Lesson 22: Te-wa, te-mo - topic/comment magic! How 〜ては and 〜ても REALLY work

You've heard of Japanese topic/comment structure but there are some simple facts that never get explained. They make life a lot easier! This video looks deeper into Japanese ては and ても and how they form compound sentences ▼See More ▼
Visit my Patreon community:
/ curedolly
Red Kokeshi Angel Patrons who help this work to be possible:
Tascha Keettel
Bibo
Steven Davis
Daniel Schulz
Liane Degville
Lola
Joe Wright
Larne Pekowsky
Rembot
Colin Jervis
Arzar
Kathy Worley
Mirnes Selimovic
Nico.Nico
Sincere thanks to all my patrons, supporters, students and fans
▼Please visit us at KawaJapa
learnjapaneseon...

[@Garbaz]

I never knew that even でも is made up of grammatical parts! Quite incredible how logical Japanese is.

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

Isn't it?

[@SingTingz31]

I had to watch this twice to finally get it. Thank you Cure Dolly Sensei for leaving us with this wealth of information. RIP

[@humanbean3]

these videos feel like the japanese teaching version of those raw as hell mixtapes you could get back in the day with someone either rapping or making amazing music on audacity or on an old 4 track drum kit or something; raw musical genius that only a select few will ever have the pleasure of hearing. Its organic indeed. pure fire.

[@aocchan]

Even when I think I already know something, like でも, when you explain it you really turn my surface knowledge into a deeper and more complete understanding of Japanese. Thank you.

[@BabyBalla3score]

Watched this video a few days ago and today I came across a sentence that used ては. I didn't understand its usage until a gentleman on japanese stack exchange helped me out. I immediately made the relation back to this video and couldn't believe I made that mistake. Good news is, I bet it won't happen again so easily. Thank you for this great video!

[@donconore]

That explanation of は really helps make the phrases 「〜てはいけません」("you must not do …" - Genki I) and 「私は〜なくてはいけません」("I must …" - Memrise) that bit clearer. ありがとうございます！

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

Yes that's right - there are a lot of common expressions that utilize the negative-linking function of 〜ては also, outside of formal Japanese quite a lot that reduce it to ちゃ (or じゃ where the て-form ends in a で). So really the 〜ちゃだめ I used in the video is exactly the same as 〜てはいけもせん, just with the ては reduced to ちゃ and the formal いけません replaced by the more informal だめ. Sometimes you will hear it cut down to just the ちゃ, so someone may say 行かなくちゃ meaning " I have to go", short for 行かなくては　(いけない or whatever negative phrase one would have topped it off with - the ちゃ, since we know it builds up to something negative, can stand on its own in very casual speech). It even gets cut down further to 行かなきゃ which is just a lazy version of 行かなくちゃ. Useful to know as you see them in anime and manga. I guess that fact is that Japanese, despite being a generally efficient language, has the most long-winded way of saying "must" - so people look for ways to cut it down!

[@Kyaro8888Cari]

I love the logic of Japanese. I've been studying for almost a year, and I'm really enjoying these videos (along with WaniKani).

[@retronickmusic]

Brilliant! I remember struggling so much to correctly learn, and apply the "と思う" form of expressing my thoughts, and the exploded view at the end is a thing of beauty. This way of speaking, and writing has served me very well, and I use it almost every time I write on HelloTalk. It really is easy with a bit of practice, and looks really impressive when you use it with a study partner for the first time.😎 このビデオがすごいと思う！

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

Thank you so much. I was a tiny bit worried about that map because it makes a relatively simple sentence look _more_ complex than it immediately appears, but I thought it was a good idea to demonstrate how the structure works on a sentence that _is_ quite easily graspable. The "bundling" function of と is something the textbooks don't really explain (at least in my experience), possibly because in easy sentences it is easy to skip it and still understand what is being said. But I want us to have a good foundation for understanding it in all circumstances. So I was happy to find a way to map it out in a manner that looks clear even though it's a bit complex! Happy to hear you're getting some output too. There's a lot of stress on input (and I agree that it is super-important) but the mind is really geared to picking up language as a means of communication. Things stick with us much better from having _used_ them ourselves and not only read or heard them. がんばってください。

[@retronickmusic]

KawaJapa CureDolly I learned how "と思う" works from "Japanese From Zero!" Books, and videos, so there is 1 book that teaches it early, and I think that George Trombley is very good at explaining it in his own way, but seeing this breakdown...I would have printed this out as my wall poster back then. Bravo.

[@hektor6766]

@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 One may be able to passably understand an easy sentence, but there's still the nagging question of just why とis there. Accepting it as a quotation particle just isn't good enough. The same issue arises when the books merely lump と in with こ　そ　あ　ど in front of いう, as I felt Bowring did. It's not a satisfactory elucidation of its function. Your explanation clears the confusion away.

[@tangoto1209]

Might have to watch this playlist five or six times to understand it fully

[@MrKlumpfluff]

Thanks Ms. Dolly. Great class, good examples, answering the emerging questions as they arrive during the lecture. You leave nothing out hanging, as far as I can see.

[@chungkng]

Thank you so much for this lesson. I've always felt like your lessons were amazing, but this one was just on a whole other level. The way you've been gradually building up the "LEGO" pieces has allowed me, and I'm sure many others, to come up with our own ways to understand things based on the fundamental elements you've helped us deploy. Thank you very much for this. The work you're doing is amazing and sometimes I find myself in disbelief over this fact. I can't wait until I get financially stable enough to support you on Patreon. About the usage of も to mean "as much as" or "even", I came up with a thought process which I found was kinda interesting, see if you agree with me: も, being the inclusive particle, in such cases really seems to be doing exactly just that. Upon being attached to a construction such as "空っぽのびんで", what it does is really just include it, that is, recognize it, acknowledge it. Now, after that recognition takes place and the sentence goes on, the thing that is happening here is that the recognition is taking the form of "although" you mentioned. So, there is this information about the jar, the way it is being, and I include it, I recognize it, and I have something else to say about it. That something else can be attached to the sentence through the logical usage of an "although". The jar is empty, I (も) include (acknowledge) that fact, BUT I have something else to say about it. So, although the jar is empty, as much empty as it is, dropping it is still bad. What do you think of this?

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

Yes I think that is right. Also も as the reverse partner of は implies that the comment on the topic it marks is the _same_ as the comment on another (often implied) topic. So 空っぽのびんでも is saying that the comment on the topic "empty bottle" is the _same_ as the comment on another topic - presumably "full bottle". In other words, even though it is empty it is still a bad thing to drop it (just the same as if it were full).

[@chungkng]

@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 that makes so much sense now that you mention it! Thanks for the thoughtful reply.

[@niket527]

As usual, this clears up so much! I often see things like 「something something」してはいけません and although I got the general feel that it means "you mustn't do that" now I see why.

[@rapidriver]

本を落としてるルフレかわいい~ Nice video! The も and は being opposites thing hit me like a bus.

[@elezraita]

Ｉ love how 空っぽ is a noun, but the dictionaries and even CD define in English using adjectives. 空っぽ noun : empty, vacant, hollow. This may be the case if it's being used with a の in the dictionary, but it is not. Most confusing. If we are going to define nouns, we should do so with nouns.

[@Nic0Flores]

Until now, I had the intuition that ちゃ was one way or another related with しまう/ちゃう because it also can have a negative implication. Once again I got this feeling just trying to relating things, because books, apps and websites I have been using don't take care of giving an appropriate explanation. Thank you very much Dolly sensei!

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

Yes this is one of those points that rarely gets explained - and this ちゃ does kind of resemble ちゃう, although they are in fact different and have different implications. ちゃう can be negative but is by no means necessarily so (and is not a conjunction leading to a negative result but more like a finisher on something already said). More on しまう/ちゃう here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/jKq9iKKAeLiEa7M

[@arpitkumar4525]

This is a little hard to digest but I think I will get it if I keep practising. Will look for more such sentences

[@jaakkohintsala2597]

really useful info on wa

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

Thank you!

[@dolores6722]

This really organised and solidified some knowledge I had lying scattered all around my brain. Thank you for your hard work sensei! I wonder if では (or じゃ) at the beginning of some sentences uses this grammatical pattern too. Like in では、始めましょう。

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

Thank you! I actually considered talking about では/じゃ in this lesson since it is somewhat connected but I ended up feeling it was too far a digression. The で in the sentence-starter version really bundles anything - a whole meeting, a conversation, the current situation (having arrived in class, finished a lesson etc). Technically it bundles whatever it is into で and marks it as a topic with は, so what follows should be a comment on it, but more often it is a change of subject. We do the same in English with "well then" and French does something similar with "alors". The idea is that having established or wrapped up something, the current order of business is whatever we are addressing now. From this we can extend as far as using じゃ to mean "goodbye" in casual contexts. Well, after that nice conversation... it is often in fuller form, something like じゃまたね but often not. In English too we may well say "well then, see you tomorrow" (じゃまた明日) but I don't think it ever gets reduced to just the "well then".

[@dolores6722]

Thank you for the explanation! As always, I really appreciate your hard work.

[@jeomaxx7499]

if we look at this in a interrogation just by particles its easy to find facts and faults. Japanease language is something alright.

[@bude8234]

So, is this where the pattern " . . . てはいけません" we learn in various texts - you must not do something - comes from? Is this the same as "" . . . てはだめ"? Thanks.

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

Yes exactly the same structure. だめ is just a less formal (and more forceful) way of putting it. ちゃだめ as shown in in the manga at 6:06 _is_ てはだめ in abbreviated form, just as じゃ is では in abbreviated form (ては→ちゃ, では→じゃ).

[@aqpoyo]

@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 so let-s take another example to see if I got it right. まだ家に帰ってはいけませんHere the いけません is like saying you can not go, you are not allowed to go, you must not go right? In some places I have seen this いけません treated as a helper verb or just an expresion but it is not right? It is a full clause been connected by the て form and the は like a comment to the first sentence right? Thanks!

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

​@@aqpoyo いけめせん literally means "can't go", but in this expression it is important _not_ to take it literally. It is like "won't do" in English "behaving like that won't do". You can't take the phrase literally and ask "what won't it do?" - it just means "not good". Same with いけない in these expressions. Various enders to xては like いけない, なれない, だめ etc, all mean the same thing. "x is a no-no". So your example is about going somewhere is a little misleading because it could assume that the 行く of いけない is literally about going. It isn't. Does this clarify? Please ask again if not.

[@aqpoyo]

@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 yep it does clarify it but just to be sure even if it means in this construction that it is a no-no, is it the same as 行けません? and if it is why is it written in kana and not in kanji? So now I am bit curious. If I say 店に行けません that would mean I can not go to the store because I have no way of going, my car broke for example. But if I say 店に行ってはいけません would mean I am not allowed to go to the store because, for example, I rob there once and I am not allowed to go back, a strange example but I think it marks my point. Thanks!

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

@@aqpoyo It is the same as 行けません but it is normally written in kana because it is something like okurigana (kana added to the end of a word/expression). These are written in kana more often than not. So we are much more likely to write 持っていく than 持って行く (overuse of kanji is a frequent habit of Western learners who "learn kanji" out of context). In the case of your example, it also has the incidental advantage of making it clear that we are not talking about literally "going" anywhere (or even if we are this いく has no connection with that fact). The whole point of this video is to show how xては and xても change the nature of what we are saying about x. They aren't decorations. They change the meaning. So just as you say 行けない just means literally "can't go" whereas Xてはいけない means "shouldn't do X". It is most often used of someone else's potential action. Though the "negative" version Xなければいけない (meaning "if I don't X it won't go - which is simply translatable as "I must X" or "I have to X") is more often used of oneself.

[@kunslipper]

Thank you so much.

[@muckvix]

Thanks for the great lessons! About でも: at 2:44, you suggest that its semantics of "even though" is a little bit related to one of the meanings of も: "as much as". I have trouble connecting the two, though. IIUC, "as much as" is roughly equivalent to "(note that the amount/extent/etc. that we just mentioned is quite large)". But if I substitute that in place of でも , I would get "About the jar being completely empty (note how empty it was). Alice didn't want to throw it down." This would be the opposite to the actual meaning of the sentence, which is roughly "About the jar being completely empty. Doesn't matter that it was empty. Alice didn't want to throw it down." Could you help me connect でも semantics to the も semantics? Or should I just think of でも of having its unique meaning that doesn't really derive from も?

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

I think the meaning is something like "however-much empty the jar was Alice didn't want to throw it down". The reverse would be something like "However-little empty the jar was Alice threw it down" (= even though the jar wasn't very empty she threw it down). Does this help?

[@vgamedude12]

Japanese is like a programming language

[@hshenriquesaporito]

このビデオを前に見なかったは、それが分かさせなかった。今は幸せて、分かっているから 😊

[@Sam-py9qq]

At 10:00, since the で in でも is the て-form of the copula, and 降る is a verb, isn't there a case for nominalizing the phrase with の like in のだ/のです? Is there a reason why we shouldn't?

[@daviddamasceno6063]

The old, unanswered mystery about the difference between WA and GA is finally becoming clear to me. This is only a mystery in the first place because no one really take the time to explain, in japanese terms, what those particles actually do. You're really making all the difference in my studies, sensei!

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

Nobody explains the difference between a logical particle and a non-logical topic-marker and this really leaves everything in a wash of vagueness and guesswork. If you want to see my fullest explanation of this, see this two-part series: kzbin.info/www/bejne/lZ-7eaOhibmZfdU

[@schokoladenjunge1]

I like this video in particular as it emphasizes that the contrast lies not between が and は, but rather between は and も, which is appropriate, given that they are markers of the same type This idea alone has made me grasp some more subtle uses of は by not comparing with が but rather with も, which i feel has a more intuitive notion of "inclusion" behind it, while both が and は have "excluding" properties. は by means of being the opposite of も, "as little as" etc. が simply by making something the subject and thus NOT comparing it to other things (as は,も would do), and so, in a sense, elevating it above other things in the process. 先生は てんさい。 先生が てんさい。 先生も てんさい。 The first is a neutral statement because it excludes but also explicitly compares the teacher with other teachers. The secone is not neutral, as it gives the impression that theres not even a comparison to be made. 先生 is a genius, as opposed to other people. The third however is also not neutral. It compares せんせい to other people in an inclusive way. As for 先生, they are a genius (and not something else). As for 先生, they are a genius.(What, and no one else?) As for 先生, they are (also in the group of) genius(es).

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

​@@schokoladenjunge1 Yes this is right. The が example for 先生 wouldn't have quite that implication. It is more the "neutral" one of the three (an important point that does have to be learned somewhat from experience is which one is used "neutrally"), though if it implied anything it would imply "先生 is the one (out of a group) who is a genius" - but in this case it wouldn't have that implication unless context was nudging it that way because of its "neutral" status in this expression. For more detailed information on these matters you might want to look at this two-lesson playlist: kzbin.info/www/bejne/lZ-7eaOhibmZfdU

[@schokoladenjunge1]

Exactly because, by your course, the が version would seem to be the more neutral one, I asked a native speaker whom I regularly converse with. Their experience suggested that it was not at all the neutral expression in this case, for the reason I mentioned in the last comment. It is the は version that takes neutrality here. It is an interesting way to phrase the difference as you did - 先生 is *the* one out of an unnamed group (likely people in the same university) that is a genius. が seems to carry a type of definiteness here that "the" conveys rather nicely.

[@SuperAlexGaga]

Thank you so much for another amazing lesson - I love this Alice's lessons. I understand what you said about 'temo / demo', but sometimes 'sae (mo)' seems to have a meaning similar to 'too' ou 'even'. My question is: in what sae differs? Is there a element of surprise? OFF: I'm crossing my fingers to you, someday, make a lesson about 'datte', which is something I barely grasp, its usage and 'you ni', which, at least for me, is trickier.

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

Sorry for the slow response! Both sae and datte require a bit more explanation than I can give in a comment here, but the good news is that this week's video lesson covers datte. I'll try to get to you ni and sae soon!

[@SuperAlexGaga]

Thank you so much. You're an angel.

[@yuu4142]

Thank you for this lesson! i can't understand the diference between say 「空っぽのびんでも下へ落としては悪いと思った」and「空っぽのびんも下へ落としては悪いと思った」both look very similar to me *sorry if my english is not very good

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

The first one means literally "even if it is an empty bottle dropping it downward is bad" the second "dropping an empty bottle as well (as something else) is bad".

[@harveyfresh6701]

Hello Dolly-Sensei, You said in 9:43 that "so we could also say, "雨が降るでも公園に行く". I thought that だ can only be used for nouns in A-B sentences (e.g. パンだ), and since で is the て form of だ, how can でも be attached to 降る (a verb)?

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

The combined form でも has evolved into a kind of clause connector. The reason it is properly a clause-beginning connector (rather than a clause-ending connector like けど) is that the で sums up the previous clause. This use of で is fairly frequent. Sometimes in narrative we even see a paragraph started with で, (comma usually included) which implies something like "having said all that, now".

[@harveyfresh6701]

@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 hmmm let me know if I understood correctly: "で sums up the previous clause", is this similar to the function of だ in だって you described in Lesson 23? If yes, then is it ok to treat でも as a separate clause connector, similar to "けど" or "だから"? Even though でも originates from で which is the て form of だ, + も?

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

@@harveyfresh6701 で can of course work as a clause connector because it is the て-form of the copula and all て-forms can act as clause connectors. でも is a clause connector - it can come at the beginning of a clause implying a connection to the clause before it (which could be what someone else said). The difference between けど and でも is that if there is a comma in the middle けど should come before it and でも should come after it. In other words けど belongs to the first clause and でも to the second.

[@harveyfresh6701]

@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Ok, I got it now. ありがとうございます。

[@user-vq2eo2ci1e]

I still don't really understand how to use ては/では in many case when it means "if." English explanations on the web all contain some contradiction when I find cases in the wild. Maggie sensei said ては/では is used in the negative sense/about things you deem as "bad" but I found this phrase on a twitter ads, "今、HIVでは死にません" and I was like, isn't that a good thing? I find it weird that a lot of materials cover the differences between ば/なら/たら/と for "if" but don't touch upon ては/では at all, even though Japanese people actually use it a lot too to mean if. One grammar website just says it means "if" and that's not helpful at all...

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

In the minority of cases where a pair of particles or other grammatical elements genuinely has a "combined use" like て+は or のに (meaning "but") it is important to be aware that they still exist as separate entities and the use of the two side by side does not necessarily imply their combined meaning. For example in 泳ぐのについて (about swimming) the "but" meaning of combined のに is not present. The same with your HIV example. It is just the regular て-form of the copula and then making it the topic of the following comment. See this video on "combined particles": kzbin.info/www/bejne/n4HMfYmQpL6bnK8

[@melitonchiong4006]

Thank you for this lesson. I'm really having a hard time understanding the difference between ては and ても. I just have one tiny question. If ては is often used to introduce a negative remark, why isも used in 誰もいない, and not 誰ではいない?

[@cerulis1]

She explains that 誰もいない example in this video: kzbin.info/www/bejne/ZmHRfIiqotOtrKs

[@lambas]

How come the first part of the sentence 「雨が降るでも公園に行く」we have both a verb 「降る」and the copula 「で」? Shouldn't there be only one engine? Either a verb, an い-adjective or だ (in one of its forms) So how can we have both? Can the part of the sentence that comes before でも be considered a noun? What's going on?

[@epix4300]

Done

[@madelynk.gilmore6939]

I have heard that "でも" can only be used at the beginning of a sentence, but you used it in the middle of "雨が降るでも公園に行く" - so is it more like でも can only be used for the beginning of clauses?

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

Yes exactly. I think sometimes people use "sentence" and "clause" interchangeably which is why I use the term "logical clause" - meaning a clause that has its own B-engine. Generally でも is used at the beginning of a clause. Not absolutely exclusively, but mostly, and that is how I was using it here. 雨が降る、でも公園に行く - as opposed, we might say, to 雨が降るけど、公園に行く (note the commas, inserted for clarity).

[@madelynk.gilmore6939]

@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 明らかにしてくれてありがとう! :D

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

@@madelynk.gilmore6939 役に立てて嬉しいです。

[@orangegab06]

Great! A little confusion concerning the ては though, as in this phrase for example: 君のレストランの料理がまずくては誰も来ませんよ。 ( きみの レストランの りょうりが まずくてはだれも きませんよ。) Does this mean "If your restaurant's food is not good, no one will come." or "Because your restaurant's food is not good, no one will come." ? I was thinking that it could mean both depending on the context, that is, "BECAUSE your restaurant's ...." in the present, and "IF your restaurant's..." in the future/hypothetical case Just like how I felt like "雨が降っては　こうえんにいけない" could mean "Because it's raining we can't go..." in the case that it's presently raining, but could mean "If it rains, we can't go..." in the case where it's a hypothesis for the future...

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

Generally speaking "Xてはnegative" when used of a person's possible action expresses a warning/prohibition against something so the usual implication would be "if your restaruant's food is not good no one will come" with overtones of something more prescriptive like "you'd better not make a restaurant with bad food or no one will come".

[@orangegab06]

@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Ah right, it makes a lot of sense! But then would you use a different phrase to say "Because your restaurant's food is not good, no one will come."? I was thinking of using から for "because" but since the second sub-topic ".. no one will come" is negative (or is it-), I thought using ては still seemed to follow the rules

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

@@orangegab06 There isn't only one way to say things in Japanese (just like English) but a common way would be: 君のレストランの料理がまずいから、誰も来ませんよ。

[@orangegab06]

@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 That is true... thank you so much

[@pazispeace]

Hi Dolly先生、hope you are doing great. I was doing some searching and watching your videos about も, but I still don't understand why some people (reddit threads) say that でも means "something like" in this context: Panda is having a conversation with his mother and they end up talking about what is he going to do about his future But panda doesn't like the idea of talking about his future while he's lazing around, to which he responds もう ゴロゴロ し てる とき に 将来 の 話 なんか し ない でよ and his mother says: 暇 が ある なら ちょっと は バイト でも 探し なさい I thought that the meaning was something like: since you have free time (I'm not sure about the ちょっと here and how 暇 が ある なら complements it) even if it's a job, look for one please But what the people on reddit say about it is> "So it's sort of like "Please look for a part-time job or something" - the でも makes it softer and also suggests that other alternatives might also be acceptable. (A full-time job! A coding boot camp!)" When you suggest something bring up some examples. * noun + (particle) + でも ( = demo) : something like ~ For example, when you offer someone specifically a cup of tea, you say: Ex. お茶飲まない？ = Do you want some tea? But if you say: → お茶でも飲まない？ = Would you like some tea or something? It sounds softer and gives the listener some other choices. Would you like tea or some other drinks? Sorry for my bad English and thanks in advance 先生

[@pazispeace]

And about 暇 が ある なら ちょっと, 暇 が ある is a logical clause isn't it?, so なら is telling us that there is not doubt about the free time he has, right? It is modyfing ちょっと? or there should be a comma after なら to indicate that it is a separate comment from ちょっと は バイト でも 探し なさい

[@pazispeace]

Oh I think I figured it out, ちょっと here means "a little" in the sarcastic way meaning "much" as we do in English or Spanish. Like, when we say "I'm a little busy" but we really mean "I am busy". then the literal meaning of 暇 が ある なら ちょっとは would be something like, as for since free time exists in little quantities [to talk about your future and laze around], 　[バイトでも] even though it is a job [探しなさい] please find one （I don't understand でも there but something tells me that it means "even though it is a job") If I'm wrong please let me know, thanks again 先生

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

でも is sometimes used in putting forward either an extreme example or a reasonable suggestion (at least considered reasonable by the speaker). The reason for this is that て-form + も carries the meaning "even if" - which is in fact much the same as the "but" meaning (she is pretty but she is stupid ≈ even if she is pretty she is stupid). The extreme example use is obvious. The "reasonable suggestion" use is ironic. So in this case "you should even go so far as seeking a job (meaning "I consider it reasonable but you probably think it a stretch"). The irony tends to be a little buried since it is used so often.

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

@@pazispeace なら is a conditional clause connector and 暇がある is a logical clause. So it means "If you have free time" which obviously needs to be followed by a second clause, and is. In English a comma would be necessary. Japanese does not regard commas as grammatical necessities so much as relatively recently introduced foreign pause-markers.

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

Like most modifiers in Japanese ちょっと modifies what follows it, not what precedes it. So she is saying something like "you could a little bit go so far as seeking a job."

[@xHoneybreath]

Do you recommend buying the dictionary of basic/intermediate Japanese grammar? I'd like to have a resource that I can use to look up grammar points that you haven't explained (yet). I think you mentioned using them at some point.

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

They are both good and very thorough. Like nearly all regular grammar resources they tend to present "grammar points" largely as isolated "facts" without explaining their underlying logic, but they do present those "facts" very well. They also perpetuate a few of the fallacies I have tried to help people overcome, but that is still par for the course I'm afraid and there are currently no English-language resources that don't perpetuate at least some of them. You should already be armed against this so it shouldn't be much of a problem. These reservations apart, they are excellent books and I would consider them among the best resources of their kind. So yes, with reservations duly stated, I do recommend them.

[@xHoneybreath]

I thought that they might perpetuate inaccuracies but was hoping that overall they're still worth it (and sounds like that's exactly the case). Thanks, I'll buy them as soon as I get the chance.

[@namename4980]

Greetings, sensei! I'm confused with this phrase: パンダがいないとまずい。 白熊パンダがばれてもやばすぎる。Phrase said by Handa, hwen Polar Bear was pretending to be a panda in the zoo. And Handa was worrying. (episode 14, 9:31) So te-from with も gives meaning "even if", "despite the fact that", but it doesn't make any sense in this sentence as ばれる means "to leak out (a secret); to be exposed". Though is unformal speech, it's already ungrammatical, maybe it's still common to talk this way? For me sentence would make more sense if it would be 白熊パンダがばれなくてもやばすぎる　-　"Even if polar bear as a panda is not leaking out it's dangerous. "

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

The も here seems to be being used additively (in the too/also sense), even though that is not the usual way of using て-form plus も. So the sense is "also if" rather than "even if". This isn't what one would normally understand by the words but in context it is clear what he is saying: "If Panda is missing that's terrible. _And if_ polar bear panda gets found out* _(too)_ that's just too awful". も does work additively in this way in many circumstances, as we know, but when combined with て it would usually mean "even if", but here it is clearly intended to mean "and if". But people speaking informally may sometimes use language in somewhat unusual ways. *Structurally of course It is closer to "comes to light" than "gets found out" but the passive construction is more natural in English (Japanese, of course, doesn't have passive constructions). Another natural-ish translation might be "if the polar bear panda situation gets out that's too awful".

[@namename4980]

Organic Japanese with Cure Dolly なるほど、返事どうもありがとう

[@hannahyeve395]

This video is really helpful! I have a question though, is kedo/dakedo the same as demo grammatically wise? If so, can you explain why the two clauses aren't always contradictory? Like for example: 木を見たんだけど楽しかった。(this is just a random sentence I made up)I'm sorry if this doesn't make any sense...

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

The main difference between けど and でも is that the first "belongs" to the first clause and the second belongs to the second clause. So if there is a comma between clause A and clause B one comes before it and the other comes after it. On begins sentences and the other ends them. People may sometimes use them in various ways often as trailing "suggestors" etc that may not seem contrastive.

[@la.zanmal.]

9:21-9:39 but if で is indeed the te-form of だ, then shouldn't it be 雨が降る*ん*でもこうえんに行く? Since we wouldn't be able to say just 雨が降るだ , right?

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

This is not allowing for evolution. でも has its roots in (and is often easily seen as) て-form of で+も but it has also evolved into an all purpose clause connector. Rather similar to the way だ・です has evolved to do things in ways that で+ある doesn't: kzbin.info/www/bejne/noSTY5Z3edidnKs (while still essentially being である)

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

PS - though it would have been clearer to have a comma or period before でも, because as a clause/sentence connector でも does "belong" to the second clause unlike けど which "belongs" to the first clause. This is because of the origin of でも and still regards that で as summing up the previous statement (as in the では that prefaces a statement = "after all that, now...."

[@user-rt6fq8wk1d]

What is the difference between「雨が降って」and 「雨が降る」?

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

雨が降って on its own doesn't mean anything. 雨が降っている means "it is raining". 雨が降る means "it rains".

[@sarahwhitehouse3421]

A few questions, Can you add っぽ to words other than 空っぽ? If you can, can it only be added to certain types of words, for example if it can only be added to no-adjectives? Does adding っぽ change the type of adjective it is (I read that 空 is a no-adjective but 空っぽ is a na-adjective, and was wondering if that change is just random or if it has a grammatical reason)? Thank you so much ^-^ P.S I am aware that what I am referring to as 'adjectives' are actually nouns, but I just found that by writing them that way I could organise my thoughts better.

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

I think it is best to see 空っぽ as a word in itself even though it is clearly a variant of 空 because ぽ is not a suffix that is used anywhere else, so I don't think it can really be called a suffix at all. The difference between so-called な-adjectives and so-called の-adjectives is subtle and I have talked about it along with other kinds of "special" noun here kzbin.info/www/bejne/bnK7qoNrfMp9fMk Essentially, any noun can be used adjectivally with の (if it makes any sense to do so) but only certain nouns can use な. These tend to be more dedicatedly "adjectival" than other nouns. There are many cases where nouns can be used with either な or の - 空っぽ indeed is a case in point. Essentially this is based on a sliding scale of how "noun-like" vs how "adjective-like" a noun is. 空 can be used as a noun meaning a vacuum, vacancy or emptiness. Consequently it is more "noun-like" than 空っぽ which is purely adjectival in its uses. I t probably also exists mainly because 空 (から) can be confused with 空 (そら) in writing and even in speech can be a bit ambiguous. 空っぽ removes all ambiguity.

[@5bitcube]

Would something like this sound ironic, or would it be grammatically incorrect? 綺麗な日では部屋の中でゲームやってる

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

I am afraid I don't quite see what you are trying to say. "By means of her pretty eyes (someone) is playing a game inside the room"? (ゲーム usually refers to a video game).

[@5bitcube]

@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 I wrote 日 not 目

[@5bitcube]

@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 And what I tried to say was something like, "Since it's a beatiful day, I'm inside playing games", which would be unexpected and hence ironic

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

​@@5bitcube Aha. Was in a rush and misread it - likely because it was unexpected. I think the thing here is governed by the ambiguity rules. It has to be pretty unambiguous if one is going to express an "absurdity" - meaning something that is counter to expectation. So だから would be better than で here - making it perfectly clear that this is the copula and that a causal link is intended. Ambiguity rules here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/nZTFk4aNYrCoirM

[@5bitcube]

@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Oh I see, good to know that you have a video about that topic. Either way, I've been watching every single one of your lessons and maybe it would be better for me to keep going in order so that I don't miss out on some other info. Thank you for the prompt response!

[@Giraffinator]

is では the same as in ではない then? これはペンではない , something like "as for this, as for it being a pen, it is not"?

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

I would really (and this isn't something I usually recommend) simply regard ではない as a unit meaning "is not". It actually doesn't strictly need the は but it usually gets it (sometimes abbreviated to じゃ). The purpose of the は here is the negative implication of は.

[@x2bounty]

in 「空っぽのびんでも」 how can one tell than the の is being used as an adjectivizer and not a possessive? my instinct is to look for の as a ( 's ) equivalent, even though that makes no sense in this context.

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

This is the number one thing to learn. Your job is to look what _does_ make sense in context. All language depends on context and common sense for at least 50% of its meaning. Language is _not_ just a set of rule-based puzzles, even though knowing structure is vital too. This is far too little taught. Please see this video: kzbin.info/www/bejne/nZTFk4aNYrCoirM

[@x2bounty]

@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 got it. seems I need to continue with the input so my subconscious can eventually learn to sort these amiguities out. :)

[@-yuyuko5297]

The last lesson with Alice :(

[@megangilmore9355]

I thought one couldn't use でも in the middle of a sentence? Is this possible or did you just use it to demonstrate the use of ても?

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

You can use it in the middle of a compound sentence. Conventionally it "belongs" to the second half so it would be after the comma if there is one - whereas けど would be before it. This is not a structural rule, but a convention.

[@TzeJun-ps9le]

Does ては means “ as little as” or it is just saying that the comment of the topic is negative?

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

It depends on context.

[@TzeJun-ps9le]

@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 same as ても?

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

@@TzeJun-ps9le It does not mean the same as でも. Try watching the video again.

[@TzeJun-ps9le]

@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 I will rewatch it

[@TzeJun-ps9le]

@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 does the verb before はandも must be te form?

[@louieberen4293]

I'm confused with ては. 雨が降るのは（私が）公園に行けない。 雨が降っては（私が）公園に行けない。

[@organicjapanesewithcuredol49]

て-form + は has the property of strengthening a negative comment.

[@louieberen4293]

@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Interesting. I realized that the のは is basically an A は B です pattern. And the example I gave seems incorrect. 雨が降って公園に行けない. It is raining (and because of that and for other reason) I can't go to the park. 雨が降っては公園に行けない. It is raining (and for this reason ALONE) I can't go to the park. I now see how は, works. Thank you!

[@user-pc5kg3le7l]

＜３３３３