Translation:There is a convenience store across the street.
"Across the street there is a convenience store" should be accepted as a correct answer
Maybe you'd need to incorporate a は to make your translation correct? "As for across the street, there is a convenience store". Just a guess.
むこう=positional word meaning "on the other side"
に=particle used to show position in this case
Therefore, みちのむこうに= "across the street"
あります=to exist (for inanimate nouns only)
So then, コンビニがあります= "there is a convenience store"
Is むこう considered a postposition (as opposed to a preposition)? I'm studying linguistics but I am relatively early on in my degree and am not entirely clear on where positional words and adjectives are 'supposed' to go in Japanese.
Japanese and Korean use so- called "particles" which are postpositions. They generally do not overlap cleanly with English prepositions which is one of many reasons Japanese is difficult to learn.
"There is a convenience store on the other side of the street" should be accepted.
It is, and it sounds very weird on this sentence. The fact that it nasalises some n sounds is because it has been programmed to do so. Same goes for how it knows when to pronounce を as o and when as wo, etc . Synthetic speech is really getting quite sophisticated these days.
I would say it's not, since it pronounces some words in a weird way (some "n"s as "ng"s), but not every time, which makes me believe those are due to the way of speaking of the person who recorded it
Could somebody please explain why it's 「みちのむこう」 instead of 「むこうのみち」? Because in explainations of the 「の」 particle elsewhere, I've seen examples like 「かれの本」 ("his book") or 「あたしの天使」 ("tomorrows weather"). The further specification was followed by the more general part. So, wouldn't 「みちのむこう」 mean "the street of the other side" instead of "the other side of the street"? I've also run across a sentence with 「びょういんの入り口」 in this course, which baffled me well: "The hospital of the entrance" instead of "the entrance of the hospital"?
With の I find it helpful to read backwards and use "of". So, with your examples:
彼の本 → book of him, 明日の天気 → weather of tomorrow, 病院の入口 → entrance of hospital, 道の向こう → other side of street
Thanks for your reply :) So if I understand you correctly, the 「の」 particle generally works "backwards", seen from a western perspective?
In western languages, "his book" is basically read as "of all books, the one that is his". So the possessive pronoun further specifies the more general expression "book". But with 「彼の本」, it's the other way around, basically "of all his things, the thing that is a book"? So it's the "book" that further specifies the "his (things)", rather than the other way around?
"In western languages, "his book" is basically read as "of all books, the one that is his". So the possessive pronoun further specifies the more general expression "book". But with 「彼の本」, it's the other way around, basically "of all his things, the thing that is a book"? So it's the "book" that further specifies the "his (things)", rather than the other way around?"
I'd argue that that's not how possessives are interpreted in English. @Ever2662 is just pointing out that の functions like
's between two nouns X and Y - or, the other way around, like a reverse "of". The phrase "XのY" can often be interpreted as either "X's Y" or "Y of X"; わたしのほん could be interpreted as "my book" or "(that) book of mine". (Usually one of these translations will be preferred over the other based on context.)
Possessives are not really a matter of specific to general or general to specific. They deal only with the relationship of the possessed item or quality, and the possessor. I think this holds true for all languages I have learnt. The function of a possessive is to make clear this relationship. This often has the by-product of making clear which "specific" thing we are referring to, but that is not the main purpose.
In examples taken out of context the emphasis of a possessive cannot be known. Does "his book" emphasise the fact that it's a BOOK rather than "his newspaper", or does it emphasise that it's HIS book not your book, or my book? All that is down to context and really has nothing to do with how possessives work.
With の the thing being possessed goes after, the thing possessing goes in front. While in English there are varied ways to show a possessive relationship including forming compound nouns (e.g. table leg = leg of table), in Japanese the の particle covers all of them.
Another thing to keep in mind that I haven't seen suggested below is that when using の, the first half describes the 2nd half. No matter what comes first, the 2nd is the lasting item.
たけしのでんわばんごう - takeshi's phone number - it could be Sam's or John's, but its always a phone number.
ぼくのほん - my book - It could be blue, big or old, but its still a book.
みちのむこう - across the street - it could be across a pond, building or intersection, but its still across from something.
One thing I find myself doing is substituting in a couple of words to decribe the object to make sure I have the order correct. A lot of times, the first half of AのB can be dropped when its understood, such as when you're looking at the building across the street and you say むこうです. Theres no need to say みちの because its obvious what its across from.
I like to think of the particle having different uses. For example:
「彼の本」 ---> His book [the book of him]
「あしたの天使」---> Tomorrow's weather [the weather of tomorrow]
「 病院の入口 」---> Hospital's entrance [the entrance of the hospital]
These are examples for 「の」 being translated as " 's " in English.
Then 「の」can be used for other things, such as describing the subject it is attached to. For example:
To describe position:
「みちのむこう」The road across / The road on the other side The road = subject, Across = location -----> The subject's location
Think of 「の」here as "on" instead of "of/ 's".
To describe colour:
「オレンジ色のスカート」 ---> The orange skirt The skirt = subject, Orange = colour -----> The subject's colour
Although this last example is a bit different, I hope it makes more sense for you!
"Trees of green", "skies of blue", "clouds of white",... That last example might not be quite as different as it at first seems. :P
Think of の like a possessive particle, みちのむこう would translate to something like "the street's other side" while むこうのみち would be "the other side's street". Your examples of かれの本 and あたしの天気 actually show the same thing. The 'owner' in a の phrase is on the left, just like in English. So びょういんの入り口 would be "the hospital's entrance". Possession is weird because us English users have a million ways to say the same thing, and while the particle の is not actually a 's sometimes for the sake of translation it sometimes helps to think of it as such. I hope this helps clear some stuff up.
Does "over the road" mean the same thing as "across the street"? (Or, rather, *can* it mean the same thing?)
I don't think it can be used that way; I've never heard it used that way, at least.
Didn't accept "There's a convenience store at the other side of the road" on 2019/03/24.
Never heard "at" used in this kind of sentence in my life. It sounds quite odd to me. In which English speaking country do they use "at" instead of "on" for this sentence?
"There is a convenience store on the other side of the street" was accepted 31MAR19
Like testmoogle said, it might be because of your use of "at". I know I've heard/used "at the other end of the road", but I don't recall ever using "at the other side" before.
Be sure to report it of course, it might be accepted.
This would be useless for giving directions in Japan. There's always a convenience store across the street from everywhere.
Does it reject "Across the street there's a convenience store" because of expected emphasis? Otherwise it would seem a correct translation (to me!).
''There is a convenience store across the path'' was my answer, shouldn't it be accepted?
Any body think that "There is a Konbini across the street" should also be an acceptable answer ?
Yes, in general it is accepted. However, if you write Konbini instead of Convenience store you are marked wrong.
Why do they put these fixed words in? I keep forgetting about them and getting confused. Often I fail because i f them.
Why is this not "It is across the street from the convenience store"? Is it because of "コンビニがあります"?
Right, あります is the verb you use for "there is a [noun]," so that sentence wouldn't work because it's specifically saying "there is a convenience store."
For "across the street", I would rather use 「通りの向かい、とおりのむかい」as this seems to be the more common term in this regard.
Being the particle が after コンビニ shouldnt it be: "THE convenience store is across the street" ?
Don't take my word for it, but I don't think there's anything to specify a/an/the in Japanese.
Would this be acceptable: "There is Convenience store on the street over there."
I tried "there is a convenience store on the street opposite," and was marked incorrect. Thoughts? Is "the street opposite" a fair translation of 道の向こう, or am I misconstruing?
I've never heard "the street opposite" used to mean "across the street" in American English.