Digg
Del.icio.us
Technorati
Twitter
知らせない means "not let know," so by not letting him know you're leaving him in the dark. Translation many times isn't one-to-one in phrasing.
wtf?
彼にだけ知らせないのは不公平だ
Literal translation: Him only can't know as for unfair is.
The one that supposed to make sense: It isn't fair to leave only him alone in the dark.
So where's the dark? Isn't the dark ''yomi''?*is a newb sorry*
++I hear your whispers break the silenceand it calms me down++
知らせない means "not let know," so by not letting him know you're leaving him in the dark. Translation many times isn't one-to-one in phrasing.
Avoid Mojibake! -- 文字化けを避ける！
Jim Breen's online dictionary and kanji lookup
Dictionary at Goo -- English-Japanese, Japanese-English, Japanese Language
Weblio -- Multiple Japanese dictionary and encyclopedia simultaneous lookup
Lang-8 -- Have native speakers correct your writing!
She is probably confouding 知らせない(to not inform, to not let know) with 知れない(literally "can't know")...
BTW, "darkness is yami, not yomi.
Yeah, good catch on the yami/yomi.
ooooooooh I see, thank you. ^^;; Sorry for the misspelling.
彼にだけ知らせないのは不公平だOriginally Posted by Champloo
彼にだけ知らせないのは不公平だ
Literal translation: Him only can't know as for unfair is.
The one that supposed to make sense: It isn't fair to leave only him alone in the dark.
So where's the dark? Isn't the dark ''yomi''?
Literal translation: Him only can't know as for unfair is.
The one that supposed to make sense: It isn't fair to leave only him alone in the dark.
Wow, good job. Are you new in japanese? Yomu (yomimasu) means "to read".\
Question: 知らせないの
I realize "nai" is the negative, HOWEVER is the "no" in this case posseive or attached to the verb and thus is a 'ing' noun (gudan or guran or something its called like that)?
In other words, is the verb normalized? So that it sboth a verb and a noun?
私の趣味は金貨集めです。
I collect gold coins
First thing: it's nominalized, not "normalized".
And that is not "both a verb and a noun"; there's no such thing as far as I know. It's just a noun and nothing else.
Yeah, I am fairly new. I am better at reading it then speaking the language though.;; I SUCK at turning kanji into romanji in all honesty.
But I shall try:
Kareni dake shirasenai no wa fukouhei da. Oh god, I prolly got that so wrong it's not even funny. @.@
I think you got it so right it's hilarious.
no Doesn't act as an ing, does it? Well not from what i've learned. Yomimasu has nothing to do with this sentence, but perhaps one of the kanji looks simular to the one for 'read'. I hate to say this, but I think you are talking out of your ***.Originally Posted by GoldCoinLover
Yes, he is talking out of his ***, but "no" actually can work as a nominalizer (together with "koto", "mono", and many others). And I didn't understand the "yomu" comment either.Originally Posted by Champloono Doesn't act as an ing, does it? Well not from what i've learned. Yomimasu has nothing to do with this sentence, but perhaps one of the kanji looks simular to the one for 'read'. I hate to say this, but I think you are talking out of your ***.
Yeah, の has lots of uses. Do you understand its use in this sentence?
As, perhaps? I hear it's used for thing like that and of sometimes, but maybe now I am talking out of my ***. XDD
No, it's used like a relative pronoun here: "That (they) didn't tell only him is unfair."
You see this in sentences where emphasis is put on the second part a lot, like 初めてディズニーワールドに行ったのは子供の頃だった。("It was when I was a child that I first went to Disney World.") Make sense?
Champloo, give this a read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_particles#no
Whoa, thanks for that link, it helps alot alot alot. ^_^
Like:
Tori no uta.
''Song of the Bird''
OOOOOOOOOOH! *smacks her head* It was right infront of my face the entire time. It's used for THE.
No... I don't think that's quite correct. The の is still a nominalizer. Instead of making it just a noun like in 読むの it's a noun clause; therefore, "彼にだけ知らせないのは不公平だ", "彼にだけ知らせないの" is the noun clause. "Leaving only him in the dark is not fair."(Or more literally, "Only not letting him know is unfair.")Originally Posted by Glenn
It's just like a basic X は Y です。 but more complex.
You can easily replace that part of the phrase with a noun and it'll still work.
反則するのは不公平だ。 = "Cheating is not fair."
軟派するのはだめですよ。 = "Picking up chicks is bad, you know." (Can also be "Flirting is bad, you know.)
Actually, 'no', doesn't mean 'the'. In Japanese they don't actually use the words 'a' or 'the' at all. In the sentence you posted 'no' means 'of'. It is essentially used to make the possesive, ie the " 's " in Bird's song.Originally Posted by ChamplooWhoa, thanks for that link, it helps alot alot alot. ^_^
Like:
Tori no uta.
''Song of the Bird''
OOOOOOOOOOH! *smacks her head* It was right infront of my face the entire time. It's used for THE.
Originally Posted by KrazyKat
No can be possessive, or mean 'of'. It can also be put at the end of sentences to form questions...
so I was right in thinking it was of? GAWD THAT IS CONFUSING CRAP THAR! XD
Actually 'of' is possesive. Same thing. (unless i'm thinking in japanese too much now) We call it the genitive case if anyone cares.Originally Posted by GoldCoinLover
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genitive
True. Thinking about it now it seems that any of those sentences could take my interpretation too, though. So, yeah, you're right, but I don't think I was necessarily wrong.Originally Posted by moofs
Posting Permissions