7 ms·

> No, おもう means two things, and they're written differently so you can tell them apart 君のことを思っている You're on my mind. 思うどおりにはいかなかった It didn't go how she had ho

> No, おもう means two things, and they're written differently so you can tell them apart 君のことを思っている You're on my mind. 思うどおりにはいかなかった It didn't go how she had hoped. 面倒だと思ったことがないよ I've not really ever felt it to be a hassle. Context matters. > Which makes him exceptionally unqualified to... He's waxing poetically about his personal experience. Not sure who else would be more qualified to do that. Excuse me a bit of a meta-comment. Why such a vicious response? A priori, the article stands on its own. It sounds to me like you're bringing in a lot of personal expectations and imposing them on someone that never asked. Bad day, perhaps? If you need a beer or a listening ear, feel free to PM me.

9nGQluzmnq3M 7y ago
Not a bad day, just a pet peeve: I find the "Japanese is so exotic and mysterious and different" trope in general and Pico Iyer's writing about the topic in particular insufferable. I mean, if you're going to pontificate about Japanese literature on the world stage, is it really too much to ask that you read some of it? Languages are complicated, translation between two languages is even more complicated. Does Japanese have "weird" features compared to English? Sure, adjectives having past and conditional tenses still does my head in. But claiming that omou has 29 radically different meanings is wrong, and using this to draw the conclusion that "Speech is dangerous in Japan" is just silly.
- around_here 7y ago
  I’m with you. This is just another JCE who needs to disappear. The writing was god awful.
- sdrothrock 7y ago
  I'd like to chime in on 9nGQluzmnq3M's side here -- I had exactly the same reaction for exactly the same reason. It does Japan's complex culture a complete disservice to wrap it up in a neat package of "exotic" and "ineffable." You wouldn't accept an analysis of fine wine, a new medication, or graphics cards from someone who didn't bother to learn about them, so why is an analysis of an entire culture from an equally ignorant standpoint acceptable? Is it acceptable because "being an outsider" gives him a more "objective" viewpoint? So, his ignorance gives birth to wisdom? Or is it acceptable because Japan has a history of being labeled "ineffable" and "exotic," meaning that nobody not Japanese can ever understand Japanese culture, so anyone can say whatever they want? Anyone who starts claiming that there's a connection between "numbers of meanings [e.g. ways to translate a word into ANOTHER language]" and culture immediately starts setting off alarms in my head, but the Language Log sums that up much better than I ever could: https://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=1088 https://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=1088
  - henrikschroder 7y ago
    That's a fantastic link! I love all the hilarious historical examples where some author claims that having only specialized words for a group of related concepts means your language is dumb for not having a word for the general concept, and having only a general word for a group of concepts means your language is dumb for not having specialized. Heads I win, tails you lose!
  - xelxebar 7y ago
    I certainly get the sentiment. However, my reaction to 9nGQluzmnq3M's coment is mainly this: Why judge an article or opinion on what it's not instead of what it is? In this particular case, the article reads to me like someone sharing their emotions and feelings, achieved by contempaling some minutiae of experience in Japan. Does that explicate an experience that generalizes? Apparently not, but this certainly seems like a different matter. Put a bit extremely, the article is also a pretty terrible recipe for turducken. I doubt many would flay the article for this failing, but the point is that judging an article or opinion's failings says just as much about the reader's personal expectations as it does anything else. Pretend for a moment that the article was written in the form of a poem. I seriously doubt it'd be getting the same kickback for "lack of objectivity." I would guess this is because we culturally learn to approach written language with different expectations, based on the form of its presentation. Heck, I'd not be surprised to even see some interesting anthropological theses on this very phenomenon. Anyway, winding back the meta-levels a bit, I do get where the author is coming from, myself having lived in Japan for ten years. It's possible to find poetry or meaning in certain minutiae of daily experience, and when thinking in Japanese I certainly do interpret, feel, and use silence differently than when my brain goes into English mode. Think for a moment about the "magic" of watching a Good ol' American Superbolw game with your friends and family, or how about drinking at Ye Olde pub down the road with yer mates. The experience is singular in a way to the particular culture it's in, and after accumulating many memories of this experience, it's common for those memories to achieve some "special" emotional quality that's diffilut to transfer to others who haven't done the same. I read the original article as an attempt to share some similar kind of feeling.
    - sdrothrock 7y ago
- xelxebar 7y ago
  > Not a bad day, just a pet peeve Another commenter hinted that my "bad day" comment might come off as condescending. If so, please forgive the oversight. > I mean, if you're going to pontificate about Japanese literature on the world stage, is it really too much to ask that you read some of it? This feels like a low blow to me. There are some pretty amazing linguistic ideas that have come from linguists analyzing languages they don't personally speak. More to the point, though, in my experience there is a tendency for Japanese ability to establish feelings of superiority and inferiority amongst Japanese learners. I certainly don't know your personal psychology, but your comments in this thread remind me a lot of the hierarchy-establishing social dynamics that happens all too often amongst expats here. > But claiming that omou has 29 radically different meanings is wrong Maybe? I use Japanese daily in personal and professional life, and I certainly am unable to completely write off that claim as wildly innacurate. Delineating between meanings is more of an art than anything else. How many meanings does the word "talk" have? Approaching your partner and solemnly pronouncing "I'd like to talk," seems to have a different meaning than approaching your partner and chirpily suggesting, "I'd like to talk." How does the meaning change if we declare the setting to be a funeral? What about at home? What if the conversants aren't romantic partners but parent-child? What if the statement is made alone in one's bedroom? All of those feel like they "mean" something different to me, and I would likely render some of them in different Japanese. Similarly if we reverse the roles of English and Japanese. Anyway, you've seem to hit on a topic that I enjoy discussing. Thanks for engaging. How long have you been studying Japanese?

9nGQluzmnq3M 7y ago

Not a bad day, just a pet peeve: I find the "Japanese is so exotic and mysterious and different" trope in general and Pico Iyer's writing about the topic in particular insufferable. I mean, if you're going to pontificate about Japanese literature on the world stage, is it really too much to ask that you read some of it? Languages are complicated, translation between two languages is even more complicated. Does Japanese have "weird" features compared to English? Sure, adjectives having past and conditional tenses still does my head in. But claiming that omou has 29 radically different meanings is wrong, and using this to draw the conclusion that "Speech is dangerous in Japan" is just silly.

around_here 7y ago
I’m with you. This is just another JCE who needs to disappear. The writing was god awful.
sdrothrock 7y ago
I'd like to chime in on 9nGQluzmnq3M's side here -- I had exactly the same reaction for exactly the same reason. It does Japan's complex culture a complete disservice to wrap it up in a neat package of "exotic" and "ineffable." You wouldn't accept an analysis of fine wine, a new medication, or graphics cards from someone who didn't bother to learn about them, so why is an analysis of an entire culture from an equally ignorant standpoint acceptable? Is it acceptable because "being an outsider" gives him a more "objective" viewpoint? So, his ignorance gives birth to wisdom? Or is it acceptable because Japan has a history of being labeled "ineffable" and "exotic," meaning that nobody not Japanese can ever understand Japanese culture, so anyone can say whatever they want? Anyone who starts claiming that there's a connection between "numbers of meanings [e.g. ways to translate a word into ANOTHER language]" and culture immediately starts setting off alarms in my head, but the Language Log sums that up much better than I ever could: https://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=1088 https://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=1088
- henrikschroder 7y ago
  That's a fantastic link! I love all the hilarious historical examples where some author claims that having only specialized words for a group of related concepts means your language is dumb for not having a word for the general concept, and having only a general word for a group of concepts means your language is dumb for not having specialized. Heads I win, tails you lose!
- xelxebar 7y ago
  I certainly get the sentiment. However, my reaction to 9nGQluzmnq3M's coment is mainly this: Why judge an article or opinion on what it's not instead of what it is? In this particular case, the article reads to me like someone sharing their emotions and feelings, achieved by contempaling some minutiae of experience in Japan. Does that explicate an experience that generalizes? Apparently not, but this certainly seems like a different matter. Put a bit extremely, the article is also a pretty terrible recipe for turducken. I doubt many would flay the article for this failing, but the point is that judging an article or opinion's failings says just as much about the reader's personal expectations as it does anything else. Pretend for a moment that the article was written in the form of a poem. I seriously doubt it'd be getting the same kickback for "lack of objectivity." I would guess this is because we culturally learn to approach written language with different expectations, based on the form of its presentation. Heck, I'd not be surprised to even see some interesting anthropological theses on this very phenomenon. Anyway, winding back the meta-levels a bit, I do get where the author is coming from, myself having lived in Japan for ten years. It's possible to find poetry or meaning in certain minutiae of daily experience, and when thinking in Japanese I certainly do interpret, feel, and use silence differently than when my brain goes into English mode. Think for a moment about the "magic" of watching a Good ol' American Superbolw game with your friends and family, or how about drinking at Ye Olde pub down the road with yer mates. The experience is singular in a way to the particular culture it's in, and after accumulating many memories of this experience, it's common for those memories to achieve some "special" emotional quality that's diffilut to transfer to others who haven't done the same. I read the original article as an attempt to share some similar kind of feeling.
  - sdrothrock 7y ago
xelxebar 7y ago
> Not a bad day, just a pet peeve Another commenter hinted that my "bad day" comment might come off as condescending. If so, please forgive the oversight. > I mean, if you're going to pontificate about Japanese literature on the world stage, is it really too much to ask that you read some of it? This feels like a low blow to me. There are some pretty amazing linguistic ideas that have come from linguists analyzing languages they don't personally speak. More to the point, though, in my experience there is a tendency for Japanese ability to establish feelings of superiority and inferiority amongst Japanese learners. I certainly don't know your personal psychology, but your comments in this thread remind me a lot of the hierarchy-establishing social dynamics that happens all too often amongst expats here. > But claiming that omou has 29 radically different meanings is wrong Maybe? I use Japanese daily in personal and professional life, and I certainly am unable to completely write off that claim as wildly innacurate. Delineating between meanings is more of an art than anything else. How many meanings does the word "talk" have? Approaching your partner and solemnly pronouncing "I'd like to talk," seems to have a different meaning than approaching your partner and chirpily suggesting, "I'd like to talk." How does the meaning change if we declare the setting to be a funeral? What about at home? What if the conversants aren't romantic partners but parent-child? What if the statement is made alone in one's bedroom? All of those feel like they "mean" something different to me, and I would likely render some of them in different Japanese. Similarly if we reverse the roles of English and Japanese. Anyway, you've seem to hit on a topic that I enjoy discussing. Thanks for engaging. How long have you been studying Japanese?