Translation:My mother is next to me.
Using の makes the whole statement a noun phrase ("Totoro of next door") but using に kinda sets up a whole sentence, it's just missing a verb ("Totoro is next door" for ex.). Does that make sense?
Please post the actual link. The way you've done it is not supported in the app.
This is the link he posted: https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Japanese_particles#/List_of_particles
More "トトロ who is next to [me], トトロ of next door, [my] neighbour トトロ". "Next to トトロ" would be the other way around: トトロのとなり
There is an order for some things. For instance if you are saying the elephants peanut, you would go largest to smallest, elephant no peanut
It's not about some understood order though - it's about what the Japanese is saying.
The word for neighbour in Japanese is 近所 の ひと (meaning neighbourhood person)。隣人 (りんじん) is another word for neighbour but used in more formal settings and I believe となりびと is used for neighbour in scriptural settings.
Is there a difference between 横(よこ) and 隣(となり) when used as "next to" (I know both have other meanings than that as well)?
If I remember correctly, one of them can only be used when talking about the same kind of objects (buildings, people...), the other one can be mixed. I think 隣 (となり) must be used with the same kind of objects, while 横(よこ) can be used for different objects ("the person is beside a building"). Not 100% sure though
That’s an interesting possibility; I hadn’t thought about that one. Thank you!
隣 indicates that nothing is beside both objects in question, while it's possible that there is an object between the two objects if you use 横.
You didn't ask about it, but since it's related, そば refers to an object which is thought of as close to the original object. It stresses the distance between both objects.
This is why Duo need to give a bit of an explanation next to some things rather than just throw it out there…
The 'missing' of "i" is not a bug that needs to be fixed. Japanese often leave out "I" or "you" because the context would allow you to assume you are talking about you/the person you are directly talking to. A basic example of this would be someone asking how you are and you replying you are fine. "元気ですか?" instead of "あなたは元気ですか?" Both are acceptable but the "you" isn't necessary (think: "alright?" Instead of "you ok?")
"はい、元気です" is fine and as you are respnding to a question about yourself you dont need to say "I" (but it would not be incorrect to say it if you did)
In terms of this actual phrase though, if someone were to ask you where you were and you were to say "next to mum" you wouldnt NEED to clarify that it was your mum… if you said it to a sibling, you 'share' the mum. If you said it to anyone else you would only have to put something in front of 'mum' if it was someone elses mum "next to Bob's mum" or "next to your mum"
Definitely! Also you can usually tell if a person is talking about their own family members as opposed to someone else's because they will usually use informal words for mum (haha), dad (chichi), little sis (imooto), little bro (otooto), older sis (ane) and older bro (ani) when refering to their own family. You can also determine who someone is talking to by the way they are talking - if they are using very polite forms of verbs then they might be talking to or about their boss or someone of higher status than themselves or someone they either don't know or have just met. Whereas they would probably use more informal language talking amongst family members, friends and to/about children.
The combination of "-o" and "u" can be read as "oo". I think this pronunciation is acceptable.
Oo, ou and ō are all accepted transliterations of おう. Although oo is a little old fashioned.
No. The mother (and her location) is the focus of this sentence. わたし の is implied at the start of the sentence - ie. next to me.
According to what it just told me, 'I am next to my mother' is correct.
I said 'it is next to mother' though and it didn't like it. this lack of context is annoying...
Both of these should be incorrect. The Japanese says: となりに(next to [x])ははが([my] mother)います(is located) => “My mother is next to [x]”. x is implied; by default I would understand it as being the speaker (=> next to me) but it could be something or somebody else given the right context so “him/her/you/us/them” should all be accepted, too. But no matter what, it is the mother who is next to something else, not something else is next to the mother.
It's not correct next to my mother would be 母のとなり - の tells us who (or what) the position relates to. Literally となりに in the position of next to 母の of my mum or in relation to my mum. So I or it is next to my mum is not correct. The Japanese does not say next to my mum.
If it was "someone/something" is next to my mother then the Japanese would say 母のとなりに - the Japanese is very clear. に indicates a location、となり indicates that the particular location we are talking about is 'next to' - but next to who? の following 母 clearly shows that we are talking about 'next to my mother'. Hence, the original sentence is clearly NOT saying next to my mother. 母 is followed by が indicating that she is the focus of the sentence ie. we're talking about where she is, NOT who is next to her.
Short answer: It depends on context.
Long answer: It doesn’t have to be 私の, it could be anybody – if that somebody is already the topic of conversation. Say you’re describing a photo of your family, but you’re not in it yourself (maybe because you’re the one who took it). Then maybe you happen to point out your little brother first: これは弟です。 And then you continue pointing out people relative to his position: それで、となりに母がいます。 “Next, [my/our] mother is next to [him].” Because you were just talking about your little brother, he would be understood to be the point of reference.
However, sometimes context doesn’t offer any reasonable topics to fill in the blanks (as in this case, because there is no context to begin with). In this case the interpretation defaults to “I” being the point of reference. If you think about it, that’s sort of natural: If you haven’t introduced any topic of conversation, yet, there really isn’t much to start from that you can expect the other person to know about. You can’t just imply any random third person because the listener has no way of guessing which one you have in your head (supposing it’s somebody you both know to begin with), so that really only leaves the first person “I” or the second person “you”, as these the only people that can be implied simply from the situation itself. However you rarely make declarative statements about the second person (especially in a language as indirect as Japanese), so it is most natural to assume the speaker is talking about themselves. Hence, “I” becomes the default topic for declarative clauses outside of context.
Note however that for questions, the situation is reversed: You hardly ever ask another person questions about yourself, but very often about them. So in questions, “you” becomes the default topic. For example, if somebody asks you: 結婚していましたか？ “[???] married?”, it is much more natural to assume that the implied subject is “you” (“are you married”), rather than “I” (“am I married”). But if you were talking about your cousin before, then you would assume that they are the implied subject – after all it would be very odd for the other person to randomly change without the topic to your marital status without forewarning (and even if they did, they can hardly expect you to know that if they don’t signal it to you).
There's no "I" in this sentence. Im taking a placement test and keep getting these wrong because I have no idea who the sentence is talking about. The real translation is "next to my mother"
Japanese has a tendency to leave out pretty much anything that can be deducted from context, and you just have to get used to it. The sentence doesn't mean Next to my mother, because in that sentence the subject is someone or something other then the mother. It is roughly equivalent of the sentence Someone is next to my mother. Now, the sentence we have here is different. It is the mother that is the subject (が tells you this), she is being next to someone . It is more like That is my mother, next to someone/ something. I hope I managed to clarify this a little, but my English in not all that good.
Oh, yeah. When there is no context it is usually safe to assume that the subject is I, or if it is a question, you.
Yeah like people have said, Japanese can omit parts of sentences that English requires (like a subject) - it happens with other languages too, and also with translating verb tenses, where they're not necessarily used in the same way, but Duo wants to make sure you recognise the tense by translating to the equivalent in the other language
You have to get used to answering in the way Duo expects - so in this case, just assume the context is always I and my and so on, adding that to the English sentence where it's required. Language is tricky!
It seems to me that, in duolingo, when the subject is ambiguous they default to I, unless it's a request. Hopefully by the time japanese comes out of beta they'll be more flexible about it, but considering the context of the lessons, it's fair to assume yourself as the overarching topic.
Phillip Lober the Japanese is not saying next to my mother. That would be 母の となり. In this sentence 母 is also marked by が which clearly tells us that we are talking about where my mother is located/positioned in relation to someone or something else.
did it accept it for you ? When I input that, it said I was wrong (although i'm pretty sure I'm right) ...
隣(となり): next to, neighbouring (i.e. to the side of). E.g. かれはわたしのとなりにすんでいます. He lives next to (=next door to) me.
次(つぎ): next (i.e. following). E.g. つぎのえき the next (following/coming) station
そば means nearby or in proximity of something and 隣 means next to or adjacent to something
Tonari next to something or someone (location). Tsugi next person, next thing, next in line (modifier/adjective).
There's no "my" in this sentence, right? This is how I would reply to my brother as a kid. "Where are you?" "I'm next to mom."
My is not necessary. It is understood that you're talking about your own mother, as you would never refer to someone else's mother as haha. So it can only be your own mother that you're talking about. My is superfluous.
Also this sentence is talking about where the speaker's mother is - not where the speaker is.
Yes. With this word order you'd be emphasising that it is your mother who is next to you - in the word order of the original sentence it's emphasising where your mother is - ie. next to you (the speaker).
I was gonna ask the same thing, leaving my comment here in case someone answers
For the people asking why "I am next to my mom" is not valid, it's because this answers the question "Where is your mom?" You would not normally answer "I am nex to my mom". But "My mom is next to me"
Is tgr placement of the position word important? I've seen it both before and after the subjects in different sentences.
Why is "Haha" translated as Mother ? I thought mother was "Chichi" and father "Haha" ?
Nope - haha = Mum, chichi = Dad. If you are a Dragon BallZ fan then that might be what is confusing you cos Goku's wife's name is chichi.
I wrote "my mom is to me" and it was wrong cause I didn't say mother. They give you the option to say mom and it's wrong. - _-
Nope. That's not why it was wrong at all. It's because you forgot to translate となり - next to. You forgot to say WHERE she is.
Please read all the comments above and below for an explanation of why I am next to my mother is incorrect. And yes - it would be different because this sentence focuses on where your mother is in relation to you (the speaker), not where you the speaker are in relation to your mother.
With out something to mark "my mother" as the topic "I am next to my mother" seems like a better translation to me. Am I wrong? I would translate "My mother is next to me" as "watashi no haha wa tonari ni ga imasu." Would that not be correct?
I’m afraid you have things mixed up. The が particle marks the mother as the subject, so it is unambiguously the mother who is somewhere. Where? となりに “to the side”. The “I” is implied.
I am next to my mother would be: [わたしは]母のとなりにいます。 To break it up:
- います: “am located”. Where?
- となりに: “to the side, next to”. Whose side/next to whom?
- 母の: “mother’s”
Pretty much all of the Japanese spatial relationships are expressed this way: X + の + (relation) + に = “on/under/next to… x”. So:
- いすの上に “on the chair”
- 父のうしろに “behind dad”
- ベットの下に “under the bed”
How do I know if its "I am next to my mother" or "My mother is next to me"? Duo preffers the latter.
I know its customary to omit youself as the subject of a sentence (no "watashi wa"), so how can I tell which is which?
Please take a look if your question hasn’t already been answered before. In this case for example it has multiple times, after questions of PadiS46, EKU-17, ArgusC, ImADorkIDo among others.
I know that AbunPang has pointed out that your question has already been answered multiple times but I also wanted to answer a few of your queries directly. 1. It is not a matter of Duo preferring one translation over another - it is a matter of what the Japanese is telling us and the Japanese is not telling us where the speaker is in relation to the mother but where the mother is in relation to the speaker - they are different and not variations on the same translation. 2. How do you tell the difference? You read and understand the Japanese. Particles in particular let you know who we are talking about ie. the particles tell you in this sentence that we are focusing on the location of the mother in relation to the speaker - not the other way around.
So.. imas = is, but desu also = is? would it be correct to say となりに ははがです?
です is “to be” as in “x is y”. Think of it as a sort of equals sign.
いる (of which います is the polite form) is “there is” or “to be located (at some place)”. In a lot of situations it can be translated simply as “to be” in English, but that’s because English “to be” happens to cover this meaning as well as the equals sign meaning. But they are fundamentally different concepts.
In other situations いる can correspond to “to have” in English, because Japanese expresses possession as “as for x, there is a y”. For example “I have a dog” is わたしは犬がいます (literally: “as for me, there is a dog”).
Also be aware that いる is only used for things that can move out of their own will (people and animals). For everything else, use ある (polite form あります) instead: わたしはパソコンがあります “I have a computer” (literally: “as for me, there is a computer”).
Am I right in saying my answer:"It's next to my mum," is wrong because the use of います instead of あります insinuates that the subject of the sentence is an animate thing and as such should be referred to as he/she/I/they rather than it? Thanks in advance :)
Not entirely. The main reason that “it’s next to my mum” is not possible is another one. “next to my mom” would be 母のとなりに – “next to x” is expressed as xのとなり because Japanese has postpositions (ones that come after the noun) rather than prepositions like English.
The verb います tells you that whatever we’re talking about is a living thing, but it could still be an “it” if we’re talking about an animal.
How do I know that I am refering to myself and not my mother. F.E. the statement translates to 'My mother is next to me' What I am asking is: why it's not 'I am next to my mother' instead?
AbunPang has answered your question directly above. But in brief the particles used tell us who is next to who. If it was I am next to my mother the Japanese would be 母 の となり.
No, “next to my mother” would be 母のとなりに (lit.: at the next-to-position of mother”). Please have a quick scan of the comment section if your question has already been answered (quite a number of times in this case).
A lot of the comments keep talking about how, Japanese people will Leave out words that can be duducted from context. But usually when you do that it's cause the context is obvious--maybe you're having ongoing conversation, or your physically in front of someone or, your watching something while having a discussion. The issue is that when questions like this are asked on duo, there's no context at all.
I have a Japanese text book that will explain a scene before asking certain question--you go to your friends house to deliver a present, you bump into some work colleagues in the hotel lobby, All the little scene markers help create a context to help practice and understand ommited text, personal I think that if duo does not create a contextual situation then they should just include the ommited text in brackets so it's easier to understand.
I think there is plenty of context. We have a speaker. The speaker is talking about their own mother. The speaker states that their own mother is next to... why wouldn't we deduce that the speaker was saying my mother is next to ME? Seems entirely logical to me. If the speaker wanted to say that their mother was next to someone or something else then wouldn't they just say that??
If you wanted to make the sentence about another subject such as you, he, etc., how would you change the sentence?
Are you asking about changing who the mother is next to or changing mother to someone else? Do you want to say, My mum is next to someone else (ie. not me) or someone else (ie. not mum) is next to me?
This has been answered quite a few times already on this discussion.
Mother is the subject marked by が in this sentence. So your mother is the one next to you.
"I am next to my mother" would be 母のとなりに私がいます (or) 私は母のとなりにいます - I am the one next to my mother.
So if this sentence is "my mother is next to me" how would it look if i am trying to say "i am next to my mother"? Hard for me to understand the importance of the order of everything.
This has been answered a few times in the discussion above
"I am next to my mother" would use 母のとなりに : "in my mother's next-to position"
母のとなりに私がいます (or) 私は母のとなりにいます - I am the one next to my mother.
Also it's not just the word order - it's the particles that tell us what words are doing in a sentence.
Because the mother is the subject, not “I”. I am next to my mother would be (わたしは)母のとなりにいます.
Also for the future, please have a quick scan whether your question has already been answered before asking, so clutter can be kept at a minimum.
Why not "My mother is at the house next door." According to my dictionary 隣 means: "house next door, neighbouring house, next-door neighbour"
It does not mean those things just by itself - となりびと is one way of saying neighbour, but となり does not mean neighbour by itself.
So why is it in other examples I had to add WATASHI in but in this one I don't? Why is Duolingo Japanese becoming so bad that it more frustrating than good?
The problem is that in Japanese a lot of things depend on context. This is why you can usually leave out the pronoun “I” in declarative sentences and still have it be understood. But there are contexts where you can’t, for example if you have been talking about another person before, you have to indicate that you’re changing the topic to yourself, otherwise the other person has no way of noticing it. Another possibility is if you need to attach something to わたし – obviously you can’t do that if it isn’t there. This includes things like -も “also” which (unlike the English translation) is not an independent word in Japanese, but rather a case particle which has to attach to something. So if you want to say “I [did something], too” you cannot leave out わたし because if you did, -も would have nothing to attach to. Maybe you were referring to such a sentence earlier?
In any case, adding わたし should usually not be wrong, even if it will often sound unnecessarily wordy in real world conversation. After all, Duolingo doesn’t give you any context from which you could tell if you need it or not. However if you do add it, you have to do it in the right way. In this case for example you would need to say: わたしのとなりに母がいます。 This is because in Japanese となり “next to” is a noun and you have to literally say “at my ‘next to’” = “next to me”. It would be wrong without -の (or with another particle instead of it).
No - because that's not what the sentence is saying. "I'm next to my mother" would be 母 の となり に います where 私は is implied at the start of the sentence. (See also my explanation below where someone else asked the same question)
となり is grammatically a noun. Think of it as "the position next to" rather than just "next to". Same thing with other similar position words: うえ = "the position on/above", した = "the position under/below" etc.
It probably needs a “ni”: わたしの母がとなりにいます should be correct – although わたしの is redundant because you would normally only use はは for your own mother. Another person's mother would be referred to using the respectful お母さん (おかあさん).
You would never use haha for anyone but your own mother so "watashi no" is completely unnecessary.
Because adjacent is more a mathematical term used to describe where an angle is and sounds extremely odd and unnatural. I have never ever heard this used to describe that someone is next to someone else. I have heard it used for mathematics and when describing the location of a place/building in relation to another.
Requiring the "my" really? My Mother and Mother are synonymous in English.
They are not the same - Mother does not necessarily mean your OWN mother. Also when it comes to Japanese we can know that someone is speaking about their own mother (or any other family members) immediately by the language they use. はは can only ever mean one's OWN mother because you would NEVER use it when talking about someone else's mother, so YES including "my" in the translation is important. It shows that you understand the Japanese and that you understand that this word would only ever be used for one's own mother and not someone else's .
No - here is my response to the same question below - AnaLydiate 25 25 22 21 21 16 16 15 No because the sentence is talking about where the speaker's mother is in relation to the speaker. Watashi no is implied at the start of the sentence - so (watashi no) tonari ni haha ga imasu - My Mum is next to me.
OR you can scroll down to the 6th comment from this one.
I thought it was "I am next to my mother".. how do you tell the difference?
母 is marked with が, telling you that she is the subject, i.e. in this case the one who is at some place. And the place she is located at (marked with に) is となり "to the side, next to". The thing/person at whose side she is located is only implied; by default you would understand it as "next to me".
"Next to my mother" would be 母のとなりに (you use の to indicate the thing/person whose side となり refers to). So "I am next to my mother": [わたしは]母のとなりにいます。
It is incorrect because it is a completely ungrammatical word order. Also 'me' is the wrong form - 'me' is used when 'I' is the object eg. 'take ME with you'.
Because the Japanese says “Mum is next to me”. That’s a different sentence, even though it describes the same situation. It’s just like you can’t translate “She is my mother” when the original sentence says “I am her child”.
Normally i would say "i am next to my mom". Also, what is the purpose of "い" before "masu"
いる means “to be (at a certain location)” – or if no location is given simply “to exist, to be there”. -ます is the polite verb ending.
Be careful though, いる is only used for humans and other things which can move by themselves. For objects and plants another verb ある (with the ending: あります).
Imasu for living things - humans and animals etc. Arimasu for inanimate objects - buildings, furniture, vehicles etc.
Q. "となりに母がいます。 " "I am next to mother" Wouldn't it imply that it was my mother? Given that the announced solution was "I am next to my mother" given it didn't require me to define if it were my mother and father when I was between them?
I am not sure what you're trying to say. For one your translation is incorrect. が tells us that 母 is the focal point/topic/subject of the sentence - hence my mother is next to me - not I am next to my mother. わたし の is implied at the start of the sentence - 私 の となり に - next to me, so clearly I or the speaker is not the topic of the sentence. Also 母 would only ever be used in reference to one's own mother so there is no implication needed - 母 will only ever be your own ie. the speaker's mother. No implications needed.
No because the sentence is talking about where the speaker's mother is in relation to the speaker. Watashi no is implied at the start of the sentence - so (watashi no) tonari ni haha ga imasu - My Mum is next to me.
Those sentences mean exactly the same in English so I have no idea what you're trying to say. I am next to my Mum. My Mum is next to me.
They are not the same - one focuses on YOUR the speaker's location in relation to your Mum, while the other focuses on the location of your Mum in relation to you the speaker. The Japanese makes it very clear which is which.