Learn Japanese with JapanesePod101.com

View topic - Verb modifies Noun

Verb modifies Noun

Have a Question about some Grammar point? Share it with the world!

Re: Verb modifies Noun

Postby keatonatron » Tue 11.10.2009 11:01 pm

IceCream wrote:e.g. ∃x[(Kx & ∀y(Ky → y=x)) & Bx].
This is the logic for the sentence, "the king of france is bald"


Do you have any webpages that explain that? I'm intrigued.
User avatar
keatonatron
 
Posts: 4838
Joined: Sat 02.04.2006 3:31 am
Location: Tokyo (Via Seattle)
Native language: English
Gender: Male

Re: Verb modifies Noun

Postby IceCream » Tue 11.10.2009 11:13 pm

arggh sorry, i meant, "the present king of france is bald".

It's:
∃x - there exists an x such that
Kx & ∀y - x is a king of France, and for all y,
Ky → y=x - if y is a king of France then y=x
& Bx - And, x is bald

there's a bit on it in the stanford encyclopedia, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/russell/#RWAP and http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logical-atomism/#2.3
:)
User avatar
IceCream
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu 11.05.2009 6:13 pm
Native language: English

Re: Verb modifies Noun

Postby Yudan Taiteki » Tue 11.10.2009 11:42 pm

IceCream wrote:its as much in japanese as チョコレート is in english, i think :wink:


Actually not -- katakana cannot fully express the phonetic inventory of English, whereas romaji can fully express Japanese's phonetic inventory. Romanized Japanese is still Japanese, just not Japanese as it's usually written.

(In theory katakana could be a really inefficient writing system for English if native speakers corrected pronunciation and disambiguated homophones based on context, but it's definitely not as direct as romaji is for Japanese.)
-Chris Kern
User avatar
Yudan Taiteki
 
Posts: 5609
Joined: Wed 11.01.2006 11:32 pm
Native language: English

Re: Verb modifies Noun

Postby Fillanzea » Tue 11.10.2009 11:55 pm

I went back and edited my post.

Sorry for derailing the discussion. My computer at work is locked down such that I can't change the language input, unfortunately.
Fillanzea
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun 06.10.2007 9:22 pm

Re: Verb modifies Noun

Postby IceCream » Tue 11.10.2009 11:56 pm

hmm, romaji can't express ふ , even for a start.

Then again, Japanese doesn't express it's full phonetic inventory in hiragana or katakana either. Neither does english with english letters...
User avatar
IceCream
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu 11.05.2009 6:13 pm
Native language: English

Re: Verb modifies Noun

Postby Fillanzea » Wed 11.11.2009 12:21 am

When you say that romaji can't express ふ, all that really means is that an English speaker without previous knowledge of Japanese wouldn't pronounce either "fu" or "hu" as the correct sound. But there's no way for an English speaker without previous knowledge of Japanese to pronounce ふ correctly, with or without romaji, so that seems like a moot point. It's only from an Anglo-centric point of view that it matters that ふ isn't pronounced with an English "h" or "f" sound -- mapping "fu" to the sound "ふ" isn't really any harder or more arbitrary than mapping "fu" to the sound in "food" or "fool."
Fillanzea
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun 06.10.2007 9:22 pm

Re: Verb modifies Noun

Postby IceCream » Wed 11.11.2009 12:37 am

Fillanzea wrote:It's only from an Anglo-centric point of view that it matters that ふ isn't pronounced with an English "h" or "f" sound -- mapping "fu" to the sound "ふ" isn't really any harder or more arbitrary than mapping "fu" to the sound in "food" or "fool."


That's true, but still, to say that roman letters can express the full japanese phonetic inventory isn't right.

Also, lets look at the idea of phonetic mapping in general. The IPA maps every phonetic sound in english, but, i'm not inclined to agree that when i look at the dictionary entry for "phonetic" , the part that says "fə-nĕt'ĭk" is in english either.

I think Hyperworm's argument has more to it, but i'm still not sure exactly how far you can go with it before it turns into another language altogether...
it also wouldn't explain how a single word in romaji is japanese since no japanese grammar is required...
User avatar
IceCream
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu 11.05.2009 6:13 pm
Native language: English

Re: Verb modifies Noun

Postby becki_kanou » Wed 11.11.2009 12:53 am

Where did this discussion about romaji come from? :? I assume it was in one of the edited posts, since I don't see any romaji anywhere...It's really confusing for people who come late to the thread if posts are substantially changed or erased, so please keep that in mind. :D

Anyway, to join the discussion, I usually find myself typing particle「 は」 as "ha" in romaji because I'm so used to typing it that way in Japanese and I so rarely type in romaji that it just gets carried over.

edit: I see the original post got re-re-edited, so this doesn't make sense anymore... Oh well. :wink:
そうだ、嬉しいんだ、生きる喜び!
例え胸の傷が痛んでも。
User avatar
becki_kanou
 
Posts: 3402
Joined: Sat 04.19.2008 10:09 pm
Location: Hyogo, Japan
Skype chat: yes_becki
Native language: U.S. English, 米語
Gender: Female

Re: Verb modifies Noun

Postby tōkai devotee » Wed 11.11.2009 3:13 am

becki_kanou wrote:
edit: I see the original post got re-re-edited, so this doesn't make sense anymore... Oh well. :wink:


There are a lot of things on TJP that don't seem to make sense anymore! Or perhaps it is just me?? :lol: But some threads seem to be getting out of hand and becoming quite incomprehensible. It might just be the silly season, or for me, it might be this unprecedented November heatwave we have at the moment. We've already had several days in a row above 35C and no relief until Sunday. My brain is getting fried!!

Oops! Now we're totally off topic!!
User avatar
tōkai devotee
 
Posts: 1113
Joined: Thu 08.02.2007 6:15 am
Native language: Australian!

Re: Verb modifies Noun

Postby ヴェンリメル » Wed 11.11.2009 5:32 am

Not that I mind all the tangent discussion, but the only responses that I did get read like the writer didn't read all of my post.

I didn't correct things, to preserve my thought process. I understood it wasn't conditional... I ... don't really have anything else to say, just now.
ここに何も見つけられませんな。
User avatar
ヴェンリメル
 
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun 05.10.2009 8:32 am
Location: Fresno, CA; USA
Native language: English
Gender: Male

Re: Verb modifies Noun

Postby Hyperworm » Wed 11.11.2009 9:03 am

ヴェンリメル wrote:Not that I mind all the tangent discussion, but the only responses that I did get read like the writer didn't read all of my post.
I did in fact read it all but I couldn't figure out what the "it's not conditional" was applying to. Maybe because your last sentence was still translated as if it used the conditional たら "if/when", I somehow managed to convince myself that your viewpoint hadn't changed ^^; Apologies.
(Rather than you trying to preserve your train of thought in writing, I personally think it's a better idea to spend time thinking and deciding where your viewpoint/confusion really is, then present relevant questions/statements, and if your viewpoint changes in the middle of writing a post, revise it accordingly. ^^)

ヴェンリメル wrote:このサイトからポストが読まれた方法は覚えます。
[このサイトからポストが読まれた方法]は覚えます
方法は覚えます I will remember the method.
このサイトからポストが読まれた A post was read from this site.
I will remember the [method by which a post was read from this site].

Probably not what you meant? ^^;
One thing about the Japanese way of writing relative clauses is that there is no connecting phrase or particle. That means you have to get used to discerning the relationship between the two parts without one. It could be "(the method) by which", "(the object) that", "(the place) where", "(the person) who", "(the time) when"... etc., depending on the context. In this case "by which" is the only reading I can think of that makes sense.

Clause + noun isn't necessarily the most natural way to express this sentence, but if you wanted to use it anyway as an example:

[このサイトで読んだポスト]の中身は必ず覚えます
ポストの中身は必ず覚えます I always remember the contents of posts.
このサイトで読んだI read them on this site. (で is more normal)
I always remember the contents of [posts that I have read on this site].

Try to get used to translating these sentences into English as actual relative clauses. I don't think there's much to be gained by expressing them as something like "In this note, a name written, that person dies.". That doesn't reflect the meaning or structure of the original, which is a modifying clause with "that" or "which" or any of the things I wrote above. There's no 「名前が書かれたその人間は死ぬ」 in sight.
Maybe you should find some more examples to try. ^^
fun translation snippets | need something translated?
BTC@1KMZXgoWiDshQis5Z7feCx8jaiP4QAB2ks
User avatar
Hyperworm
 
Posts: 493
Joined: Tue 11.20.2007 2:26 pm
Native language: English
Gender: Male

Re: Verb modifies Noun

Postby ヴェンリメル » Wed 11.11.2009 5:54 pm

I was going more for: "Methods read on the site are remembered." to go alongside "People written in this notebook will die." Trying to see if I actually understood it.

Going to need to let this settle; reread those posts a bit.
ここに何も見つけられませんな。
User avatar
ヴェンリメル
 
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun 05.10.2009 8:32 am
Location: Fresno, CA; USA
Native language: English
Gender: Male

Re: Verb modifies Noun

Postby Yudan Taiteki » Wed 11.11.2009 6:18 pm

ヴェンリメル wrote:I was going more for: "Methods read on the site are remembered."


In that case, the 覚える part needs to be passive as well.

Constructing passive sentences by translating from English to Japanese is generally a bad idea because the usage of the grammatical passive in Japanese are, for the most part, very different from those in English. That is, if you took 10 random sentences in English using the passive and translated them into natural Japanese, it's very likely that none of them (or at best 1) would actually use the grammatical passive in Japanese.

The reason for this is that the two main reasons for using the passive voice in English are (1) when the object of the verb is more important than the subject (i.e. the focus), or (2) the agent/subject of the verb is unknown or unimportant.

Because English does not have free word order, you have to do grammatical changes to get things to the front of the sentence to focus -- if I say "The boy was hit by the car," for instance, I am doing that because the boy is more important to the context than the car. But in Japanese you can use は for focus and the word order is much freer, so you can simply say 子供は車がぶつかった without using a grammatical passive.

(2) above is more likely to be represented by a grammatical passive in Japanese, but there are other ways to do it (such as ~てある).
-Chris Kern
User avatar
Yudan Taiteki
 
Posts: 5609
Joined: Wed 11.01.2006 11:32 pm
Native language: English

Re: Verb modifies Noun

Postby NocturnalOcean » Wed 11.11.2009 7:12 pm

Isn't is 子供は車にぶつかった ?
失敗は成功の元
NocturnalOcean
 
Posts: 688
Joined: Mon 03.12.2007 12:43 pm
Native language: Norwegian

Re: Verb modifies Noun

Postby IceCream » Wed 11.11.2009 8:45 pm

子供は車にぶつかった

wouldn't ぶつかった have to be passive for に to make sense?
User avatar
IceCream
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu 11.05.2009 6:13 pm
Native language: English

PreviousNext

Return to Grammar Questions and Problems

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests