- Forum >
- Topic: Japanese >
- "三時ではありません。"
"三時ではありません。"
Translation:It is not three o'clock.
93 Comments
ありません is the polite/formal version of ない. じゃ is the casual, spoken version of では.
So, all in all, じゃない is a considerably more casual version of ではありません
One can also say ではない and じゃありません, and they fit somewhere in between, though I'm not versed enough to comment on where exactly each one lies or how big the gap is.
@Andrew-Lin yeah, that makes sense to me, but I'm not a native speaker, so I'm not sure if that's how it actually goes.
Also, I asked my (native Japanese-speaking) partner about じゃないです and it took her a while to register what I was asking because she doesn't think there's anything wrong with じゃないです. Even after I explained that じゃない is a negative verb form of です, and by adding です on the end like that "for politeness" is essentially treating it as an い-adjective, she told me that Japanese people don't really think that deeply about it f(^_^;
I believe that ではありません＞じゃありません＞ではない＞じゃない. Do you think it's reasonable? Sometimes people use ないです for ありません, original it's not grammatically correct but is very common in daily conversation.
Depends. If you like forgetting where the keys are for "arimasen" are, then be my guest. Doing that everyday racks your brain. That's why i maxed out time.
If you really want to break it down... the "de" indicates a state of being, while "arimasen" means "there is not." So, literally, it means, "There is no being 3:00," or in other words, "It isn't 3:00." If we just said, "Sanji wa arimasen," that would mean something like, "There is no 3:00."
"De wa arimasen," "Jya arimasen," and "Jya nai" are all forms of the same construct, which means "it isn't."
Tbh that article is really confusing especially considering it used Kanji that we haven't learned yet at this point in time >. <
I got this sentence (and got it right) 5 times now almost in a row. Was it just me?
So your telling me that the entire phrase after the first two characters mean "it is not?"
Why does this exact same item keep coming up even though I've always answered correctly?! Very annoying!
Roman numerals are mostly used in Japan, but you are right, you should learn the Kanji
I made same mistake as you in another comment! Roman numerals are like VII and IX, but you mean arabic numerals like 7 and 9 ;)
In practice, 'arabic numerals' (which are actually indian) are used in most applications and are readily understood even by young school children. The kanji are used more than the kana forms - especially in advertising.
Does anyone else find it bizarre that in the lesson introducing time the first thing it teaches is "It is NOT 3 o'clock"?
Do they really gotta separate 'o' and ''clock'...? I mean, c'mon.
It's just an extra step for no good bleeping, censored reason.
I constantly type the right answer and they still say I have a "typo", really annoying
The acceptable translations for time are inconsistent. In one instance, "3" is acceptable. In another, it is not; "3:00" is required. There was also an instance where "PM" was required. Either allow them all or settle on one.
And now I have this mental image of Sanji from One Piece introducing himself and someone going "いいえ3時でわあれますん。1時です。"
How to differentiate between 3 PM and just 3:00 ?? I got a response earlier where I should have used PM and here it says PM shouldn't be used
PM in Japanese is 総理大臣... just kidding, that means "Prime Minister".
The one you're looking for is "p.m." and in Japanese, it's 午後 (ごご). So, if you see/hear these characters in the sentence, you'll know you should include "p.m." in your answer.
Side-note: the convention in Japanese is the opposite of English. 3 p.m. = 午後三時
I've already learnt a little more than 1 000 漢字 and you just gave me a mini heart-attack with 総理大臣 meaning P.M. Take my lingots!
Well, "Living in quiet retirement, dividing one's time between yard work and intellectual pursuits" is such a long way to say 晴耕雨読, but that's what it means. When learning a new language, you should discard any preconceptions about what it should be, and embrace what it is.
Why is the first we learn "it is NOT X o'clock" instead of "It's X o'clock". I never ever said it's not x o'clock...
is there a way to say this politely, as to answering someone for the question (is it three o clock?)
Yeah, it's already polite :) The use of です and ます forms indicate politeness.
Yes, it means the same thing. But be aware that じゃない is a casual form, and there are strict social rules in Japan about when it is/isn't appropriate to use casual speech.
Why is the "は" pronounced like "wa" instead of "ha?" I thought it only did that when it was being used as a subject marker, but in this example it's being used in a verb. Could anyone please explain if this is just an irregularity or if は is also commonly used to make the "wa" sound?
Well, です itself is considered an irregular verb, so this pronunciation of は as wa is irregular too, in a sense. That said, the は in ではありません is, etymologically speaking, behaving as a particle, so it still complies with the general rule of thumb.
However, は is used as the topic marker, not the subject marker, though the subject is commonly also the topic.
What do you mean by "outside of numeric values"? 三 means three, 3, or even III; it's just the way Japanese represents the number, so there's no situation where it isn't used as a numeric value.
So time does not need the "wa" particle? Or do all subjects not need it when the verb is "dewa arimasen"?
三時 in this sentence is actually the object, not the subject. The subject/topic is implied by the context, so the は particle is also dropped. If you wanted to include a subject, you could say something like 「今は三時ではありません ="(The time) now is not 3 o'clock", and it falls into the same pattern as です (AはBです = "A is B").
I used "3" instead of "there" and got it wrong. Is it specific that in this case it should be translated to the word from of the number?
Both "three" and "3" are now accepted. Thank you and all students reporting.
No, 3 should also be accepted. You should report it.
In fact, "three o'clock" would commonly be written as ３時 in Japanese.
Is it a glitch that it tells me I missed a word, but doesn't tell me what word I missed? I feel like it would be more helpful if it gave you an example of the correct sentence
The error in translation is when you said "now", as that is represented by 今は
368
My source is admittedly anime, but i hear "janai desu" more than "dewa arimasen." Is there a difference? Which is more common?
I'm not sure how old this comment is, but- じゃないです is the more casual form ではありません is formal I'd say it's not really about how common it is, more how close you are to the person you're speaking to.
Bruh i accidentally put is before it but I translate it perfectly with only hearing it atleast
i put "It is not 3:00 now.", any particular reason why this isn't accepted?
"Now" doesn't appear anywhere in the Japanese sentence.
You could infer from context that the speaker most likely meant "now", but we don't have any contextual information for these exercises, and something else (e.g. the start or end time of a meeting) is just as likely as to not be 3:00. So it's not valid to assume "now".
What about くなかったです(kunakattadesu)? Why do we use the Na-adjective verb form?
くなかったです is the polite negative past form for い-adjectives.
三時 is a noun, not an adjective, so we use ではありません as the polite negative non-past form of です. It's the same as な-adjectives because な-adjectives are also known as adjectival nouns.
Ok, so I put "It is three o'clock," and I get it right! Wat the heck?!?!
