A I see, oops ^^' Thanks for the clear up!

Sentence 1 was being delivered by someone being deliberately cagey -- I guess I was reading it right, and it was just a weird sentence. Sentence 2 didn't have anything after it -- drdunlap's explanation makes sent to me though?

For sentence 3, this is how I'm reading the two... clauses?, and I feel like I get the meaning now, but I'm still not seeing how they connect, grammatically:

"そんなにいい仕事をやめたなんて何か感じるところでもあったのですか"

そんなにいい仕事をやめたなんて - You gave up SUCH a good job.

感じるところでもあったのですか - Was there a personal reason?

(If I had to guess, I'm assuming that either nante is acting as a conjunction, nanika is being used to nominalize the first half, or there's no explicit grammatical connection at all and the semantic connection is entirely implicit from context).

Anyway, thanks!

Saginaim Wrote:or there's no explicit grammatical connection at all and the semantic connection is entirely implicit from context.

This!

なんて is technically an adverb (not a conjunction).. but this is a perfectly normal way to form a sentence like this.

Guys, I have a question.

……フン！

きょうのところは　このへんで
かんべん　しといてやるけどな　
つぎに　バンディッツのまえに
あらわれやがったら　おぼえとけ
そんときは　ボッコボコの
カッスカスに　してやる！

ボッコボコ is beat up or something right? How about カッスカス? I only found "dry/tasteless/barely" for its definition.

Thanks.

I'm not sure, but my guess would be that it's coming from the word カス (worthless, trash). にする follows a noun and means to make something into that noun. So basically he's going to beat up the person so much they'll become worthless trash, or something like that.

Oh, never thought like that. Thanks, yudantaiteki

In this sentence:

木村によると、女性は化粧をしたときと、していないときでは、随分変わるそうです。

I get the meaning that according to Kimura, it seems that women change a lot whether they are using make up or not, but that's kind of a shot in the dark. I really don't understand the construction ときと~ときでは. Can someone help me breakdown the grammar of this sentence?

The と in したときと　is simply the "and" kind and forms a pair with していないとき i.e. したときと、していないとき = Time when did and, time when didn't.

では is doing it's normal thing here but applied to both possibilities i.e. XとYでは　= depending on X and Y (It's really hard to think of how to translate では so don't trust me too much)

I'm not 100% sure based on your translation what you think means but here's mine:

According to Kimura it seems that women change a lot depending on whether they've done their make up or not.

A few more I don't know

ひょっどすて and ねえだべか in それはひょっどすて筋斗雲ではねえだべかっ！？
こっだら in こっだらどこでなにすてるだ？
こっちさこねえでけろー
あれまやんだー
おっかねえよ

learningkanji Wrote:A few more I don't know

ひょっどすて and ねえだべか in それはひょっどすて筋斗雲ではねえだべかっ！？

Most likely ひょっとして and ではないか?

Quote:こっちさこねえでけろー

こちらに来ないだろう (I'm not sure about でけろー)

Quote:おっかねえよ

I think this is just おっかない?

The others I might be able to figure out from the context if I knew the manga, but otherwise I'm not sure.

learningkanji Wrote:ひょっどすて and ねえだべか in それはひょっどすて筋斗雲ではねえだべかっ！？
こっだら in こっだらどこでなにすてるだ？
こっちさこねえでけろー
あれまやんだー
おっかねえよ

That's a pseudo dialect associated with areas from Tohoku to Kanto.
1. ねぇだべか is a slip-up of ねぇべか, which is ないだろうか as yudan said.
2. こっだら どこで is こんな ところで.
3. なにすてるだ is なにしてるんだ.
4. こっちさ こねぇでけろ is こっちへ こないでくれ.
5. あれまやんだ is あれ、まぁ、いやだ.

Splatted Wrote:The と in したときと　is simply the "and" kind and forms a pair with していないとき i.e. したときと、していないとき = Time when did and, time when didn't.

では is doing it's normal thing here but applied to both possibilities i.e. XとYでは　= depending on X and Y (It's really hard to think of how to translate では so don't trust me too much)

I'm not 100% sure based on your translation what you think means but here's mine:

According to Kimura it seems that women change a lot depending on whether they've done their make up or not.

Oh, now that you said it that makes a lot of sense. Thank you a lot for the help.

Thanks.

There's something I don't understand about the way the following (admittedly fairly basic) sentence was translated:
母の 代わりに私が手紙を書きます。

It came out as: "I will write a letter for my mother". But that doesn't seem to include 代わり (i.e. "substitute") in any way. Perhaps "mother" should be "substitute mother" aka "godmother"? Or is there a reason why 代わり would not show with a separate translation here?

This is a case of an ambiguous translation causing confusion. The "for" here doesn't mean "to" but rather "on behalf of". The letter writer is the substitute for his mother.

@ Splatted

Ah, I see! Thanks!

I wouldn't have thought of that possibility very soon, since writing a letter for someone else doesn't sound like something that would happen very often. Or perhaps this is more common in Japan?

I've no idea if it's more common in Japan but it doesn't strike me as incredibly odd. I've had cause to correspond on someone's behalf before and I imagine a lot of people have at one point or another.

Grammatically I think that it could mean "I will write a letter to my mother's substitute*", but it would be an incredibly odd way of saying it. Xの代わりY is a standard way of saying "Y instead of X" and 私が could imply this even without the preceding part of the sentence. (I.e.　私が手紙を書きます could mean "I , not someone else, will write the letter.) Also, 私が is not necessary in this sentence but they've chosen to specify exactly who is writing the letter because that's what the sentence is about.

*If it was this I would wonder if they were substituting for something other than motherhood. E.g. filling in for her at work.

Edit: P.s.

母の代わり - Mother's substitute
母代わり　- Substitute mother

They don't necessarily mean something different but notice that the second one is specific while the first one is not.

@ Splatted

Thanks again for taking the time to reply!

I agree that writing a letter on behalf of someone is not that odd, but to express it as "to write a letter for someone else" strikes me as strange. In English, because the phrase "on behalf of" is so much more descriptive. Normally, "writing a letter for someone" will tend to be interpreted as "writing a letter that will be sent to that someone." It's only "for" that person in the same sense that a present is intended "for" the recipient. But perhaps my language instincts are off here, or the one from my native language is interfering.

In Japanese, the equivalent also strikes me as odd, given how many different verbs Japanese has to express both the giving and receiving of both objects and actions to cover just about all the possible nuances of status and politeness. For "to give" (or "to perform an action") there's the neutral あげる, there's くれる for multiple levels of politeness, there's やる when the receiver is of lower social status, 差し上げる when the receiver is of higher social status and くださる when the one requesting the giving is of lower social status than the (hoped-for) giver. And to express receiving there are もらう and いただく. So next to all those ways of expressing giving and receiving, it's also possible to simply use 代わり/かわり to describe doing something for someone? I'm not doubting your word, but I do feel somewhat annoyed at the author of my grammar book for not including this possibility. Approximately where does あまり fit in the whole politeness / social status spectrum, I wonder if you could tell me?

代わりに is used for doing something in someone else's place (i.e. substituting for someone). It doesn't have the meaning of doing something as a favor for someone else. You also can't use あげる/くれる/etc by themselves to represent the idea of doing an action as a substitute for someone else.

（人）の代わりに別の人が来る
come along in someone's place
（人）の代わりに電話に出る
answer the phone ［telephone］ for

It is possible to combine this with the giving/receiving verbs, for instance (from Eijiro):

（人）の代わりに宿題をやってあげる
do someone's homework for him

It can also be used with inanimate objects as well:

2本の鉛筆を箸の代わりにする
use two pencils as chopsticks
クリームの代わりに牛乳を使う
use milk in place of cream
朝ご飯の代わりにドーナツを食べる
eat a donut in lieu of breakfast

yudantaiteki Wrote:代わりに is used for doing something in someone else's place (i.e. substituting for someone). It doesn't have the meaning of doing something as a favor for someone else.

While I understand the technical difference, one person substituting for another will often amount to one doing the other a favour. When only inanimate objects are involved, like your example of the pencils and the chopsticks, substitution naturally becomes the only possible meaning.

Thanks for replying!

Eminem2 Wrote:

yudantaiteki Wrote:代わりに is used for doing something in someone else's place (i.e. substituting for someone). It doesn't have the meaning of doing something as a favor for someone else.

While I understand the technical difference, one person substituting for another will often amount to one doing the other a favour. When only inanimate objects are involved, like your example of the pencils and the chopsticks, substitution naturally becomes the only possible meaning.

Thanks for replying!

Substitution is always the only possible possible meaning of かわりに regardless of whether the subject is inanimate or animate and this is independent of any giving receiving words that might be used in the sentence. There is no implication that the person who was replaced wanted to give up their role and it's entirely possible to do something for someone without taking their place in any way.

I think you may have been mislead by the use of "for" in the original translation and my subsequent statement that it should be "on behalf of", but that was not intended to be a translation of 代わりに. There is no value judgement implicit in the phrase, so although it may be clear based on what is taking place, there is no redundancy when combing 代わりに with words such as もらう or あげる. E.g.

田中さんの代わりに私が店の後片付けをしてあげる - I will do the favour of cleaning up the store in place of Tanaka-san

Tanaka-san is the one being substituted and the one receiving the favour.

田中さんの代わりに私が残業代をもらう - In place of Tanaka-san I will receive overtime pay.

Tanaka-san is being substituted but this time it is the speaker who is better off.

Can you see how もらう and あげる are filling a different role from かわり in both these sentences?

Splatted Wrote:Substitution is always the only possible possible meaning of かわりに regardless of whether the subject is inanimate or animate and this is independent of any giving receiving words that might be used in the sentence. There is no implication that the person who was replaced wanted to give up their role and it's entirely possible to do something for someone without taking their place in any way.

Okay, I get that from a strictly logical point of view. I was probably being too intuitive. Possibilities like substituting for someone without their knowledge or consent do exist, of course, although it seems to me like these will be the exceptions rather than the norm.

Splatted Wrote:I think you may have been mislead by the use of "for" in the original translation and my subsequent statement that it should be "on behalf of", but that was not intended to be a translation of 代わりに. There is no value judgement implicit in the phrase, so although it may be clear based on what is taking place, there is no redundancy when combining 代わりに with words such as もらう or あげる. E.g.
田中さんの代わりに私が店の後片付けをしてあげる - I will do the favour of cleaning up the store in place of Tanaka-san
Tanaka-san is the one being substituted and the one receiving the favour.

Okay, yes. You're mentioning the substitution right at the beginning. And adding あげる at the end makes clear that the action should be considered as being given.

Splatted Wrote: 田中さんの代わりに私が残業代をもらう - In place of Tanaka-san I will receive overtime pay.
Tanaka-san is being substituted but this time it is the speaker who is better off.

Now the もらう emphasizes that the speaker considers this as receiving something and apparently not as something that goes without saying. But that still feels a little redundant to me, since receiving money is almost always considered a bonus.

Splatted Wrote:Can you see how もらう and あげる are filling a different role from かわり in both these sentences?

I do on a strictly logical level, but on a more practical level I still suspect that leaving those verbs out will lead to most Japanese considering their meaning to be implied. Purely based on their extrapolating the most probable meanings. I.e. the speaker substituting for Tanaka-san by way of a favour in sentence 1 and the speaker considering the extra payment in sentence 2 as a bonus.
(Although more outlandish meanings are also possible without the use of those verbs: perhaps the speaker is much better off substituting for Tanaka-san in sentence 1 because this gains him some other favour that is more important to him. Or perhaps the speaker in sentence 2 doesn't really feel comfortable accepting the overtime payment for some unstated reason and feels inconvenienced accepting the money. Far-fetched but possible, I suppose.)

I think I see the problem now. Giving and receiving words are often used to make explicit the implicit assumptions regarding who owes who for what just took place, regardless of how obvious they may be. You can leave them out and be understood, but they serve to inform the listener not just when you receive or offer a favour, but also that you have noticed and acknowledge this situation. (Think please and thank you)

E.g. In Japanese you might say 田中さんが鉛筆を貸した but it's politer to say 田中さんが鉛筆を貸してくれた。
Just like how in English you might say "Tanaka-san lent me a pencil", but it's politer to say "Tanaka-san was kind enough to lend me a pencil."

The exact details of what is required and when are well beyond my level of Japanese but I hope this helps a bit. I've　no idea when, why or if it's polite to tell someone you're doing them a favour.

Politeness is not a good thing to leave "implied." You do sometimes have to be careful with the terms that indicate giving originating from yourself (あげる、差し上げる、やる) but you should never leave out くれる or くださる with the idea that their meaning is implied. You could also say that "Give me a pencil" implies "Please" before.

もらう used with a -te form often means that you have asked the person to do that action for you (same with ていただく) although that's not the case with the regular verb.

Splatted Wrote:I think I see the problem now. Giving and receiving words are often used to make explicit the implicit assumptions regarding who owes who for what just took place, regardless of how obvious they may be. You can leave them out and be understood, but they serve to inform the listener not just when you receive or offer a favour, but also that you have noticed and acknowledge this situation. (Think please and thank you)

E.g. In Japanese you might say 田中さんが鉛筆を貸した but it's politer to say 田中さんが鉛筆を貸してくれた。
Just like how in English you might say "Tanaka-san lent me a pencil", but it's politer to say "Tanaka-san was kind enough to lend me a pencil."

The exact details of what is required and when are well beyond my level of Japanese but I hope this helps a bit. I've　no idea when, why or if it's polite to tell someone you're doing them a favour.

Yes, you've certainly helped. Thanks again for taking the time and trouble to reply!