Does anyone know where i could find a list or words like 
if, then, untill, but, why, what, when  etc..

it would be best to get thsoe in  anki stack

A lot of those will be covered under grammar in most books, so you might want to look through lists like these:
http://www.guidetojapanese.org/learn/grammar (more detailed)
http://thejapanesepage.com/grammar.htm (quick rundown of grammar points)

Second link looks good. thanks.
But I still prefer them in form of listing for learning.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_particles ? :/

Yes that's almost exactly what I need. Now I will have to stick that to anki stack and learn them.

Trying to learn grammar in the form of a word list strikes me as a recipe for getting very confused...

http://amaterasu.tindabox.net/guide/Vocab.php

[Zgarbas]

The list format is ok, so long as you supply it with some sentences.

Renshuu's grammar library helped me a lot, and making your own sentences really helps internalise grammar points. Other than that, textbook-extracted sentence/vocab decks were also of great help, especially in a format like

FRONT
grammar point (either in English or in Japanese)
BACK
Sentence

As I noticed you do not need that much of grammar .
basic rule is to read sentence backwards and replace everything with English equivalents and you get something sensible.
but you need to select good English equivalents like for example particle "ni" seem to be same as English "at", "de is same as English "in"

(2016-02-07, 7:15 pm)Digix Wrote: As I noticed you do not need that much of grammar .
basic rule is to read sentence backwards and replace everything with English equivalents and you get something sensible.
but you need to select good English equivalents  like for example particle "ni" seem to be same as English "at", "de is same as English "in"

That is a huge oversimplification of what de and ni mean. I really think you should study grammar a bit more in depth.

[Zgarbas]

The word 'seems' is very important in that observation.

Translating backwards to direct and fixed English equivalents can be quite helpful when you're only starting out, but it's a terrible habit which will quickly become more trouble than help after the absolute beginner phase. The particles are *not* the same as any English equivalent, as they are far more flexible and have different uses (of course, English prepositions also do this, but in a completely different way). There's a reason why beginner textbooks go through the trouble of translating は as 'As for X' rather than 'is'.

(2016-02-07, 8:26 pm)debrucey Wrote:

(2016-02-07, 7:15 pm)Digix Wrote: As I noticed you do not need that much of grammar .
basic rule is to read sentence backwards and replace everything with English equivalents and you get something sensible.
but you need to select good English equivalents  like for example particle "ni" seem to be same as English "at", "de is same as English "in"

That is a huge oversimplification of what de and ni mean. I really think you should study grammar a bit more in depth.

It is not oversimplification it is just that "at" fits best here.
I know that sometimes it looks awkward but meaning is correct and this is what matters.
If you disagree just try it placing at in place of "ni" will work absolutely every time

Quote:The word 'seems' is very important in that observation. 

This is because I am not yet sure when I have to read forwards and when backwards. 
I probably should post another topic with that question because I am still unsure about compound sentences.
like if we have something  "a then b" or "a until b"  I am not yet sure if I should exchange a and b or not.

Quote:Translating backwards to direct and fixed English equivalents can be quite helpful when you're only starting out,

that is exactly my situation. I need to understand sentence at first and only them I can think about reconstructing it into proper English or analyzing its grammar.
there is nothing worse when you stumble upon some important word which you just don't know and can't even skip. 

also since I am not native English, my English usage is extremely flexible and I dont mind sentences that sound like total nonsense to English people, because of that reason I prefer absolutely literal translations.
and also recommend that apporach to other people not to try to make translation correct English but just make it literal even if it sounds awkward.

Quote:There's a reason why beginner textbooks go through the trouble of translating は as 'As for X' rather than 'is'.

I can suggest better translation for beginners: translate は  into blank space   it is meaningless noise, just like English articles "a" or "the"
I learned meaning of は probably as fist particle  but so far I still plain ignore it because i just don't care about that meaning.

Is this guy a troll or something?

(2016-02-07, 9:13 pm)Digix Wrote: It is not oversimplification it is just that "at" fits best here.
I know that sometimes it looks awkward but meaning is correct and this is what matters.
If you disagree just try it placing at in place of "ni" will work absolutely every time

…

also since I am not native English, my English usage is extremely flexible and I dont mind sentences that sound like total nonsense to English people

誰にも知らない事実　(a fact that nobody knows)
アメリカにとっての最大の脅威 (the greatest threat to America)
間に合う (to be on time)
コーヒーはテーブルの上にあります (The coffee is on the table)

...

There are lots of uses of に where 'at' simply doesn't work.
I mean, if you don't mind making English sentences that are nonsense... then I guess you can do it anyway, but that doesn't make them mean the same things.

Particles in Japanese just mean what they mean. On particle in Japanese might overlap its meaning with a dozen words in English. In the case of は and が, they don't have anything resembling an English equivalent -- the meanings they represent are represented in English by a change in sentence structure (English being much more dependent on word order to convey meaning).

That's not to say that I didn't use lots of broken English over-literal translations myself as a beginner, but that doesn't make them correct in any real sense.

If it works for you, then that's fine I guess... the important thing is that you understand the meaning of a sentence structure by analysis or translation or whatever once or twice, so that in the future you can just read that structure and understand it as Japanese.

However, you would be doing a great disservice to other beginners to suggest they ignore the meaning of は or treat に as a backwards 'at'. You can get pretty far treating の as a backwards 'of', although not when it's being used as a subject marker, and you run into some subtle cases even in the conjunction の that can't really be 'of'. As for the rest of the particles... they don't have any single English term that really applies even half the time, and yet they are essential to understanding Japanese.

アメリカにとっての最大の脅威 (the greatest threat to America)
間に合う (to be on time)
コーヒーはテーブルの上にあります (The coffee is on the table)

"at" works fine here
The coffee is at the table
to be at time
the greatest threat at America
I know that it is wrong in English, but meaning is correct.

[Zgarbas]

Is the coffee standing on the table, spillt on the table or just being aerved at the table?

Is the threat in America or to America?

Are you there at a given time, barely made it, or just set up an appointment?

Because those are *huge* differences in meaning which are lost by the vague bad English. Your English also features quite a few mistakes so maybe that's why you don't see the problem? I also tend to use poor English when translating from other languages, but my poor translations do not change the original meaning; it just makes me a poor translator.

(2016-02-07, 10:06 pm)Digix Wrote: I know that it is wrong in English, but meaning is correct.

It's wrong in English because the meaning is incorrect.

In most of those cases, if you didn't just dismiss the English as wrong you could take it as a totally different meaning.

'The coffee is at the table' wouldn't mean the coffee is on the table. It would mean the coffee is in the same place the table is, perhaps on a tray next to the table.
'To be at time' sounds like you've just forgotten another article like 'to be at that time'. Like 'the show is at 8'. In a full sentence it would just be confusing. It doesn't mean the same thing as 'on time' in any case.
'the greatest threat at America' is just ambiguous if you don't dismiss it out of hand. Does it mean the greatest threat directed towards America, or the greatest threat found within America?

You can speak this broken English to yourself to bridge your learning if you like, but that doesn't make it in any way have the correct meaning. If you tried to speak this way to someone else (or provided these kinds of sentences as 'literal translations') they would fail to communicate because you're not using the actual meaning of the words.

ハンバーガーにします。 I'll have a hamburger.
行くことにしよう。 I have decided to go.
毎朝味噌汁にご飯を食べる。I eat miso soup and rice every morning.

None of these sentences work with at.

There's also passive sentences like:

魚が私に食べられた
"The fish was eaten by me"
"The fish was eaten at me" ???

To all@

You are a bit wrong here. because japanese language does not provide that information either. 

コーヒーはテーブルにあります does not tell you if coffee is on the table or near the table or on the tray. and we have to convert same ambiguity into English 
same is with other sentences because japanese language provides no details and you have to get them from context
English language is very specific, and does not allow ambiguity and it requires you to specify with high accuracy where is coffee 
while in japanese language you just throw words table and coffee and say that they relate to each other in some way.

ハンバーガーに します。 I'll have a hamburger.
Literaly this is "I will do at hamburger", does not make much sense in any was regardless of grammar. 
maibe you can explain logic behind that.
行くことにしよう。 I have decided to go.
 dictionary translates it as whole expression.
毎朝味噌汁にご飯を食べる。I eat miso soup and rice every morning.
every morning (miso at rice) eat if we reverse that we get "eat soup at rice every morning"
"at" works great here because I think japanese people to say that you eat  soup together with rice not just soup and rice 
if intent was to say "miso soup and rice" "mo" woud be used not "ni"

魚が私に食べられた
"The fish was eaten by me"
"The fish was eaten at me" ???
japanese sentence does not provide that information ether, 


"The fish was eaten at me" is still better than "The fish was eaten in me" or "from me"

in any case I do not claim that "at" is perfect choice it is just best of what  available in English if you have to chose one word from all. 
real meaning of "ni" is to associate words to each other without providing details of that association.

Quote:Your English also features quite a few mistakes so maybe that's why you don't see the problem? 

My mistakes are not really mistakes but they represent how i think. I can write somewhat correctly but it requires great effort as I have to think about every word how English person woud say it, not how I woud say it.
I notice English mistakes when words are contradicting their meanings but if something is just missing it does not bother me.

(2016-02-07, 9:27 pm)debrucey Wrote: Is this guy a troll or something?

Most people who learn a second language for the first time don't really understand what an undertaking is. Also a lot of people get stuck with a translation fallacy where they believe that learning a language is mostly about translating concepts and ideas from their native language into their L2.

The opposite idea that is more about learning enough of the language to start learning about the language in the language. This is sort of what blogs like AJATT and JALUP are trying to facilitate with ideas like only studying whole sentences and ditching English as soon as practical.

[Zgarbas]

(2016-02-07, 11:38 pm)Digix Wrote: To all@

You are a bit wrong here. because japanese language does not provide that information either. 

コーヒーはテーブルにあります does not tell you if coffee is on the table or near the table or on the tray. and we have to convert same ambiguity into English 
same is with other sentences because japanese language provides no details and you have to get them from context
English language is very specific, and does not allow ambiguity and it requires you to specify with high accuracy where is coffee 
while in japanese language you just throw words table and coffee and say that they relate to each other in some way.

Quote:Your English also features quite a few mistakes so maybe that's why you don't see the problem? 

My mistakes are not really mistakes but they represent how i think. I can write somewhat correctly but it requires great effort as I have to think about every word how English person woud say it, not how I woud say it.
I notice English mistakes when words are contradicting their meanings but if something is just missing it does not bother me.

The meaning in the Japanese language is clear. The ambiguity is only in your translation. Your translation is the cause of the loss of information, which exists in the original sentence.

Your mistakes reflect your native language, as I can assume that you are a native Slavic language speaker based on them*. I know that in many slavic languages 'at' is a lot more versatile than in English, which explains your confusion to some extent. Before moving on to translate things from Japanese to English, I would recommend either perfecting your English or your attitude towards languages. Of course, many people end up poor speakers of the language, it is only our intention to rectify the misunderstanding you seem to have regarding the Japanese language by pointing out that your logic is easily rebuked with examples that we can come up with on the spot; if you do not have any desire to become a proficient speaker based on your rather unique ideas about how languages work then you are of course free to do so, but please keep in mind that they are based on premises that i doubt anybody else will share.

*it would be hilarious if I'm wrong on that assumption, feel free to ridicule me if that is the case.

yes, in fact you are wrong about your assumption because my native language is not slavish  while it is almost precisely same with only difference that you have to replace words into appropriate equivalents. (I speak Russian as my second language english language is my third language while japanese is 4-th)

I don't think my English can be perfected any  ore than it is now, I am using it many years but it is not changing. 
no matter how much time passed, articles remain totally meaningless to me. 

Quote:The meaning in the Japanese language is clear. The ambiguity is only in your translation. Your translation is the cause of the loss of information, which exists in the original sentence.

 
No, you are wrong there is ambiguity. there si no way to tell which English equivalent should be used except from context and human experience. just like there is no way to identify subject of sentence most of the time.
this is very obvious problem for machine translation or in situations when you dont know context and especially when text is grammatically incorrect or plain damaged. Your translation may tun into huge mess.
also this is confirmed in every article about japanese grammar when they try to propose some tricks how to guess missing information.

all languages have words with different ambiguity levels. like 
go->-run->-sprint
where each of them is subset of previous word
word sprint can be replaced with run or go anytime but word "go" cannot be replaced with run.
English "at" is most ambiguous.as if I say "at school" you cant tell if I am inside of school or just nearby
while if I say in school you can clearly say that \I am inside of school.

same is with japanese.
if I say "watashi ni" you cant tell if it is "in me", "to me", "by my" ,"on my" you cant translate that into English without context

while if I say "watashi de" it is obvious that it translates to  "in me"

Word "at" is not more versatile in slavish languages it is pretty much same as English equivalent.

I do not propose to translate "ni" into "at" for official documents, but this is good placeholder until you identify context.

I may have some idea why your English isn't getting better after many years...

(2016-02-08, 11:50 am)debrucey Wrote: I may have some idea why your English isn't getting better after many years...

You are so smart....