1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Japanese
  4. >
  5. "あしたはカラオケに行きましょう。"


Translation:Let's go to karaoke tomorrow.

June 21, 2017



I believe it should be "Let's go to karaoke tomorrow"


Let's is a contraction of let us, so it is perfectly fine, even if nowadays it is certainly less common and sounds perhaps stilted at times. If anything, it is at least more emphatic.


It is not less common, it is virtually unused in casual speech, certainly not in a conversation about karaoke. It's something that would come up in a presidential speech, "Let us rebuild the great tradition of blaa blaa" and is inappropriate here.


My point was that it is less common nowadays (compared to before, which was perhaps not clear), not necessarially less common than "let's". Google's n-gram viewer seems to show the same trend.

That said, I don't think it is "inappropriate" here, it's just unusual.


No native speaker would reasonably use "Let us" here because in modern contexts, it is never used in equal social standing. "Let us pray", "Let us go see what all the fuss is about" or other rhetorical constructs occasionally are used but the underlying assumption is that the person speaking is higher status than the listener and would never expect them to say no. It's similar to Wouldn't...? ->Would not...? style questions where the formal tone brooks no argument.


That's one way to interpret it, certainly, but I disagree that it inherently implies a difference in social status. If we really wanted to, we could imagine this being someone of high social status, or pretending to be, speaking to another of equal rank. Register is certainly a factor, but that needn't be bound to rank.

I've already highlighted several possible uses and these all seem reasonable to me, but then perhaps I am not such a reasonable native speaker (and I do assure that I am a native speaker). I've no issue with using it, nor do I with "would not" — as per your example — if the situation demands such; be it for emphasis, authority, or what have you. Words are tools to be used to express oneself.

We can see in the translated sentence that "let's" is shown as the translation, as it probably should be, so as not encourage any potentialy costly social mishaps. I'm fairly certain this has been the case since I made my initial comment, whether it has been changed in the exercise or not.

My intial comment hinted at essentially everything anyone has said against "let us" here, so I'm a mite surprised there has been so much said. I stand by the fact that it is uncommon, and may even prove downright awkward at times, but it is not incorrect. If you choose not to use it in "common speech" that's on you. If I look like a pompous fool for doing so, so be it.


Your point was understood but mine was apparently unclear. I was implying that it's unfair to say less common because that still implies that it is used to some extent, whereas I was saying that it is actually never used in a casual context. Hyperbole. But whateva


No, I did understand you.

In my experienve at least, it is used "to some extent", even if that is only to intentionally sound old-fashioned with humerous intent. More often perhaps it is to be sarcastic, pointed, scathing, derisive, or just emphatic, which decoupling the contraction tends to do. Common? Maybe not, but certainly not never used.

I'm sure in many cases though it would sound more like asking for permission on behalf of more than one person rather than making a suggestion.


It is not "perfectly fine" just because it is grammatically correct. Nobody would say "let us" when talking about going to karaoke unless they were trying to be snooty.


The important thing is NOT what we say in English - this isn't an English learning exercise, it's a Japanese one. If non native English speakers have entered "let us" instead of let's, they should be given the point. It's archaic English, sure, but that doesn't actually matter because it does not substantially affect your understanding of the Japanese.


ive always thought karaoke was a native japanese word but here it is written in katakana


Believe it comes from kara (empty) and oke (orchestra); hence, katakana.


That still doesn't explain the katakana


My thought is that since 'oke' comes from the European 'orchestra' it is a loan word and therefore qualifies for katakana.


Katakana is also used for newer words that just don't have kanji assigned to them.

My guess is that this is done so that it's still easy to separate the word from the articles, verb tenses and incidental things you use hiragana for. Don't quote me on that, though...


The real issue is that people would say "let's go karaoke" and not "to karaoke"


Not where I'm from, I think that might be a dialect/regional thing.

Edit: Your translation is using karaoke as a verb, whereas the Japanese is using it as a noun in this case, which might be why it would be rejected.


Thanks for pointing that out Isola. I mistakenly thought karaoke was a verb.


This is the more important point and I was marked incorrect for it


I agree. We never use "let us" in this context on modern English. This sounds like something a Shakespearian character would say. I bet the average person wouldn't even know the abreviation of "let's" is.


Come on, allow "tomorrow let's go to karaoke"


What is wrong with using "the karaoke" instead of "karaoke"?


Karaoke is an uncountable noun, so you wouldn't modify it with a definite article (the) unless you were referring to something specific.

(Edit to say apparently some dialects do say "the karaoke" so you can make a case for it. In my dialect we do not.)


Karaoke is a place, you'd say let's go to the karaoke add you'd say let's go to the bowling alley. At least that is what makes sense to me.


I also got this marked wrong, I dont know if the exercise means karaoke as a verb for some reason, but I think it's more natural to say "the karaoke". In all fairness I think they should both be correct


I live in Japan and in my experience 'Let's go karaoke' is more common than 'let's go to karaoke' because we tend to think of Karaoke as a verb more than a destination....


How would you say that in Japanese?


As far as I can tell, カラオケ is a noun in Japanese, but is like many other nouns used with をする to turn it into an activity. So, カラオケをしましょう (let's do karaoke) would be a way of using the word like a verb. カラオケに行きましょう (Let's go to Karaoke) isn't wrong either, as it's used in the same way as we'd say "Let's go to the Arcade." In Japanese, if you want to specify the establishment you want to do kararoke in, you'd say カラオケバー or カラオケ屋、for Karaoke bar and establishment respectively.


As others have noted, 'let us' is never used in common speech, it is used in rituals and formal settings. For example, Catholic priests usually say 'let us pray'.


I know it says "ni ikimashou", so technically "karaoke" should be treated as a place rather than as an activity, but "Let's go do karaoke tomorrow" is what I put as it seems most natural. Either way, "to karaoke" does not appear to be correct (as "karaoke" is not being used as a proper noun). It should be "to a karaoke (bar) or "to the karaoke (bar)".


Here I am again because it gave me the same question. I know it wanted "to karaoke", but without "the" or "a" it doesn't form a natural sentence. "karaoke" (uncapitalized) isn't a proper noun.


I see what you're getting at, because we say "go to the zoo" or "go to the park", but it's not about being a proper noun.

"go to school" - school is not a proper noun

"go to work" - work is not a proper noun

"go to dinner" - dinner is not a proper noun

"go to karaoke" - completely natural to me and and a phrase I use often

I'm interested to know where you and the others who find this phrase unnatural are from. Maybe we can narrow down the region/dialect.


Why are these discussion options not available on the iPhone app? these make learning so much better and easier! At least it's not available for Japanese. Not sure about other languages.




Why isn't "Let's go Karaoke tomorrow" accepted?

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