Still trippin' over particles...

[kohlrak]

The dictionary program i use, uses a copy of edict as it's "dictionary file." Anyway... I tried to make it make a list of all the particles, and i got alot... About... 80... I don't think there are 80 particles... It seems to display repeats for every variation of the words, including if it's spelled with kanji or not... Now, i doubt that any of the particles would be spelled with any kanji. So what i'm asking for is any complete (and correct) list that some one can find. I'm sure many of the students of the japanese language have something close to a complete list. Or, if you want, you can check the list yourself...

If it dosn't already give you the search results for it, just type in "prt" without the quotes, and to continue viewing the list keep pressing "continue" when the bullet is in "continue displaying results from previous slection". (http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jwb/cgi-bin/wwwjdic.cgi?1F)

I'd be much obliged if some one could do either thing for me...

[yukio_michael]

I think you're going about learning the language in the wrong way... You're all over the place. One thread, you're making up your own kanji-compounds, this thread, you're trying to find a full list of all of the particles, as if having them all in front of you would make them all clearer---

You also keep asking for information that is available countless places online, as well as in several books... for particles, I recomend

A Dictionary of Japanese Particles (http://www.amazon.com/Dictionary-Japanese-Particles-Children-Classics/dp/4770023529/sr=1-3/qid=1158453887/ref=pd_bbs_3/103-5111122-7012659?ie=UTF8&s=books)... It covers the various usages of the particles (I have no idea if it is entirely complete), and gives many good examples.

But you've stated before that you are against changing your method of learning... I put that link up there in case someone else finds it useful...

I think you would do a lot better to say learn, ga, wa, de ni, o, ---learn those particles and how you can use them.... Do you know the difference between how de is used and how ni is used?

Learn these things step-by-step, lesson by lesson, instead of kanji this week, particles that week, etcetera... I might be wrong but having a (complete) list of particles, isn't going to do you much good if you lack the fundamentals of the langauge to actually use them.

Concentrate on a few particles at first, and then tackle the rest of them... why bother with more complex particles if you aren't using the basic ones?

[kohlrak]

actually, i'm not neccesarily trying to learn verbs, then adjatives, then kanji, and so forth. Basically, i'm trying to grab all the information at once, one informational part at a time. THEN i group up the information, then read it all, and try to remember the parts that i don't understand while reading other sections. Then after reading it all, (since i won't just remember it all from that) keep the compiled information with me at all times then use it. When i use it, it'll "sink in" much easier, and faster. It also requires less time to perform. While waiting for my printer to be fixed, i've been putting heavy study (during my boring classes) to hiragana. Lack of a vocabulary has made it quite hard to get certain hiragana to be used, but for the most part i am starting to notice the pattern in them. While playing the japanese version of starfox64, i've slowly and slowly been becomming more and more capable of picking out the few words i know in the game, and familiar with accents and voices, though distorted as the audio typically would be.

I know i said i wouldn't mention klingon again, but i once again... MUST...

I learned klingon this very way. My major issue is my vocabulary. In the KLI email group, they have a guy called the beginner grammarian. Still not sure how the system works out on how to tell who the grammarian is at a specific time (since it appears to change in rare scenarios for no apparent reson), but his (or her) job is simple. Go around reading all the emails (which is not really hard, considering there isn't a high post rate since it's an email thing) and checking it for anything that seems odd. Then s/he would "post" the things that seem odd or unclear and say why it's odd and unclear, then make suggestions. The major problem they have with me, is that i don't show my feelings in a normal way, because, i simply cannot do much with the very little vocabulary i have in klingon. Now, that is the downfall of my method. Due to lack of ability to constantly use it, my vocabulary was (and still is) natrually small. In japanese, i can see (and hear) more examples of japanese more freaquently and with kanji as well, i'm sure vocabulary won't be as much of a problem for this language. My method is strange, unusual, and quite difficult for you to understand, but i assure you that it will work.

On a final note, thank you for your assistance.

EDIT: Oh, and if i didn't say above why i am learning them all at once, it's so i don't develop bad habits. If i use only basic ones, when more advanced ones are preferred, by habit i will choose the basic ones over the more advanced, which would make me sound awkward.

[Buntaro]

kohlrak,

I think this is what you are looking for: ni, e, de, o, kara
kawa ni oyogu = swim into a river
kawa e oyogu = swim towards a river (without actually entering the river, e.g., while swimming in the ocean)
kawa de oyogu = swim in a river
kawa o oyogu = swim (the entire length of) a river
kawa kara oyogu = swim from a river

[kohlrak]

that's part of what i'm looking for... There are many particles, one of which is わ and not spelled は. There's way too many particles that aren't documented, then there are the interchangeable ones. From the looks of it, the hardest part of japanese is the particles. Many of them are used on case by case basises and such... It's a mess... Some people don't even consider all particles as particles. Last night i heard some one here say they don't considere "kara" as a particle.

[yukio_michael]

actually, i'm not neccesarily trying to learn verbs, then adjatives, then kanji, and so forth. Basically, i'm trying to grab all the information at once, one informational part at a time.People don't learn very well when they have more information than they actually can process at once... What you want are reference maerials and you are trying to use them as you would course materials... This is not how language is taught, or well learned. There certainly isn't wrong with having reference books to look things up, but I wouldn't use them to structure your own type of course work.

THEN i group up the information, then read it all, and try to remember the parts that i don't understand while reading other sections. Then after reading it all, (since i won't just remember it all from that) keep the compiled information with me at all times then use it.Why are you grouping the information? Are you a linguist? Are you a professor of the Japanese language? It's like you are teaching yourself the language through the way you think it should be organized which I think is the quickest route to confusion and failure if ever there were one...

When i use it, it'll "sink in" much easier, and faster. It also requires less time to perform. While waiting for my printer to be fixed, i've been putting heavy study (during my boring classes) to hiragana. Lack of a vocabulary has made it quite hard to get certain hiragana to be used, but for the most part i am starting to notice the pattern in them.It's true, use of anything will help you remember it, but for example--- You're still learning hiragana, and yet last week you wrote your own thread about how to make kanji-compounds... It's my feeling that the way you are going about learning Japanese that eventually there will be simply many aspects of the language for which you may have a familarity yet no actual ability to put to actual use, and at the very worst, if put to use it may be outright incorrect...

While playing the japanese version of starfox64, i've slowly and slowly been becomming more and more capable of picking out the few words i know in the game, and familiar with accents and voices, though distorted as the audio typically would be.It's not a good idea to try to learn Japanese from anime, and probably less a good idea to learn it from a video game as this isn't going to be typical Japanese in how it is spoken, or what is actually said--- but it is good for listening comprehension.

I know i said i wouldn't mention klingon again, but i once again... MUST... I learned klingon this very way.[...]Let me hopefully be the first person to tell you that you probably can't learn Japanese the same way that you learn a fictional language that has admited limitations in both vocabulary and grammar... I don't know anything specific about the fictional language you speak of, other than that it is limited as I have said in both a full grammar & vocabulary because, and it's important to note this, it is fictional... Not to start any sort of flame-war, but its I don't think even as well-designed a fictional language as some of those developed by JRR Tolkien, which probably have fewer devotees than klingon, but have more expressive grammars... That said they are all fictional languages... so you can't compare your success in learning them with your success in learning Japanese. You couldn't even comapre your success in learning say something like Spanish or German to learning Japanese because the languages opperate differently... If you have a system for learning vocabulary, or a system of memorization, these things can be used accross languages but it's not use your techniques in tackling a relatively small fictional language system with specific quircks made to make it seem more "alien" (thanks wiki), and apply that to learning Japanese.

Now, that is the downfall of my method. Due to lack of ability to constantly use it, my vocabulary was (and still is) natrually small. In japanese, i can see (and hear) more examples of japanese more freaquently and with kanji as well, i'm sure vocabulary won't be as much of a problem for this language. My method is strange, unusual, and quite difficult for you to understand, but i assure you that it will work.Your method isn't difficult for me to understand, I just think that it's wrong. You are ignoring years and years of coursework and teaching methods in order to try to teach yourself something the same way you may have partially-learned something else only casually related. You don't learn words very well by taking a dictionary and reading it page by page--- rather, we start with simple books, then gradually read more difficult books, and at the top of the list are books that are subject-specific which contain jargon, etcetera... you have to remember the phrase, you've got to crawl before you walk.

On a final note, thank you for your assistance. EDIT: Oh, and if i didn't say above why i am learning them all at once, it's so i don't develop bad habits. If i use only basic ones, when more advanced ones are preferred, by habit i will choose the basic ones over the more advanced, which would make me sound awkward.I do hope that maybe you'll take my advice--- If the number of questions that you ask about very basic things is any indication, your method might not be the best way of learning a real language. The problem is what you say about basic and advanced particles, it's really academic--- In most cases, I think the basic particles & words are prefered in coloquial Japanese... You can get quite far in speaking Japanese just by learning the particles I mentioned above, wa, ga, o, de, ni, mo, to, no, e... after that, you could probably learn ten other particles and still have a very rich and functional Japanese... But it's academic to grasp all particles or I'd call them more obscure over more complex ones... Your Japanese won't sound natural at all if you use a system that you design yourself.

From Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_particles

Get a coursework, follow it, practice the kana by writing them, listen to Japanese music, watch Japanese movies etcetera, watch streaming content available on the internet... use google... These are all great resources for learning Japanese. good luck.

[Elizabeth]

that's part of what i'm looking for... There are many particles, one of which is わ and not spelled は. There's way too many particles that aren't documented, then there are the interchangeable ones. From the looks of it, the hardest part of japanese is the particles. Many of them are used on case by case basises and such... It's a mess... Some people don't even consider all particles as particles. Last night i heard some one here say they don't considere "kara" as a particle.
Kara is definately a particle. That wasn't Tommy you were trying to study from again was it ? :okashii: :bluush: And what would it mean if you still didn't agree ? That you wouldn't have to bother learning it ? Case by case to a small extent, still the general rules and meanings far outweigh any "natural conventions" or exceptions which simply need to be memorized.

Sounding awkward is inevitable in a language you're unacquainted with -- everyone is in the same situation since whatever our method none of us are going to internalize the structure & vocab without asking for real-world feedback. Use 'basic,' or required, particles in basic, simple sentences (the only kind I'm assuming you're familar with) and you'll be fine. :cool:

[yukio_michael]

Particles are postpositions (as opposed to English prepositions) which contextualize the the elements which precede them. I think the dificulty you are encountering with particles is self-created from trying to look at all of the particles as one system, rather than as I & Elizabeth had stated using the basic (or common) particles first without worrying about the less comon ones.

Use 'basic,' or required, particles in basic, simple sentences (the only kind I'm assuming you're familar with) and you'll be fine. :cool:Exactly.

Here are some other links which you might find informative: Particles vs. Patterns (http://users.tmok.com/~tumble/jpp/parvpat.html), & How to understand a Japanese sentence (http://users.tmok.com/~tumble/jpp/pars.html), both by Ken Butler.

[Ben W Bell]

I recommend this book on particles. I use it and it does seem quite complete having about 70 particles in it. Granted some of them are pretty obscure, but there are actually a lot of particles and that book gives lots of good examples of the nuances of each one.

http://www.amazon.com/All-About-Particles-Japanese-Children/dp/4770027818/sr=1-6/qid=1158564760/ref=sr_1_6/102-6424475-5906530?ie=UTF8&s=books

[Tomii515]

Kara is definately a particle. That wasn't Tommy you were trying to study from again was it ? :okashii: :bluush: And what would it mean if you still didn't agree ? That you wouldn't have to bother learning it ? Case by case to a small extent, still the general rules and meanings far outweigh any "natural conventions" or exceptions which simply need to be memorized.
Sounding awkward is inevitable in a language you're unacquainted with -- everyone is in the same situation since whatever our method none of us are going to internalize the structure & vocab without asking for real-world feedback. Use 'basic,' or required, particles in basic, simple sentences (the only kind I'm assuming you're familar with) and you'll be fine. :cool:

Hey! Haha! my bad XD

[JimmySeal]

I recommend this book on particles. I use it and it does seem quite complete having about 70 particles in it. Granted some of them are pretty obscure, but there are actually a lot of particles and that book gives lots of good examples of the nuances of each one.

http://www.amazon.com/All-About-Particles-Japanese-Children/dp/4770027818/sr=1-6/qid=1158564760/ref=sr_1_6/102-6424475-5906530?ie=UTF8&s=books

I second that motion. I don't think any book will explain particles better.

[kohlrak]

It's my feeling that the way you are going about learning Japanese that eventually there will be simply many aspects of the language for which you may have a familarity yet no actual ability to put to actual use, and at the very worst, if put to use it may be outright incorrect...

Thus why my vocabulary is almost always small when i use this method. But i find that, for the most part, if you restrict yourself to very closely related things. I also like to skim over the referance materials and look for the so-called "warnings" and "exceptions." For instance, "する." If I am looking for a random verb to use, i know that if it ends in する it's actually "to do" with a noun. And because it is irregular, i'm not going to use that verb. Based on that, i can come up with simple things like "グラウキはテレビをかいます。" Simple? The intent is to say, "Gurauki is going to buy a T.V." Am I right? lol

It's not a good idea to try to learn Japanese from anime, and probably less a good idea to learn it from a video game as this isn't going to be typical Japanese in how it is spoken, or what is actually said--- but it is good for listening comprehension.

Indeed, but it's the only half lagimate resources i have. I have already questioned the fact that in the game, everyone is speaking informally to each other. I would imagin it would be the reverse if it was a real situation, not that i beleive animals are going to be hoppin' in space ships anytime soon.

Let me hopefully be the first person to tell you that you probably can't learn Japanese the same way that you learn a fictional language that has admited limitations in both vocabulary and grammar... I don't know anything specific about the fictional language you speak of, other than that it is limited as I have said in both a full grammar & vocabulary because, and it's important to note this, it is fictional...

Oh, but of course. I consider it more of a fictional, and intresting intro to languages in general. Probably a better one than french or spanish, because they have, for the most part, a rather close system to english, which makes it difficult to learn other languages once you have a mindset that everything is close to your own language. With Klingon, on the other hand, things are a little more like languages all over, rather than a european language. In turn, learning languages like japanese would be easier to undertake since you're not restricted to thinking that everything has a direct or almost direct translation. For instance, in klingon, verbs are also adjatives and can be converted to nouns without changing the end of it like you would in a european language. EX:

A muS B = B hates A

A muS = The hated A

muSwI' = The hater

Now, this is a really simple intro, but it is a little more easier to adapt to japanese or something after learning this than a european language, since you are introduced to new parts of speech and concepts.

Not to start any sort of flame-war, but its I don't think even as well-designed a fictional language as some of those developed by JRR Tolkien, which probably have fewer devotees than klingon, but have more expressive grammars...

Grammatically, you're right. But it's heavily context based, meaning you can get away with it, but it's not very flexable so it would seem awkward.

That said they are all fictional languages... so you can't compare your success in learning them with your success in learning Japanese. You couldn't even comapre your success in learning say something like Spanish or German to learning Japanese because the languages opperate differently...

Not a specific comparison, but a general vague comparison. And i really stress "vague" and "general."

If you have a system for learning vocabulary, or a system of memorization, these things can be used accross languages but it's not use your techniques in tackling a relatively small fictional language system with specific quircks made to make it seem more "alien" (thanks wiki), and apply that to learning Japanese.

That's why i don't use quirks. They're only specific to that language which you are learning, and it would only be pure coincidence if they worked for another. Plus, hands on is a much easier way of learning the language, and you do that through a collection of referance materials.

Your method isn't difficult for me to understand, I just think that it's wrong. You are ignoring years and years of coursework and teaching methods in order to try to teach yourself something the same way you may have partially-learned something else only casually related.

Everything takes years to "master," but my objective is to get to the point that i can make basic sentances and read basic sentances. Slang is for later, and that's what i would imagin you spend the most time working on after the first year or so. But, that is just an observation.

You don't learn words very well by taking a dictionary and reading it page by page--- rather, we start with simple books, then gradually read more difficult books, and at the top of the list are books that are subject-specific which contain jargon, etcetera... you have to remember the phrase, you've got to crawl before you walk.

That is, indeed, true, but if you crawl too much, you start to think it supports all your needs. You then become dependent on crawling to suit all your needs, which won't do too well at an intersection. Which i don't like about language courses, because they're not always complete (which i don't beleive my book is, it does seem a bit small for such a complex language) and then you don't know what you don't know till you need to know it and don't. Then you waste alot of time and money learning from a whole new course (which may not contain all the basics) and bore yourself and it becomes more of a chore than anything. This is a major problem with C++, though it isn't a foreign language.

I do hope that maybe you'll take my advice--- If the number of questions that you ask about very basic things is any indication, your method might not be the best way of learning a real language. The problem is what you say about basic and advanced particles, it's really academic--- In most cases, I think the basic particles & words are prefered in coloquial Japanese... You can get quite far in speaking Japanese just by learning the particles I mentioned above, wa, ga, o, de, ni, mo, to, no, e... after that, you could probably learn ten other particles and still have a very rich and functional Japanese... But it's academic to grasp all particles or I'd call them more obscure over more complex ones... Your Japanese won't sound natural at all if you use a system that you design yourself.

Well, what i'm trying to do is get a list of all the ones i *NEED* to convey any idea i want. Kinda like when learning prepositions, you don't just learn "to" but you need to learn "from" and others. All i want right now is what i *NEED* to express any idea i want. I like what buntaro did, but i need a little more than what he used...

Get a coursework, follow it, practice the kana by writing them, listen to Japanese music, watch Japanese movies etcetera, watch streaming content available on the internet... use google... These are all great resources for learning Japanese. good luck.

Google is crap. It's a pain to sort good material from bad material. It's alot easier (and safer) for both parties to just speak directly, rather than skimming over a site and only checking a few things then taking it all for fact.

Kara is definately a particle. That wasn't Tommy you were trying to study from again was it ?

I didn't take much of what he said for fact, but i do listen to a few things he says... He handed me a small list, that wasn't all that great, but i didn't want to say anything not to offend him. His list was pretty decent but dosn't include everything needed.

And what would it mean if you still didn't agree ? That you wouldn't have to bother learning it ?

And that's the problem... Things that are disputed are harder to get documentation on. It's alot easier to get documentation on how to spell in the kanas, rather than how to spell in romaji. Same with particles... That's why i want a complete list... I may not be able to get it anywhere else...

Case by case to a small extent, still the general rules and meanings far outweigh any "natural conventions" or exceptions which simply need to be memorized.

Indeed.

Sounding awkward is inevitable in a language you're unacquainted with -- everyone is in the same situation since whatever our method none of us are going to internalize the structure & vocab without asking for real-world feedback. Use 'basic,' or required, particles in basic, simple sentences (the only kind I'm assuming you're familar with) and you'll be fine.

Easier said than done... Especially when ka, wa, wo, and ga are the only ones you are familiar with, and even then that's only in noun situations...

Particles are postpositions (as opposed to English prepositions) which contextualize the the elements which precede them.

Not all particles are... There are some particals (like ka) that come at the end, but are not prepositions.

I think the dificulty you are encountering with particles is self-created from trying to look at all of the particles as one system, rather than as I & Elizabeth had stated using the basic (or common) particles first without worrying about the less comon ones.

Perhaps. I look at them as one big part of speech with subcats. Really... I want something i can use for general speech. Not quite going around and using big words like i use in english. That's for experienced people. I want to be able to say any 1 clause sentance and some simple 2 clause sentances. I want to be able to talk like a japanese teenager at this point, rather than a japanese professor. I already talk too much like a professor in english, even though i'm not.

Here are some other links which you might find informative: Particles vs. Patterns, & How to understand a Japanese sentence, both by Ken Butler.

I'll check them out as soon as i can.

I second that motion. I don't think any book will explain particles better.

Only experience can explain...

So far... I have contrasting examples of ni, e, de, o, and kara... A more detailed analasys of what i'm looking at here points out that adjative particles would be explained in my adjative sections of my exturnal adj resource. sentance ending particles are more conversational, so i will learn them from reading conversational media, such as japanese forums... Therefor i don't need them. Noun particles, on the other hand, are scattered all about my course book and i don't have an exturnal source for nouns (and they shouldn't be complicated so naturally you won't find much resource on them) so that means it's the prepositional particles (and a few others) i'm concerned with at the moment. The particle section of my course book (which has horrible examples of things throughout apparently) mentions the following:

ga marks an emphatic grammatical subject (see mo, below).

wa marks a sentance topic that may be either the subject or object of the sentence, or a modifier. Some of the modifiers in b above can be used with wa also.

no links a noun to another noun. It is most frequently used for the posessive ("of").

ni links a noun or noun equivalent (such as the premasu form of a verb) to a verb, adjective, or copula.

o marks the thing acted on (see mo, below).

mo can be used instead of ga or o (see above) but carries the additional meaning of "that thing/person also."

e links a noun to a verb and marks the direction toward which an action is performed.

to does one of two things: (i) it links nouns together in a complete list (see ya, below) or (ii) it marks the partner with whom the action is being performed.

ya links nouns together in an incomplete list (see to, above)

yori marks a noun or noun equivalent as the standard against whcih a comparison is made

kara marks a starting point in time or space.

made marks the ending point in time or space.

de marks the means, way, place, or manner in which an action is performed.
bakari has one of two functions: (i) it can be used in place of (or sometimes together with) ga or o to cary the additional meaning of "nothing else," or (ii) if it follows a number, it signifies that a number is only approximate.

dake can be used in place of or together with ga or o to carry the additional meaning of "that was the limit."

hodo can be used (i) to mark a thing against whcih a comparison is made and which is about the same in degree or extend as the thing compared, or (ii) to mark a number that is only approximate.

kurai (or gurai) makrs the approximate quantity, quality, or degree, and can often be used interchangeably with hodo (see above).

ka (i) shows that a statement is a question, or (ii) has the meaning of "either...or."

So, assume that the above is the only thing i've read about these particles...

I understand wa, ga, no, wo, the first meaning of to, ya, and the first meaning of ka. The others are either confusing to me (such as why some are specifically marked interchangeably with another and others are not) or if it's not explained as specifically.

Basically, i all i want, now, is an example of that i don't understand...

If (using the examples above) "かわまでおよぐ" means "swim to a river" (with the including meaning that the point is or will be reached) rather than e (へ)which means swim towards a river then i might understand that one. The question would be then dosn't that mean ni means to actually enter the river while made means to stop at the entrance to the river?

(whew...)

[Tomii515]

Thus why my vocabulary is almost always small when i use this method. But i find that, for the most part, if you restrict yourself to very closely related things. I also like to skim over the referance materials and look for the so-called "warnings" and "exceptions." For instance, "する." If I am looking for a random verb to use, i know that if it ends in する it's actually "to do" with a noun. And because it is irregular, i'm not going to use that verb. Based on that, i can come up with simple things like "グラウキはテレビをかいます。" Simple? The intent is to say, "Gurauki is going to buy a T.V." Am I right? lol
Indeed, but it's the only half lagimate resources i have. I have already questioned the fact that in the game, everyone is speaking informally to each other. I would imagin it would be the reverse if it was a real situation, not that i beleive animals are going to be hoppin' in space ships anytime soon.
Oh, but of course. I consider it more of a fictional, and intresting intro to languages in general. Probably a better one than french or spanish, because they have, for the most part, a rather close system to english, which makes it difficult to learn other languages once you have a mindset that everything is close to your own language. With Klingon, on the other hand, things are a little more like languages all over, rather than a european language. In turn, learning languages like japanese would be easier to undertake since you're not restricted to thinking that everything has a direct or almost direct translation. For instance, in klingon, verbs are also adjatives and can be converted to nouns without changing the end of it like you would in a european language. EX:
A muS B = B hates A
A muS = The hated A
muSwI' = The hater
Now, this is a really simple intro, but it is a little more easier to adapt to japanese or something after learning this than a european language, since you are introduced to new parts of speech and concepts.
Grammatically, you're right. But it's heavily context based, meaning you can get away with it, but it's not very flexable so it would seem awkward.
Not a specific comparison, but a general vague comparison. And i really stress "vague" and "general."
That's why i don't use quirks. They're only specific to that language which you are learning, and it would only be pure coincidence if they worked for another. Plus, hands on is a much easier way of learning the language, and you do that through a collection of referance materials.
Everything takes years to "master," but my objective is to get to the point that i can make basic sentances and read basic sentances. Slang is for later, and that's what i would imagin you spend the most time working on after the first year or so. But, that is just an observation.
That is, indeed, true, but if you crawl too much, you start to think it supports all your needs. You then become dependent on crawling to suit all your needs, which won't do too well at an intersection. Which i don't like about language courses, because they're not always complete (which i don't beleive my book is, it does seem a bit small for such a complex language) and then you don't know what you don't know till you need to know it and don't. Then you waste alot of time and money learning from a whole new course (which may not contain all the basics) and bore yourself and it becomes more of a chore than anything. This is a major problem with C++, though it isn't a foreign language.
Well, what i'm trying to do is get a list of all the ones i *NEED* to convey any idea i want. Kinda like when learning prepositions, you don't just learn "to" but you need to learn "from" and others. All i want right now is what i *NEED* to express any idea i want. I like what buntaro did, but i need a little more than what he used...
Google is crap. It's a pain to sort good material from bad material. It's alot easier (and safer) for both parties to just speak directly, rather than skimming over a site and only checking a few things then taking it all for fact.
I didn't take much of what he said for fact, but i do listen to a few things he says... He handed me a small list, that wasn't all that great, but i didn't want to say anything not to offend him. His list was pretty decent but dosn't include everything needed.
And that's the problem... Things that are disputed are harder to get documentation on. It's alot easier to get documentation on how to spell in the kanas, rather than how to spell in romaji. Same with particles... That's why i want a complete list... I may not be able to get it anywhere else...
Indeed.
Easier said than done... Especially when ka, wa, wo, and ga are the only ones you are familiar with, and even then that's only in noun situations...
Not all particles are... There are some particals (like ka) that come at the end, but are not prepositions.
Perhaps. I look at them as one big part of speech with subcats. Really... I want something i can use for general speech. Not quite going around and using big words like i use in english. That's for experienced people. I want to be able to say any 1 clause sentance and some simple 2 clause sentances. I want to be able to talk like a japanese teenager at this point, rather than a japanese professor. I already talk too much like a professor in english, even though i'm not.
I'll check them out as soon as i can.
Only experience can explain...
So far... I have contrasting examples of ni, e, de, o, and kara... A more detailed analasys of what i'm looking at here points out that adjative particles would be explained in my adjative sections of my exturnal adj resource. sentance ending particles are more conversational, so i will learn them from reading conversational media, such as japanese forums... Therefor i don't need them. Noun particles, on the other hand, are scattered all about my course book and i don't have an exturnal source for nouns (and they shouldn't be complicated so naturally you won't find much resource on them) so that means it's the prepositional particles (and a few others) i'm concerned with at the moment. The particle section of my course book (which has horrible examples of things throughout apparently) mentions the following:
So, assume that the above is the only thing i've read about these particles...
I understand wa, ga, no, wo, the first meaning of to, ya, and the first meaning of ka. The others are either confusing to me (such as why some are specifically marked interchangeably with another and others are not) or if it's not explained as specifically.
Basically, i all i want, now, is an example of that i don't understand...
If (using the examples above) "かわまでおよぐ" means "swim to a river" (with the including meaning that the point is or will be reached) rather than e (へ)which means swim towards a river then i might understand that one. The question would be then dosn't that mean ni means to actually enter the river while made means to stop at the entrance to the river?
(whew...)

holy crap.

[Elizabeth]

Basically, i all i want, now, is an example of that i don't understand...
If (using the examples above) "かわまでおよぐ" means "swim to a river" (with the including meaning that the point is or will be reached) rather than e (へ)which means swim towards a river then i might understand that one. The question would be then dosn't that mean ni means to actually enter the river while made means to stop at the entrance to the river?
(whew...)
*Echoes Tomii*

On the crucial point, they're all three generally interchangeable in the sense of going to or arriving at a preset goal point. To clarify anything further than that and actually make it "into the river" I might say something like "kawa no naka ni oyogu."

[Glenn]

You mean that to mean something different than 川で泳ぐ? I was thinking of someone swimming around in a river somewhat aimlessly.

[WHEATTHlNS]

Which i don't like about language courses, because they're not always complete (which i don't beleive my book is, it does seem a bit small for such a complex language) and then you don't know what you don't know till you need to know it and don't.

Thats, an interesting approach. These "language courses" arent meant to be complete. Thats why they are staged. Even High School language courses that go to "Japanese IV" probably only go to about 1 to 2 full years of College Level Japanese, and are expanded on when one goes further in their coursework. Each successive class builds on itself.

I dont think you can approach language in this synthesis way youre going about doing it - because youre stressing blunt-trauma immersion (and praying it sticks), over a short period of time. Never a good combo for learning, especially if youre going for retention over memorization. It may start slow, but if you follow certain books (Genki I, II, An Integrated Approach To Intermediate Japanese, etc.) - youll see things start to coalesce together and start making sense.

[kohlrak]

Thats, an interesting approach. These "language courses" arent meant to be complete. Thats why they are staged. Even High School language courses that go to "Japanese IV" probably only go to about 1 to 2 full years of College Level Japanese, and are expanded on when one goes further in their coursework. Each successive class builds on itself.

When it says thorough, you expect it to be complete though.

I dont think you can approach language in this synthesis way youre going about doing it - because youre stressing blunt-trauma immersion (and praying it sticks), over a short period of time. Never a good combo for learning, especially if youre going for retention over memorization. It may start slow, but if you follow certain books (Genki I, II, An Integrated Approach To Intermediate Japanese, etc.) - youll see things start to coalesce together and start making sense.

Intresting theory, but... Lemme point out that i'm currently on my second year of french. I know i'm not anywhere near fluent in any of the two languages, but i've been taking french your way, actually. Sitting there in class, getting bored to death and remembering all the cute junk... Event that dosn't do you any good unless you take parts of my method. Plus, i feel much more comfortable with my little japanese knowledge than i do with my year and a quarter experience of french. Considering french is closer to english than japanese is, that is sayin' something about my method.

Now, ever since i've joined jref, i've gotten more insults at me and/or my method of learning japanese, than i have gotten answer to my questions. Clearly it has become pointless to even ask the questions, since i sometimes get an answer (and only once or twice complete or large), and sometimes don't. I don't know why people are persistant in bashing me as if i was president Clinton talking about his foreign policy. Clearly, my method works much better than his method of foreign policy. I seem to have more peaceful times in the jref chat room, which i havn't been to for a while since it likes to automatically log me out when i go idle. Now i don't mean everyone has been unwelcomming, but for the most part, it has been unwelcoming on the forums. Jul 25, 2006 to Oct 13, 2006... That's over a month, and i'm still treated like some kind of idiot. Considering my method of learning is nothing more than immersing myself in what makes class methods work, i'm not exactly an idiot. Just because you learned through another method dosn't mean my method is unintellegent. That's like saying that because you grew up eating dough things all your life, that squid must taste nasty.

[Glenn]

I agree. I think you've made it quite clear how you plan to learn the language, and that you don't plan on straying from that path. I don't understand why people who know this continue to tell you the same thing. I wish people would just answer your questions and stop talking about your method of learning too. If it works for you, it works for you.

[Elizabeth]

Intresting theory, but... Lemme point out that i'm currently on my second year of french. I know i'm not anywhere near fluent in any of the two languages, but i've been taking french your way, actually. Sitting there in class, getting bored to death and remembering all the cute junk... Event that dosn't do you any good unless you take parts of my method. Plus, i feel much more comfortable with my little japanese knowledge than i do with my year and a quarter experience of french. Considering french is closer to english than japanese is, that is sayin' something about my method.

I'm not trying to minimize your feelings of being treated rudely, but I also wish you would stop talking so much about your method, stop saying meaningless things like you won't use "suru" because it's irregular, stop getting tangled up in needless controversy and appreciate/focus more on the huge amount of positive support which has already been offered. Most others of us here are also not taking classes and I don't know anyone that has advocated that as a sole method....

[nice gaijin]

...
Now, ever since i've joined jref, i've gotten more insults at me and/or my method of learning japanese, than i have gotten answer to my questions. Clearly it has become pointless to even ask the questions, since i sometimes get an answer (and only once or twice complete or large), and sometimes don't. I don't know why people are persistant in bashing me as if i was president Clinton talking about his foreign policy. Clearly, my method works much better than his method of foreign policy. I seem to have more peaceful times in the jref chat room, which i havn't been to for a while since it likes to automatically log me out when i go idle. Now i don't mean everyone has been unwelcomming, but for the most part, it has been unwelcoming on the forums. Jul 25, 2006 to Oct 13, 2006... That's over a month, and i'm still treated like some kind of idiot. Considering my method of learning is nothing more than immersing myself in what makes class methods work, i'm not exactly an idiot. Just because you learned through another method dosn't mean my method is unintellegent. That's like saying that because you grew up eating dough things all your life, that squid must taste nasty.
I haven't bothered reading your posts because you write far more than is necessary. You have a system, good for you; if you are so sure of your methods, stop addressing everyone who takes issue with them.

Your questions are buried amidst a jumble of pointless ramblings, that's they aren't getting answered. If you have a question, ask it concisely and directly.

理屈っぽいんだよね、君。

[KittKatt]

I decided to put this here since this is a thread on particles; I'm learning about "wa, ga, and o" in this grammer study book and I don't really get it. I mean, I've got the deffinitions, " ga marks the subject, o marks the direct object, and wa marks the topic," I just don't really understand the difference. Earlier in this thread it said:
kawa ni oyogu- swim into a river
kawa e oyogu- swim toward a river
kawa de oyogu- swim in a river
kawa o oyogu- swim ( the entire lenghth)
kawa kara oyogu- swim from a river
I already knew that " kawa" means river and "oyogu" means swim, and " kara" is from, but I don't understand the particles. The example is probably great, but why do the particles make it mean that? Is there any simple explanation?

[nice gaijin]

It's best not to think of a lot of things in Japanese in terms of direct translation, but to just get used to using them in appropriate situations; in which case practice is the best way to go about learning them. You can try to intellectually grasp the concepts of particles and grammar structures all you want, but going out and using those structures and learning from your mistakes is going to get you a lot further.

[Buntaro]

KittKatt,
As NG has alluded to, there is no really good translations for these particles, as these words do not exist in English.
However, you can use these:
ni --> (1) into
ni --> (2) motionless existence on, in, at ~~
e --> toward
de --> within the limitations of
o --> direct object
kara --> from

[Elizabeth]

KittKatt,
As NG has alluded to, there is no really good translations for these particles, as these words do not exist in English.
However, you can use these:
ni --> (1) into
ni --> (2) motionless action on, in, at ~~
e --> toward
de --> within the limitations of
o oyogu --> direct object
kara --> from
Although ni and e are used interchangeably in directional terms for to. I've never had a Japanese speaker tell me otherwise and would say 'no hou ni/e' is closer to towards. But these are fine nuances that definately aren't something the OP needs to be overly preoccupied with at this early stage. :wave:

[KittKatt]

Thanks a lot! I'll write it down! :-)
Still, can I have a little help in the wa, ga and o? There doesn't seem to be a huge difference between them to me, but I don't think that you can just switch them around.

[Glenn]

There's a huge difference between them.

ga -- Marks subjects of sentences and clauses. John ga kita -- John came (John is here). Sakana ga oishii -- Fish is tasty.

o -- Marks direct objects of sentences and clauses. Sakana o taberu -- I eat fish. Biiru o nomu -- I drink beer. Hae o koroshita -- I killed a fly.

Notice that in the o example sentences that there aren't subjects. In Japanese, known information is usually omitted, so it's safe to assume that the subject of these sentences is the first person.

wa -- Marks topics of sentences. This is a bit difficult to grasp for native English speakers, because we don't mark topics like this -- we just understand that they're topics, whether we know it or not. Most times it's used like a subject marker, though. I can actually use the above sentences with wa, too, like this: John wa kita -- John came. Sakana wa oishii -- Fish is tasty. Sakana wa taberu -- I eat fish (but not meat). Biiru wa nomu -- I drink beer (but not wine). Hae wa koroshita -- I killed the fly (that we saw earlier; that we were talking about...).

I think that maybe this page (http://www.sf.airnet.ne.jp/~ts/japanese/topicfocus.html) will be useful in your understanding of wa, but it may take some time to really grasp it. Also, for basic grammar, I suggest browsing around that site (the link is in my sig).

[KittKatt]

Thanks, Glenn! :-) I'll remember that. I think I'll bookmark that page. :-)