@nestor - It's 押し込む, not 申し込む

I think the phrase you're talking about is referring to the kids rather than Miss Honey (you're reading Matilda, aren't you!)
I don't think the 求められている is about her, because it's passive. If it was Miss Honey who demanded that her orders be followed, I think it would be 求めている.

I'm not a good translator, but I think it'd be something like: "Miss Honey seemed to completely understand the embarrassment and fear of the small children who, for the first time in their lives were pushed into a classroom and forced to follow orders"

Oh damn it, how I'd miss that. I need to stop turning to this thread as a ‘break’ while I'm working on stuff that uses my brain power. That translation makes sense, too.

Asriel Wrote:@nestor - It's 押し込む, not 申し込む

I think the phrase you're talking about is referring to the kids rather than Miss Honey (you're reading Matilda, aren't you!)
I don't think the 求められている is about her, because it's passive. If it was Miss Honey who demanded that her orders be followed, I think it would be 求めている.

I'm not a good translator, but I think it'd be something like: "Miss Honey seemed to completely understand the embarrassment and fear of the small children who, for the first time in their lives were pushed into a classroom and forced to follow orders"

Ah-hah, you're right! Thanks! When I read your post I was like, well then wouldn't there be a comma after 彼女は? ...and then I looked at the book and realized that I made a typo and there is indeed supposed to be a comma there. Both phrases are describing the students, as you say.

And mad props for recognizing that it's Matilda, haha. I mentioned to someone on this forum that it might be a good book for English learners, only to find a Japanese copy in a Book Off a few days later and decide that the opposite might be true too.

I don't think that putting a comma in there would change the meaning.

fakewookie Wrote:I don't think that putting a comma in there would change the meaning.

Just a guess, but I think in this situation if you wrote this in an essay for a class and didn't include a comma your teacher would think it important enough to write one in. Any time you establish a topic then add a long section modifying another noun there's a comma. If it was just a couple of words modifying the noun a comma probably wouldn't be used.

That's not to say it would change the meaning. It just would have been easier for a reader to establish what's going on the in the sentence. One of my Japanese friends commented that the translator didn't do a very good job with that sentence.

Commas in Japanese are quite arbitrary, and don't really affect meaning.
I think it would be easier to understand if there was one there, because otherwise I kind of get the impression that 生まれてはじめて is dealing with 彼女 as opposed to the 子供たち.

The thing that tipped me off, though, was that I don't think a teacher would be "pushed" into a classroom, and the passive form of 求める.

Hey guys, I'm going through some grammar stuff and I'm trying to figure out why in the following sentence に対して is the correct grammar and に対する is not:

あなたの林先生に対して尊敬心はいつ頃からのものですか。

Isn't it the case that に対して should be used when modifying the predicate (いつ頃からのものです), and に対するis used when modifying a noun (尊敬心). Where am I wrong in this? Aren't we adding information about who the respect is for in the first part of the sentence?

あなたの林先生に対して、尊敬心はいつ頃からのものですか。

Hah! What a difference a comma makes. I get it now, thanks

DoBJG, p. 110:

"春学期は五月十日で終わる。
春学期は五月十日に終わる。
The spring term ends on May 10.

When で is used, the nuance is that the spring term lasts up to May 10. When に is used, however, the sentence simply indicates the time when the spring term ends."

I think I must be nuance-blind. Could I ask someone to rephrase this explanation? Thanks in advance.

I remember these sentences It just means something like:

Using で: Spring term goes until May 10.
Using に: Spring terms ends on May 10.

Although I'm not sure using で is so strong as to warrant translation using "until", that would be more something like "五月十日までです。" I think.

So really it's not that important of a distinction to make.

If I'm reading them correctly, they're suggesting that で there has more of a processual, involved focus, whereas に has more of a detached, pinpointing sense.

Reading those で example sentences, I could imagine a student telling a classmate when their semester will be finishing up, with the implication they'll be taking classes till then—or I could imagine, in the sentence about the concert, two people are waiting for someone who's at a concert, and one of them tells the other when it's supposed to end.

As opposed to with に, perhaps, a semester calendar that states the official semester end date, or a staff member informing a patron buying a ticket the time the concert is scheduled to end.

Well, that's my take at the moment. ^_^

Post by yudantaiteki on で + time expression, which you might like if you want to tie this kind of で into your understanding of some other uses of it.

Does this translation look OK? I'm a bit thrown off by the 的 in the second sentence. Is it read as 「まと」 here, meaning "target" or "aim" and not 「てき」? I haven't seen this before, but at the same time I can't see it being used as "-like" here either.

宗教団体と名乗って、認証だって受けているんだけど、宗教的な実体みたいなのはろくすっぽないんだ。教義的には脱構築っていうかなんというか、ただの宗教イメージの寄せ集め。

"They call themselves a religious organization, they even received [state] certification, but they lack religious substance. The aim of their doctrine is the mishmash product from a sort of deconstruction of the image of normal religions."

http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E6%95%99%...4%E3%81%AB

Boom!

Well, I know that you can add 的 to basically almost any noun and get a な adjective out of it, but I'm not sure if that's how it's being used here. What I come up with in that case is something like:

"Doctrinally, they are deconstructed or something, a mishmash of normal religions. "

Just sounds weird to me. (also I can't believe doctrinally is a real word, lol)

That link has ‘as a matter of doctrine’ as a translation. Doesn't have to be literally a single word with -ly. ^_^ Doesn't seem too far off from how you were fitting the idea of ‘aim.’

I guess I don't want to believe that a word that fits the template so well, and which has its own entry, isn't being used in this case. I don't think weblio just generates a 的に entry for every word there is. ;p But you could be right?

FooSoft Wrote:Does this translation look OK? I'm a bit thrown off by the 的 in the second sentence. Is it read as 「まと」 here, meaning "target" or "aim" and not 「てき」? I haven't seen this before, but at the same time I can't see it being used as "-like" here either.

宗教団体と名乗って、認証だって受けているんだけど、宗教的な実体みたいなのはろくすっぽないんだ。教義的には脱構築っていうかなんというか、ただの宗教イメージの寄せ集め。

"They call themselves a religious organization, they even received [state] certification, but they lack religious substance. The aim of their doctrine is the mishmash product from a sort of deconstruction of the image of normal religions."

You can whack 的 on the end of a surprisingly large number of nouns. It's a way of creating an adjective (or adverb with に). In this case, dogma becomes dogmatically. The は makes me think it's modifying the whole sentence, like 究極的には would mean "ultimately, ...". At least it wouldn't make much sense for it to be linked to 脱構築 without a verb.

Strictly speaking, perhaps we should call it deconstruction. It's nothing more than a mishmash of religious imagery.

Maybe I should point out that ただの means 'just, nothing but' here.

Ah, I see, thanks guys that makes sense now.

I found this also:

http://books.google.com/books?id=8YUeMKY...22&f=false (I don't think it's entirely related in this case, just interesting, the domain adverbs stuff.)

@vinniram, nest0r & pm215

Wow, I was surprised to see that this exact sentence had been discussed here before.
I'm editing my DBJG with yudantaiteki's post. Thanks for your help.

ivanov Wrote:Wow, I was surprised to see that this exact sentence had been discussed here before.

It's surprisingly common with some of the popular sentence sources (DBJG, Core, and especially Kanzen Master); it's often worth doing a quick google search for "site:koohii.com <chunk of sentence>".

FooSoft Wrote:宗教団体と名乗って、認証だって受けているんだけど、宗教的な実体みたいなのはろくすっぽないんだ。教義的には脱構築っていうかなんというか、ただの宗教イメージの寄せ集め。

"They call themselves a religious organization, they even received [state] certification, but they lack religious substance. The aim of their doctrine is the mishmash product from a sort of deconstruction of the image of normal religions."

I agree with Javizy that 教義的には is really kind of just setting the scene (topic) for the sentence. Mishmash isn't the aim of the organisation's doctrines, it's the writer's opinion of them. Here's a sentence from wikipedia.jp's キリスト教 entry which I think is a clearer but parallel use:

教義的には、東方教会が聖霊の流出を「父から」とするのに対して、ローマ教会が「父と子から」と改変したことに起因する

Struggling to come up with vaguely natural sounding English here, but I think (hope!) something like "As for their [doctrine|creed], perhaps it's deconstructionism or something, but it's just a mishmash of religious images." has the sense more or less right.

nest0r Wrote:That link has ‘as a matter of doctrine’ as a translation. Doesn't have to be literally a single word with -ly. ^_^ Doesn't seem too far off from how you were fitting the idea of ‘aim.’

I guess I don't want to believe that a word that fits the template so well, and which has its own entry, isn't being used in this case. I don't think weblio just generates a 的に entry for every word there is. ;p But you could be right?

My reading of that weblio entry is that it is saying that "as a matter of doctrine" is a good translation when you are using 教義的に in the sense 主義として; this implies that there are also uses of 教義的に in other senses, for which that would not be such a good translation.

pm215 Wrote:

nest0r Wrote:That link has ‘as a matter of doctrine’ as a translation. Doesn't have to be literally a single word with -ly. ^_^ Doesn't seem too far off from how you were fitting the idea of ‘aim.’

I guess I don't want to believe that a word that fits the template so well, and which has its own entry, isn't being used in this case. I don't think weblio just generates a 的に entry for every word there is. ;p But you could be right?

My reading of that weblio entry is that it is saying that "as a matter of doctrine" is a good translation when you are using 教義的に in the sense 主義として; this implies that there are also uses of 教義的に in other senses, for which that would not be such a good translation.

That's what I was getting at, expanding the possible sense/application of it beyond an -ly adjective modifying something in particular.