all right thanks

座席にかけていると、ウナギはズボンから腹のほうにのぼってきた。くすぐったくてならない。思わず笑い声をあげると、タクシーの運転手が妙な顔で聞く。

Maybe it's an hackneyed question, but why in many novels the author switches between the past and the non-past forms?
Wouldn't they be all past in English?

It's more about completion ("As I sit down, the (edit: oops, eel) is now in the state of having climbed up to my belly") than past in that sentence.

I'm sorry, I've quoted too much sentences. I was referring to the final 聞く

The story continues like this:
「お客さん、どうかなさいましたか」 「いや、うふふ。なんでもないよ。うふふ、急いでくれ」 「変な笑いかたですよ。いい気持ちじゃありませんな」 「こっちだってそうさ、うふふ」 　なんとか帰りついたものの、博士もこのウナギの処置には手を焼いた。つかまえてどうかしようにも、しろうとの手におえるしろものではない。博士は悪戦苦闘する。ウナギのほうは大喜び。にょろにょろと巻きつき、楽しげにたわむれている。

again we have 手を焼いた and 悪戦苦闘する.

And... it's an eel

I see it as a time skip to the end result (so the previous bit being in present tense is not in conflict with talking about what happened afterwards in past tense), then the narrator starts talking generally about the process of dealing with an eel (A layman would be overwhelmed (can't use past tense here). For the doctor (just what is he a doctor of?), it's a difficult battle. The eel has fun the entire time).

sunehiro Wrote:And... it's an eel

What kind of idiot names two animals phonetically so close and then decides that they should both be written in katakana (with spellings that differ by only one stroke) most of the time? They're not even loanwords, there's no excuse! I shall be writing a strongly worded letter to the author of the Japanese language about this!

た is not really "past tense", it's completion. Sometimes it expresses the past tense, but it's not used in narratives the way we're required (at least in writing) to use past tense when telling a story. I think the examples here show completed states or actions at the time point of the narrative rather than past tense.

Difference between る form and た form is ultimately mood or sense if it's vague or solid, rather than tense or aspect, I think. For example, suppose you are fishing and you get a feeling that it pulls the string or see a shadow, that's when you say 「いるいる…」, and then you confirm it is a fish, that's when you say 「いた！」. We use る forms for things that haven't done yet because they are vague.

viharati Wrote:Difference between る form and た form is ultimately mood or sense if it's vague or solid, rather than tense or aspect, I think. For example, suppose you are fishing and you get a feeling that it pulls the string or see a shadow, that's when you say 「いるいる…」, and then you confirm it is a fish, that's when you say 「いた！」. We use る forms for things that haven't done yet because they are vague.

Just quick thing, that would be aspect rather than mood. Where the verb is in a state of incompletion or completion, that is aspect. Tense is location in time; aspect is about the fabric of time: a single block of time, continuous flow of time, or repetitive occurrence; mood is the degree of necessity, obligation, probability, or ability.

Very interesting, thanks a lot for the clarification guys.
I didn't know the concept of completion, even though I 'sensed' it sometimes.
I'm sure the next part of the book will be less confusing.

By the way the book is おかしな先祖 by 星新一, a collection of humourous short stories.
If you want to know more about the doctor and the eel, it should be the second or third story, ほれられた男.

RandomQuotes Wrote:

viharati Wrote:Difference between る form and た form is ultimately mood or sense if it's vague or solid, rather than tense or aspect, I think. For example, suppose you are fishing and you get a feeling that it pulls the string or see a shadow, that's when you say 「いるいる…」, and then you confirm it is a fish, that's when you say 「いた！」. We use る forms for things that haven't done yet because they are vague.

Just quick thing, that would be aspect rather than mood. Where the verb is in a state of incompletion or completion, that is aspect. Tense is location in time; aspect is about the fabric of time: a single block of time, continuous flow of time, or repetitive occurrence; mood is the degree of necessity, obligation, probability, or ability.

As for た form, of course it has something to do with completion but it's not really reasonable to refer to it as aspect when it's applied to actions that have not done yet.
e.g.
２０円 … ３０円 … ４０円
よし、買った！　Alright, I'll buy it!

さぁ、行った行った！ Go away!

viharati Wrote:

RandomQuotes Wrote:

viharati Wrote:Difference between る form and た form is ultimately mood or sense if it's vague or solid, rather than tense or aspect, I think. For example, suppose you are fishing and you get a feeling that it pulls the string or see a shadow, that's when you say 「いるいる…」, and then you confirm it is a fish, that's when you say 「いた！」. We use る forms for things that haven't done yet because they are vague.

Just quick thing, that would be aspect rather than mood. Where the verb is in a state of incompletion or completion, that is aspect. Tense is location in time; aspect is about the fabric of time: a single block of time, continuous flow of time, or repetitive occurrence; mood is the degree of necessity, obligation, probability, or ability.

As for た form, of course it has something to do with completion but it's not really reasonable to refer to it as aspect when it's applied to actions that have not done yet.
e.g.
２０円 … ３０円 … ４０円
よし、買った！　Alright, I'll buy it!

さぁ、行った行った！ Go away!

It's weird grammar term, but that's what it is. Like in English "I've already eaten " is in the present tense even though the eating is in the past. It's a weird grammar thing, but since it's not mood nor tense, it has to be aspect. ~た is, grammatically, the perfective. As to why it's used there, beats me.

Not sure about the first sentence.
Context: Genzou (Reika's father) is talking to Kaito (Reika's bodyguard), who's being "threatened" by someone unknown.

Genzou「Reikaが第三者に敵意や悪意を持たれ、危険な目に合わせられるのであれば、まだ納得は出来る」
If the malice and hostility is held while treating Reika as a outsider and the danger (dangerous experience?) can be dealt with , then I can still understand. (But I have a feeling it should be Reikaを第三者に～ for this to be possible).
If a third-party holds malice and hostility (and this affects Reika) and the danger can be dealt with, then I can still understand. (But then the flow of the dialogue seems weird)

Genzou「それがボディーガードによる危険だとすれば、私は目を瞑るわけにはいかなくなるのだ」
(But) If that danger arises because of the bodyguard, I can't ignore it.

Kaito「つまり……オレに辞めろってことか？」
So you're telling me to quit?

に marks 第三者 as the agent of the passive verb, here and in general. An outsider is the one doing the threatening and holding of malice and hostility in the hypothetical.

It seems like it's all just hypothetical talk about Reika being threatened by a third party.

Quite a direct translation, and not the greatest, but I guess it's something like:

'If Reika is bears hostility and ill will from a third party and is exposed to danger, then I can still understand.'
'If that danger is due to the body guard, then I won't be able to turn a blind eye.'

Edit: Didn't realise Vempele already replied.

Thanks for clearing that up guys.

Does "Reikaが第三者に敵意や悪意を持たれ" imply that Reika incurred the hostility due to her own actions in this context? Since the next sentence is contrasting where the danger originated from.

Edit: Facepalm, never mind. I think I see how the dialogue flows now.
If a third party holds malice that is directed to Reika and she is exposed to danger because of it...
But if the danger is due to the bodyguard (since the malice is directed at the bodyguard rather than Reika), then ...

Hello, sorry for the stupid question, but it's been bothering me for a while.
I recently stumbled upon this sentence : 雨が止みそうです.

Apparently the -sou form is used like this: Verb (stem of ます form) + そうです.

But if the verb is 止める, then the ます form is 止めます, then the sou form should be 止めそうです and not 止みそうです, right? What am I missing?

The verb here is not とめる, it's やむ.

oh well, that really was a stupid question... Thanks

Not stupid at all; new readings for basic kanji are a constant source of frustration at any level.

In the 8547 sentences shared deck, I came across this sentence:
私は喜びのあまり思わずに隣の人にだきついてしまった。translated as: I was so happy that I hugged the person beside me without thinking.

Why is the の particle used here? What nuance does あまり give to the 思わず?

Additionally, if anyone could explain when it's okay to use あまり with a positive verb, that would be great. Thanks!

edit: damn, you're good. I fixed it.

I think there's a に隣 missing after 思わず.

Xのあまり means "lots of/too much X" (in this case it's like the "so happy that..." in English.)

I thought 思わず was usually (always) used without に? But then, I wouldn't translate it to "without thinking", either.

Hey everyone, I am currently playing a game and I can't seem to find a word. The word I am looking for looks almost like 汪意する, but with the first kanji slightly different (the second part looks more like in 生, but without the first stroke). The kontext is the following sentence:
水の中にもぐると体力が減るから、もぐりすぎないように(汪意しろよ).
Thanks in advance.

You're misspelling 注意. I didn't even know 汪 was a kanji!

Where does 石の上にも三年。 come from?