1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Japanese
  4. >
  5. "バターをたくさん入れました。"


Translation:I put in a lot of butter.

June 13, 2017



Shouldn't the english translation have a preposition added in somewhere? "I put on a lot of butter" or " I put a lot of butter on"?


I believe it should be "I put a lot of butter in"


Are you wearing the butter or something? XD.


I would agree the preposition should be on but apparantly it was supposed to be in?


It does have a preposition now they probably have fixed it.


いれるmeans 'insert'. So the preposition is in.


Insert into what? Or where? Or who? It's very confusing


There is no object in this phrase, it's a context thing. Maybe it's about cake or something. "You mean the cake? Yeah, I put butter in [it]."


Lol! "Everything's better with butter."


I agree MaynardHogg! When we make things like breads, cakes and even mashed potatoes we usually put butter IN the mix so this appears to be another case of context. Yum!


It's only as confusing as you make it...


Butter works fine as lubricant you know


Cooking or baking


Welcome to 中略 Japanese.

One could ask the same about Engllish "Insert the thumb drive." IADOTC


Now you're cooking like a true American.


I put in a lot of butter.


As of 7/17/17, this is now correct.


Doesn't seem to be the preferred translation, though, since "in" wasn't among the answer options for me.


25/09/17 and it's definitely not fixed. I've seen both JP>EN and EN>JP in my review today, and both are missing a necessary preposition.


05/03/21 it's now the preferred answer




Needs "in," and "put a lot of butter in" is a dangling participle, so should be "i put in a lot of butter," or more colloquially "i used a lot of butter [in the recipe]"


There is nothing gramatically wrong with dangling participles. You have been lied to be prescriptivists.


I wouldn't say there's nothing wrong about them, even as anti-prescriptivist as I am. They can be confusing, so there are usually better choices available if you want to be clear.

But this also isn't a dangling participle. It's not even a participial phrase. "Putting a lot of butter in" would be a participial phrase.

An example of a dangling participle would be something like "Putting a lot of butter in, the cake was going to be delicious." -- The thing which the participle "putting" is supposed to modify, that is, the person baking the cake, does not occur in the sentence.

The thing which makes dangling participles confusing is that they end up sounding like they're attached to a different noun from what was actually intended. So in the example above, it sounds a bit like the cake is putting a lot of butter into... itself? -- until you realise that it's an inanimate object and that makes no sense.

Sometimes this can be a bit funny. "Flying over the African landscape, the elephant herd looked majestic."

Dangling participles are only wrong from the point of view that you want language to be clear -- for poetic reasons, they're often acceptable.


The prescription against dangling participles assumes people can only parse sentences robotically and without context, and in my opinion it's difficult to write a sentence with one that's so ambiguous an average reader can't figure it out.

But looking at the comments here, (even though as you correctly say, this isn't a dangling participle) maybe I'm wrong, because I never thought I'd see so many people stymied by putting a lot of butter.


I put up a lot of butter into my umbrella.


Cholesterol here I come!


@DEcobra's post "Cholesterol here I come" is 3 years ago and I add that

RDA cholesterol daily allowance is 300mg and 100g butter = 215mg cholesterol

latest Health Official reports 300mg daily limit does not include eggs.

Also: "High-fat dairy products like butter have been linked to a reduced risk of obesity, diabetes, and heart problems. Still, butter is high in calories and saturated fat and should be enjoyed in moderation. It's best to consume it alongside a mix of heart-healthy fats like olive oil, avocado, nuts, seeds, and fatty fish."

NB: balanced health diet and portion moderation control.

[angel food cake has 0 cholesterol] TONIKAKU

[another public service announcement]


I added plenty of butter is the same meaning

  • Paula Deen, probably.


I think that tango was really the last for Marlon.


In an effort not to be too literal, I said "used" instead of "put". It wasn't accepted.


i believe if u wanted to say "used" it would be "つかいました".


"on" would be 塗(nu)る


I cannot get this English translation. It sounds so awkward to me. While "I put in a lot of butter" might be literal and grammatically correct, I don't think I would ever use it myself. I would rather use "I put a lot of butter in it". If you get all loosey-goosey with the languages, then you could use like "There is a lot of butter I put in", "In it, I put a loooot of butter", or best yet "I Paula deen'd it."


@ekp@h English has 2 common variants: "I put in" or "I put.....in", but German is more strict with putting separable prefix-verbs the end at (sic/冗談でしょ!)


Wherever context would make it obvious. Probably something like a cake or cookies?


Would 置きました be correct?


i was looking forward to this lesson on SHOPPING, but find the title misleading !! in the end, i am baking a cake, into which i put a lot of butter and protest, as I prefer Angel food cakes over sponge and vegetarian (on principle...)


  • Felix, Stray Kids
Learn Japanese in just 5 minutes a day. For free.