Mostly it's just a more formal version of あと, but there are some compounds where it has to be read as のち (i.e. 後ほど).  It's the same issue as 私 being わたし or わたくし -- you basically just have to guess.

FooSoft wrote:

世界はゆるい粥のようにどろどろとして骨格を持たず、捉えどころがない。
Is どころがない here essentially the same as どころではない, so with that verb stem it means "impossible to grasp"?

It's one of Aどころ words such as つかみ所 and 見所. They are like one word versions of 捉えるところ, つかむところ, 見るところ, etc. In general, A in an Aどころ word is a verb so it roughly means "things to do A." But they're words on their own, so their meanings can be narrower or more figurative than literal interpretations.

捉え所 is particularly figurative and means "point or key which helps understand something." For example, if someone's argument zigzags making no point, it's 捉え所のない話. In your example, 捉え所がない means "difficult to grasp/understand/see," "vague and hard to define" or something along those lines. So your translation is spot on if you mean "understand" by "grasp," but the analyzing process to get to the right meaning is a little off. Also, 捉え所 strongly collocates with ない so it usually takes the form of 捉え所がない or 捉え所のない.

つかみ所 is often synonymous with 捉え所. But it can mean a literal handle/grip while 捉え所 is always related to understanding and such.

FooSoft wrote:

テレビゲームのし過ぎは子供の視力を弱める＿＿＿＿子供の基礎体力まで低下させているということだ。
a. もさることながら
b. にとどまらず

So I incorrectly picked the first option, and while looking back I see that まで may be a hint that にとどまらず is more appropriate, is もさることながら really gramatically incorrect here?

Grammatically speaking, もさることながら follows a noun, e.g., あの声優は演技力もさることながら、いろいろな声に対応できる (The voice actor has a good acting skill. But what impressed me even more is his various voice registers.). So it doesn't fit in the sentence.

FooSoft wrote:

Edit: another thing too, sorry:
天吾はようやく目を開け、焦点をあわせ、テーブルの縁を握っている自分の右手を眺めた。世界が分解されることなく存在し、自分がまだ自分としてそこにあることを確認した。
Any ideas why this is ある and not いる? Isn't it still referring to 天吾?

It seems like it's an excerpt from a novel or some written material. ある here seems to be referring to 天吾. My guess is that it's emphasizing that he is seeing himself as an object existing in the still existing universe rather than a person living in the world. If you strictly follow the grammar rule that animated things take いる, it must be いる.

Last edited by magamo (2010 December 12, 11:23 pm)

So I am looking for a good Bible in Japanese and I got confused between these two:

http://www.amazon.co.jp/新約 … p;sr=1-246

http://www.amazon.co.jp/新約 … =pd_cp_b_1

The red one seems to be the regular New Testimant and the other is "単行本". So what would that be in this context? The letters of St. Paul?

Also, A6判 and B6判 are dimensions, right?
I know I am stretching this thread quite a bit but my parents offered to buy me a collection of books for Christmas and this is a book I know I will read.

Ah, Thank you.

It's not in DOBJG.  Someone said it was in DOAJG, which is strange, since it's a pretty basic grammar point.  It's in JSL book 2.

vinniram wrote:

I had a flick through DOAJG, but I couldn't find it in there either. I guess the authors didn't consider it "grammatical" enough to put in, but instead just a suffix to be learnt like any other vocab.

Did you look up entries explaining Japanese equivalents of "something like" or "things like"? (I don't know if there is an entry for that.) The でも in your example doesn't seem to be "at least" to me. It seems like the でも as in は？ 証拠でもあんのかよ。(What, do you have proof or something?) It indicates that A in Aでも is an example of things of the same kind.

Last edited by magamo (2010 December 13, 9:39 pm)

外に席が空いてないのでここに座ってもいいですか。

Context: An employee is asking a fellow employee who is sitting at a table whether he can sit next to her.

My translation so far is: "Besides, the seat wouldn't happen to be vacant would it (?), so is it alright if I sit here?"

1) "外に" seems really out of place here. What does it actually mean here, because I'm sure it doesn't mean "in addition, besides", because the person asking to sit down hasn't said anything else to warrant saying "in addition".

2) 空いてない means "isn't vacant", but is he saying it in a "this seat isn't vacant, is it?" sort of way, therefore the negative? If not, please explain, because I don't understand why it isn't just 空いてる.

Thanks for any help.

Last edited by vinniram (2010 December 14, 12:22 am)

vinniram wrote:

外に席が空いてないのでここに座ってもいいですか。

Context: An employee is asking a fellow employee who is sitting at a table whether he can sit next to her.

My translation so far is: "Besides, the seat wouldn't happen to be vacant would it (?), so is it alright if I sit here?"

1) "外に" seems really out of place here. What does it actually mean here, because I'm sure it doesn't mean "in addition, besides", because the person asking to sit down hasn't said anything else to warrant saying "in addition".

2) 空いてない means "isn't vacant", but is he saying it in a "this seat isn't vacant, is it?" sort of way, therefore the negative? If not, please explain, because I don't understand why it isn't just 空いてる

Is 外に pronounced ほかに here? Depending on context, it can be そとに too. If it's ほかに, then it means "other than (something implied)," "except (something implied)," "anywhere else," "something else," and so on. It's like "except-ly," if that makes sense. If you already know 他に, then 外に is another kanjification for the exact same word. Anyway, here are some examples to help get the meaning:

ほかに何かご注文はございませんでしょうか？(at a fast food restaurant etc.)
Anything else?

でもほかにやることないし。
But I don't have anything better to do.

ちょっとお願いしていい？　ほかに頼める人いないんだ。
Can I ask you a favor? You're the only person I can count on.

So your sentence is "May I sit here? All seats are occupied (other than this)."

If 外に is そとに here, then it means "No seats in the terrace are available, so can I sit here?" "No seats are available outside, so..." etc. It requires a specific context to interpret this way though.

From donna toki:

人は主任のした行為を批判するが、彼の置かれた立場を考えれば彼がなぜそうしたか、理解にかたくない

???

None of it, basically. It seems to say, something like:

A person criticises the person in charge, but if I think about where he was placed, it's easy to understand why.

Asriel wrote:

It's like saying that while you may criticize the person in charge, if you think about where they're coming from, you can understand why they did it.

Ah, okay. Thanks for clearing that up!

I think I come across a fair few sentences like this in textbooks, where the lack of context makes it difficult for me to understand the true meaning.

Like, for example, in this particular sentence (人は主任のした行為を批判するが、彼の置かれた立場を考えれば彼がなぜそうしたか、理解にかたくない)...

Is that first 人 an actual person? Or people in general? Like, is it saying that people have a general tendency to criticise the people in charge? Or is it referring to a particular instance in which an actual person has criticised the person in charge? Or could it be both?

Similarly, I took 彼の置かれた立場 to mean something like 'the position he was put in', but is this a physical position (like, say a particular seat in an auditorium), or an abstract one (like, someone's point of view)? Or could it be both?

Thanks again for the clarification!

Not really, you just have to remember when each reading is used.