# Are adjectives inflected?



## Artrella

Hello forum! 
My teacher told us this morning that Japanese adjectives have got *tense*. For instance, I would have a morpheme to say I am tall and one different for saying I was tall.
Now the question is, why is it inflected! Isn t the verb already inflected!
If this is the case, wouldn t it be redundant!


Sorry for the question marks, and apostrophes! [I m in a cyber[
Thank you


----------



## Outsider

Why do you inflect adjectives for gender and number in Spanish? English doesn't.


----------



## Artrella

Outsider said:
			
		

> Why do you inflect adjectives for gender and number in Spanish? English doesn't.




Soooorrry.......... is this question for me Outsider )I cannot put a question mark and some other things.......... arrggghhh!!!


----------



## Outsider

It was just a rhetorical question. What seems redundant to us may look quite natural to the Japanese.


----------



## Artrella

Outsider said:
			
		

> It was just a rhetorical question. What seems redundant to us may look quite natural to the Japanese.



Outsider, I know it was a rethorical question... look, the thing that surprised me is the fact of having verbs that decline according to tense, because I have never heard of it, at least not in the languages Im trying to learn.
And you are right, we say _niña alta _ ... if _niña_ is already feminine, why do we need to inflect the adjective... yes!


----------



## Dalian

Hi, Artrella, I'll try to answer your question.

In a Japanese sentence where there's an adjective, there can be no verb at all.
e.g. I'm tall. = watashiwa takai.
                    I              tall
there's no equivalent of 'am'.


I was tall. = watashiwa takakatta.
                   I             tall (katta is the inflectional suffix indicating past tense.)

Dalian


----------



## Dalian

Like Chinese, Japanese adjective can directly serve as predicate. It's not necessary to use an auxiliary verb 'be' as in English.


----------



## Outsider

That's called a zero copula.


----------



## Dalian

yes, thank you outsider.


----------



## Artrella

Dalian said:
			
		

> Hi, Artrella, I'll try to answer your question.
> 
> In a Japanese sentence where there's an adjective, there can be no verb at all.
> e.g. I'm tall. = watashiwa takai.
> I              tall
> there's no equivalent of 'am'.
> 
> 
> I was tall. = watashiwa takakatta.
> I             tall (katta is the inflectional suffix indicating past tense.)
> 
> Dalian




Thank you Dalian, now this explains the "tense-inflection" in adjectives.
Your explanation is great!!!
Muchas Gracias por tu ayuda!


----------



## Whodunit

Outsider said:
			
		

> That's called a zero copula.



That's the same in Arabic. You have no present tense form for "be" for no person, but if you want to use another tense, you have to know other forms. I think thus it's called "zero present copula", am I right?


----------



## Outsider

I'm not sure I follow, sorry. We say that a language has zero copula when instead of saying, for instance, "John is tall" or "Mary was sad" one simply says "John tall" and "Mary sad".

P.S. Copula.


----------



## Whodunit

Outsider said:
			
		

> I'm not sure I follow, sorry. We say that a language has zero copula when instead of saying, for instance, "John is tall" or "Mary was sad" one simply says "John tall" and "Mary sad".
> 
> P.S. Copula.



Yes, you follow.

In Arabic you would say "I tall", but for another tense, it's "I was tall/I will be tall". But never "I am tall". That's why I said "zero present copula". Did you understand now?


----------



## Outsider

Yes, I do.


----------



## Edwin

Dalian said:
			
		

> Hi, Artrella, I'll try to answer your question.
> 
> In a Japanese sentence where there's an adjective, there can be no verb at all.
> e.g. I'm tall. = watashiwa takai.
> I              tall
> there's no equivalent of 'am'.
> 
> 
> I was tall. = watashiwa takakatta.
> I             tall (katta is the inflectional suffix indicating past tense.)
> 
> Dalian




It's been a long time since I studied Nihongo. But I seem to recall that we were taught to say:

I am tall = Watashi wa takai desu
I am here = Watashi wa koko ni imasu

I was tall = Watashi wa takai deshita
I was here = Watashi wa koko ni imashita

The form takakatta seems vaguely familiar, but isn't that an alternative construction?   We never worried about whether or not desu and imasu are verbs or not.


----------



## madler

Edwin said:
			
		

> It's been a long time since I studied Nihongo. But I seem to recall that we were taught to say:
> 
> I am tall = Watashi wa takai desu
> I am here = Watashi wa koko ni imasu



-> Watashi wa SE GA takai desu.

"Watashi wa takai desu" means something like "I'm expensive."



> I was tall = Watashi wa takai deshita



-> Watashi wa se ga takakatta desu.

For the original poster: there's no redundancy because the adjective carries the tense.

Ringo ga akai. The apple is red.

Ringo ga akakatta. The apple was red.

Ringo ga akakereba... If the apple is/were red...

Ringo ga akakattara... [ditto]

Ringo ga akakunai. The apple isn't red.

Ringo ga akakunakatta. The apple wasn't red.

Ringo ga akakunakunattara. If the apple were to cease being red...

Etc.

It's all pretty straightforward.

Marc


----------



## redwine

madler said:
			
		

> -> Watashi wa SE GA takai desu.
> 
> "Watashi wa takai desu" means something like "I'm expensive."
> 
> 
> 
> -> Watashi wa se ga takakatta desu.
> 
> For the original poster: there's no redundancy because the adjective carries the tense.
> 
> Ringo ga akai. The apple is red.
> 
> Ringo ga akakatta. The apple was red.
> 
> Ringo ga akakereba... If the apple is/were red...
> 
> Ringo ga akakattara... [ditto]
> 
> Ringo ga akakunai. The apple isn't red.
> 
> Ringo ga akakunakatta. The apple wasn't red.
> 
> Ringo ga akakunakunattara. If the apple were to cease being red...
> 
> Etc.
> 
> It's all pretty straightforward.
> 
> Marc




adjectives in japanese, as in english, have no gender, number or case.

there are three principal classes of adjectives:
1. true adjectives
2. adjectives in 'na' and 'no'
3. presents and pasts of verbs

the adjective maybe used in four ways
1. as an attribute
e.g. high house- takai uchi

2. as a predicate in ordianary sentence
this house is high- kono uchi wa takai

3. as a predicate in polite sentence with the verb gozaimasu:
that tree is high- ano ki wa tako gozaimasu


4. as an adverb
that tree has become high- ano ki wa takaku narimashita

true adjecyives ens in ai, ii, oi, ui, their terminations according to the way in which they are used are shown:
attribute: takai
predicate: takai
predicate with gozaimasu: tako
adverb: takaku

what remains after suppresing the final i od a true adjective is called a stem; it is often used as the first component of a compound.

trueu adjecyives have a kind of conjugation which is obtained from the adverbial forms:
adverb takaku
past              takakATTA        was high
future            takakARO         will be high
gerund           takakUTE         being high
cond. present  takakEREBA     if is high
cond past       takakATTARA   if was high
probable past  takakATTARO  probably was high


HOLD ON TO YOUR SEATS!

the negative forms of the true adjectives are obtained from the adverbial; 

yoku              well
yoku nai         not good
yoku naku       not well
yoku nakatta   was not good
yoku nakaro     will not be good
yoku nakute     not being good
yoku nakareba  if is not good
yoku nakattara if was not good
yoku nakattaro probably was not good

more on adjectives next time.....
so class dismissed!


----------

