Translation:I made a suit at a department store.
There is no context to the sentence. Giving this sentance straight like this using 作ります without conjunction gives the impretion that you was the one that made it
This is true, and I think the Japanese sentence should be altered. Who makes their own suit at a department store?!
I make all kinds of things in department stores: suits, fruit salads, campsites, perimeter defenses. Everyone is usually really cool about it.
Because there is no context, there's no reason you can't have anyone be the subject for this sentence. They really need to up their game here.
After I figured out the wording DL expected here, I suspected it was the idea that you bought all the different parts to make a complete suit.
Does anyone know the etymology of sebiro? If it were in katakana, I woild guess Savile Row.
背広, 脊広 [せびろ, セビロ]:
1 (P, n) business suit (perhaps from "civil clothes" or "Savile Row")
From my Aedict dictionary.
Some possible origins of the word sebiro are: 1. A garment that makes your back (背）look wider (広い）. 2. Taken from 'Saville Row'. 3. Taken from 'Civil Clothes'. 4. Taken from the Scottish brand 'Cheviot'.
Main points: 1. Nobody knows. 2. Hardly anybody uses this word! Just say suit スーツ!
Wow that's one interesting fact.
That savike row sounded so convincing till I read all those possible explanation. Thx a lot.
I think the etymology isn't known for sure, as the dictionaries I've seen suggest a number of possible etymologies.
The fact that it is not in katakana really makes me think it could not be from any of these foreign words, unless it is so old, it has become naturalized. Even ramune, ラムネ, is written in katakana, though it was introduced less than a decade after the Meiji Restoration.
デパートで背広を作られました might work better to mean, "I had a suit made", but that is N4 grammar. スーツ is also a suitable replacement for 背広 (せびろ).
Id say it makes least sense, because in the dog sentence there was no confusion to be had, you just accepted it was a fantastic setup, but in this one it lures you to think its a cotidan scenario that employs common sense logic.
This English translation is at best confusing and at worst genuinely misleading. I'm not entirely sure what is even trying to be conveyed.
No. The subject is ambiguous, so it could be "they", but the verb is in past tense so it must be "made".
Why is this "a" suit and not "the" suit? Could it be "suits" instead of "suit"?
Not really sure, but based on other Duo lessons in the course I imagine for "the suit" they would put "そのせびろ" rather than just "せびろ".
Would this sentence mean, like, a clothes designer who has a suit they designed being sold?
Sorry DL !? ..... Try again.. It is possible to" have a suit made up" in a department store but unless you are a tailor employed by say Isetan or Mitsukoshi etc you won't be be involved in any making . Check the meaning of the adjective "bespoke"
Could 'They made...' or 'You made...' or even 'She made..' be acceptable?
Actually I recently saw a documentary showing Japanese shops selling cloth and they all had sewing machines available for customers to use
Not unless you're a tailor by profession, you didn't. You had it made for you.