I don't understand na-adjectives.

I don't understand na-adjectives. - Printable Version

+- kanji koohii FORUM (http://forum.koohii.com)
+-- Forum: Learning Japanese (http://forum.koohii.com/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: General discussion (http://forum.koohii.com/forum-8.html)
+--- Thread: I don't understand na-adjectives. (/thread-4422.html)

Pages: 1 2

I don't understand na-adjectives. - stplush - 2009-12-06

I'm reading through Tae Kim's grammar guide and I just don't get it. From his examples 好き is a na-adjective? How can this be if there's no na sound in the word? I'm so confused on how this works.

Plus going by this example, what is が doing in the sentence? Is it being a particle or something else?

ボブは魚が好きだ。

Thanks for any help on either questions.

I don't understand na-adjectives. - mezbup - 2009-12-06

bob likes fish.

it's a na adjective because you can put na on the end of it where appropriate. You don't need it in that sentence but for example if bob told you he likes fish you might ask him...

一番好きな魚は何ですか

Ichiban sukina sakana ha nan desu ka?

What is you're favourite fish?

Ichiban meaning "the number one/most" suki (needs na here because it's an adjective) comes to mean favourite.

好きな人ができた。

sukina hito ga dekita.

"I've found someone I like"

Another sentence illustrating how suki works when used as an adjective. So as you can see here 好きな人 is a "liked person".

Hope that answers it a bit.

I don't understand na-adjectives. - stplush - 2009-12-06

Yes, that really helped. Thank you so much.

Two more questions.

So if a word doesn't end in い it's automatically a na-adjective? How do you know when it can be a na-adjective?

And why is 好き considered a noun?

I don't understand na-adjectives. - Aijin - 2009-12-06

They're called な adjectives, because you place な after them when they modify a noun. When used alone, and in dictionaries, they won't have な, because it's not part of the word. You can think of the な as a bridge between the adjective and the noun, linking them into a single phrase/unit.

For example: 好き = liked, thus 好きな人 = liked person
元気 = energetic , 元気な子供 = energetic child
きれい = pretty, きれいな人 = pretty person

So just like a normal adjective, you place it in front of the noun, just like in English, except for with a な adjective you simply add な directly after the adjective.

For your sentence, that's just an example of the basic pattern for expressing likes/dislikes: personはthingが好きだ。

トムは漫画が好きだ = Tom likes manga.
お母さんは鮨が好きだ = My mother likes sushi.

You can use the same pattern for expressing dislike （嫌い)　as well.

トムは漫画が嫌いだ = Tom dislikes manga.
お母さんは鮨が嫌いだ = My mother dislikes sushi.

I don't understand na-adjectives. - stplush - 2009-12-06

Ahh, I see. That really helps me out. Glad people like you guys are here to help the ignorant. Tongue

I don't understand na-adjectives. - Aijin - 2009-12-06

Quote:So if a word doesn't end in い it's automatically a na-adjective? Or am I still confused?.......

No, it isn't automatically a な adjective. If an adjective doesn't end in い then yes just assume it's a な adjective, but keep in mind that some な adjectives do end in い. For example: the very common きれい. However, if you look at the kanji form, it's 綺麗, so there's no hiragana い to conjugate, and thus it has to be a な adjective. A い adjective must have the hiragana い at the end in order to conjugate. But really, don't overthink it, it should be pretty straight forward.
There are more types of adjectives than just な and い adjectives, but you don't have to worry about that until the more advanced levels.

Quote:And why is 好き considered a noun?

Well, when I learned English I thought "why is like a verb?!" Smile

It is what it is. But, to be more specific, 好き means 'fondness' and 'liking', which are both nouns in English as well. In their base forms, な adjectives are nouns more or less.
元気 = energy; health; vigor, etc.
好き = fondness, liking
嫌い = dislike

By attaching the な after them they function as adjectives in that they describe/attribute things to a noun. And when you simply use them to describe, like saying 子供は元気です they function as adjectives: the sentence translates to "The child is energetic/healthy" not "The child is health" because it's acting as an adjective in that context.

I don't understand na-adjectives. - jajaaan - 2009-12-06

Something Tae Kim doesn't make a big fuss about (which he needs to) is Japanese word classes. In English, these are things like verbs, nouns, and adjectives. Trouble is, Japanese word classes don't match up 1:1 to English word classes. A better way to define them are with alternate words like verbal, adjectival, and nominal.

Short lesson on Japanese word classes:
Japanese verbals go at the end of clauses. They have forms that end in {u} and {ta}. A verbal can modify a nominal by being placed directly before it to create a subordinate clause. In English we say "the man who eats cake," which, when put into the Japanese order becomes "the eats cake man."

Japanese adjectivals appear at the ends of clauses when they are the predicate. An English sentence like "He is cold" has "is cold" functioning as a predicate. The form of adjectivals is consistent. They always end in {i}. They can modify nominals by being placed directly before them (exactly like in English). Red dog = akai inu. It's worth noting that adjectivals always correspond to the English adjective word class.

The Japanese nominal is a waste-bin word class. Nominals have no common form (i.e. they may end in any sound). Mostly, they are what we think of as nouns. However, some are adjectives. Some, even, are the roots of verbs (formed by adding suru, "to do" to the end).

Now pay attention because this is the important part: nominals can modify other nominals by making use of the particle no; however, nominals that are semantically adjectives must use an alternate particle na when modifying other nominals. Examples: nihon no kuruma = japanese car; kirei na kuruma = pretty car. The only difference is that nihon is a thing (noun), and kirei is a quality (adjective). They are both in the same word class, though, along with suki.

As for your question about suki and ga, the answer is that all Japanese adjectives, whether in the adjectival or nominal word classes, have the built in meaning of "is + adjective." The particle "ga" is (to put it simply) the Japanese subject marker, and if you're going to include the subject of whatever it is that "is liked," you'd mark it with the subject marker. Makes sense, right? A sentence like "kuruma ga suki" actually translates to "car is liked," and if you were to include a topic, it would probably refer to a human, maybe the speaker: "watashi wa kuruma ga suki" = As for me, car is liked.

The general rule of thumb for knowing when to use the particle ga and when to use o is that if something is being operated upon by the predicate use o for what's being operated on and ga for the operator. If the predicate describes a state, uncontrolled by human volition, then use ga. Since adjectives tend to describe states, you're going to want to stick with ga for the most part. You can, of course, replace either ga or o with wa to topicalize that part of the sentence, but that's another story.

I don't understand na-adjectives. - harhol - 2009-12-06

^ Tae Kim covers all that, but in a way that is easy to understand. You're overcomplicating rules which are actually pretty simple.

I don't understand na-adjectives. - jajaaan - 2009-12-06

harhol Wrote:^ Tae Kim covers all that, but in a way that is easy to understand. You're overcomplicating rules which are actually pretty simple.

If the OP is using Tae Kim and didn't understand what was there, why not elaborate on it for him?

I don't understand na-adjectives. - stplush - 2009-12-06

Aijin Wrote:By attaching the な after them they function as adjectives in that they describe/attribute things to a noun. And when you simply use them to describe, like saying 子供は元気です they function as adjectives: the sentence translates to "The child is energetic/healthy" not "The child is health" because it's acting as an adjective in that context.

Sorry to be a bother, but did type adjective by mistake where I bold? Sorry, but I need to be sure of this so not to get confused later.

I don't understand na-adjectives. - harhol - 2009-12-06

jajaaan Wrote:
harhol Wrote:^ Tae Kim covers all that, but in a way that is easy to understand. You're overcomplicating rules which are actually pretty simple.
If the OP is using Tae Kim and didn't understand what was there, why not elaborate on it for him?

I don't think going into intricate detail about predicates, adverbials, verbals and nominals is going to help someone who is struggling to understand AなB. Wink

But I could be wrong...

I don't understand na-adjectives. - Aijin - 2009-12-06

Quote:Sorry to be a bother, but did type adjective by mistake where I bold? Sorry, but I need to be sure of this so not to get confused later.

It functions as an adjective in the English sense that it modifies the noun, yes.

I don't understand na-adjectives. - jajaaan - 2009-12-06

harhol Wrote:
jajaaan Wrote:
harhol Wrote:^ Tae Kim covers all that, but in a way that is easy to understand. You're overcomplicating rules which are actually pretty simple.
If the OP is using Tae Kim and didn't understand what was there, why not elaborate on it for him?
I don't think going into intricate detail about predicates, adverbials, verbals and nominals is going to help someone who is struggling to understand AなB.

But I could be wrong...

If you treat someone like they can't understand complicated things, then they won't. If you give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they have a brain in their head, then there's a chance they will step up and try to understand. Wink

I don't understand na-adjectives. - stplush - 2009-12-07

harhol Wrote:
jajaaan Wrote:
harhol Wrote:^ Tae Kim covers all that, but in a way that is easy to understand. You're overcomplicating rules which are actually pretty simple.
If the OP is using Tae Kim and didn't understand what was there, why not elaborate on it for him?
I don't think going into intricate detail about predicates, adverbials, verbals and nominals is going to help someone who is struggling to understand AなB.

But I could be wrong...

Sure, be a douche if it makes you feel better about yourself. Can't say I'm surprised seeing as where you're from.

I don't understand na-adjectives. - Thora - 2009-12-07

stplush Wrote:So if a word doesn't end in い it's automatically a na-adjective? How do you know when it can be a na-adjective?

If will be using hiragana for awhile, then there will be some na-adjectives that end in い: 失礼　（しつれい）　　有名（ゆうめい）. In that case, think of it as only i-adjectives end in -ai, -ii, -ui, oi (except kirai). eg. あかい、おおきい、ふるい、あおい You might want to Google a list and memorize a few common ones な　ones to start out.

Quote:And why is 好き considered a noun?

As Aijin said, na=adjectives are called nominal (noun) adjectives because they act like nouns grammatically even though they have the meaning of adjectives. So na-adjectives aren't conjugated. Instead, the copula です/だ ("is") gets conjugated.
　　　元気な兄
　　　兄は元気だ。　←　need the だ　here. See how it's like 兄は学生だ。 (学生 is noun).
　　　兄は元気じゃない　/　だった　/ じゃなかった

This is in contract to true adjectives (i-adjectives) where the adjective itself is conjugated：
　　　　高い車
　　　　車は高い。　←　no だ　required (for informal)
車は高くない　/　高かった　/　高くなかった
　　　

I don't understand na-adjectives. - kazelee - 2009-12-07

stplush Wrote:Can't say I'm surprised seeing as where you're from.

Come now. Douches comes from all corners of the globe (not implying his intention was to be one). Wink

He's simply stating that it wouldn't make sense to over complicate the subject from his perspective... from what I grasp.

Personally, I have trouble grasping grammar explanations without first being exposed to the pattern a few times. とする was one that really bit me in the ass until I heard it used over and over and over in a particular drama. Exposure is your best friend!

The things seem complicated at first and then they become easy. Once you get used to them, you start to forget that you ever even struggled with it.

I don't understand na-adjectives. - stplush - 2009-12-07

kazelee Wrote:
stplush Wrote:Can't say I'm surprised seeing as where you're from.
Come now. Douches comes from all corners of the globe (not implying his intention was to be one).

He's simply stating that it wouldn't make sense to over complicate the subject from his perspective... from what I grasp.

Personally, I have trouble grasping grammar explanations without first being exposed to the pattern a few times. とする was one that really bit me in the ass until I heard it used over and over and over in a particular drama. Exposure is your best friend!

The things seem complicated at first and then they become easy. Once you get used to them, you start to forget that you ever even struggled with it.

Maybe I misunderstood, but he contributed nothing to the topic....so I took it as a hidden insult by what he said. But yeah it's the internet, say whatever you feel like right?! So if I'm wrong disregard and I apologize.

Thanks to those that did help. Lock the topic if you will.

I don't understand na-adjectives. - kazelee - 2009-12-07

stplush Wrote:Lock the topic if you will.

f(^^;) I can lock topics?

Why would I do that? There's a plethora of good info getting passed around here. You could just rename the topic and/or keep asking question, if you like.

I don't understand na-adjectives. - Tobberoth - 2009-12-07

stplush Wrote:And why is 好き considered a noun?

Let's complicate it a bit more: In Japanese, na-adjectives are called 形容動詞 (keiyoudoushi) which means adjective-verb. But they can still be nouns.

I don't understand na-adjectives. - harhol - 2009-12-07

stplush Wrote:Sure, be a douche if it makes you feel better about yourself. Can't say I'm surprised seeing as where you're from.

Don't believe The Patriot, it's all lies!

I wasn't trying to be a douche. I was merely pointing out that a highly technical explanation of a rule is unlikely to help someone who is struggling to understand a simple explanation like the one given in Tae Kim's guide:

The na-adjective is very simple to learn because it acts essentially like a noun. In fact, they are so similar; you can assume that they behave the same way unless I specifically point out differences. One main difference is that a na-adjective can directly modify a noun following it by sticking 「な」 between the adjective and noun (hence the name, na-adjective).

I can only assume you either missed that paragraph or haven't learned hiragana yet.

I don't understand na-adjectives. - stplush - 2009-12-07

Sorry for misjudging you then...

Yes, I understood that it's simple. You just add な to activate it as a na-adjective, but I guess what confused me is that the い-adjective(as the name applies, already actually has the い in the word). So I guess the question was a dumb one, but I guess all questions are dumb to the people who know the answer.

I don't understand na-adjectives. - wildweathel - 2009-12-07

You can tell if a word is a na-adjective by looking in your dictionary. While there are other other rules you can learn by experience, they're too irregular to easily describe and aren't worth memorizing on their own.

EDICT:
好き (すき) (adj-na,n) liking; fondness; love; (P);

Yahoo!辞書
すき【好き】［名・形動］
１心がひかれること。気に入ること。また、そのさま。「―な人」「―な道に進む」⇔嫌い。

In EDICT, the key for na-adjectives is "adj-na." In Yahoo, 「形動」. "n" and 「名」both signify that 好き can also be used as a noun.

Grammatically, the only difference that comes to mind is that nouns use の to modify other nouns. na adjectives use な.

For example 夕日の公園　（ゆうひ　の　こうえん）is "evening-sun kind-of public-park" = "public-park in the evening-sun."

na-adjectives use な: 自分の好きな道を行く（じぶん　の　すき　な　みち　を　いく）= oneself kind-of like kind-of road <-object go = "go the road one likes."

How do you remember that a word is a na-adjective? Review a phrase that uses that word as an adjective:「一番好きな色」= "favorite color." If you're not familiar with this approach to study, my favorite introduction is here: http://www.alljapaneseallthetime.com/blog/10000-sentences-why . The devil is in the details of course, which is why something like 40% of the threads here are about how to review sentences.

A lot of people worry about grammar. You really don't have to: your brain is naturally very good at recognizing and using patterns. Read or hear something enough times, and the correct grammar will become natural. The real goal of getting through Tae Kim's guide is knowing enough to start reading--and where to look when you see something you don't recognize.

頑張って

I don't understand na-adjectives. - stplush - 2009-12-07

Thank you for taking the time wildweathel, that was very thorough. Yeah, I'm hoping to start the sentence method shortly after I get a good understanding. Your post made the な usage clearer, thanks again.

I don't understand na-adjectives. - QuackingShoe - 2009-12-07

wildweathel Wrote:Grammatically, the only difference that comes to mind is that nouns use の to modify other nouns. na adjectives use な.

I was in the middle of typing out a somewhat long post detailing other differences when I realized virtually all of them were more like classical distinctions than actual, useful differences.

So... nevermind? But they do use 'ni' to function as adverbs.

I don't understand na-adjectives. - Thora - 2009-12-07

[shh - that comes later :-)]

Does anyone know any good introductory grammar sites that we can direct people too? Tae Kim is pretty deficient in some areas. And not everyone is interested or able to check out the many good grammar books that often get recommended here.