> I've got a book which you recommended for me. > I've got the book which you recommended for me. lang8で聞いてきたぞ you say this to your friend 1:"I bought a book which you recommended for me." 2:"I bought the book which you recommended for me." if you were recommended several books before, and you bought one of the recommended books,1 is more natural than 2, 2 is not wrong though. if you were recommended only one book before, and you bought that book, 2 is natural and 1 is unnatural both expressions can be correct, but 1 is rarely used because you should say the name of the book instead of "a book" like "I bought Harry Potter (you recommended for me)" 以上が自分の投稿 はじめまして、Kobayashiさん。私だったら、「I bought the book you recommended for me」の代わりに「I bought the book you recommended to me」を書くと思います。 The word "to" is optional in this sentence, by the way. In fact, if you type the phrase "book you recommended me" and "book you recommended to me" into Google, the version without "to" gets about 15,000 more results. が1人目 I agree with your explanations! However, these sound even more natural: If you were recommended several books: I bought one of the books (that) you recommended me. If you were recommended one book: I bought the book (that) you recommended me. That is better than which, but you can omit it altogether. が2人目
>>9 まず I bought the/a book you recommended for me じゃなくて I bought the/a book you recommended me がナチュラル。 たくさん紹介された時は I bought a book you recommended meだけど I bought one of the books you recommended me. の方がよりナチュラル 1つしか紹介されてないときは I bought the book (that) you recommended me. 択一
質問です。 「私は英語が上手く話せないんです…」 と伝えたい時 I don't speak English well. I can't speak English well. のニュアンスの違いについて教えて下さい。 個人的には前者は 英語を話しません。 と拒んでいるように感じますし、 後者は禁止を感じます。
禁止というより能力がないということです。 couldでもつかってみたら? I could not speak English well.
31 :
これはひどいww
32 :
>>27 I am buying the ones that they recommended to me in the school. ○they recommended the ones to me. ×they recommended me the ones. 代名詞の時はこの語順固定なんじゃなかったっけ?
1: 不定詞で文章をつなぐのと、現在分詞で文章をつなぐのとではどういう意味合いの違いが でますか? I read the book earnestly, leaving other things undone. I lead the book earnestly, to leave other things undone. 2: 仮定法の時の倒置でshouldはよく見かけますがcouldだと倒置は可能ですか? Should the space ship explode, radiation materials would be scattered over various areas in the northern semi-sphere. Could he attain the score, he would not be hired by that company. 教えてくださいお願いします。
何という意味でしょうか? 車で煽られて怒った男性の発言らしいです。 What's the fucking problem. Ride my ass and drive around asshole. Drive around if you don't what to be fucking my ass Get the fuck going. Beat your fucking head in and your little shitbox.
外国のお客様には、お会計後の帰り際に、Have a nice day.と一つ覚えで言って送り出してましたが、 ふと夕方以降は変なのかな?と疑問に思ったのですが、どうでしょうか。よろしくお願いします。
68 :
>>67 夕方以降は Have a nice evening / a nice night. などの方がいいでしょう。
69 :
"if I wasn't already a Bush supporter, I would have immediately switched. Geez, that's a good reason right there to vote for Bush. 「もしまだブッシュを支持してないなら…」以降はどういう意味ですか?
I think it smarter if you stick to use expressions having them feel any your devices. For example, I might use an expression such as Enjoy the rest of today, which I think has been precious to you.
Good morning... I HAVE RETURNED..(creepy British accent) .. No? Cmon... I'm jet lagged people:) (creepy British accent)とI HAVE RETURNEDのつながりがよくわかりません その後のNo?もつながりがわからず、全体的に、どういうことを言いたいのかわかりません 長時間飛行機に乗ってきた、という文脈で発せられたツイートです。 どなたかご教授願えませんでしょうか?
90 :
check stuff out ってどういう意味ですか? 特別な言い回しなのでしょうか
91 :
>>89 おはよう…戻って来たよ(気持ち悪いイギリス英語のアクセントで)…違う?勘弁してよ…いま時差ボケなんだから(^-^) >(creepy British accent)とI HAVE RETURNEDのつながりがよくわかりません イギリス英語をまねた発音で言っているつもり、という意味 >全体的に、どういうことを言いたいのかわかりません 帰国して、時差ボケだ、ということ >どなたかご教授願えませんでしょうか? ご教授→ご教示
92 :
「しあさって」はtwo days after tomorrowと言いますが この語句の核となる本体の名詞はないじゃん。 (1)明日→tomorrow (2)あさって→the day after tomorrow (3)しあさって→two days after tomorrow つまり(1)はtomorrowという名詞。 (2)はafter tomorrowがうしろから本体のdayを修飾してる (3)はtwo daysというのは副詞的目的格(知らん人は知らんで良い)で、two daysが前から副詞句であるafter tomorrowを修飾してるわけだし。 つまり、「しあさって」はthe day two days after tomorrowなら、何の疑問もなく納得なんだけど。 だれかこんなわたしをcrystal-clearにconvinceしてくれるような説明をしていただけませんか?
>>97 正解です! http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=84141 Let's look at the first phrase first: 'If yesterday was two days ago tomorrow.' For the purposes of argument, assume it's Wednesday today. Then the phrase says: 'If yesterday (TUESDAY) was two days ago tomorrow (THURSDAY)…' When it's Thursday, Tuesday was indeed two days ago. In fact, for any 'tomorrow', two days before that will clearly be 'yesterday.' So the first part of the question is just always true. It's like it said 'If bananas are yellow, will the day after tomorrow be today or yesterday?' That's the same as just asking, 'Will the day after tomorrow be today or yesterday?' So now consider the second part of the question: 'Will the day after tomorrow be today or yesterday?' Again, assume it's Wednesday today. Then the question says 'Will the day after tomorrow (FRIDAY) be today (WEDNESDAY) or yesterday (TUESDAY)?' Clearly, Friday is neither Wednesday nor Tuesday. Likewise, 'the day after tomorrow' is never 'today' or 'yesterday.' So the correct answer to the question is 'Neither.'