work for me. Once again, thanks for providing such outstanding content.
Thank you so much for your kind words. The method of instruction you mention is too prevalent in my view and falls between two stools. You _can_ learn language by mimicking but _not_ in a few hours' instruction a week. If you want to learn without near-total immersion you need to understand the structure (and if you want to learn _with_ near-total immersion you still make life a lot easier by getting the structure in advance). That, at least is my view. And to be brutally honest, _most_ students of Japanese (including those who pass exams) never become competent in the language. And I do largely blame the methods of instruction - though there are a few other reasons too.
Most instructors give people a lot of fish. My teaching philosophy is: "Don't give people fish. Teach them _how_ to fish."
"If she didn't exist, what would she do?" I giggled.
先生、ありがとうごさいます
どういたしまして。
15:30
"as for this year, please treat me well"
i didn't get why this is an unfortunate choice of words then you explain some people might thinking like "why he is asking for me to treat him well this year, is that mean i am not treating him well last year?"
i thought japanese are easily offended but its really because their language and culture are very subtle about meaning/subject/context, if i live in japan, people definitely will think i'm an insensitive person.
The thing is that of the two non-logical topic-markers, は implies that the comment on the topic is different from the comment on an implied other topic (if there is one) while も implies it is the same. So 今年も implies "this year, like last year" and 今年は implies "this year, unlike last year".
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 wow that's just simply a really great explanation, thank you.
you already explain it at 15:54, i need to put more attention, hahaha.
So does this mean that は either emphasizes what follows OR acts as a "は of distinction"?
Because in 雨は 降っている it wouldn't really make sense to emphasize that it's falling since we weren't expecting rain to do anything else but for rain to not do anything at all. So that makes it sound as if the "は of distinction" emphasizes what it marks, just like が?
Also, with 姫は美しかったです why do we need the topic at all? Isn't it already clear who we're talking about?
Yes you are right. は is not necessarily distinguishing and emphasizing the comment at the same time. The second question is interesting and it is one of those cases where we really need to get used to what sounds natural in Japanese.
昔々姫がいました。美しかったです is possible (it is clear who was beautiful and it is a grammatical use of the zero pronoun) but it lacks the fairy-tale ring and sounds a bit bald. Structure is no substitute for immersion; only a tool for making it easier.
For deeper information on topic-comment structure please see this two-part series: ua-cam.com/video/_nXHpkTTfGs/v-deo.html
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Cure Dolly-sensei, thank you for responding to me!
I watched the two other videos you linked and I’m still a bit puzzled.
From what I can see, a sentence like 私は本を買った
1. distinguishes 私 from other topics, and 2. places the emphasis on 本を買った.
It’s saying: (1) What I did was: (2) buy the book.
So in this case は both distinguishes its topic, as well as emphasize the comment.
But then we have a sentence like 雨は 降っている
Here は once again distinguishes 雨 from other topics, but it doesn’t emphasize the comment 降っている, which isn’t new information at all. We were expecting something to fall, just not rain.
So I get the impression that there are 2 different types of distinguishing はs and that this second type seems (to my eyes) have the same function as が.
In the book store example of your more recent video 私が本を買った emphasizes 私 as the one who bought the book. And 雨は 降っている distinguishes 雨 as the thing that is falling (as opposed to 雪). I fail to see the difference. Both seem to emphasize the subject/topic rather than the action.
@@fynriel2678 A point I made in both videos is that you actually need to be familiar with what is natural in any given case. は can perform a distinguishing function, it can stress what follows, or both, or neither. A lot depends on context and common sense and also on having an idea what is the natural "neutral" way of saying something (the less "neutral" way will usually be making a point based on particle choice while the more "neutral" one often won't be).
For example 雨が降っている is "neutral". The が is not making any point. It is just the usual way of saying it. 雨は降っている is not "neutral". It is clearly saying that rain is falling but something else isn't.
Language is not math. English is full of ambiguities that are only resolved by context and so is Japanese ua-cam.com/video/gcbbSW-KuTQ/v-deo.html
- languages inherently are.
Structure is there to help us understand things - see what is happening and why but it is not and cannot be a substitute for experience in the language. Nothing can.
5:47 Epic arm reveal!!
I'm a bit embarrassed about my arms as they are very long and thin, so I don't usually show them.
Her example combines the two particles, in order to show the difference: 姫がいました、姫はかわいいしかったです - (が ≈ a princess you have yet to be informed about) existed, (は ≈ in relation to the aforementioned princess), she was cute.
Translation: Princess existed, in relation to the aforementioned princess, she was cute.
Oh wow I was stuck and didnt want to study and happen to stumble upon a rap vid and good ass anime. Then I discovered your channel, thank you for making this easier to understand.
I'm happy to be able to help.
Hello, I've been learning Japanese for a while but I'm still a beginner and have really struggled with the は and が concepts, even after watching hours of YT videos and reading online. However, after watching your first 4 videos, something has definitely clicked! The ∅が explanation really helped me understand the difference between subject and topic. And the direction of emphasis for は and が explanation was amazing too. ありがとうございます!
I have one question: you mentioned that が is always in every sentence, even if it's invisible (∅が).Please could you clarify the sentence "アフリカはライオンはいるけど、トラはいない". Has the が after lion and tiger been replaced (for emphasis/distinguishing purposes)? Or is there an invisible ∅が I'm missing. To me, the lion and tiger are the "do-er/be-er" in this sentence.
The structure of this sentence is a pure は-marked topic (アフリカは) followed by a compound sentence consisting of two logical clauses both with a zero が-marked subject. In both clauses the ∅が immediately follows the は.
Hey CD-Sensei, is this class is documented on a website . I need to read about it to put it in my head.
I am sorry. Some of my video classes are based on articles on KawaJapa, but this one isn't. I will be starting a "from scratch" grammar series soon and it will have a book to go with it eventually - but as I will be writing the book alongside making the videos, that won't be out for quite a long time.
I think the best memory aid here is the charts I made for the video, so you could take screenshots of the different charts. I am so sorry I don't have a more satisfactory written form at this stage.
Yo this was awesome
Thank you!
Hi,
I am having trouble understanding the differentiating function of は:
You say that when I say "Yamada-kun wa ...", I am specifically talking about Yamada-kun and not about something else, right?
But isn't true for everything else too?
When I say (in English):
"The door opened."
can't I also say that I am specifically talking about the door but not the book, not the refrigerator etc. or I am specifically talking about the action of opening but not getting broken, not closing. So, isn't this "differentiating" function is a default feature of communication?
When we are trying to communicate something, we are communicating specifically that thing, right?
Can't we say this for "ga" too, for example? Like, in
"Mukashi mukashi hime ga imashita.", isn't it true that we are specifically talking about the princess, not the prince, not the king, not the "strange fellow who is always chewing gum"? What makes "wa" different?
If by "differentiating function" we mean that we are not only saying that the statement is true for the mentioned topic but also it is not true for other possible topics (as in the case of "kotoshi wa yoroshiku onegaishimasu"), I cannot understand how this is related to its main function and the functions revolves around it. Hypothetically, we could say something about a topic without necessarily implying that that said thing is not true for other topics. For example, if I said "Mukashi mukashi hime ga imashita. Hime wa kawaikatta.", the fact that princess is the topic does not necessitate it to be to only topic that "was cute". This does not have to imply that princess's maid or queen is not cute.
Don't get me wrong. I am not saying that it does not imply that. I am saying that this is not a function that necessarily derives from its main function (which is marking the topic). It may be so in Japanese, but it could be not so.
In summary, my question is this:
If by "differentiating function" you mean the thing I explained in my first paragraph ("specifically talking about something but not another thing"), why do we even mention it and act like it is a special thing for wa whereas it is true for almost every piece of information that is conveyed im any language?
If by "differentiating function" you mean the other thing (that we are not only saying that statement is true for the topic but it is false for other topics), why would that be a function that is strongly connected to its main function whereas the main function can apply without it? Or is it just not-very-strongly-related, an extra function?
Thanks.
The point here is not topics, but comments. は is a topic marker and it implies that the _comment_ on that topic is _different_ from the comment on another implied topic (if there is one). も, the other topic marker does the reverse and implies that the comment on this topic is the _same_ as the comment on another topic.
So 今日も頑張る implies "today, as usual (i.e. same comment as other days applies to today) I'll try hard."
今日は頑張る tends to imply that today I'll try hard in contrast to most days when I am pretty idle.
More on all this in this two-parter: ua-cam.com/video/_nXHpkTTfGs/v-deo.html
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Okay, I got it now. Thanks, both for the answer and for your content in general.
The video really made me understand much better about both particles, which I had some questions about. But still now remains one of my questions:
(Watashi wa) Ringo ga suki -> in this sentence is there a zero-pronoun with ga? So is it possible to have ga twice in a sentence?
OR
Is ringo really the subject and does “suki” not really mean: ‘to like’ but rather something like: being likeable??
Yes, it is exactly as you say. Suki is an adjectival noun (so it needs da grammatically, but that does get left off sometimes), _not a verb meaning "like"_ and it describes the apple so the apple is the ga-marked subject, just as the flower is in hana ga kirei da. There is no zero pronoun in the sentence because ringo ga suki da is a complete logical clause in itself. If watashi wa is added this merely introduces a topic on which the logical clause then becomes a comment. Since wa handles non-logical topic-comment relations (as opposed to logical subject-predicate relations) by itself, no zero pronoun or zero-ga is implied.
Suki-da as you say does mean something closer to "be likeable". You'll find a full run-down on that here: ua-cam.com/video/vk3aKqMQwhM/v-deo.htmlm7s
Thank you so much.
Sensei, is it correct to say that the "wa" particle is more appropriate to use when one wishes to make a statement of fact, and the "ga" particle is more appropriate to use when one wishes to express a personal opinion? Consider these two sentences: "Sakana wa oishi desu" and "Sakana ga oishi desu." Both mean "Fish are delicious." But, the first example appears to be describing "
The subtler implications of the は vs が particles are quite complex and usually context-dependent. The best way to learn them is by experience. Once you are able to read Japanese one should read a lot - and expose oneself to it in as many media as possible - that way one gradually develops a "feel" for the implications in different cases.
In this case, for example. in sakana wa oishii desu the wa could have a differentiating function, implying "as for the the _fish_ that is delicious (but the asparagus leaves something to be desired". It is also more likely than ga to be used to mean "as for fish (in general rather than any particular fish), it is delicious". Again it can be laying stress on the comment of which it is the topic "as for the fish, it is _delicious_ "
Japanese is a very context-dependent language. Without context we often can't know what the zero-pronoun might be and similarly we often can't know what wa vs ga might imply in a given case.
what does kara particle do and where do you place it in a sentence thank you.
Kara is a conjunction which means that you place it between two logical clauses (clauses that could be complete sentences in themselves). It "belongs" to the first of the clauses (clause X) and marks it as the _cause_ or _reason_ for the second clause (clause Y). When it isn't being used as a conjunction it means "from" and still has a variant of the same sense here - _from_ clause X, clause Y follows. However this really needs a lesson of its own!
This is very informative. Thank you so much. I fell like it'll help me a lot.
I do have a question. I thought it might be covered in this video. Why is が always used with すき to say something is liked, but は is never used? I know that ~がすきです is usually giving new information. But what about if you've already stated it before, and you are stating out again at a different time? (I hope that makes sense.)
Edit: Nevermind; this is perfectly explained in your next video. Thank you!
thanks
What about が treated as a conjunction? Is that different from its subject marker role? For instance:
レナ
「お父様は？」
村人
「最上階に登られましたが...
帰ってこないのです。」
It is a different thing altogether. I made a video about these "pitfalls" (elements that look and sound identical but are actually different). It is No.2 ua-cam.com/video/Qf7IGkrnnjY/v-deo.html
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Thanks.
In the example 今年はよろしくお願いいたします, can it be said to people who I just met or should I use a different particle? And I may not have understood it completely but would the sentence アフリカはライオンはいるけど虎がいない be the same as the one in the video? Since the は has already singled out the lion which in a way singles out the tiger too.
I think it would only be safe to say that if you met on New Year's day! If you had even a short acquaintance in the old year it would sound a bit odd. You could use が in that position with the tiger without breaking any grammar rules but it sounds more natural and symmetrical to use both はs. The second が carries a slight possible indication that the hearer doesn't know what a tiger is.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Thank you very much!
so for the first example, if we were talking to someone who didn't know yamada-kun, how would we go about saying the same thing?
私の友達は頭の中で山田くんが3rd earをgrowing？
What we are doing with 私の友達は in a sentence like this is making Yamada-kun into a known entity because while Yamada-kun himself is unknown the fact that I may have a friend is familiar/common enough to function as a known entity that we can mark with は. And yes that strategy can be adopted.
The use of 中 here is an interesting example of the fact that even simple-seeming words do not in fact occupy the same area of the meaning spectrum as equivalent English words. You couldn't say what you said there because 中 is not a direct equivalent to English "middle" - that is only part of its meaning-spectrum. It also means "inside" and in this case it would sound more as if you were saying "inside his head".
More on the meaning-spectrum here: ua-cam.com/video/CpiELpGR-VU/v-deo.html
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 ohh, okay but is my sentence structure still correct if I used the correct "middle" kanji there?
@@lynkkx Well this is the next thing - (and if this feels worrying, please don't worry - part of the reason I stick to simple sentences early on is so that we can tackle these things when we have more experience) - Japanese doesn't use the same expression strategies as English - so just plugging Japanese words into an English-structured sentence often doesn't work.
I think we would have to use 額 (forehead) here, either alone or as 額の真中 "dead center of (his) forehead". Conventional teaching tends to lead us to believe that language is a sort of code and that we can just use the same coding as English and expect the same results.
This is why I always say that structure is a support to immersion. You can't learn Japanese from structure alone. The only way to know how to say many things is to have some experience. Structure can teach you how to understand things when you hear them - not necessarily how to say them - you end up constructing Eihongo (the mirror image of Japlish).
However there is a trick you can use to know how to say things even without experience. I taught it in this video: ua-cam.com/video/1FdhiQH8TS8/v-deo.html
PS - the TLDR here is stick to making very simple, straightforward sentences at this stage. You can't really learn to construct Japanese at any depth without experience.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 yeah I guess I really just have to take things alot slower than I want, my brain works a lot off logic and fixed structures which is why I used to love all types of math so much back in school, I always see things as a puzzle that has a logical way of being put together.. So converting an english structure into japanese is what comes natural to me, but I am working on that. I still remember some concept I learned somewhere where to learn something you have to empty your glass before filling it up again. So I basically have to forget english and learn japanese as japanese from scratch.
I've been wondering what kind of emphasis differences ga vs wa would make in questions like 会議はいつですか vs 会議がいつですか. Am I correct in thinking that the former has an English equivalent of "Speaking of the meeting, when is it?" while the latter would be something like "When is THE meeting?"
Interestingly enough, I find it easier to grasp wa than ga. I don't really "get" that sense of emphasis when I see a ga sentence, I just know it's supposed to be there because I learned it.
Hmm I would have to say that 会議はいつですか is the usual and natural way of saying it. I am not even sure that 会議がいつですか sounds like natural Japanese. Have you seen an actual example of it? The problem with it is that は here sets the topic which is a meeting (which the listener must be assumed to know of or the question is pointless) and then asks a question. が among other things stresses the _doing_ of the verb and also may single the subject out from among other things (私がアメリカ人です implies "I am the one who is American").
Since this is a non-statement question が really has no function here. Unlike ○○がありますか which is quite legitimate and used more often than ○○はありますか. What is the difference? Well this is a statement-question. We are making a positive statement about the subject (that it exists) and then asking if it is true. Thus the は・が distinctions that apply to non-question statements apply here too. In fact が is the most neutral form and は will imply some emphasis ("does it actually exist?" - or something like "how about a ○○, is there one of those?")
But in an open, non-statement question (one to which you can't answer "yes" or "no") が is generally out of place. I'd be interested to see if you have an example of the use of 会議はいつですか and what the context might be.
Non-Japanese cultural note: in much of the world you should never ask a closed question about something you need information on. For example "Does this bus go to Baguio?" You will always get "yes" because you obviously _want_ the bus to go to Bagio so the nice, "polite" answer is "yes" and that is what you will get regardless of where the bus actually goes. You must ask an open question like "where can I get a bus to Baguio?" and then if the nearest bus does you will get a cheerful "Oh, it's right here" and if it doesn't you will get information on where to go, or at least "I'm not sure, maybe you should ask..."
I haven't seen it used anywhere, I was just wondering what would happen if you'd replace the wa with a ga in a question like that. If 会議が sounds unnatural in this case, what would the zero particle stand for then?
Thank you for the in-depth answer. I really appreciate the work you put behind your videos
Thank you so much೭੧(❛▿❛✿)੭೨ The zero particle here is in fact が. Logically the が-function is operative here. We are using the copula です to couple 会議 with いつ which is technincally a noun so the normal copula function (which requires が) is the logical structure of the sentence. Cf. our lesson on the copula:
ua-cam.com/video/iV5rjLeFIXo/v-deo.html
Looking at it another way, we could change the question-word to "where" and subject to a girl and we have "where is she?" we can't say "where is her?" so we know that the logical particle is が. Cf our lesson on that subject:
ua-cam.com/video/DHH_e0q8b7A/v-deo.html
However the logical presence of が doesn't mean that its explicit use in the sentence is natural. Depending on what we are trying to say, using が in place of は in a logical が-sentence can be unnatural.
KawaJapa CureDolly Your explanation was very helpful, especially the last paragraph.
Thank you! I might have added that a third way to know that the zero particle is が is simply that every sentence _must_ have a logical が - and that が must belong to a noun or pronoun. So the が must belong to 会議 (or rather its invisible "it"). In other words, the sentence in English is "As for the meeting, when is it?" The が-marked subject is "it". 会議は (∅が) いつですか.
Hello, I had a few questions about the usage of GA and WA in certain situations and what using one rather than the other implies, especially in sentences with question words.
-For example, I understand the sentence "それは何ですか” as using WA to bring attention to some-thing, SORE, and asking "it is what?" about it. My question is, what could the Zero Pronoun be implied to be? What kind of answer can NANI be asking about in this case, or any case in general. What is the extent of the use of NANI in asking questions? For example, if I wanted to ask what something (for example SORE) is in the sense of describing what it is or doing, not what the "name" of SORE is, what COULD technically be used and what is used mostly.
-I also wonder about whether GA could even be used in subjects that are being asked about. The nature of these sentences and the meaning/definition of NANI is confusing to me. Does the role of NANI, subject or predicate, change anything or is it always known to be what is being inquired about, such as its use as the grammatical subject in "何がしている？" versus its use in the sentence "していることは何ですか”. Could GA be used in the sentence "それが何ですか？”
Sorry for the difficult questions. I feel like a very hard part of Japanese figuring out the most common way of structuring certain sentences and how possibly sentences can be structured. Also as you said, the use of "unexpected" structure/particles is hard to learn as well.
In それは何ですか (in this case 何 is pronounced なん) the subject is of course それ so it is それは∅が何ですか (as for THAT, what is IT). 何 is has just about the same range as "what" in English and other common questions are それはどういうものですか - "as for that, how-say thing is it?" which is roughly equivalent to "what kind of thing is that?" Obviously more specific questions would be asked more specifically, such as "あのものの使い道は何ですか" (that thing's use-road is what?) = "what is that thing used for?"
何がしている is not correct Japanese. It means "what is doing?", which is just as ungrammatical in English. You may mean 何をしている which is structurally ∅が何をしている "what (are you, is she etc) doing? The subject, of course, is the zero actor defined by context.
The use of "unexpected" particles is not hard to learn. Learning it in the abstract from lists, textbooks etc is not difficult. It is impossible. Learning it from immersion is the correct and only effective way: ua-cam.com/video/3UDW5wTYbzM/v-deo.html
Organic Japanese with Cure Dolly Thank you for the response. I seemed to be confused about how in a some verbs can be both transitive and intransitive. For example, in your sentences “本が読める” and “私が本を読める,” the verb means two completely different things in relation to the subjects. The first sentence means “the book is readable”, but the second definitely doesn’t mean “I am readable,” it is more closely related to the English potential “can read”. I assumed that there was no strict rule on what can be the subject of a verb, so I thought “何がしている” could be interpreted as “what is doing/being done”. I realize that is improper English but as we have come to learn, improper English literal meanings don’t imply that the Japanese it comes from is improper.
To broaden the question further, in English we could say “what is happening” or “what is doing that (ex: what is falling from the sky)”. For the second sentence I would guess that one could say “that which is falling is what” in Japanese but I feel like there would be a better way to phrase it.
It is apparent in English that you can technically phrase sentences in a lot of different ways with the emphasis placed in slightly different places, but usually only in literature and more nuanced discourse is there a decision made in structure choice as to intentionally change the meaning of what is being said. And so for Japanese, I’ve been trying to learn the limits as to how certain words can be used and what kind of sentence structures are technically grammatically correct. Thanks for the help
This might be a bit late, but I have a question. In the sentence about lions existing but not tigers (アフリカはライオンはいるけど、トラはいない。) I don’t understand why the last ‘ha/wa’ wasn’t replaced with ‘ga’, since it’s new information.
Remember that は marks what it is attached to - not what follows it - so tigers _per se_ are not new information because we already know that tigers exist just as we know that Africa exists and lions exist. This makes it a valid candidate for は, though we wouldn't have to use it in all circumstances. We use it here to indicate the fact that the comment on the sub-topic "tigers is _different_ from the comment on the sub-topic lions.
Ah ok, that makes a bit more sense. So, if you were, say, talking about an extinct animal that the listener had not heard of before (to include in an argument about why we should protect endangered animals or something) would you use ‘ga’?
@@HelloHello-wi3vp In this respect (but in this respect only) は and が are a bit like "the" and "a". "The" represents something we already know about. So "the hat" means "the hat you know about" and "a hat" means some hat you don't know about. However included in the "the" group are things in general. In English we don't usually use "the" for them but we do sometimes. So we can use either no article "dinosaurs are extinct" or the "the dinosaur is extinct". We all know what dinosaurs in general are. If we say "a dinosaur died" or "some dinosaurs died" we are talking about particular dinosaurs that we are assumed not to know specifically about.
Now when we introduce something the listener has never heard of at all - like the peltroftosaur. We wouldn't say "a peltroftosaur" because the implication is that while we don't know the individual peltroftosaur in question we do know what a peltroftosaur is. So we would have to introduce it more fully "An animal called a peltroftosuar" or something of that sort. Similarly in Japanese we wouldn't simply plonk it in with が if the listener had no idea what it was. We would say something like ペルトロフトソールという動物 (an animall called a peltroftosaur).
Organic Japanese with Cure Dolly Thank you for explaining that! I really appreciate it, and I also thank you for answering my questions. Your answer was very clear and made sense, so I think I’ll get the hang of it with a little more practice. :)
When I try and review a lot of the things I learn on this channel people don't seem to understand the usage of the invisible が particle (And I don't really understand it either) and frequently correct my usages of it to be は even when I use direct examples from the videos themselves. How can I grasp the usages if I've been through both videos twice and still am being corrected? Additionally, if people haven't seen these videos, would they even be aware of the existence of an invisible が particle at all? I still don't really understand 0が in the slightest, and I can't get anyone to tell me it's useful at all.
The first thing I would recommend is to watch the first three lessons of my "from scratch" series which goes over this whole thing very carefully ua-cam.com/play/PLg9uYxuZf8x_A-vcqqyOFZu06WlhnypWj.html
Most people will not recognize the zero particle. Most people also cannot explain how Japanese is structured (even if they know it by instinct). In the first two videos I do use が where は would be more natural in order to demonstrate the actual structure. In the third video I introduce は and show how we should use that.
sensei i was hunted again by double が structure, can you explain this sentence?
あのごろ、私のほうが背が高かったのにな
i understood what the sentence is trying say but as you can see it has two がs どうすればいいのですか、先生
In 私のほうが背が高かった, the first が is the が of the sentence and it refers to me: I am the subject and the predicate is 背が高かった. The second が is part of the common phrase 背が高かった which means "(my) back was tall". The subject of this (subordinate) phrase is "back" and the predicate is "tall".
For the use of ほう, please see this video: ua-cam.com/video/ma1yZwt1XAc/v-deo.html
What exactly does ことしはよろしくおねがいします mean?
Literally it means something like "This year please be good to me". Very literally, "This year goodly (I) implore".
However, usually we would use the inclusive particle も rather than the exclusive particle は.
With も it means "this year once again please be good to me".
With は it tends to imply "This year please be good to me (and don't treat me the way you treated me last year)".
However, it could work if you have no history with the person concerned.
It is a very common New Year's greeting.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Thanks. Could it also mean "I look forward to working with you this year"?
@@sixkicksfightertricks949 Not literally, but it can have that implication.
Thank you so much for making these videos! I have 1 question. How can I say the word imply in Japanese? When I am trying to explain to my Japanese friends that "A means B but it also subtly implies C" or perhaps, "this word Suggests B (but doesn't outright mean it) " .Thank you so much.
It depends on the exact sentence but 意味合い means a nuance or implication so you might say something like Xという意味合いもある
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Awesome,Thank you so much!
I'm reminded of a chapter in Jay Rubin's 'Making Sense of Japanese' where he remarked that modern literature, both Japanese and English, has a peculiar habit of introducing characters and other topics as though the reader should somehow already be familiar with them, to give the readers the feeling that they are living in the made-up world of the story.
Just as a modern English novel can start with 'The two-by-four lay soaked in blood on the floor' instead of 'A two-by-four lay soaked in blood on the floor', a modern Japanese novel may similarly start with a wa-marked topic apropos of nothing. 'Hime wa imashita' - 'As for the princess, she existed' could be a perfectly legitimate opening sentence in modern Japanese literature. What two-by-four? What princess? Read on to find out.
Yes that is absolutely true. Of course it doesn't change the fact that both "the" and は have the meaning and implications that they have, just that those precise implications are being leveraged for what are (by non-literary - or even earlier literary communication purposes) unconventional effects. Of course they have become conventional in modern literature, but without changing their effect - only making it less unexpected. I would say it can be compared with "cold opens" in films.
Interestingly it is also used that way in metaphorical expressions. "Kicking the bucket" or "throwing someone under the bus". What bucket? What bus? - just the conventional one that you throw people under. I don't suppose it even goes anywhere. It just stands parked somewhere in the linguistic aethyr waiting for people to be thrown under it.
Can i or can i not say watashi ga hj desu instead of watashi wa hj desu.
What is hj?
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 its my name. So when i am introducing my self can i use ga partical ?
@@itshj6476 You could, if you wanted to put emphasis on what comes before the particle が. In this case, your name. You'd do this if you needed to clear up the fact that you are the one who is called HJ. 私がｈｊです。meaning: "I am the one whose name is HJ."
@@hawdgeal thanks a lot.
Love your videos, very insightful. But, near the end you spell onegaishimasu in Japanese as お願いいたします not お願いします. What's the difference?
Oh dear. That was a slip. I wonder how that got through. お願いいたします is pronounced as it is spelled (onegai-itashimasu - not onegai-shimasu). It is a very polite form of onegaishimasu. いたす (itasu) is a humble (kenjougo) form of する. お願いします itself is kenjougo (very humble Japanese) though it is so commonly used that it doesn't have the force of keigo (extra-polite Japanese). Using itashimasu in place of shimasu makes it extra-polite Japanese. It certainly should not have been on the board because it is confusing - and more advanced than anything I was trying to teach.
申し訳ございません (moushiwake gozaimasen - extremely humble apology)*:ﾟ*｡⋆ฺ(*´◡`)
ありがとうございました
どういたしまして。By the way, if you want a mnemonic for いたす as the humble form of する, you can see it as humbly describing one's own actions as いたずら - mischief. There is no real connection between the two words (as far as I know) but it makes a fun mnemonic.
Oops! First comment sent before finished . . . here is the rest. . . . But, the first example appears to be describing "delicious taste" as a characteristic of fish, whereas the second example seems (to me, at least) more like a statement of personal opinion.
So if I were to say "There are tigers in Africa but not lions." (a false statement) and you were to correct me "No, there are *lions* in Africa, not *tigers* ", would you use ga?
Me: "Africa wa tora [wa] iru kedo, lion [wa] inai."
You: "iie, *lion* [ga] iru kedo *tora* [ga] inai."
Is this how you would correct my statement?
done
my jaw dropped at 3:04
Content superb, second to none, but the face and voice are very distracting. I cover the animation with my hand.
Thank you so much for your kind appreciation of the content. As for the me-ness of me, life is hard for a poor android. Humans can go to the beauty parlor but I have to wait for an upgrade that may never come. All the video lessons have full subtitles (not auto-generated ones) so if my voice is difficult for you, you may find them helpful.
The princess sentences are rather confusing. The way you present は and が make it seem like the は statement will come first to let us know what the topic is - the princess existing isn’t particularly interesting information, it’s just tell us of the topic. This would make it seem like は would be used. And that the が comes second to denote that we’re getting more useful information directly linked to the subject: the princess was beautiful. In fact it would almost seem like the zero pronoun would be fitting here and use no は or が at all, since the subject is clear by now.
So why are they switched? The explanations just seemed to call the the other particle that wasn’t used.
By "interesting information" I mean information that the listener does not know and the speaker is trying to convey. The term "salient information" is better but I can't rely on viewers to understand the word. The zero particle could have been used in the second sentence but my purpose was to show when は can be used. It can be used in the second sentence but not the first. You can't introduce someone with は because she is unknown at that point. You can thereafter refer to her using は. が tends to point backward to its marked noun as the salient information. は, while marking the topic tends to point forward to the comment as the salient information.
Organic Japanese with Cure Dolly The first time I read this when you replied I was pretty much entirely lost, though coming back and reading it again I think I get it.
が is for important information, and can introduce something new, は is for recalling something the listener knows and points the conversation to talk about that thing. Like how the second sentence merely says the princess exists, and は signals we’re about to start actually talking about them. Am I correct?
Organic Japanese with Cure Dolly And yeah, I’ve hardly if ever heard the word salient. Not a common word at all.
@@HyperLuigi37 Yes that's right. It does take a little getting to grips with because it's not quite like anything in English. I'm going to do another video on this in the next few weeks.
@@HyperLuigi37 No, and I would be using it in a strictly linguistic sense which is even less common. That's why I used "interesting" instead!
yamada might wanna get that removed.
It's part of what makes him Yamada.
where is the が in this sentence?
彼女は育児で忙しいよ
彼女は ∅が 育児で忙しいよ
彼女 is the subject being described as 忙しい. The rest of the sentence is modifying 忙しい.
＜３