PDA

View Full Version : Japanese Question



lorenzokenzo
April 10th, 2009, 15:49
あなたに愛されたついて

You were loved but it has now past???

Oneiro
April 10th, 2009, 15:59
Grain of salt here but the ついて comes across to me like "concerning" or "about" so maybe something more akin to "It was af it you were loved?"

More than happy to have someone correct me though.

UPGRAYEDD
April 10th, 2009, 15:59
is there any more?

Could be - concerning the love I had for you...

UPGRAYEDD
April 10th, 2009, 16:03
maybe you got broke up with in text message slang

kamukamuume
April 10th, 2009, 16:33
well 愛された is passive form, meaning it's something like "I was loved by you." as for the ついて、I usually hear it as について when it means "concerning" or "about," but if the grammar can mean something similar without the に、maybe it's "concerning how I was loved by you."

saikick
April 11th, 2009, 04:23
well 愛された is passive form, meaning it's something like "I was loved by you." as for the ついて、I usually hear it as について when it means "concerning" or "about," but if the grammar can mean something similar without the に、maybe it's "concerning how I was loved by you."

I agree, you need a 「に」 for this sentence to make sense.

I think its more like,

「あなたに愛された」について
The topic about "being loved by you"

Oneiro
April 11th, 2009, 14:15
yeah but it is real common for particles to be dropped. just how in English we do not often speak without contractions because it can sound unnatural. to tell the truth, the origin of OP's text sounds like an e-mail header and good christ those get crazy.

saikick
April 11th, 2009, 14:27
Mmmm, in this case I personally don't think particles get dropped, even if it's an e-mail header.

I don't know, it's really unnatural the way it is!

AliDimayev
April 11th, 2009, 14:31
Have you ever read a newspaper headling in JAPAN?!

saikick
April 11th, 2009, 14:35
Yes, but the Japanese will not use that sentence.
Seriously.

Even if it's in a newspaper they will not forget the NI!!!

saikick
April 11th, 2009, 14:35
Not in this case at least.

AliDimayev
April 11th, 2009, 14:38
Did your Japanese boyfriend tell you that?

saikick
April 11th, 2009, 14:40
No, my boyfriend isn't Japanese.

Hyakuman
April 13th, 2009, 11:21
Honestly, I'm gonna agree with saikick on this one. No Japanese person (unless they are totally an internet valley girl) is going to skip the に in 「について」...

surgeon
April 19th, 2009, 08:54
yes, you can't drop the に for について. it would be like dropping the 'th' from thought and writing just ought.

kamukamuume
April 19th, 2009, 10:40
yeah, there are actually plenty of rules governing what kinds of changes are allowed in casual speech. I've heard my girlfriend say "じゃ、買い物行こう?" and the like, but in general, I think に is one of those more rigid particles. for something like を or が, there's a lot more flexibility.

kind of like in ebonics (a form of colloquial English), "where you goin'" sounds okay, but you can't just take the verb "to be" out of every sentence. "I tired" sounds like shit no matter what dialect you're using.

Hyakuman
April 21st, 2009, 11:55
yeah, there are actually plenty of rules governing what kinds of changes are allowed in casual speech. I've heard my girlfriend say "じゃ、買い物行こう?" and the like, but in general, I think に is one of those more rigid particles. for something like を or が, there's a lot more flexibility.

kind of like in ebonics (a form of colloquial English), "where you goin'" sounds okay, but you can't just take the verb "to be" out of every sentence. "I tired" sounds like shit no matter what dialect you're using.

Yeah but について is one of the phrases that just can't be broken apart. It's like saying ーざる得ない instead of ーざるを得ない -- no dice.

kamukamuume
April 21st, 2009, 13:57
Yeah but について is one of the phrases that just can't be broken apart. It's like saying ーざる得ない instead of ーざるを得ない -- no dice.

I was actually in agreement with you. Oneiro's implication was that since some particles are dropped in casual speech, any particle is fair game; I was making a case for why that's not true.

Hyakuman
April 21st, 2009, 16:42
I was actually in agreement with you. Oneiro's implication was that since some particles are dropped in casual speech, any particle is fair game; I was making a case for why that's not true.

Yeah wierd, I totally read that the first time as a counter argument. Reading it a second time over, you're right in saying that に is very rigid.