billyclyde wrote:

And しっている often gets shortened to してる, like in manga dialogue.

No. している is actually what's often shortened to してる.
I don't think しっている is even a word unless it's from some japanese dialect.

chamcham wrote:

billyclyde wrote:

And しっている often gets shortened to してる, like in manga dialogue.

I don't think しっている is even a word unless it's from some japanese dialect.

しっている(知っている)　is a word. It's actually the one this topic is named after. It means "to know".

That was actually me that talked about the furigana. In any case, I was mistaken in remembering. (There is no furigana for okurigana) Sorry.

Thanks vosmiura.

vosmiura wrote:

By itself 久しぶり (and other na-adjectives) act similar to nouns.  You can use it like a nown to say "久しぶり です" "it's a long time".  As a modifier you need a particle there "久しぶり * 彼の声が聞けた".  To modify nouns you use な but to modify verbs or adjectives you use に.

But wait, isn't 彼 a noun? Or is 久しぶり modifying the last verb or something?

vosmiura wrote:

Hmm... how can I make it easier.  Just adding "~ly" is not a sure thing because "~ly" is for adverbs that describe "how" something is done.  A better way is to try to figure out "what question" the adverb  is answering.

Adverbs typically answer questions such as how?, when?, where?, why? and to what extent? This function is called the adverbial function, and is realized not just by single words (i.e., adverbs) but by adverbial phrases and adverbial clauses.

For example in the phraze "I will eat it ...." you can fit lots of adverbs.
- If you use "quickly, slowly, grudgingly" you're answering the "how?" question.
- If you use "now, shortly, soon, later, tomorrow" you're answering the "when?" question.
- If you use "often, frequently, sometimes, daily" you're answering "how often?".

So the grammar rules themselves are very general, and the adverb itself tells you what its about.  In the case of 久しぶりに it's answering the "when?" question, so works just like any of 今,　今日,　1時に,　来た時, etc.

That's great! I'll use this explanation for reference in the future.

So to translate the sentence correctly [久しぶりに彼の声が聞けた] how would you put it?

Virtua_Leaf wrote:

But wait, isn't 彼 a noun? Or is 久しぶり modifying the last verb or something?

It's modifying the verb, or the whole sentence.

久しぶりの彼の声が聞けた you would modify the noun so I guess it would be something like "(I) could hear the voice of he who I have't seen for a long time".

So to translate the sentence correctly [久しぶりに彼の声が聞けた] how would you put it?

"After a long time, (I) could hear his voice".  Meaning its been a long time since the last time I heard it.

Last edited by vosmiura (2008 March 03, 4:08 pm)

johnzep wrote:

普通（ふつう)→
普通に→

The problem with this example is it's a "~ly" example.  This is easy to understand, but it's probably why he tried to wrongly use "after a long time"~ly before.

Just as a little warning.

Don't get too caught up in literal meanings.
Japanese is a very flexible language in which words or phrases don't
necessaarily have one specific meaning.

For example, the same sentence could mean,

After a long time, I could hear his voice(i.e. we've been separated for a long time
and now we finally meet again).

I can hear his voice like I used to long ago. (i.e. he had a soar throat and couldn't sing for a while)

I can hear his voice, which sounds like what I remember from long ago. (i.e. I can hear a voice that I haven't heard in a long time).

I finally can hear his voice after what seems like forever(i.e. I used to be deaf, but now I can hear).

It's all the same sentence and is just a matter of interpretation.
Even if the same sentence can mean different things, Japanese people
are comfortable with leaving the meaning ambiguous.

Last edited by chamcham (2008 March 04, 8:45 am)

Virtua_Leaf wrote:

Okay... I'm getting it now, these sentences suit my level of learning IMO etc.. I just wanted to know how you'd literally translate the sentence. For instance:

After-a-long-time(ly) he('s) voice (identifier) hear(could)

What would I put where the 'ly' is? I get it, the NI is answering the WHEN question of the adverbial thingy, I just want to put it into a phrase so I can see it and get used to it. I mean, soon I hopefully won't need it, but just until I have it learned.

There's no single word in English that you can just append like that.  Maybe the closest is "at", but depending on what the word/phraze is, in English "at" changes to "on" or is simply not necessary, for example "after a long time [at]" <- the "at" is superfluous so just leave it out.

Or you could just replace the NI with [when] just to remind yourself what its talking about.

When I was doing this kind of translation, I wasn't breaking it down so much.  I'd turn it into more understandable English clauses like:

After a long time (since the last time), his voice [id] could hear.

Or I like jonzep's phrase:

The first time in a long time, his voice [id] could hear.

Last edited by vosmiura (2008 March 04, 1:25 pm)

Can you please given an example sentence from the dictionary with  久しぶり[で] ?
The particle で has many different uses. My guess is that the dictionary
sentences is using で to mean "and" in some of their example.

For example, "Yeah, it's been a long time
and we finally talked" (hashiburi de) as opposed to "We finally talked after a long time(since we haven't had a chance to meet each other in a while)" (hisashi buri ni).

It's hard to know without context. So some dictionary sentences would help.

chamcham wrote:

Can you please given an example sentence from the dictionary with  久しぶり[で] ? The particle で has many different uses. My guess is that the dictionary
sentences is using で to mean "and" in some of their example.

Sure. The dictionary is Kenkyusha's New Collegiate J-E:

久ショぶりに「で」  after a long time [interval, silence, absence, separation]

久しぶりで北海道へ行った。　I went to Hokkaido after a long interval.
久しぶりで雨が降った。　It rained for the first time [We had the first rain]  in many days.

The brackets in the definition suggests that に is for time and で　is for time (interval) as well as silence, absence, etc. Or perhaps they're interchangeable. It's not clear to me.