ō is o with a macron over it, indicating it should be pronounced for extra time. This is how we sometimes transcribe Japanese long vowels instead of explicitly showing the diphthong.
õ is o with a tilde over it. In Spanish, the tilde is written over consonants to show they have been palatalized. In Portuguese, it is written over vowels to show they have been nasalized. It has nothing to do with transcribing Japanese, hence Jop-V's comment that heysofia meant
ō instead of
"Ha" is pronounced "wa" in "konnichiha" due to old Japanese language (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_kana_orthography) . It is pronounced "wa" only in "konnichiha" so don't say "wa" in other words unless you are told to do so :)
I've never seen this done, especially for the very reason that we conveniently have a free-standing N character. But that's not to say it's never been done. You wouldn't normally see a small tsu before a character from the H-row either, nor would you typically see it after a drawn-out vowel, but you might see both at the same time in weird dialogue, like if a super villain were having a good laugh, it might be written as ハーッハハハー。
It's a matter of the semantic, idiomatic hypernym - hyponym maps of the languages having only partial coverage of eachother.
Another instance of this sort of discrepancy in hypernym - hyponym mapping between Japanese and English can be seen with place deixis. English only has A) 'this'/'these' (proximal: describing a referent or referents near the speaker) and B) 'that'/'those' (medial/distal (ambiguous): describing a referent or referents anywhere else) whereas Japanes has これ/これら as co-hyponyms to A (so, again, proximal: near or with the speaker) but no co-hyponyms to B, only the hyponyms to (/things more specific than) B (that imply B) それ/それら (medial only: describing a referent or referents that is/are nearer the speaker's colocutor than the speaker and where neither party is closer to one another than the referent is to either) and あれ/あれら (distal only: describing a referent or referents farther from both the speaker and their colocutor or colocutors than the farthest of them are from one another). Both それ and あれ could be chalked up to the hypernym 'that' in translation to English just like the various time specific greetings could be generalized to an English equivalent of their semantic hypernym like "hello". And conversely, a translation of someone saying "hello" might actually be a translation of one of the semantic hyponyms of the original utterance because something at the same level of detail doesn't exist or isn't commonly used in the target language.
Phrases and expressions don't translate one-to-one between languages, especially when the two languages are not the least bit related to each other the way English and Japanese are. Translation is about equivalent usage.
Literally, こんにちは is:
こん literally "this"
にち literally "day"
は grammar particle [topic marker]
The best literal translation is "As for this day..." But that's not how English speakers greet each other. So we look at how Japanese speakers use the phrase, and the equivalent usage in English can be "hello" or "good day" or "good afternoon".
Hi, it keeps giving me error when I write Good day, Hello and in the correct answer that is what is suggesting Good Day Hello I do not understand why. I reported it as an error, saying that my answer should be accepted. Any comment? I also think Good morning should be accepted as translation....or not?
That's how you write a period in Japanese.
I'm sorry, that is incorrect.
The grammar particle that marks the topic of the sentence is written は but is pronounced "wa". And こんにちは breaks down literally as
こん ~ this
にち ~ day
は ~ topic marker
So the greeting is literally "As for this day..."
わ is only used when it is part of the word itself, such as 私 (わたし).
私は寿司が好きです。 (watashi wa sushi ga suki desu)
私 ~ I
は ~ topic marker
寿司 ~ sushi
が ~ subject marker
好き ~ liked
です ~ is
As for me, I like sushi.
[You should be able to read the text without signing up, but in case the site gives you trouble, here is what it says:]
What Does GOZAIMASU Mean?
Learn what 'gozaimasu' means and why it makes phrases more polite
Hi everybody! Hiroko here. Welcome to Ask a Teacher where I’ll answer some of your most common Japanese questions.
The question for this lesson is…
What does GOZAIMASU mean and why does it make phrases more polite?
When you say “Good morning” in Japanese, you can say “Ohayo” casually or “Ohayo Gozaimasu” to be polite. However, you cannot say ‘Kon’nichiwa gozaimasu’ or ‘Konbanwa gozaimasu’ as more polite phrases of ‘Kon’nichiwa’ or ‘Konbanwa.’
So what’s going on with this?
When you say “Good morning” politely, you say ‘Ohayo gozaimasu.’ It’s just the casual “Good morning,” ‘Ohayo’ with ‘gozaimasu’ at the end.
The word ‘gozaimasu’ is a very polite expression and can roughly be translated as “am,” “is,” or “are” in English.
The phrase “ohayo” comes from an adjective, “hayai” meaning “early” and it literally means “it’s early.” So, “ohayo” can take the polite expression “gozaimasu” after that to say it politely.
However, other greeting phrases, such as ‘Kon’nichiwa’ meaning “Hello,” and ‘Konbanwa’ meaning “Good evening.”‘ cannot take ‘gozaimasu.’ You don’t say ‘Kon’nichiwa gozaimasu’ or ‘Konbanwa gozaimasu.'
It’s because the phrases “kon’nichiwa” and “Konbanwa” have different origins from ‘Ohayo (gozaimasu)’. ‘Kon’nichiwa’ means “today (is)…” and came from the sentence, ‘Kon’nichi wa genki desu ka.’ meaning “How are you today?” Whereas Konbanwa’ means “this evening (is)...” and came from ‘Konban wa genki desu ka.’ meaning “How are you this evening?” So, the latter part, ‘genki desu ka,’ is dropped to make “Kon’nichiwa” and “Konbanwa”. They don’t come from adjectives like how Ohayo comes from “hayai” so these two greetings cannot take ‘gozaimasu’ after them.
Just remember that you can choose either the casual or polite version when you say “Good morning” but you don’t have to worry about the politeness when you say “Hello” and “Good evening” in Japanese.
Any reason why the kanji equivalent (今日は) is being marked as incorrect? I understand that the phrase is much more commonly written in Hirigana, however for those of us that use IME, sometimes it auto-completes the Kanji (which is helpful in most situations, just not this one).
Is 今日は considered completely unacceptable for some reason I'm not aware of?