Quote:Here the notion that something is read "レントゲン" is brought up as topic...and it is commented on.

Well, you surely can think that way but that doesn't make it a correct way of thinking...

Quote:likewise these は are also topic markers, just the topic is being refined by use of multiple は for clarity. ie　しない refers to I, today and tennis.

That is in a total disagreement with the authority of authors of DBJG - guess whose explanation is likely to be followed by learners of the japanese...

Edit: After some thought, I'm inclined to think that nadiatims is trolling here...

nadiatims Wrote:"僕は今日はテニスはしない。"
likewise these は are also topic markers, just the topic is being refined by use of multiple は for clarity. ie　しない refers to I, today and tennis.

don't the は’s here mark more than the topic...?? Or are you understanding topic to be something different from me?

Apart from 僕、which would be a topic marker, isn't constructing a sentence that way more likely to be using は as a comparitive thing?

Like, i'd be more inclined to read it like, he's not playing tennis today, he's doing something else instead, but usually he'd play tennis.

If that's right, isn't that definately more than は marking the topic...?!

Perhaps I worded it badly, what I mean is that the 3 は marked words introduce topical information that clarify what the comment is about.

so it‘s 僕は because he's talking about himself, not some other guy, it's 今日は because he's specifying about today (other days' he may or may not play tennis) and it's テニスは because he's talking about tennis (not some other activity which he may or may not do instead)...

really I'm not trolling

Usually は is described as marking topic or showing contrast; "showing contrast" can be thought of as a kind of topic marking but I've always thought it's clearer to separate the usages -- but this debate is as long-standing as the "ga marks the subject" one, so I don't really want to get into it again.

As for the sentences, I'm going to have to agree with the others here. お金は払う implies something else -- that you are at least going to pay the money, but you're not going to do something else, or that you'll pay the money but you're not satisfied (with the service or whatever). Honestly the most neutral way to say the sentence in normal speech is to drop the particles entirely and just say お金払う.

犬は聞こえるが、犬は見えない。 is a strange sentence to me -- I'm not a native speaker but I would probably go so far as to say it's wrong. Once you've marked a topic with は, you don't need to mark that same topic again later in the sentence. It's particularly odd with the が in there -- if it's two separate sentences that at least puts it in the realm of possibility for me (although it's still odd), but I can't see any native speaker actually using the original example.

@nadiatims

The other wa's are called contrastive wa (as opposed to topical wa). And your explanation matches the "contrastive" nature of those - it appears that the misunderstanding was just in the terminology.

I remember Japanese people to refer to those contrastive wa's as particles for emphasising. I'm not 100% clear whether they are always the same though...

I don't think you have to worry about nadiatims' Japanese ability; I've never seen anything to suggest that he/she has any problems understanding or using Japanese. I don't agree with his/her method of explaining the particles but I've never seen any actual incorrect usages.

Re: classical lessons, one potential problem with them is that the historical 6-form system, which derives from the 18th century work of the 国学者, is not entirely accurate and generates some problems (particularly with the so-called 未然形). Unfortunately the traditional forms have to be learned so that you can use Japanese reference works (although more recent works in Japanese have been doing better).

@ imabi, Your site can wait, right? Editing such a large project will take a long time. There's no rush or deadline. Make your school stuff your priority.

You mention people "requesting changes" and seem to feel obliged to either fulfill these "requests" immediately or explain why you don't agree with them. They aren't requests. They're suggestions you can consider, ignore or implement at any time. Most of the folks providing the feedback you requested won't be using your site. No one is expecting or needs any immediate response from you. Focus on your SATs.

Also, don't feel you need to defend your decisions. Just thank people for taking the time to help you. People will have different views. You might even change your mind about certain things a few months from now. Save your time. (Let other people debate stuff.) :-)

(I basically feel somewhat reluctant to provide feedback right now if it's going to interfere with your exams or whatever. )

Indeed please do not jeopardise your studies on account of anything I write.
I may have been a little abrasive because I forgot how young you are.

Asriel Wrote:Yes, it was a reference to classical -- that's what I've been looking at. This is a definite possibility that I hadn't considered, or even known about -- had no idea けり was still up in the air, to whatever extent it may be.

き and けり are much less well understood than many people think (or even claim). The usual notion of き as "personal past" and けり as "non-personal past" is inadequate to explain many of the uses, particularly in narrative fiction.

The Genji has a lot of good examples of き being used in places where it's hard to describe it as "personal past", but since けり is also used by the narrator it can't simply be dismissed as a narrative convention. けり is used for scene-setting and for the so-called "surprise" or "discovery" meaning, but it crops up in other places where it's not entirely clear why the narrator wanted to use it there.

The best explanation of けり that has been advanced so far (AFAIK) is that it represents some previously existing situation or fact that is being brought into the narrative, or into the viewpoint of a character (or actual person).

I suspect that some of the uses of き in Genji have to do with the narrator talking about things in the past relative to the point we've reached in the story, and rather than bringing a situation/fact into the narrative we're actually diving back into the past....but I'm not sure about this at all. A lot of modern (and ancient) commentaries and translations into modern Japanese gloss over or skip entirely the き's and けり's, which leads me to believe that specialists aren't completely sure either.

I actually found the sentence nadiatim thinks is wrong. So, it stands. It is an odd sentence. Then again, 100% parallelism is almost always redundant anyways.

Some of things you think are mistakes are starting to look like misunderstandings of grammar for yourself. I am not going to get into an argument about that, but I would recommend you at least do some research of your own. I have made a wholehearted attempt at making sure terms are defined.

Ah, I'll do fine on my exams without even trying. I'm not an average person by any stretch. Thanks for your concern though.

I will definitely make it a goal to make the site at least 5% easier each week. That may seem funny to some, but it's the only thing that is realistic with my time constraint. All I will say to rap this discussion about is that you would all please wait and visit frequently and see what great things happen.

To ydtt: I would love to discuss more about -ki and -keri with you. It is hard to pinpoint the difference, but I think I played the information safe. There is plenty of information I left out of my discussion because then things get quickly into the theoretical realm. I understand that the bases are not the best representation of the language's agglutinative nature, but it is the traditional and most common way. It let's not have to discuss how to conjugate things over and over again.

The bases don't really work in explanation that well when there is more than one. A student would ask, well why aren't there 6? For example, da in a dictionary is given the Ren'youkei だっ、で、に. "We" know when it's used, but a learner sure doesn't.

There are questions in Classical Japanese of why り can't follow the Izenkei of all verbal classes. Why can きchose between the Ren'youkei and Mizenkei for す and 来?

I think we can agree that the stem of any given verb is not the same as discussing the bases. Ex.

Kaku's stem is kak-. Everything we see after that is affixed to it.

I would love having linguistic conversations about this. But, it doesn't need to be here.

And, I don't think people want to continue seeing comments about the site either. So, nadiatim and anyone else that want to mention things to me to make my site better, just please give me emails.

imabi Wrote:I'm not an average person by any stretch.

You're definitely an expert.

imabi Wrote:Race White

That's quite unusual. Where I live everybody's Green, some are Pink, though.

imabi Wrote:Favorite Book 聖書

I am a Christian, too. I believe in 天照皇大神 and her younger sister, イエス。

Who is this 'Yes' you speak of? please tell me more. Bring pamphlets.

imabi Wrote:To ydtt: I would love to discuss more about -ki and -keri with you. It is hard to pinpoint the difference, but I think I played the information safe. There is plenty of information I left out of my discussion because then things get quickly into the theoretical realm. I understand that the bases are not the best representation of the language's agglutinative nature, but it is the traditional and most common way. It let's not have to discuss how to conjugate things over and over again.

You pretty much have to stick to the traditional explanations at first, if only because they're used so widely.

Lesson 129:

Quote:Buddhism Note: Manjusri is the god of Wisdom.

Buddhism doesn't have gods (or gods of things) in the sense that a person raised with Abrahamic values might conceive. Manjusri is a Bodhisattva. The closest thing in Christianity would probably be a saint.

Quote:Cultural Note: Koubou was a Buddhist priest famous for his calligraphy.

You may want to note that Koubou is the posthumous name of Kukai, by which he is much better known in western academia.

Pretty much every Japanese museum I've ever been too referred to Bodhisattvas as "Gods" in their English literature.

Then they are wrong. Don't expect translations at a museum to be overly accurate/complete compared to the original text. They are generally done by people who are neither professional translators nor experts in the field. Even if they are Buddhists, most don't know much of anything about Buddhism. (In a battle of anecdotes, I have never seen a museum describe one as anything other than a Bodhisattva or attendant, to my recollection).

There are gods in Buddhism, but they are not the same thing as Bodhisattva (in fact they are pretty much the opposite).

Bodhisattva = Enlightened being that delays entry to nirvana until it can help all of humanity attain nirvana. They are revered/worshiped, but not as gods (think of how some Christians worship Mary).

God = Petty & selfish being that cannot attain enlightenment until it eventually dies and is reborn in another (lower) level of existence. They are not worshiped.

Thank you Jarvik. I have changed those things you wanted.

I wonder what would happen if my site got 100 visitors on at the same time and every hour? Hmm...what would be very interesting. Course, every moment has its time. It still disappoints me that I've only gotten 30,000 hits this year when a video of a chick eating her own crap on youtube can get this much in a single minute. I do know that the more my work is viewed, and the more ideas and feedback that is provided, it will only get better.

Well, I would like to take this time to illustrate a few things that will increasingly help the website that all can look forward for.

I am going to try to make a lot of things through quizlet and word for activities with the site material. I am to increasingly make the text easier to follow and understand while still retaining the amount of information it provides. I will add word banks from vocab words for the JLPT top levels for my advanced section. My classical lessons are hard, but I have thought of making word banks for them too. And, I think it would be useful for everyone for there to be a lot of explanatory notes for the examples as much as possible, even if it may seem redundant.

The one thing I can't do anymore do to my making of so many internal links is move lessons around.

Regardless of what it is now, it is certain that a year from now in will be ten times better. I still have a lot to do, and this place just so happened to find it a year before its prime. I do hope that you all return frequently and help shape it into something that can be enjoyed by any student at any level.

Let us all reach Japanese to the ultimate level!

Hi imabi!

Yeah i think that is a very important key there.
How useful is the material that is being displayed
and how people are using it?

I think a lot of people here are incredibly smart and pretty advanced
so the first lessons might not be as appealing as the higher lessons.

But anyways I still think you are doiong a great job
and providing a lot of value for the community.

How's your SEO strategy for the website?
Anyone here good with SEO?

Adding either audio or video would be great. Hence have people's
audio/visual senses both stimulated at the same time.

Anyone have any more ideas to make the material on the website "stick" more?

Having already memorised most of Tae Kim's grammar guide and looking to further improve my grammar, I had a check with the Imabi website (thanks to this thread).

I'm going to echo some of the opinions earlier in the thread: I'm sure your Japanese skills are great (I'm not knowledgeable enough to make a judgement) but your English is hella strange, in this thread as well as the website. Okay, it's not "hella strange", but there's something about the grammar that makes it sound weird and unnatural.

You said it's something to do with where you were brought up (Texas). Whatever the reason, your particular kind of English grammar combined with your run-on sentences makes it strange to read.

If anyone doesn't understand what I mean when I talk about Imabi's English, read a few random pages from Tae Kim's website and then read a few pages from Imabi's website. One is perfectly clear and very easy to understand, the other one, less so.

I think it is reasonable to say that the greatest barrier for Japanese students learning Japanese using this website, is the English itself.

Constructive criticism by the way, I hope this site improves and continues improving.

Also I'm going to echo another thing: I can picture nothing else except "I'm a bi-sexual Japanese at a learning center" when I look at the URL. I can't. I know it's "ee-mah-be", not "I'm a bi(-sexual)". But I just can't.

qwertyytrewq Wrote:but your English is hella strange, in this thread as well as the website. Okay, it's not "hella strange", but there's something about the grammar that makes it sound weird and unnatural.

Steve Kaufman Wrote:There is only one kind of English prose; clear, concise and well constructed prose.

You, I mean imabi, should start reading Bertrand Russell - and I'm not joking.

You do not amuse me. The lack of close proofreading should not be the basis for claiming that a native speaker does not know his language. Now, quit playing off of this absurd claim and get to something substantial. Use a dictionary if you must. I find my work pleasing to the eyes and do not know why any of you are still using this awfully played card.

I think the reason that people think it's weird is that your writing is so academic. I'm doing a research project on my own (no, not a paper, but an IRB-and-all-that-fun-stuff research project), and one thing I've had to learn from my mentor is how to "dumb down" my academia-speech so that normal people can understand it. In this case, you want to appeal to normal people. Not just normal people with a college education in reading research articles that can understand your English.

No, I don't think that's what it was. It's not that they thought it was academic; it's that they (earlier) were jabbing at it from a capability standard.

I have been consistently making my site have a broader base by dumbing down the text, and I don't know how many times I have to say that. If people have been paying attention, they would have known this. I try to always make a goal of making the site at least 2% easier a day.

qwertyytrewq: If there are pages you want me to make easier, by all means send them to me. I can't change that until I'm told where to go. I spend many hours a week trying to dumb down things.

For example, I just made the first two lessons easier than they were. I am trying to keep the big vocabulary usage under control.

I do love how each time people talk about my site here my site hits go up substantially.

I do enjoy editing my site; it gives me purpose. I think I have cut out 5 pages of unnecessary verbage (a phrase my English teacher coined from verbal and garbage).

imabi Wrote:You do not amuse me. The lack of close proofreading should not be the basis for claiming that a native speaker does not know his language.

No one is saying you don't know your own language, no doubt you're fluent, it's your native tongue after all. But your writing does seem idiosyncratic to put it kindly. There were times reading your site or your posts here where I've had to kind of do a double take. I'm not going to find you an example but suffice it to say they can be found easily enough on your site and in your posts. It may be that you're not very accustomed to writing or it may be that this is a reflection of your communication abilities in general. Perhaps you are not particularly accustomed to considering the listener when you speak to them, and as a consequence do not match and mimic the speech style of those around as much as the general population does, causing idiosyncrasies to emerge. This would seem to be backed up by the general manner in which you have reacted to people on this board too. For example: Responding to criticism and suggestions in a defensive and seemingly irritated manner.

Yes, you're right. I do get irritated. I have to write all the time in English Literature and do quite well. I have been going through the lessons in order with a beginner, and there have been a lot of notes and things that been added and at times removed.

I am more worried that everything is right on my site. Nadiatims, there have been people that have done just that, and that is saying I didn't seem to be a native English speaker. To play on that is not right.

I have to be defensive to a degree. To make a metaphor, I am the father of a newborn child. The child is weak and has little immunity. Whenever it gets pinched, there is a chance that a lot of blood flows out, and it could jeopardize the overall health of the child. Likewise, whenever there is criticism that is by any degree misleading, it has the potential to stunt its growth and viewing. It is very easy to find every comment about the site with one google search due to its unique name: I've done this.

My site is structured like any other book. Things are mentioned before and are built upon. If someone goes to a page and stumbles on something they don't know in the discussion of something else, the links are there to fill in that gap.

I think that it is time that I address here how to take my work. Some of it appears to be lack of knowing what it is, how it was made, its purpose, and what constitutes it.