1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Japanese
  4. >
  5. "こまりました。さいふがありません。"


Translation:I'm in trouble. My wallet is missing.

June 21, 2017



Why isn't this past tense? It tells me "i was in trouble" is wrong.


I know! And there is an actual verb for 'to be lost/s.t. is lost' I see aru and I take it litterally.


Is it meaning 'I'm troubled?' Is the reason it takes past tense something to do with transitive/intransitive been form?


Yes you are along the line. 困りました=困っています which means in the state of trouble. So there is no pass tense involved. To say I was in trouble, use 困っていました


Agreed. I appreciate the explanation. I do, however, wish that Duolingo had a way to let us know that. Thanks...


Since there are “Tips and Notes” pages for several units, there may well be more in the upcoming version of the Japanese tree.


Thanks a lot !


Sorry, that's not right. I'm Japanese, and 困るis a basic word that you hear almost every day. It does not mean to be in a state of trouble. It describes your emotional state of being upset. This question should be deleted.


こまりました = trouble had started (but used to describe the present in relation to an event)

こまっています = I am in trouble (い indicating present)

こまっていました = I was in trouble (current form of being, but in the past... if that makes sense? You were in trouble at that moment in the past)




Fear not! Duo got a team of dogs.


yeah you found your purse in a hat that the dog sold.


"I have a problem, my wallet is missing." WRONG!


They do rather clearly indicate two sentances. ..


It seems that all of the comments thus far are in regards to the first sentence. I am actually confused by the second sentence though. I fail to understand how "さいふがありません" translates to "My wallet is missing". Shouldn't it rather be: "My wallet isn't (does not exist" or more naturally sounding "I don't have my wallet"?


"My wallet does not exist" sounds different to me as "I don't have my wallet." Look at the following example -

  • There is a table. (or equivalently A table exists.) (テーブルがあります)
  • I have a table. (テーブルを持っています

So similarly 財布がありません (My wallet does not exist, or my wallet is missing.) is different from 財布を持っていません (I do not have my wallet.)


Would you use 持つ if you aren't actually carrying the table? I was under the impression that 持つ only means have if you are carrying something, either physically (like a wallet) or metaphorically (e.g. to have insurance). Wouldn't you use ある if you aren't actually carrying the table?




My biggest problem with DuoLingo. Sometimes they want very specific exact translations and sometimes they want the nuanced translation. You never know which one they are will accept.


Wow, I can't believe this translation has been live on the net for a year now. Worst translation I've seen so far anywhere.

First of all 困る doesn't mean to be in trouble. This is a basic Japanese word that you will hear very frequently. It's on every drama. It means to be upset. Simple, folks!

When something goes missing, you don't say xxがありません. You say xはなくなった。財布がない simply means, the wallet is not there. So the correct translation is: I'm upset. The wallet isn't there. I get the feeling that this question was ripped from a movie subtitle. Not cool.


Does こまりました means more literally "the trouble has happened"?


I think it means more like "trouble has started".


i think its more like, "ive gotten into trouble"


Should "I got in trouble. I do not have my wallet." be accepted?


Duolingo specified "I lost" the wallet. Its absence could mean other things...


"There was trouble. My wallet is gone" is counted wrong.


”Xがなくなりました。" I lost X/ X has disappeared.


Also "(person X) died."


In the UK, a man keeps his money in a wallet and a woman keeps it in her purse. She then puts her purse in her handbag along with her keys and the kitchen sink.


So what a woman carries would never be called a wallet?


Nope, there's not much difference between a wallet and a purse other than one is owned by a man and one by a woman. I think maybe in the past they were designed differently but nowadays you can find plenty of purses that look identical to wallets, they just have a different name.

It's a pretty stupid distinction but I'd be surprised to hear a woman say she had a wallet or a man say he had a purse.


This may be regional. I'm a woman (in Ireland) and I carry a wallet. I would consider a purse to be more focused towards carrying coins, like one of those ones with the clippy tops; and a wallet flatter and for carrying notes and cards.


Interesting, thanks for answering!


The present perfect is what is grammatically correct in this situation in the UK "I have lost" Americans use the Simple Past "I lost".


My answer was marked wrong for the same reason. Reported.


"i got in trouble. I don't have my wallet" rejected but should be allowed


So what does this mean really? I am in trouble because my mother will chastise me for losing my wallet or I am really troubled because I lost my wallet?


I’m troubled because I lost my wallet.


First, translating こまりました as in trouble in this context is ridiculous in English. It could be troubled or worried. Second, lost or missing may be the intended meaning but using ありません is more like not having or not being. Languages don't correlate literally but the distinction would help understand how words or phrases are used.


こまりました does not mean worried in any case. It can only mean "troubled." "Worried" is 心配(しんぱい).

ありません does not necessarily mean "not have." It means "not exist" in the original meaning, and only from context one can derive this meaning to "not have." Definitely not appropriate to say "I do not have my wallet" in this case because it is more "I own the wallet but right now it is missing."

I am not sure why you would say "ridiculous" for "I am troubled." If you want a better word in this situation, consider "Dang/Fudge" (trying to be a bit more polite).


Great explanation KeithWong9


Komori mashita. Saifu ari masen.


Komarimashita. Saifu ga arimasen.


I was marked wrong for stating "my wallet is not here" instead of "my wallet is gone"


"My wallet is not here" is ambiguous. It could mean that it's never here to start with. I don't believe it should ever be included as an answer.


The sentence gives no indication it was there to begin with. My wallet is gone would be more like さいふはなくなった


It also gives no indication that it wasn't there to begin with hence the word 'ambiguous'


"my wallet is not there" should be accepted, right? Saifu ga arimasen. My (inferred from context) wallet (Saifu) is (ga) there (ari) not (masen)... Surely then "my wallet is not there" is the most direct possible translation.


財布がありません (saifu ga arimasen) is more literally "there is no wallet".

あります (arimasu) means "there is" or "there are" in the sense that something exists (the expletive or existential there). In your sentence, "there" is a location (an adverb). I think what you're suggesting would be closer to 財布はそこにありません (saifu wa soko ni arimasen).


"I'm in trouble" sounds like too much drama. Why not just say you have a problem? Surely there's a better translation that doesn't turn people into drama queens.

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