1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Japanese
  4. >
  5. "アイヌの人に会いました。"


Translation:I met Ainu people.

June 22, 2017



Where are the Ainu from?


The Ainu are the indigenous people in Hokkaido.


As they are indigenous, I assume they would speak Japanese (or a dialect at least?) so why is the name in katakana instead of hiragana?


Well in modern times the Ainu people can speak Japanese, but the Ainu language itself has no relation whatsoever with the Japanese language. Also nowadays when it is written, they actually just use katakana.


They use an extension of Katakana. Japanese (mostly) can't finish a syllable with a consonant but Ainu can so they use half sized katakana for that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ainu_language#Special_katakana_for_the_Ainu_language


イランカラㇷ゚テ。アイヌイタㇰ クハウェアン エアイカㇷ゚ ヤ?


Since katakana is for words that are from languages other than Japanese and アイヌ comes from their own language. That's my guess.


They speak Ainu langauge. Ainu language is called アイヌイタㇰ (ainu itak) in Ainu.


Iirc the gov't doesn't recognize them as the indigenous people


The bill to recognize them just passed last year (2019).


Seeing as how literally the next thing the Japanese government did involving the Ainu was cancel the dance they were supposed to do at the Olympics opening ceremony, I would have to agree with you there.


seems like it still falls short though


Northern Japan, particularly Hokkaido (and the Isle of Sakhalin, I think). They are one of the indigenous peoples of northern Japan and the surrounding areas.


They are the aboriginal people of Hokkaido and Sakhalin Island. They are not considered fully Japanese.


I think they live in some parts of Russia and Japan


There is a strong theory that the Ainu were once all over the Japanese islands but were pushed up north to the harsh areas and were treated much like the native Americans by the white people


I don't know about "all over," but they were certainly in Northern Honshu (the Tohoku regiin) too. I think they traditionally ranged farther north and east than south (where they'd have to compete for resources with the Emishi peoples as well as Wajin "Japanese," would they not?).


It's believed that the Jomon people were related to the Ainu but full intermixed with the Yamato people to make what we now consider Japanese people.


But the Ainu share ancestors with the Japanese so perhaps it's more like the Ainu and Japanese treated each other like the countless of native tribes did in Northern America... "White people", I assume you mean colonizers..? You say it like the color of their skin mattered, lol. They were no different than the native tribes already in war with each other. Just another tribe added to the mix that happened to be much stronger and advanced.


I recommend learning more about the history of the Ainu and the history of Native Americans.


Probably a better Western comparison would be the Ainu and the Sami.


Hmm, how did white people treat the native Americans? Most of their deaths were caused by foreign diseases and not by colonisers themselves. Many Europeans died of diseases brought by the colonisers to Europe too.


Hmm, how did white people treat the native Americans?

This is a good starting point:


You can also read about the Indian Removal Act and the Trail of Tears if you're looking for a deeper understanding.


Thanks for bringing this to light, I read through the wiki page and it seems I was right, most massacres ranged in deaths from tens to hundredths and sometimes thousands. If population of native Americans was around ~60 million then the massacres account for less than 0.01% of all their deaths. Of course, I denounce all massacres perpetrated by both sides, but it's clear they were killed mostly by disease like I said, don't try to flip history upside down to fit your political agenda.


I'm not sure what my political agenda is. I believe in truth and respect for all people. You asked how white people treated Native Americans. White people (of whom I am one) massacred Native Americans in the thousands. They forced them from their lands with the Indian Removal Act because white people couldn't co-exist with them. This resulted in the Trail of Tears, where thousands more died due to the terrible conditions of their forced relocation.

From history.com:

White Americans, particularly those who lived on the western frontier, often feared and resented the Native Americans they encountered: To them, American Indians seemed to be an unfamiliar, alien people who occupied land that white settlers wanted (and believed they deserved). Some officials in the early years of the American republic, such as President George Washington, believed that the best way to solve this “Indian problem” was simply to “civilize” the Native Americans. The goal of this civilization campaign was to make Native Americans as much like white Americans as possible by encouraging them convert to Christianity, learn to speak and read English and adopt European-style economic practices such as the individual ownership of land and other property (including, in some instances in the South, African slaves). In the southeastern United States, many Choctaw, Chickasaw, Seminole, Creek and Cherokee people embraced these customs and became known as the “Five Civilized Tribes.”

But their land, located in parts of Georgia, Alabama, North Carolina, Florida and Tennessee, was valuable, and it grew to be more coveted as white settlers flooded the region. Many of these whites yearned to make their fortunes by growing cotton, and they did not care how “civilized” their native neighbors were: They wanted that land and they would do almost anything to get it. They stole livestock; burned and looted houses and towns; committed mass murder; and squatted on land that did not belong to them.

State governments joined in this effort to drive Native Americans out of the South. Several states passed laws limiting Native American sovereignty and rights and encroaching on their territory. In Worcester v. Georgia (1832), the U.S. Supreme Court objected to these practices and affirmed that native nations were sovereign nations “in which the laws of Georgia [and other states] can have no force.” Even so, the maltreatment continued. As President Andrew Jackson noted in 1832, if no one intended to enforce the Supreme Court’s rulings (which he certainly did not), then the decisions would “[fall]…still born.” Southern states were determined to take ownership of Indian lands and would go to great lengths to secure this territory.

More at the source.


How ignorant can you be? Sure probably most deaths were caused by diseases given their inevitably large-scale, invisible impact--but don't be misleading into thinking that the colonisers didn't massacre them in great amounts!


I like how you somehow managed to turn Japanese tribal conflicts from hundreds of years ago into a way to attack white people. Impressive.


Hokkaido wasn't officially part of Japan until the Meiji restoration. In an attempt to modernize and westernize the country, the Ainu who up to this point had lived mostly as hunters and fishers were forbidden to practice their own religion and culture or speak their own language and were compelled to adopt Japanese names. Attempts to turn them into farmers mostly failed and for decades the population struggled with poverty. Only in the 2000s were they lawfully recognized as an indigenous people by the Japanese government and official apologies were extended. So yes, in fact mistreatment of the Ainu people has quite a few similarities to Native Americans and Australian aborigines.


This cultural suppression was also seen with the Okinawan people who the Japanese also forced to modernize; not only is Okinawa the subject of increased obesity and westernization, but their native cultures are being suppressed, their clay sources for traditional Ryukyu pottery are being paved over, and the land is increasingly turning into a tourist sink; this is not good for the economy, as when a drop in tourism occurs, they will be devastated, a region with an already poor population.

Edit: To add on: due to COVID-19 restrictions, businesses had to calculate shrewdly in order to simply stay open; the military mainstay and tourist mainstay were gone for over three months (international flights were restricted, and the military was restricted from doing activities off base, even delivery). Many businesses closed down, including a favorite restaurant of mines. I would hear stories of people quickly starting an impromptu delivery service, or simply close down so that they would not lose money. There was someone I knew that had to move back with her parents, as she lost all three of her part-time jobs when COVID-19 restrictions were starting to be put in place.

I mention this information, as it is biting irony to what actually happened sometime after I posted this originally; I was already machinating the devastation in a tourist economy. It is good that things are recovering (at least, for Okinawa).


You just did that yourself, actually.


How's this an 'attack' on white people? could you clarify your straw man argument?


Im really surprised theyre teaching about Ainu people on duo...


Though they don't really say what Ainu people are anywhere...


It's good, because they are the indigenous peoples of Hokkaido and northern Honshu. Like all indigenous peoples, they deserve recognition institutionally and societally.


I put "I met the Ainu people" and it was marked wrong.

"Meet with" is not the only grammatically correct option, you can also simply "meet" people.


steevmak, did you use the report button under the sentence correct/incorrect results?


I input: "I met with an Ainu person." And got it correct. I've recently received 4 emails confirming the team has added my suggestions. So, it's possible there have been some recent changes.

Meanwhile, can anyone answer this for me:

Also I'm wondering on the side if "I met the Ainu people" would use たち?

So, アイヌの人たちに会いました

Ah, just found another exercise asking me to block together the Japanese translation for "I met Ainu people." The correct answer there was "アイヌの人に会いました"。To see its sentence discussion click here.

So, is たち more casual? I'm not quite sure when to use it and when not to yet.


With「アイヌの人に会いました」, i picture one person. With 「アイヌの人たち」or 「アイヌの人々」,clearly one us talking about more than one person. 「人たち」is more common in speech while 「人々」is a sophisticated version of the same thing.


When I hear アイヌの人たち, it sounds to me like its referring to a specific group of Ainu people that the listener knows about. アイヌの人々 sounds more like a general statement about Ainu people. Is there any kind of difference between the two, or is that my misunderstanding?


I don't quite think of an example how the Ainu people can be specific "with the use of the" in this situation. I tend to say it is not correct. If we want to say the Ainu people will be そのアイヌの人 (more naturally use 彼 or directly say his name).


it is used with this verb "aimasu/au"


Because "au" is an intransitive verb.


Isn't が used with intransitive verbs?



John ni aimashita.

I met John.

In the English sentence, "meet" is a transitive verb, and the direct object is John. Direct objects of transitive verbs are marked with を in Japanese. But 会います (aimasu) is an intransitive verb unlike its English counterpart. So "John" is not the direct object, it is the indirect object / target of the sentence, which is marked with に.


Densha ni norimasu.

I take the train.

In English, "take" is a transitive verb, and the direct object is "train". But 乗ります (norimasu) is intransitive, and 電車 (densha) is the indirect object / target, so it's marked with に.


Doa ga shimarimasu.

The doors are closing.

閉まります (shimarimasu) is an intransitive verb, but in this case ドア is the subject of the verb, which is why it is marked with が.


One of the used particles, I'm sure.


How would the Japanese be diffeent for "met " and "have met "?


My bet would be (for this example): アイヌの人に会ったことがあります。


Yeah, [casual past]ことがある is the perfect past form (have/has done).


Why is it that hovering over アイヌ gives "Ainu" (fair enough) and "dog" (!)?

I get that いぬ/犬 means "dog", but is there an actual connection between アイヌ and いぬ, or is it just a phonetic link made by Duolingo?


Yes, it's just a phonetic link. There should be a line that shows where Duolingo has separated the words.

This isn't the best example but it's the only screenshot I have on hand. The first two options show that they are translating the phrase "thank you". The third option is only translating the word "thank". You can tell by that line that comes right after it, which if you follow it up cuts off at the you. It's hard to explain in words, but I hope looking at it visually makes it clearer.

So in your case, it reads アイヌ as a whole, but also offers a translation for just イヌ, which should have a similar line cutting off the ア.


Thank you, I had no idea that was what the line meant. (I think it would be nice if the translation made it clear that Ainu was the name of an ethnic group. As a proper noun it could be anything, and this was not a name I knew or sadly that most English speakers would know. )


It registers met "with" Ainu people but not met "the" Ainu people. Had the sentence in Japanese been 「アイヌの人 と 会いました」, "with" would be a more natural answer. As it stands, at the very least "the" should also be acceptable, I think.


Okay, is anybody else getting messed around with this one? One time I said "I met some Ainu people" and it corrected it to "I met with some Ainu people". This time around I added the "with" but now it says it should be "I met Ainu people"



Your best bet is to always open the discussion and look at the answer at the top to see what the expected answer is. Sometimes the corrections are correcting you from multiple correct answers, and the result is an answer that isn't actually accepted.

About your answer, I think the "some" is the problem, which isn't present in the Japanese.


The problem with Japanese sentences like this is, it's open to so many possible translations. I don't think most Japanese would say いく人のアイヌ人に会いました。If they say simply "アイヌ人に会いました." it could mean they met one, or more than one, Ainu, so in that case, "some" could work.


I see what you're saying in that "some" could work as an interpretive translation, but in this duolingo world of machine-graded translating, if you're wondering why your answer has been flagged as wrong it's probably for interpreting and adding words that aren't there (doesn't mean you didn't understand the answer or that you're wrong, just that your answer is graded "wrong" here).


The amount of time Duolingo throws this sentence at me, I started getting irritated at those poor Ainu people.


I have learned so much.


Golden kamuy ✨




Golden Kamui is an interesting and fun way to learn about the Ainu people.


"i've met ainu people" was rejected but I think it's ok


For "I've met Ainu people" that would be アイヌの人に会ったことがあります。


When the English past perfect is used for experiences then this is right, but the past perfect also has other uses, and those simply map to the Japanese past form.


How many of the Ainu people did he/she/they meet?


いいねー :c




Why is に used and not と?


I'm not positive, but I think 会うに means "to meet someone" (e.g. to be introduced) and 会うと means "to meet with someone" (e.g. to get together).


Why is "i met people of ainu" wrong?


Why is "i met the people of Ainu" wrong?


"Ainu" is the name of the people, not a place, so we say "Ainu people". Another example:

Place = France

I met the people of France.

People = French

I met French people.


golden kamuy


I met a person of Ainu.
Is this wrong?


Ainu isn't a place, it's the name of an ethnic group of people, so "of" doesn't work here.


No, Ainu isn't a country, like "Nihon+jin" if you want to use the "people" kanji.

Tokyoites = 東京の人


It doesn't necessarily need to be a country before the 人. I hear 大阪人 very often and 東京人 is a word too.


Keep in mind that language learning softwares and classes err on the side of conservative with grammar. 東京人 may be an understandable word or even a useable colloquialism, but it's not as correct (nor easy to understand for new learners) as 東京の人.


And I think that for latinamericans it is ラテン系




Were they looking for gold?


No, the Ainu people are native to the northern island of Hokkaido, which wasn't part of Japan until the 1800's. The Japanese feared being invaded by Russians, & thought this island would become a starting point for them, coz the Ainu were hunter gatherers, like the Native Americans. So, the govt encouraged Japanese people to go and live there, believing a population of "civilized people" would get the idea out of Russian heads. This spread diseases, much like the Native Americans, and devastated the Ainu


Sounds pejorative.

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