Translation:I eat at around twelve o'clock.
I think the focus of the sentence is important. If the conversation is about eating. "We eat around twelve". If the focus is the time of the break "We eat at around twelve". The "at" implies that the listener should pay attention to the time. Without it the speaker is just subtly being more casual.
Remember that in English, or at least what I think..
In terms of time, "in" is used for a year, a month, or anything that spans a long time, usually longer than a day. I eat
in May, in week 20, or in a leap year.
"On" is used for a day. I sleep
on Christmas day, on Saturdays, or on my birthday.
"At" is for a point or part of the day. I wake up
at noon, at 10:30, or at sunrise.
So if you don't put an "at", it is probably grammatically incorrect.
Note that this applies only when the focus is the point in time, not the duration or the difference in time with respect to the present or any reference time specified (next week, in three days, etc.).
I might be miserably wrong though.
As one of my Japanese friends have learned, in English, the main thing is to just mostly get the word order right and we'll automatically fill in the gaps. Atleast for Canada, we are so used to it. I purposely put minor grammar mistakes in there, but if I read that to another English person, they wouldn't even notice. Good luck on your studies.
All true. However, as you said "at" is for a specific time or place, so for the purposes of this question you should not say "at around". Those two words don't go together. "At" is specific, "around" is general. Something can start "at" a time, or "around" a time. But it can't start "at around". Just as you wouldn't mix other specific and general terms. You wouldn't compare two things by saying they are "kind of exactly the same". They are either similar, or exact. Not both.
I think you mean that "at" connotes precision, whereas "around" connotes approximation.
That is true, as far as it goes, but what are the parts of speech of those words?
I'm sure that we can both agree that "at" is a preposition. You get up at a time, in a house, on a particular day of the week, and in those phrases, the preposition tells you the relationship of the action to the time, place, and time period in question. But what about "around"? Is that a preposition, too? Can you get up around something?
"Around" certainly can be a preposition. If I tie a piece of rope around a stick, then the word "around" tells me the relationship between the rope and the stick. But is the time that you get up wrapped around something, in a similar way to the rope being wrapped around the stick? And what does this have to do with approximation?
As I see it, "around" in the context of approximation is an adverb, simply meaning "approximately".
If I get up in the morning, then I have got up at some time, whether I happen to know what that time is or not.
If I know precisely when I got up, then I can say, "I got up at precisely 9:00," or whatever the time might have been.
If I don't know exactly when it was, then I can say, "I got up at approximately 9:00." However, the word "approximately" can be replaced by a synonym, as in the following examples:
"I got up at roughly 9:00." "I got up at about 9:00." "I got up at around 9:00."
In the last example, "around" is not a preposition, like it was when we were wrapping rope around sticks. The time of getting up does not encircle the time of 9:00. When I say that I got up at around 9:00, I am saying that I got up at some time, and that that time was approximately - or around - 9:00.
For me (native English speaker from Canada) I would say "I wake up around noon" which could be anywhere from about 11:45 am to 12:15 pm (as an example). But if I said "I wake up at noon" that would be 12:00 pm. "Around" implies an approximation whereas "at" is pretty much exact.
I wouldn't use "at around noon" but as someone else said it might be a regional difference. But I certainly wouldn't call it a "typo" to exclude the "at"!
I think it's helpful. The "at around" in English makes the listener sure that you're talking about a time before even hearing the time, rather than say a place, so they are prepared to process and register the information better. For instance they may think you're trying to say "I eat around here often," at first and may take a little more time to register that you indeed just mentioned the time you eat, not the place. Every little bit helps in communication.
Duolingo for some reason completely skipped over particles.
Prepositions come after what they modify. For this reason, Japanese is said to be a postpositional language. In this sentence, に is the preposition. It means in or at. So this sentence could be literally translated as "12 o'clock about <=at eat." The subject is implied based on context, so we could translate it as "at about 12 o'clock, [subject] eat(s)." I hope this explains a little!
That's correct! But there's one minor error in your sentence: you have written 話せます, which means 'to be able to speak Japanese'. So this sentence actually means "I will be able to speak Japanese at around 5 pm tomorrow." (I want to know what learning method that speaker is using! :-) ) To say what you intended to say, you need to change the verb form to 話します: 午後五時ごろに日本語話します。
十二 - twelve
時 - indicates hour
十二時 - twelve o'clock
ごろ - at around
十二時ごろ - at around twelve o'clock
に - indicates time
食べます - to eat (formal form)
食べる - to eat (informal form)
十二時ごろに食べます - I eat at around twelve o'clock. (Formal form)
十二時ごろに食べる - I eat at around twelve o'clock (informal form)
Not quite. に does not signify time; it can be used with places as well. Rather it is a preposition (technically a postposition) which here means "at". (When used with a point in time, such as twelve o'clock -- when used with a day it would of course be "on", and with a month "in", etc. It can also mean other things in other contexts, because preposition use is generally not parallell between languages,)
ごろ - around 十二時ごろ - around twelve o'clock に - at (for time) 十二時ごろに - at around twelve o'clock
Para los que hablan español (including those who knows it), les recomiendo ver estos vídeos para que comprendany refuerzen el uso de la partícula "に":
Primer vídeo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkXOE4t-1ss
Segundo vídeo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUiMDl6DxbA
Tercer vídeo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHDt8_JMwMs&t=
Recuerden verlo en ese orden en el que pongo los enlaces. El hombre explica todo detalladamente. Les recomiendo su que canal, que habla sobre el idioma japonés.
When I took my Japanese class in college we were taught that you couldn't just say 食べます in its own without a direct object. You had to be eating something you couldn't just say "I eat" or "I ate" abstractly like that. So, I'm a little confused why this sentence has no direct object?
Kanji often have multiple pronunciations, most commonly one derived from the Chinese name for the kanji character and one (or more) derived from the Japanese word for the concept written by the kanji. Duolingo gives one pronunciation in the "hint" but it may not be the one used in the sentence. The hint tells us this kanji is default pronounced "shoku" (I think) but as part of the verb "to eat", it's pronounced "ta", to form "tabe".
There are different readings for kanji depending on context. Chinese origin, Japanese origin (onyomi and kunyomi); in most cases though a Kanji's name (like the letter M in English, is called "em") is different than its reading (ie. M => "mmm"). Also, the reading in vocabulary is different depending on context yes, but also grammatical placement. For example, I've noticed that in the majority of cases the onyomi pronunciation is used for compound kanjis whereas the kunyomi is often used when a kanji stands alone with hiragana to form a vocab word. This is not a set rule though ;).
It is correct but it is more commonly written in kana alone. This sentence is also from the original tree that did not go beyond a few N4 level kanji and this kanji is N3 level. If you hit the report button on the question it will be reviewed by the contributors and can be added as an answer.
numerals are used in these situations often in Japanese for shorthand, but this skill is specifically about teaching you the numbers and telling time so writing them in arabic numerals kind of defeats the purpose of translating. If they ask you to translate "10" into Japanese, typing "１０" shouldn't be acceptable; even if they do use the numerals in Japan, it doesn't show that you know the actual Japanese numbers they are trying to teach you.
Additionally: given that this is on the discussion page for the "Translate from Japanese to English" question, you typed this for a listening question? Those even more so won't accept it since they are auto-generated from the lesson's sentences and will only accept the very specific way that sentence is written when being taught. Alternate answers can't be added by contributors for them.
"Ni" here means "at", as in "I eat at twelve o'clock". In grammatical terms, it's part of an adverbial (When do you eat?). "Wo" is used for the object (What do you eat? I eat rice. "Rice" is the object.) "Ga" is used for the subject, if it is not the topic (Who ate the rice? I ate it. "I" is the subject (and "rice" is the topic).).
Here's a super helpful article on 'wa' and 'ga': https://8020japanese.com/wa-vs-ga/
And here is a more extensive explaination:
wa = TOPIC marker. It indicates WHAT you are talking ABOUT.
ga = SUBJECT marker. It indicates WHAT/WHO is DOING something.
wo = OBJECT marker. It indicates WHAT/WHO something IS BEING DONE TO.
ni = WHEN something is being done.
he = WHERE something is being done.
There are exceptions and variations, of course. For example, 'wa' and 'ga' are often confused because the subject is generally also the topic; (I think) 'ni' and 'he' can be prepositions for other things than time and place; and for some reason I've been told that particles DON'T come before VERBS.
Hope this helps! Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong! ^w^
Because kanji can have several readings and pronunciation based on their context. This is because they often come from Chinese originally, and the Chinese reading, Onyomi, might sometimes be used rather than the Japanese reading, or Kunyomi. Regardless of reading, they are often linked by the concept, in this case, the concept of eating. 食べ may be pronounced as "tabe", to eat, and also 食どう, "shokudou", or dining room. You can see that both these readings are dealing with the concept of eating, and also why you hear "shoku" when you might have expected to hear "tabe".
Order. If it's 二十, or "two tens (plus zero)", that's twenty, but if it's 十二, or "(one) ten plus two", that's twelve.
For more practice, observe the patterns of even larger numbers: 二百 Is two hundred, 九千 is nine thousand, 一万 is 10,000, 一万千 (one ten thousand plus one thousand) is 11,000, and finally: 二万三千四百五十六 is 23,456. Two ten-thousands plus 3 thousands plus 4 hundreds plus 5 tens plus 6 ones. Note how each decimal digit has its own character.
れい means zero, 十二 means 12
On a 24-hour clock 00:00 is midnight, the start of the new day, 12:00 is noon, a normal lunch time.
On a 12-hour clock both midnight and noon can be written as 12:00.
So when telling time, both can be 12, but only midnight can be written as zero, れい
So ごろ is always with に behind it when you're talking about doing something at that time?
I have been using kanji when ever possible because I believe it adds depth to your writing, but in this example I was not able to use the kanji 頃. It counted "十二時頃に食べます。" wrong and told me to write "十二時ごろに食べます。" although the kanji is usually pronounced 'koro' according to Google translate 'goro' and 'koro' seem to be used interchangeably (ex. https://www.japanesepod101.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=797 ) but also according to Google translate it appears both sentences are pronounced 'Jūnitoki-goro ni tabemasu.'. My question is if there is a difference between '頃' and 'ごろ' like there is between 'ください' and '下さい' (one of which is used for non-tangible requests and the latter being for physical requests.). The previously linked article seems to only be for the distinction between 'ごろ' and 'ころ' in spoken Japanese and at that only even tenancies for pronunciations.
ころ・ごろ when meaning "around, about" is most commonly written in kana alone. It is a suffix and many suffixes tend to prefer their kana version to the kanji.
You'll see the kanji in nouns like 頃おい kooroi - time/period/days, 頃刻 keikoku - a short period, or 頃日 keijitsu - recently/these days
You can see its entry for it on Jisho
(and best to avoid google translate for a pronunciation guide, its automated system is not good at distinguishing context and grammar when kanji have multiple different sounds)
The system claimed i had typos in my answer, yet after typing out the word. O'clock, the second part of the word after the apostrophe, was moved to the next line. Causing the word O' clock tobe cut in half. This doesn't make the word incorrect. However your DUOLINGO seems to have a problem with it.
That seems to be a flaw with listening exercises in general (Since this is a Japanese to English question I assume you got this question as a listening exercise).
Since Duo is a computer program and the computer compares characters, not meaning, 頃 and ごろ will be interpreted as different answers. For normal questions that is fine since they can be added as alternate acceptable answers, but listening exercises assume that any deviation from Duo's answer means you weren't listening properly, which is true for most languages, except for Japanese where there's often more than one way to write a word.
Outside of Duo, 頃 is a correct way to write ごろ, however in situations like these it is typically written as ごろ.
From what I've learned so far, に can be used as a time reference, to say "per ____", and also to say that you are going somewhere.
In this example, 十二時ごろに食べます, the particle に is used to say that the action is being done at this time (around 12:00).
に can also be used to say that you do something per week/month/etc. If you were to say that you go to school five times a week, you'd say 一週間に5回学校へ行きます.
It can also be used to say that you are going somewhere. Ex: 学校に行きます。
Frequent error with answers from tiles: it complains about an extra space when you use the tiles for "o'" and "clock" but that is the only way to complete the sentence using tiles. I've noticed the same issue with "did" "n't" given as two tiles.
Reporting this when I see it, but it's not clear whether the information transmitted with the report will be comprehensible, since I doubt the tiles will be shown.
I have not seen this kind of issue in the other language trees.
Actually I didn't learn Japanese in this app I learn English lol because some words I think are not in Japanese sentence. So I didn't put it in. But it's my fault because I'm not a native English speaker and my English is very weak. What I have learned from this app is meaning is not important than grammar.