# He bought a new car. It is a good product. (yamato kotoba and kango pairs)



## Nino83

Hello everyone.  

I'm wondering why there are often two different words to describe the same concept. 

For example, _atarashii kuruma_ 新しい車 and _shinsha_ 新車 for _new car_ or _yoi/ii shina_ 良い品 and _ryouhin_ 良品 for _good product_.  

Are these words used in different contexts? Do they have different meanings? 

_He bought a new car. It is a good product._ 
_Kare wa atarashii kuruma o katta. Ii shina da. 
Kare wa shinsha o katta. Ryōhin da._


----------



## DaylightDelight

In general, Kango versions tend to be used in more formal situations.
For example, a news caption might say "新車販売台数" but not "新しい車が売れた数".

Also they can have slightly different meanings.
For example, 新車 can only mean a brand new, non-used car.
On the other hand, 新しい車 can also mean "a replacement".
So 新車を買ったんだ。中古だけどね。 does not make sense but 新しい車を買ったんだ。中古だけどね。 can work.


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> _shinsha_ 新車  _ryouhin_ 良品


One kanji word + one kanji word with Kun-yomi. This might have its name, but I've forgotten it. Don't you think that this is a clever way to save a space, do you?

One more,
I'm going to sell a book. I'm talking to a shop owner,
良品です。 I mean that the book is in a good condition.
良い品です。 I mean that it is a good book for them to sell in the shop.

You may wonder if these different ways could make the difference in each meaning. Not always. We have been using 良品 and 良い品 differently, because that's useful for us, maybe. See when you say,
汚い水です。
汚水です。 Unlike the 良品 cases, they are the same.


----------



## Nino83

Thank you everybody!


DaylightDelight said:


> So 新車を買ったんだ。中古だけどね。 does not make sense but 新しい車を買ったんだ。中古だけどね。 can work.





frequency said:


> 良品です。 I mean that the book is in a good condition.
> 良い品です。 I mean that it is a good book for them to sell in the shop.


Ok, so sometimes there is some little difference.
Interesting the difference between 良品 and 良い品. What I'm wondering is if they are interchangeable.
For example we're speaking of musical instruments and I want to say that the Fender Stratocaster made in Japan is a good poduct, in general.
Which one should I use?

本製のフェンダーストラトキャスターが良い品だと思います。
本製のフェンダーストラトキャスターが良品だと思います。


----------



## DaylightDelight

Nino83 said:


> Interesting the difference between 良品 and 良い品. What I'm wondering is if they are interchangeable.


In the particular case of 良品 and 良い品, they are not really interchangeable.
良品 tends to get used in specific contexts for limited meanings:
In manufacturing, 良品 means "a product conforming to the standard", and it is an antithesis of 不良品 (=defective product).
In trading of second hand goods, such as Internet auctions, 良品 usually means "reasonably in good condition (though not as good as excellent)".


Nino83 said:


> For example we're speaking of musical instruments and I want to say that the Fender Stratocaster made in Japan is a good product, in general.
> Which one should I use?
> 
> 日本製のフェンダーストラトキャスターが良い品だと思います。
> 日本製のフェンダーストラトキャスターが良品だと思います。


I'd prefer 良い品 in this context.
If you bought a used Fender Stratocaster in very good condition, you might say 中古フェンダーストラトキャスターの良品を手に入れた.


----------



## Nino83

Thank you very much, DaylightDelight. 
So even if they use the same kanji they have different meanings. 
I noticed that the kango versions (新車, 良品) are more specific while the yamato kotoba (新しい車, 良い品) are more general. Is it a general trend?


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> 本製のフェンダーストラトキャスターが良い品だと思います。
> 本製のフェンダーストラトキャスターが良品だと思います。


In these ones, both 良い品 and 良品 have the same meaning. I guess you want to say it's good (or a good product). Then both ways are okay.

Sorry that my example of 良品 book/良い品 book is a specific/less common case because it means a condition of a thing you want to sell. Your guitar's cases are not. So don't misunderstand it, though I think I made you confused.



Nino83 said:


> I noticed that the kango versions (新車, 良品) are more specific


I don't know and I don't think so. But note that you're making the nouns of 新車 and 良品. You don't say 汚い水処理場 but do 汚水処理場.


----------



## Nino83

frequency said:


> In these ones, both 良い品 and 良品 have the same meaning.


Ah, ok, thanks.


frequency said:


> You don't say 汚い水処理場 but do 汚水処理場.


Are 汚い水をおさめるように場 or 汚い水のおさめ方の場 possible?


----------



## frequency

汚水（下水）処理場 is sewage treatment station.

Good question. 汚い水処理場 isn't incorrect and makes sense. I mean it's understandable. But we just don't say so.

Furthermore, see 汚水処理. This is 汚水＋処理, two-kanji + two-kanji combination, thus four-letter kanji combination. This is very common, and you can find them everywhere.


----------



## SoLaTiDoberman

This is definitely out of the scope of the original thread's purpose,
but I don't think 汚い水処理場 is understandable.

JFYI:
If I hear 汚い水処理場, I don't think it's [汚い水］処理場, but I think it is 汚い、「水処理場」, which means "a dirty water-purifying-facility."
I mean it is a water purifying facility that is unsanitary. The facility is making a drinking water, but it is unsanitary. And it is completely different from 下水処理場.
下水処理場 is a set phrase, and if you use other combination of words, I cannot help thinking that it would be something different.
However, if I know that you're a non-native Japanese speaker, and if I know that your Japanese level is not advanced, maybe I can understand what you mean.

Besides, if you say 汚い水の処理場, maybe I can understand it correctly, although it still has the two meanings, 汚い水 の処理場　and 汚い　水の処理場.
下水処理場 cannot have such ambiguity.


----------



## frequency

SoLaTiDoberman said:


> I don't think 汚い水処理場 is understandable.


That's understandable from the viewpoint what a speaker wants to say.
It's not grammatically nonsense like 汚処理の水.



SoLaTiDoberman said:


> 下水処理場 is a set phrase,


I'm not trying to be correct to mention the name of a facility, but giving an example of noun + noun combination.
I just replaced 汚水 and 下水 in 下水処理場, and it's not horribly wrong.

I meant that when making a noun combination we don't use adjective + noun + noun like 汚い水処理場.


----------



## SoLaTiDoberman

@#11: I got it. 

I knew your purpose from the beginning, and I didn't want to offend you.
Only I just noticed that 汚い水処理場 may have two interpretations, without any context, or without any intonation of the speaker. And I knew it is definitely outside the scope of this thread's purpose.
Sorry, indeed!


----------



## frequency

No, rather I'm sorry that I didn't explain the combinations:
_adjective + noun + noun_ vs _noun + noun_.
If you want to make any noun phrase, the first one isn't effective very much.

By making a noun like 新車 from 新しい車, you can make more noun combinations like 新車試乗...many more. I guess Nino's question matters to this usage/grammatical point.


----------



## Sasa Hiro

DaylightDelight said:


> In general, Kango versions tend to be used in more formal situations.
> For example, a news caption might say "新車販売台数" but not "新しい車が売れた数".
> 
> Also they can have slightly different meanings.
> For example, 新車 can only mean a brand new, non-used car.
> On the other hand, 新しい車 can also mean "a replacement".
> So 新車を買ったんだ。中古だけどね。 does not make sense but 新しい車を買ったんだ。中古だけどね。 can work.



When used independently without any other words fixed,
新しい車 is better and 新車　has a connotation "a car not used　too much"
Therefore, the sentence 新車を買ったんだ。中古だけどね。 makes sense.


----------



## Sasa Hiro

Nino83 said:


> Hello everyone.
> 
> I'm wondering why there are often two different words to describe the same concept.
> 
> For example, _atarashii kuruma_ 新しい車 and _shinsha_ 新車 for _new car_ or _yoi/ii shina_ 良い品 and _ryouhin_ 良品 for _good product_.
> 
> Are these words used in different contexts? Do they have different meanings?
> 
> _He bought a new car. It is a good product.
> Kare wa atarashii kuruma o katta. Ii shina da.
> Kare wa shinsha o katta. Ryōhin da._



We do not say "_Ryōhin da" 

We say 良い品だ(よいしなだ）　or いいしなだ。
We have a new phrase　recently used
 " 無印（むじるし）良品”　good quality products without 
the brand. In this case, we say "Ryohin"

Sasa Hiro

Sasa Hiro
with no brand._


----------



## DaylightDelight

Sasa Hiro said:


> 新しい車 is better and 新車　has a connotation "a car not used　too much"


I have to disagree. To me, 新車 only means "a car not used, period."


Sasa Hiro said:


> Therefore, the sentence 新車を買ったんだ。中古だけどね。 makes sense.


It does not to me.  If someone said such a thing to me, I'd have to ask "新車？中古？どっち？"


Sasa Hiro said:


> We have a new phrase　recently used
> " 無印（むじるし）良品”　good quality products without
> the brand. In this case, we say "Ryohin"


無印良品 itself is a brand name, not a generic term to mean "good quality products without the brand".
And I've never heard it abbreviated as "Ryohin."  In Tokyo area, it's always "Muji."


----------



## Sasa Hiro

DaylightDelight said:


> In general, Kango versions tend to be used in more formal situations.
> For example, a news caption might say "新車販売台数" but not "新しい車が売れた数".
> 
> Also they can have slightly different meanings.
> For example, 新車 can only mean a brand new, non-used car.
> On the other hand, 新しい車 can also mean "a replacement".
> So 新車を買ったんだ。中古だけどね。 does not make sense but 新しい車を買ったんだ。中古だけどね。 can work.





新車を買ったんだ。中古だけどね   

 新しい車を買ったんだ。中古だけどね

新しく　車を買ったんだ。中古だけどね　

adverb 

Sasa Hiro

Ｉ


----------



## Sasa Hiro

DaylightDelight said:


> I have to disagree. To me, 新車 only means "a car not used, period."
> 
> It does not to me.  If someone said such thing to me, I'd have to ask "新車？中古？どっち？"
> 
> 無印良品 itself is a brand name, not a generic term to mean "good quality products without the brand".
> And I've never heard it abbreviated as "Ryohin."  In Tokyo area, it's always "Muji."



「無印良品」の人気まとめ一覧 - NAVER まとめ

無印 means literarily " no brand "
but 無印良品  is  the brand name 

Sasa Hiro


----------



## DaylightDelight

Sasa Hiro said:


> 新しい車を買ったんだ。中古だけどね


It may be personal, but this sounds acceptable to me.


Sasa Hiro said:


> 新しく　車を買ったんだ。中古だけどね


Right. I totally agree that this sounds the best.


----------



## SoLaTiDoberman

新しい（←近未来的なという意味の）クルマを買ったんだ。中古だけどね。
新しい（←「あたらしく」という意味の）クルマを買ったんだ。中古だけどね。（私は個人的にアリと思います。）
新しい（←新しくて新車にみえる、といった意味の）クルマを買ったんだ。中古だけどね。
新しい（←新古車、同上）クルマを買ったんだ。中古だけどね。（or新古車だけどね）

新しくクルマを買ったんだ。中古車だけどね。 (←これが文法的には一番あいまいさがないけど、それを言うなら）　
クルマを買ったんだ。中古だけどね。　（←こっちの方が普通な感じがします。「新しく」はつけてもつけなくても意味は変わらないと思うからです。新規の購入でないなら、「*昔*クルマを買った*ことがあったんだ*」とか、いいそうな気がします。「新しい」を付けるからには、話者は何らかの「新しさ」を強調して言いたいのかもしれません。文脈によりますが。）

いずれにしても、「新車」はより意味が狭く、「新しい車」はより意味が広くて、ambiguityが増す、と私も思います。


----------



## Nino83

SoLaTiDoberman said:


> *新しく*クルマを買ったんだ。中古車だけどね


Could you translate this in English? Does it mean "*Recently*, I bought a car"?


----------



## SoLaTiDoberman

I bought a car *anew*. Although it was a used car.


----------



## Nino83

SoLaTiDoberman said:


> I bought a car *anew*.


Thank you!


----------

