1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Japanese
  4. >
  5. "ゆうはんにぎゅうにくを食べます。"


Translation:I will eat beef for dinner.

June 11, 2017



ぎゅうにく is beef but english sentence translates it as red meat?


I don't get it either. I think red meat is more likely 赤い肉. Literally, at least.


Close, it's 赤肉.


Just look at cow's meat. It's red...


and bacon isn't?


ooh i thought it translated as cow meat cus 肉 is meat and 牛 means cow


It di5es translate as cow meat


Yeah 'red meat' is a vague term that applies to a lot of meats. It is not at all right here


Bit in Japan thsy don't really eat any other red meats...unless they're importing bison etc now?


Mutton? There are a lot of indian restaurants there. But at least we learn something new from this lesson.


Indocurry! Gotta go to the places with the tabehoudai nan!


There is a traditional Hokkaido meal named after Genghis Khan or Jingisukan, it has mutton

[deactivated user]

    From Wikipedia:

    The culinary definition has many rules and exceptions. Generally meat from mammals (for example cattle, horse meat, bull meat) and meat from hunting (wild boars, deer, pigeons, partridges, quail and pheasant) excluding fish and insects are considered red meat. Although poultry is usually considered white, duck and goose are red. For some animals the culinary definition of red meat differs by cut, and sometimes by the age of the animal is when it was slaughtered. Pork is considered red if the animal is adult, but white if young (e.g. suckling pig). The same applies to young lamb and veal. Game is sometimes put in a separate category altogether. (French: viandes noires — "dark meats".)[4]

    Pork is considered white under the culinary definition, but red in nutritional studies. The National Pork Board has positioned it as "Pork. The Other White Meat", profiting from the ambiguity to suggest that pork has the nutritional properties of white meat, which is considered more healthful.[7][8]

    Clearly there's no good reason to translate 牛肉 (ぎゅうにく) as "red meat".


    As a side note, one of the reasons that beef is unhealthy is that cows are fed grain rather than grass, which leads to an unhealthy Omega6/Omega3 ratio as well as missing essential minirals. Free range beef is a lot healthier, but obviously a lot more expensive.




    Should definitely be beef. Ive never heard anyway emphasize meat color over meat type.


    Is there a difference between ゆうはん and ばんごはん?


    Technically, no. 夕飯、夕食 and 晩ご飯 share the same kind of nuances dinner, evening meal and supper have. As far as I can tell, ばんごはん sounds the roughest, followed by ゆうはん, followed by ゆうしょく. As you learn more kanji you realize how some are used predominantly in language that sounds more polite.


    Beef: it's what's for dinner.


    came here just for this reply


    This should really be changed to beef since the japanese word used is , afaik, cow meat.


    I argued 'meat' instead of 'red meat', and checked as a wrong answer...


    Why "red meat" is beef? There is no such one-to-one correspondence!


    It taught that word as beef not long before this. Feels like a gotcha without anything to clue me in that you want "red meat" instead of "meat"


    How should I know it's the future tense and not the present?


    Actually, it's both. 食べます, can mean bot "eat" and "will eat", depending on context.


    why not 'I eat eat beef at dinner'? (Not accepted !)


    Is ゆうはん and ばんごはん different? Is the difference kinda like how brits may distinguish supper and dinner? Are they eaten at different times, and/or contain different types of food?


    生肉 can be raw meat or 生で "rare" at restaurants


    Present indefinite should be accepted too.


    Either it is red meat or meat.


    Neither, it should be "beef" or even "cow meet" if you so desire.


    Apologize for the spelling, should've read "cow meat" and not "cow meet".


    Red meat? Akai niku


    Yeah this is just wrong. There are plenty of red meats that are not cow. Horse and ostrich meat are red...


    This is always beef, until its red neat... That's irritating.


    Is there a reason why に is used here and not で? From what I understood, they're both used to describe a verb in a certain place, but the former is usually used for the existence verbs, not the action ones.

    It's also used to describe a time, but one of the other questions had きのうのゆうはんでは, which is also technically a time, so I'm confused as to how this works.


    I'm not sure which question you are referring to, but I can't imagine a scenario where "昨日の夕飯では" would work as a time marker. One of the functions of に is the time marking particle, which is a function that で doesn't have. This is what the に here in this sentence is doing.

    As you mentioned, に and で have a similar function in marking locations as well. However, using で means that the action occurs at the word marked by で whereas に doesn't have that meaning. に marks important information about the location still and is sometimes analogous to "in" or "to" in English. で has more of a "at" feel, but these aren't a one-to-one translation of the particles. Examples to follow:

    私は公園行きました。(I went to the park.) 公園食べました。(I ate at the park.) 9時戻りました。(I returned to my house at 9.) 公園大きなプールはあります。(There is a big pool at the park.) でもそれ代わりに私は自分の風呂泳ぎました。(But instead, I swam in my own tub.)


    This is an excellent post, thank you. Wish I could uprate it more so that it appeared before the red meat conversation. Nice work.


    No one in Japan uses 夕飯


    Good sentence for Jordan Peterson.

    Learn Japanese in just 5 minutes a day. For free.