# Yoshi ate the apple



## blank

Hi everyone,

xxx

and another one question:
Does "Yoshi wa ringo o tabemashita" means "Yoshi ate *an* apple" or "Yoshi ate* the* apple"?
How do I say "Yoshi ate *the* apple"?


----------



## karuna

Probably, you could say _sono ringo _— "that apple" if you really want to stress it. I guess that _kono _and _ano —_ "this" and "that over there" could also be used according to the situation. But in most cases you don't need to translate "the" because it becomes clear from context.


----------



## SpiceMan

You would just say "(Yoshi wa) ringo wo tabemashita", since there are no determiners in Japanese language besides demonstratives (this, that, which, etc.)


----------



## blank

karuna said:


> Probably, you could say _sono ringo _— "that apple" if you really want to stress it. I guess that _kono _and _ano —_ "this" and "that over there" could also be used according to the situation. But in most cases you don't need to translate "the" because it becomes clear from context.


 
thank you for the answer!


----------



## blank

SpiceMan said:


> You would just say "(Yoshi wa) ringo wo tabemashita", since there are no determiners in Japanese language besides demonstratives (this, that, which, etc.)


 
thanks!


----------



## Whodunit

blank said:


> and another one question:
> Does "Yoshi wa ringo o tabemashita" means "Yoshi ate *an* apple" or "Yoshi ate* the* apple"?
> How do I say "Yoshi ate *the* apple"?


 
Question to the natives: Is it possible to distinguish between indetermined and determined nouns this way?

Yoshi ate the apple. = Yoshi wa ringo o tabemashita. (ヨシはりんごを食べました。)
Yoshi ate an apple. = Yoshi ga ringo o tabemashita. (ヨシがりんごを食べました。)


----------



## SpiceMan

I'm not native, but I'm confident there's no difference in those sentences regarding the apple(s). 

In the first sentence you're just saying that yoshi had the/an apple.
In the second one, you're stressing that it was yoshi the one who had the/an apple.

So the difference is the stress over the subject, not the determination or indetermination of the direct object.


----------



## Whodunit

Okay, so how would you do the same with the/an apple? I mean, if ga can stress that the subject did do something, would it be possible to stress that the object is indeed the one someone (else) was referring to?

wa - neutral (subject)
ga - stressing (subject)

o - neutral (object)
? - stressing (object)


----------



## gaer

Whodunit said:


> Okay, so how would you do the same with the/an apple? I mean, if ga can stress that the subject did do something, would it be possible to stress that the object is indeed the one someone (else) was referring to?
> 
> wa - neutral (subject)
> ga - stressing (subject)
> 
> o - neutral (object)
> ? - stressing (object)


 
Japanese doesn't work that way, Who. My Japanese friend, after many years of writing English, still does not know when to use a/an or the. She guesses and gets it right about 50% of the time.

You will find that Japanese is incredibly vague about many things that are important to us, and very specific about things that are not important to us.

Gaer


----------



## sneeka2

Indeed, Japanese is a very vague language and depends heavily on context. Take 猫の耳 (neko no mimi) for example. It might mean "cat ear", "cat ears", "a cat's ear", "the cat's ear", "ears of cats" etc. Nothing to indicate plural, stress etc. It makes it hard to follow Japanese conversations sometimes since natives of most western languages would expect a more specific description of what's going on, while a Japanese just fills in the unspecified blanks.


----------



## gaer

sneeka2 said:


> Indeed, Japanese is a very vague language and depends heavily on context. Take 猫の耳 (neko no mimi) for example. It might mean "cat ear", "cat ears", "a cat's ear", "the cat's ear", "ears of cats" etc. Nothing to indicate plural, stress etc. It makes it hard to follow Japanese conversations sometimes since natives of most western languages would expect a more specific description of what's going on, while a Japanese just fills in the unspecified blanks.


Right. Just consider this one example:

私はりんご（林檎）が好きです。
I like an apple. 

That's the translation given, which is weird. Most likely, it should be:

I like apples.

I'm not sure, but I think this would be a totally different sentence in Japanese:

I would like an apple.

Here's another:

林檎は彼女によってナイフで半分に切られた。
The apple was cut in two by her with a knife. 

Apple(s) "by means of her" knife with two parts in were cut.

Perhaps it is clear to the Japanese mind if there is one, two or more apples, but I can't tell!

Gaer


----------



## sneeka2

gaer said:


> I'm not sure, but I think this would be a totally different sentence in Japanese:
> 
> I would like an apple.



I'd say「りんご食べたい（な）。」[ringo tabetai (na)], which is quite different indeed and should be translated back to English as "I want/would like to eat (an) apple/s". =)


----------



## gaer

sneeka2 said:


> I'd say「りんご食べたい（な）。」[ringo tabetai (na)], which is quite different indeed and should be translated back to English as "I want/would like to eat (an) apple/s". =)


Exactly, although I never know if something is correct or not. If someone tells me a Japanese sentence has been correctly written, for me it is a complete leap of faith. 

But the point is that your sentence would say:

Apple would like to eat. No the/an, no sure indication of how many, I fear. And my point has always been this. In English (and other languages) a huge deal is made over the difference between one and two, but not between two and three or two and four.

I ate apple(s). Fine. How many? In my experience Japanese CAN be as specific about number or anything else as is necessary.

Gaer


----------



## sneeka2

gaer said:


> I ate apple(s). Fine. How many? In my experience Japanese CAN be as specific about number or anything else as is necessary.



Sure. 

りんご四個食べた。(ringo yon-ko tabeta)
I ate four apples.

(Well, actually "apple four pieces ate". Might've been somebody else though. I should have written 私はりんごを四個たべました to catch the English meaning 100%.)


----------



## gaer

sneeka2 said:


> Sure.
> 
> りんご四個食べた。(ringo yon-ko tabeta)
> I ate four apples.
> 
> (Well, actually "apple four pieces ate". Might've been somebody else though. I should have written 私はりんごを四個たべました to catch the English meaning 100%.)


I don't think you need 私。Usually without it the concept of "I" is pretty clear. Now, try explaining to someone who does not understand Japanese the need for 個。

This is a perfect example of the incredible difference between our languages. I ate four apples. Why do I need an extra word/character to describe the shape or nature of the four things? But in Japanese you have to have those "counters", and I can never remember them. 

Gaer


----------



## SpiceMan

While they're always called counters, I think it's most intuitive to call them "units" just like liter, miles, inches, etc.

Saying "it's 2 wide" lacks the unit. Saying "it's 2 feet wide" doesn't.
Likewise saying "1 ringo" lacks the unit. Saying "1ko (ikko) ringo" doesn't.

Thread that discussed counters here.


----------



## gaer

SpiceMan said:


> While they're always called counters, I think it's most intuitive to call them "units" just like liter, miles, inches, etc.


The label "units" is fine as far as I'm concerned. I made no comment about the use of these counters/units being any less or more logical than any feature of any language. I was merely pointing out the difference in languages.

If you buy two of anything—apples, light bulbs, chairs, pencils, etc.—there is no "unit" marker. I don't think this is at all like measuring distance. 

Gaer


----------



## etudian

In most cases, は and が are not interchangeable. It's hard to explain precisely. I can just give you examples.

Yoshi ate the apple.
ヨシ*が*（その）りんごを食べました。 (It is Yoshi who ate the apple. The focus here is on who ate the apple. There must be other people who could have eaten the apple.)
ヨシ*は*（その）りんごを食べました。 (What Yoshi did was to eat the apple. The focus here is on what Yoshi did. It must be natural for the speaker to mention Yoshi.)

The two sentences above are not interchangeable. You have to choose the right one depending on the context.

Yoshi ate an apple.
ヨシ*は*りんごを（1つ、1個）食べました。 (Same as above.)
ヨシ*が*りんごを（1つ、1個）食べました。 (Possible, but again the focus here is on who. There must be other people the speaker could mention.)

Who ate the apple?
誰*が*りんごを食べたのですか？
誰*は*りんごを食べたのですか？ (Impossible!)
りんごを食べたの*は*誰ですか？
りんごを食べたの*が*誰ですか？ (Impossible!)

(But:
I don't know who ate the apple.
りんごを食べたの*は*誰か私にはわかりません。
りんごを食べたの*が*誰か私にはわかりません。
Both are equally OK.)

Yoshi ate it.
ヨシ*が*食べました。
ヨシ*は*食べました。 (This sentence is awkward as a response to the above question, but it's possible, impling that there may or may not be other people who ate the apple, but at least Yoshi did.)

Today is my birthday.
今日*は*私の誕生日です。
今日*が*私の誕生日です。　(My birthday is today, not yesterday, not tomorrow.)

My birthday is today.
私の誕生日*は*今日です。　(= 今日が私の誕生日です。)
私の誕生日*が*今日です。

I want to eat an apple.
私*は*りんごを食べたい。
私*が*りんごを食べたい。 (I'm the one who wants to eat an apple.)
私*は*りんご*が*食べたい。 (It is an apple that I want to eat.)
私*が*りんご*は*食べたい。
私*が*りんご*が*食べたい。 
私*は*りんご*は*食べたい。 　(I want to eat an apple, and I may or may not want to eat something else.)


----------



## gaer

etudian said:


> In most cases, は and が are not interchangeable. It's hard to explain precisely. I can just give you examples.
> 
> Yoshi ate the apple.
> ヨシ*が*（その）りんごを食べました。 (It is Yoshi who ate the apple. The focus here is on who ate the apple. There must be other people who could have eaten the apple.)
> ヨシ*は*（その）りんごを食べました。 (What Yoshi did was to eat the apple. The focus here is on what Yoshi did. It must be natural for the speaker to mention Yoshi.)
> 
> […]


I am shocked that no one has asked any questions or thanked you for the time you took to give us this excellent information.

I found it very helpful, although I could never write such sentences without a thousand mistakes. <smile>

Gaer


----------



## karuna

Indeed, Etudian gave us very useful sentences. I offer my belated thanks to you.


----------



## blank

etudian said:


> In most cases, は and が are not interchangeable. It's hard to explain precisely. I can just give you examples.
> 
> Yoshi ate the apple.
> ヨシ*が*（その）りんごを食べました。 (It is Yoshi who ate the apple. The focus here is on who ate the apple. There must be other people who could have eaten the apple.)
> ヨシ*は*（その）りんごを食べました。 (What Yoshi did was to eat the apple. The focus here is on what Yoshi did. It must be natural for the speaker to mention Yoshi.)
> 
> The two sentences above are not interchangeable. You have to choose the right one depending on the context.
> 
> Yoshi ate an apple.
> ヨシ*は*りんごを（1つ、1個）食べました。 (Same as above.)
> ヨシ*が*りんごを（1つ、1個）食べました。 (Possible, but again the focus here is on who. There must be other people the speaker could mention.)
> 
> Who ate the apple?
> 誰*が*りんごを食べたのですか？
> 誰*は*りんごを食べたのですか？ (Impossible!)
> りんごを食べたの*は*誰ですか？
> りんごを食べたの*が*誰ですか？ (Impossible!)
> 
> (But:
> I don't know who ate the apple.
> りんごを食べたの*は*誰か私にはわかりません。
> りんごを食べたの*が*誰か私にはわかりません。
> Both are equally OK.)
> 
> Yoshi ate it.
> ヨシ*が*食べました。
> ヨシ*は*食べました。 (This sentence is awkward as a response to the above question, but it's possible, impling that there may or may not be other people who ate the apple, but at least Yoshi did.)
> 
> Today is my birthday.
> 今日*は*私の誕生日です。
> 今日*が*私の誕生日です。　(My birthday is today, not yesterday, not tomorrow.)
> 
> My birthday is today.
> 私の誕生日*は*今日です。　(= 今日が私の誕生日です。)
> 私の誕生日*が*今日です。
> 
> I want to eat an apple.
> 私*は*りんごを食べたい。
> 私*が*りんごを食べたい。 (I'm the one who wants to eat an apple.)
> 私*は*りんご*が*食べたい。 (It is an apple that I want to eat.)
> 私*が*りんご*は*食べたい。
> 私*が*りんご*が*食べたい。
> 私*は*りんご*は*食べたい。 　(I want to eat an apple, and I may or may not want to eat something else.)


 
Thank you very much  for the time you spent in explaning this to everyone and to me. Since I don't know kanji, would you mind to write their meaning in Hiragana in addition to the kanji? (I mean only the kanji and not everything).


----------



## gaer

blank said:


> Thank you very much for the time you spent in explaning this to everyone and to me. Since I don't know kanji, would you mind to write their meaning in Hiragana in addition to the kanji? (I mean only the kanji and not everything).


See if this helps. I'm late to work, so I have to run!

ヨシ＝よし＝Yoshi
食べました、たべました、tabemashita, from taberu
1個、いつこ、いっこ、ikko (1 apple, using 個, counter or unit marker
誰、だれ、dare, who
誕生日、 たんじょうび、tanjyoubi, tanjyôbi, birthday
私、わたし、watashi, I

Gaer


----------



## kknd

Nice!

I'd like to summarize what I heard here and somewhere else:
- _ha/wa_ is the topic marker, a sentence has topic-comment (theme-rheme) construction, so it means that what we know (old information) is highlighted by topic and the things we want to convey (new information) are the rest.
- _ga_ is the subject marker, which means that we want to focus a little bit on actor (subject), because topic doesn't give as any light, just context.

Commenting examples given:
- (_wa_) Let's think about Yoshi, person we know and respect. Apples were eaten [by Yoshi of course - we are talking about him of course]; and so on.
- (_ga_) Yoshi ate the apples; and so on.

It's also simple now why one cannot use _wa_ with _dare_ in question. You cannot treat as topic (thing that is know, old information) a person you're just want to ask about. We are introducing new information here (topic is irrevelant). Later is question about the event - we set the topic (context) and ask about a person.

I think I know how the topic marker works, but I have some problems with subject marker above. Could someone explain the 8th and 16th? I understand 20th as _Apple wants to eat me._, but I have some problems when thinking about 21st... (my guess: sentence cannot have to subjects).


----------



## lrosa

Whodunit said:


> Question to the natives: Is it possible to distinguish between indetermined and determined nouns this way?
> 
> Yoshi ate the apple. = Yoshi wa ringo o tabemashita. (ヨシはりんごを食べました。)
> Yoshi ate an apple. = Yoshi ga ringo o tabemashita. (ヨシがりんごを食べました。)



りんごはヨシが食べました　- This almost always means "Yoshi ate *the *apple". This makes sense considering that は marks a part of the sentence that does not contain new information - "the" does much the same thing. "a" is not often used to refer to the same noun in two consecutive sentences. 

A possible exception:

りんごは誰が食べましたか？　- This could mean "Who ate the apple?" or "Who ate an apple?" or "Who ate the apples?" or "Who ate apples?", but the options with "the" are more likely. The response to this question would be:

りんごはわたしが食べました　- "_I_ ate the apple" (stress on I), "_I _ate an apple", "_I _ate the apples", "_I _ate apples".

But if you mark りんご with the particle は, you are acknowledging りんご as information that is already specifically understood, and if this is the case, it is much more likely that you will have a specific apple/specific apples in mind.

However, it's important to bear in mind that りんごはヨシが食べました only reflects one of the meanings of "Yoshi ate the apple", which, when spoken, would sound like "_Yoshi _ate the apple" (stress on "Yoshi") - in other words, "Yoshi is the person who ate the apple." Unlike "Yoshi ate the apple", "りんごはヨシが食べました" cannot be part of an extended narrative of which Yoshi is the central character. 

i.e. "Yoshi ate the apple and went to bed" - in this case, Yoshi, and *not *the apple, must be marked with the particle は.


Kknd, I hope this helps a little. I didn't understand what you were referring to by 8th, 16th, 20th and 21st. Were you referring to the sample sentences given earlier?


----------



## kknd

Exactly! I wanted to ask about aforementioned examples.


----------

