"ちかくもとおくもないです。"
Translation:It is neither near nor far.
73 Comments
mo is used to add something to an object. “This place sure is clean AND tidy” to is used to add objects together. “Me AND my friends are leaving now.”
近く (adverb form of 近い) も (particle - also) 遠く (adverb form of 遠い) も (also) ない (is not) です (polite form).
I've also seen と used as "and" in sentences here. What's the difference between usage of と and も as "and"? ありがとう
と is used like "plus". It means "x and y" when listing multiple things/people/places. E.g. ジョンとマリア ("John and Maria"). も is used like "also". It means "both x and y" when used with a positive verb, and "neither x nor y" when used with a negative verb. E.g. ちかくもとおくもない (literally "both 'not near' and 'not far' " -or in other words- "neither near nor far")
Oh! So like: xもyもzじゃない = Not any of those. xとyとzじゃない = Not all of those. Is that right?
I am not certain about this but looks like it should be: xもyもzも and xとyとzは (like 学校とぎんこうはちかくないです)。
Not exactly the janai at the end of the to is giving of a negative tone and not positive tone plus janai means no or do not But I completely get the concept and I totally agree with it but just keep it in the back of your mind
It's probably confusing things to call it the adverb form when it's being used as the negative, since we don't use adverbs like that in English. Easier to think of 〜くない as the negative suffix of an い-adjective, but the く and the ない aren't really tied together, so you can use the same ない for both.
It's a little like in English if you reused the same "anti-" for two different things:
"Do you like cats, or do you like dogs?" "Neither! I'm anti-cats AND dogs!"
they shouldn't teach it like this. better would be: い-adjectives end in い, am i rite, and when you modify a noun with them u use them with the い, wo we've got as an example: ビルは高い (the building is high), or 高いビル (a high building). now, sometimes u gotta cojugate the adjective, like when u want to say a building isnt high but without saying its low. there u replace the い with the くない (い-adj ONLY) to make it negative, so going back to the building: ビルは高くない (the building is not high), or 高くないビル (the building that is not high). u can also make them past by replacing the い with かった for both cases, so 高かったビル (the building that was high), and 高くなかったビル (the building that was not high.
by the way, ビル means building i think?
Some people already did in the comments, but here you go:
ちかく(near) も(also) とうく(far) も(also) ない(not) です。(to be.)
Grammatically speaking, both near, far and not all affect the verb to be.
This is a spelling/writing rule in Japanese. Extended 'o' sounds are written in hiragana as a う rather than as a お. There are exceptions to this rule! In this case, 'tooku' is written in hiragana as とうく, but it is still pronounced as 'to-o-ku'
There are indeed exceptions to this spelling rule, and 遠い（とおい） happens to be one of them. So as 69GS pointed out, the hiragana long 'o' in Fonzie's comment (as well as your own) should be とおく rather than とうく.
WherEEEEVEER YOU AREE
So, let me get this straight:
In English we have a set expression:
Both A and B ... ("double positive")
In Japanese the same expression would be:
A も B も
Now, for the inverse, "double negative" we have:
English: Neither A nor B ...
Japanese: A も B も ない ...
Is there any reason why my sentence didn't work? "It is neither close by nor far away"
None that I know of. My guess is that Duo simply didn't have "close by/far away" as accepted entries yet, so next time you come across this, flag your answer as correct.
How do we know here that the subject is "it" rather than "he," "she," or anything else?
We don't. You can only know that from context and since we don't have any, any pronoun should be acceptable. If it isn't accepted it should be reported.
Not quite true in this. In this case touku is the negative form of toui, even though it takes the same form as the adverb
Rubbish. 遠く is just a conjugated form of 遠い and the correct term for this is adverbial form. Such a form can be used in non-negative phrases as well, for example 遠くなる (to become far/distant).
How can we be sure that the negative applies to the whole thing? Or is it a matter of context? How would you say 'it is near and not far'?
Because it says "A also, B also": ちかく{も}とおく{も}. That way whatever comes next applies to both.
"It is near and not far" would be ちかくて、とおくない[です]
I think they made a mistake; it should be 'neither... nor... ' and not 'neither... or... '.
532
So what も does, is set up a list of items without any preference.
犬も猫も好きです。 I like cats and dogs equally, without preference for one over the other. 近くも遠くもないです。It is equally not far and not close.
Near (ちかく) and(?) (も) Far away (とおく) and(?) (も) Negative (ない) polite ending (です) Im not exactly sure about も, as before its had said と meant "and". Maybe someone can help with that.
I understand. But it's been a while since I used the も も ない.... Accidently tried to figure out what the word ちかくも meant,. But it's not a word.. silly me
Makes me think it is some kind of thing of the mind "it is neither near nor far". lol
It means "not" and in this case combines with the もs (basically meaning "also") to make "neither ... nor".
God i never knew the word "nor" i'm also bad in english than in japanese xD
Sorry to ask this but why is there a ない before も ? Is it to make nor or what?
This seems like a quintessential japanese expression, allowing speaker to be completely non-commital, have no opinion about it at all.
- 201
I don't like the "no listening exercises" button, which I often accidentally press.
- 492
I also hit that by mistake sometimes, but love the feature for those times when I need the sound muted.
Well, everyone else probably does. How would you translate ちかくもとおくもないです without the use of 'neither'? I suppose "It is not near and also not far" is possible, but sounds rather stilted.
- 492
Alcedo-Atthis: your great opening line notwithstanding, wouldn't "It's not near or far" be grammatically correct?
that's what I thought. near nor far is enough for making clear they are both not true. It is probably older English, so it sounds strange
- 12
It's grammatically incorrect to use nor without neither (at least in this sort of construction), even if the intended meaning can be guessed.
