|
Meaning of "O" "E" "wo" "no"
|
|
According to my book i've bassicaly been thinking of E being used as Towards(Might be Through can't remember so well) so Gakko-e(Towards School) As for O it said it can be used as Through but that word seems to be used out of that context on many occasions a few people have told me wo is bassicaly an action exp. Te wo Hiroge(Spreading my hands... i think?) no is possessive but i often see it used in a different way, can someone post all the meanings and uses for no? |
|
Re: Meaning of "O" "E" "wo" "no"
|
|
e = Marks where an action or motion is directed. o/wo = Marks what a transitive verb acts upon. no = Marks possession, conjoins nouns, nominalizes verbals, makes questions, and pronominally substitutes. Consult your grammar book for more info.
ã“ã“ã«ä½•ã‚’言ã†ã®ã‹å…¨ã分ã‹ã‚‰ãªã„。。。
|
|
Re: Meaning of "O" "E" "wo" "no"
|
|
O = use it if the object's status is used/"suffered"/"dominated" E = use it if the purpose must be passed. WO = actually this joshi is same with O. NO = use it when you want combine noun - noun. |
|
Re: Meaning of "O" "E" "wo" "no"
|
|
Re: rehnzo The first part does not change the utterance to a question. This no is a softened version of the extended predicate ~n da. Gakkoo e iku? "Are you going to the school?" Gakkoo e iku no? "Is it that you're going to school?" Of course, we wouldn't translate it that way, but they do have different meanings, and both are questions. Adding "no" implies that you are asking if the SITUATION is that someone is going to school, while not having it just simply asks if the action is happening (the going). And this "no" is really the softened but less polite version of the full extended predicate: Gakkoo e iku n desu ka? And note that if you would like to say the extended predicate when not in a question, there are many ways, of course, but... Gakkoo e iku n da. Gakkoo e iku no. Here, the no is still there, but does not mean a question. They both mean "I am going to the school/It's that I'm going to the school" (note that this is saying that the SITUATION is existing, not simply the action is happening). The first one, using ~n da, is more blunt/masculine, while the second one is more gentle/feminine. ~~ And on to other functions of "no": No can be used to replace a known nominal for easiness: A: aoi pen ga irimasu ka? B: iie, akai no ga irimasu yo. In this example, "no" is replacing the word "pen." The English equiv. might be "Do you need a blue pen?" "No, I need a red one." So it kinda means "one" in the sense of replacing nominal words. no can also be using to link two nominals together in the form "x no y" which would in turn create something that describes y in terms of x. guriin no kuruma (green car. KURUMA (car) is being described in terms of GURIIN (green)) watasi no nooto (my notebook. NOOTO (notebook) is being described in terms of WATASI (me)) But with some nominal-class words that are more qualities rather than properties, you use "na" instead. Some dictionaries will call these words adverbs or something instead of nouns/nominal-class words, but they function in the exact same way as nouns/nominal-class words except for no is replaced by na in this describing situation. huben na zitensya (inconvenient bycicle. ZITENSYA (bike) is being described in terms of the quality HUBEN (inconvenience, which is still a noun, except when used this way.)) There are a lot more uses for no; these are just the basic usages that people learn first. o is used to mark the operand of operational verbal-class words. Simply put: keeki o taberu (to eat cake) As opposed to: keeki ga taberu (the cake eats) and: keeki wa taberu (to eat, at least, cake) As for now, thinking of "e" as meaning direction towards is fine. Only really use it for movement and you'll be fine. Most of the time ni and e are replaceable with one another. Also, wo is just another spelling of o. In speech you say "o" (you never say "wo," though sometimes it is pronounced as wo in songs) but when you write this particle, you will use the hiragana labeled as "wo") |
|
Re: Meaning of "O" "E" "wo" "no"
|
|
"O" is used as a direct object particle. Verbs that take direct objects (such as eat, drink, etc.) would take that particle. eg. kora (w)o nomu. (Drink Cola) or gohan (w)o tabemasu. (Eat rice) The (w) is added before the 'o' to notify the reader, if an entire passage is written in romajii that the 'o' is the particle 'o' in the 'wa' line, and not the 'o' in the 'a' line. -------------------------- Metapod made a very good point that 'ni' and 'e' are replaceable with one another. However, in most cases, 'e' can be replaced by 'ni', but not the other way around. eg. kochira e itte kudasai. (please go this way) or kochira ni itte kudasai. (please go this way) would also make sense. However, if eg. shichi ni aimashou~ (let's meet at seven!), shichi e aimashou would not make sense. 'e' is used only in action and motion when directed, such as iku. -------------------------- Metapod also talked very well about the 'no (desu/da)' and 'n (desu/da)'. I've read that the 'no/n' puts a stress on the sentence and the meaning of what you're trying to say. eg. atama ga itain desu. (My head hurts! or I have a headache!) However, when a sentence is ended with 'no', it tends to (again) soften the tone of the sentence. However, it is most commonly heard from and used by females. Note: When 'no' is used for colors, they tend to be 'english borrowed words' (such as green, blue, orange, etc). -------------------------- Sorry, Metapod. Hopefully you don't mind me refering to you so much. Hope you don't take offense in what I said... -------------------------- Hope that helps! |
|
Re: Meaning of "O" "E" "wo" "no"
|
|
RE: berniebh: ã„ãˆã„ãˆã€ã„ã„よ。 You were only extending on what I said, anyway :) And you made some great points, too. I should have mentioned that usually ni can replace e. When meaning "toward" you can use either one. That's kinda what I meant to say. So for the OP's reference: ni can be used a lot more than e can, so you can't always switch them out, but usually you can put ni in the place of e and keep basically the same meaning. |
|
Re: Meaning of "O" "E" "wo" "no"
|
|
The descriptions people posted for the particle "no" work well, but in a broader sense, the particle "no" simply changes a word from one kind to another (like a verb to a noun). When people describe "no" as possessive, it's partially right, but think about it. When you say "the child's dog" the noun "child" is just being changed to an adjective describing the dog. So, "kodomo no inu". Or at least that's how I've always thought of it. |