1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Japanese
  4. >
  5. "I will buy a ticket later."

"I will buy a ticket later."


June 14, 2017



If Duolingo is smart they will add grammar sections


I wouldn't hold my breath. To quote founder of Duolingo:

"My dream in life is to be able to teach you a language without you needing to read textbooks about indirect objects. In fact, I consider the use of grammar to be discriminatory against those who unfortunately didn't have a very good education in their own native language (which is the majority of the world's population). I think slapping 30 pages of grammar before every lesson is the easy way out -- instead we should strive for something that everybody can consume."


I'm not an expert, but that doesn't sound like a good way to learn a language. That's why I also use other sources, not just Duolingo.


I agree. I tried his method of not reading about grammar my first time going through the Spanish course and became so horribly confused that I quit near the end.

The inequality in teaching proper grammar is a societal problem, not a problem with the concept of grammar - grammar is very useful in a learner's understanding of a language. It seems to me that "the easy way out" would be to act like an understanding of grammar isn't useful in the comprehension of a language. Producing a method that allows the user to understand the grammar of another language in relation to their primary one while perhaps improving one's understanding of one's primary language - that's the challenge.


Well said. Ive been seeking out further resources to aid in my understanding of japanese grammar and it really has exposed to me how limited my understanding of my native english grammar really is. While its been an unaticipated brake on the learning process for me, ultimately its still been the most effective way for me to learn more and i find it quitre rewarding to increase my comprehension of native grammar along the way as well.


It's possible to have an intuitive understanding of the grammar of your native language without understanding all the terms or rules.


I'm not sure you really mean your understanding of the English grammar is limited. Being a native speaker of a language just about by definition means you're an expert at understanding (and using) the grammar of the language. Maybe what you mean is that you're limited in speaking about the grammar, that is, explaining why you say certain things a certain way.


It still could be optional. On the webpage version you can find notes for every lesson at least briefly explaining grammar in other languages, but not on mobile Japanese.


Kids learn without grammar but have language immersion and very flexible brains. Adults have more established brain patterns but can understand grammar concepts. Both methods work. Learning without formal grammar as an adult? I for one I'm glad that you people put the effort to teach us here in the comments. Thank you.


Wow. I could not disagree more with this concept. This is like an artist refusing to learn how to draw before they paint. You end up with abstract art that way, which is fine, but you won't be able to make any sense of it. Grammar is the foundation on which language stands.


I agree thay grammar has its use, and I learn from it often, but I think this claim is a stretch. Grammar is not the foundation of a language; grammar is the study of an already existing foundation created by centuries of people mimicking the language patterns of each other. Its the same with many formal academic disciplines. The study of physics does not govern the universe; physics is just is the model we have created to explain and talk about the actual rules governing the universe. Gravity existed long before we called it gravity. Language patterns existed long before we parsed them into nouns and verbs. Duolingo attempts to teach the patterns by immitation and example rather than formal study. Both have their merits and no one is stopping you from having a grammar resource by your side when you use Duolingo. To each their own.


I also like to use Lingodeer. They have optional detailed grammar info before each lesson.


Chiketto o kaimasu


But really, can someone explain why we should use は here instead of を?


You probably know

は is to bring about a discussion on a topic.

を is to indicate the target object of an action.

Sometimes をis referred to as the particle after the object of a transitive verb. Well, it is helpful to understand this way at the beginning, but the bad thing is it also limits your understanding by the rules English grammar.

Think about using the particle as you need it for your intention, whether you want to bring up an object as a topic (hence putting the emphasis on it) or simply want to mention it as the target object of an action (less emphasis). Using either は or を can both be perfectly correct, and which is more suitable depends on the context.


This movie seems interesting.


Let's go to buy the tickets.

チケートは 後で 買います。いま帰りたいだけです。

About the tickets, I will buy them later. Now I only want to go home.


I think its different ways of saying the same thing. チケットをかいます Is more direct, while the answer here is a bit softer. Like "a ticket will be bought" (implying by you). Its like 明日は買い物します!is lit. "Tomorrow is shopping" but it's implied you are doing it. Bith ways are fine. I hipe that what Ive said is correct and helps a bit!


It's because the speaker is telling you about "ticket." If he used "wo" he would be telling you about himself. The information is the same but the focus is different. Ques: Do you have TICKETS?

Ans: Chiketto wa, ato de kaimasu.

Ques: What are YOU going to do after this?

Ans: Ato de chiketto wo kaimasu.


If your main object (concern) is the ticket, you can choose を. When your main object is travel or concert or the other events or issues, は is better choice.


Because this example sentence is dumb. Instead of making "I" the subject of the verb like the English actually says, they translated it as, "The ticket [I will] buy later."

Also: people keep repeating that "は is a topic marker"(?) mantra but honestly, that never made any sense to me. And now I know why, after teaching English in Japan: は indicates the SUBJECT of the sentence. Like subject and predicate subject. In English, "I" (as opposed to object: me), "she" (vs her), he (vs him), they (vs them), etc.


You forgot "atode". 後でチケットを買います。


Depending on what you want to emphasize you would use one sentence or the other.



you are saying/emphasizing what YOU will be (buy)ing (later). (I is implied but the topic of the conversation can be 田中さん.)



you are saying/emphasizing WHAT it is that you will be (buy)ing (later).


Why チケット instead of きっぷ ?


Roughly, ticket to ride is きっぷ. Ticket to enter is チケット.


Like a place ticket (チケット) or a bus ticket (きっぷ)?


Yes. If you go to Disneyland, you'll buy チケット. A bus ticket you can say きっぷ, but it's rare to buy bus tickets except for the long distance. You will pay by cash or pre-charged card for the local area bus in Japan.

Air ticket is チケット, 航空券, or 搭乗券 not きっぷ.


Can I not use "後で" at the beginning of the sentence?

For example:



後でチケットを買います。sounds natural.

For now, you have something you should do or something you want to do.


後でチケットかいます worked for me. Although I would have included an を, personally.


Am I the only one to be taken aback by the loanword when we've already learned きっぷ?


I try to think of it as asking myself a question: WHO will buy a ticket later? 私は後でチケットを買います。(puts the emphasis on me) Versus: I will buy WHAT later? 後でチケットは買います。(puts the emphasis on the ticket)


WHO:私が後でチケットを買います。 WHAT:チケットは、後で買います。


It would be helpful if when an exercise starts accepting kanji (such as 後 here) it did not then mark the hiragana wrong.


There is a katakana ヲ in the choices instead of hiragana を. I selected it, to get 後でチケットヲ買います。 Phonetically this is perfect but orthographically it is a little weird.


I said 後でチケットを買います。I believe this is correct as ticket is the direct object being bought. I would love a native speaker to correct that and tell me why it's wrong.


チケットは後で買います is not excepted. 買います is the kanji way of writing かいます right?


what is the difference between kippiu and chikito?


For those interested, あとでチケットを買う is also accepted.


Ato de ticket wo kaimasu... should be allowed


Thank you very very much, mnau. For revealing... " My dream in life is I don't understand grammar so your not getting any from Duolingo "
Holy whatever! Guess I can stop wasting my time commenting and reporting. This certainly explains a lot! What a totally ridiculous idea. And I notice we aren't getting the usual rush of illogical excuses offered by the usual apologists. Again, thank you mnau!


Why は and not を


For all you folks confused here, 「を」is a lie! You will not need to use 「を」in most sentences.


Only in casual, colloquial conversation. Or IM/SMS. But LEARNERS should always write as grannatically as possible until they fully understand the syntax. を is a very important component for helping learners understand what's going on, since it marks the object of an action (and sometimes the direction of an action, as in (place)を出る").

This is doubly true because Japanese seldom includes an explicit reference to the grammatical subjext (marked with は). So if you drop を too, the function of the various parts can be very hard to decipher even for intermediate level learners.


Particles don't confer case on nouns; they simply indicate it. The object of a verb is still its object, with or without a particle. Full expression makes use of particles.

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