4 ms·
Yes, but the comment said: > Japanese alphabets (kana) doesn't have a concept of upper/lower cases [...] so they can't be used to express anger. It reads to m
by StavrosK 6y ago
Yes, but the comment said:
> Japanese alphabets (kana) doesn't have a concept of upper/lower cases [...] so they can't be used to express anger.
It reads to me a bit like "the natural way to expess anger is uppercase, but they didn't have that, so they did the other thing instead".
Would you find a sentence like "English didn't have dots so they used uppercase to express anger" equally natural?
- nightpool 6y agoyes, especially when written in Japanese
- mekkkkkk 6y agoTo assume that an English reader would know what "dots" are in your example seems unreasonable. As the sibling comment said, if you wrote that in japanese it would make perfect sense. The sort of meta statement would be "That other language doesn't have X, which the one I'm using has. It instead uses Y, which has the same approximate meaning.".
- afiori 6y agoThe equivalent would be "in Eglish you cannot use special marks for emphasis (as they do not exist) so they different variants of their alphabet". The comment is premised by how in japanese there are "two" sets of "letters" with slightly different uses but differently from lowercase/uppercase the difference does not translate in emphasis. Uppercase letters are linguistically related to emphasis independently form net-speak (proper names, I, beginning of sentences), so to me it reads as "the thing that naturally works here is impossible there, so they have a different solution to the problem". It is fine to take the perspective of your own cultural situation.