1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Japanese
  4. >
  5. "このレストランではタバコをすってはいけません。"


Translation:You cannot smoke in this restaurant.

July 2, 2017





Why are there two "ha"s in this sentence?


Multiple はs aren't necessarily wrong, though they're not common either. The literal meaning of why は is in this form is because the verb is the topic for いけません which means "will be not good."

The て form has many uses. One of them is to allow multiple verbs in a single sentence (Example: "I ate fish and drank water" translates to さかなを食べて水をのみました). Normally, only the final verb is regularly conjugated, which is why すって is used. The literal translation of this sentence is "To smoke in this restaurant will not be good," which is translated to English as "you cannot" or "you must not."

Bear in mind that this explanation was never given to me and I am inferring it based on all that I have learned so far.


It's because it seperates the words; 吸ってすって and いけ (not allowed to); and it also introduces このレストラン(this restaurant) as the subject of the sentence.


Is it correct to translate it to: "It is not allowed to smoke in this restaurant"?


I don't think "it is not allowed to [do an action]" is natural-sounding English in most cases. An acceptable way to phrase it would be "Smoking is not allowed in this restaurant."


Or, "This restaurant doesn't allow smoking."? Anyone see problems with translating the Japanese to this?


And yet "In this restaurant smoking is not allowed" was rejected by duolingo...


"There is no smoking in this restaurant", marked incorrect.

  • 1165

Can't we say "smoking in this restaurant is not allowed"or "you aren't allowed to smoke ..."? Verb "allow" seems to be more suitable here rather than "can", which has at least two meanings -- "is allowed" and "is possible" (compare with "you cannot smoke under water" :)


It marked "You may not smoke inside this restaurant." as incorrect for what it claimed was two reasons. First, it wanted "in" instead of "inside." I am pretty sure that this is a distinction without a difference. [I don't think you can be in the restaurant without being inside of it. ] Second, it said it wanted "cannot" instead of "may not." But this is a permission thing. About the only reason you "cannot" smoke is if there is no oxygen inside! I would argue that in English, not only should it be "may," but that "can" (in all reasonable likelihood) is incorrect.


When is it appropriate to tell this to somebody else using いけません?


Bruh, Japanese establishments let you smoke inside!! Bars and restaurants have smoking areas and it's really cool until your french toast smells like タバコ


Why is it incorrect (albeit odd) to say "one cannot smoke in this restaurant"?


Shouldn't the answer be "you must not smoke in this restaurant"


Why is inside wrong? I put: "You cannot smoke inside this restaurant" and it marked it wrong...


No sucking tobacco in this restaurant.


Said no one in Japan

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