"Can I look at my textbook?"

Translation:教科書を見ていいですか?

June 9, 2017

22 Comments


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/anbheanghearm

It should really be 見てもいい at this level of formality.

June 9, 2017

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/YuOfOwari22

I agree 100%

June 24, 2017

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/slavojaponic

what difference does the も make?

July 13, 2017

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Medusa747

The difference is, that's how it's usually taught.

As in 食べてもいいですか?(May I eat/ Is it okay if I eat?)

July 26, 2017

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/EmilieEche

Sorry but I am not sure to understand the difference... "that's how is usually taught"... in Japan? In the US? Which is more polite? Sorry but this came out a lot in previous lessons and I just want to understand :)

August 15, 2017

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/TygerK

That is how this sentence structure is usually taught in formal textbooks.

Verb~てもいいですか? Is the more polite way of asking for permission.

August 19, 2017

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/clickonwhatnow

Both are fine. I'm not sure what level of formality is inferred from "Can I look at my textbook?" to make you think it HAS to be 見てもいい.

November 9, 2017

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Yuzuling

Wouldn't it be better as mo ii desu ka

June 12, 2017

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/James483647

Yes

June 28, 2017

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/azureviolin

教科書を見ていいですか?

August 2, 2017

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/PhillipC3

Where is the "my" in the Japanese version offered here?

August 12, 2017

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Sintanity

I think it's implied, but it could be translated as "the textbook, a textbook, my textbook". The fact that it's"my" textbook is contectual, but in this sentence we have no context.

August 16, 2017

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/rhaphazard

Why would anyone have to ask permission to look at their own textbook?

May 12, 2018

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/slavojaponic

During some quiz or test, where the answer would likely be no

May 12, 2018

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/aardvarkno2

Why do we use ですか here instead of いますか? Isn't いますか used to infer an action?

June 3, 2019

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/DMAshura

Really was expecting 教科書を見て も いいですか.

June 10, 2019

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Ka_HU

Is it wrong if I add a は particle?

教科書を見ていいですか

"To look at the textbook, is it okay?"

June 28, 2019

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/BreathlessTao

Never even mind formality, it just feels weird and incomplete to me without the particle.

August 17, 2019

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Dan553966

All of the elements have meaning. "Mo" conveys a sense of additionality (too, also), ranging to the unexpected (even, although). "Mite mo ii?" then, is something like "Looking, too, is OK?" or "Even looking is OK?" "Mite ii?" leaves this out or leaves it to be understood (which is consistent with the Japanese propensity for not saying what can be understood except to be polite).

May 22, 2018

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/ChiNane

What about "mite wa ii"? My first intuition was to search for a topic marker regarding that textbook looking business.

September 21, 2018

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Dan553966

Mite ii, mite mo ii, and mite wa ii are all possible and the difference between them is the difference in the sense or meaning of the particles. First, particles indicate but do not create grammatical function. So, "mite ii," with or without a particle, means roughly "looking is OK." Add "mo" and you get "looking, too ..." or "even looking is OK." Add "wa" and you get something like "looking, as compared or contrasted with whatever else might be mentioned, is OK." In other words the particles add nuance but the grammar of "mite ii" is constant.

September 21, 2018

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/galilao

What the difference between selecting 見て as two characters within one block and selecting 見 and 7 as single characters in two separate blocks???

February 19, 2019
Learn Japanese in just 5 minutes a day. For free.