[sarvodaya]

Originally Posted by YuriTokoro

I see. The Japanese language’s order comes like the second sentence, and in Japanese, the more important focus often comes at the end the end of the sentence.
I will remember I should put the focus at the top in English.
Still, “upon which ….was based” is too difficult to say!!!

Hmm.. Yes, but it's not always the word order that determines the focus in English. I'm not quite sure how to explain it, but I think it's the copula that takes precedence. Thus we had:

1. This was the premise upon which their discussion was based.

As opposed to:

2. Their discussion was based upon this premise.

In 2, there are no unnecessary verbs -- the sentence is as simple as could be. On the other hand, 1 has seemingly unnecessary structure, which makes the reader think "Why is this unusual structure being used?" To which the answer is clearly that there is some extra meaning being conveyed by the more complex structure.

"was based" is simply a passive, past-tense verb, but "this was" is an unnecessary use of the copula in the past to describe "this" (which was the statement that multiculturalism is beneficial) as the premise. So the reader's attention is focused on this unnecessary addition, making it clear that this is the intended focus.

To illustrate that it is not the word order that determines the focus, let me provide some examples:

"Their discussion had this as a premise."

"They based their discussion upon this as a premise."

"The way their discussion progressed indicated that this was a premise."

Is that clear?

That’s it! I didn’t know this word, and I just looked it up in a dictionary.
I’m sorry, I say you are overbearing, but we also consider that we are kind of chicken-hearted.

Don't worry! I consider many Americans to be extremely overbearing, and I know that the attitude of some British towards foreigners has been quite overbearing, especially in the nineteenth century.

Chicken-hearted!? I am surprised to hear you say that.
We define chicken-hearted as "Timorous and cowardly as a chicken, faint-hearted". This is not what I think of when I think of Japan. Perhaps I am outdated!

When I think of Japan I think of codes of honour, humility, diligence and dedication. This seems to me the opposite of chicken-heartedness. One who is willing to die for a cause is not chicken-hearted.

Here are a couple of our quotations from the OED:

"Where 'tis agreed by Bullies, chicken-hearted, To fright the Ladies first, and then be parted."
The Spanish Fryar, Dryden (1681)

"Small thanks to you big, hulking, chicken-hearted men."
Treasure Island, R. L. Stevenson (1883)

And here's another quotation:

"But before his letter reached the White House, Aziz had declared on CNN that Baghdad had decided to let UN inspectors back into Iraq. By then US B-52 bombers, which had taken off from the bases in the southern state of Louisiana, were within an hour of unleashing their Cruise missiles. Informed of Aziz's statement on CNN by Sandy Berger, Clinton immediately aborted the mission. His decision was criticized at home by hawkish politicians and commentators, who called him "chicken-hearted." But if he had not aborted the mission, he would have been accused of killing hundreds of Iraqis just as Baghdad had run up a white flag."
Neighbors, Not Friends: Iraq and Iran after the Gulf Wars; Dilip Hiro (2001), p158.

I see. Thanks.
I had had some stereotype which you (foreign people) might expect about Japan. This stereotype was the premise upon which my remark was based!!!!!!

Oh, ho ho! Very good ゆりさん, and very droll!

The Japanese don’t mind when we repeat the same word, so this is a little hard to get use to for me.


OK, thanks.
the Japanese　are 　日本人というものは
the Japanese people is 日本国民は
Japanese people are 　日本人は
all Japanese people are　日本人、一人残らず

Ah.
ゆりさん、ありがとうございました。
They have gone in the book.

I’m sorry, I seem to have lost.
Is this from what I said about Japan?
Japan is not perfect. Instead, I’m sure you regard the Japanese might be kind of foolish because the national debt is too huge, and the prime ministers change too many times. Still, I love Japan. I believe you would say you love your country.

I only meant that no nation could be so perfect that all of its members have no hatreds that are based on religion or skin colour — I'm sure that every nation has at least a few members that hate on the basis of religion or skin colour.

I didn't have that impression. I read this article as a result of what you said:

Japan's Road to Deep Deficit Is Paved With Public Works - NYTimes.com

I see that, as a percentage of GDP, your national debt is almost three times as much as ours. So fair enough! On the other hand, we need a strong public works programme — our roads are a patchwork of potholes and odd-jobs, we destroyed our own rail network in the '60s and have never recovered, not to mention any number of other parts of our crumbling infrastructure. Meanwhile, unemployment is a major issue for us — the solution is simply to employ those people rebuilding our country! This would not only improve the infrastructure, but also restore national pride — something we are sorely lacking.

Don't talk to me about Prime Ministers! Yes Japan has had quite a few changes in recent times, but we have not fared so well with ours either. Tony Blair led with a presidential style entirely inappropriate to his office. At times we benefited from this, but mostly the country was damaged by it. He was not a strong leader, and so to maintain his presidential style he kept his most realistic challenger, Gordon Brown, in check with a leadership deal and assassinated (not literally, thank goodness!) any competition in the cabinet that he couldn't handle. In my view Gordon Brown had the qualities of a good Prime Minister, but by the time he took over the Labour Party was so severely weakened by Blair's premiership that he could hardly get anything done and we were left with an incompetent government. Now we have Cameron, who is turning out to be more poncey and bumbling by the day. I've always been a supporter of the Liberal Democrats, and so I'm glad that they're getting a look in, but I don't hold out much hope of them being able to make a tremendous difference in this coalition.

Ok, rant over. Sorry!

Despite all that, yes, I love my country; and yet I find myself mourning for its past — not for imperialist reasons, but because I believe we used to care, we used to live and die for something, we used to take pride in our country and our community in a way that we don't seem to any more. Nowadays we hardly stand for anything, but I think we used to. In some ways we are still recovering from the '60s, but we are so apathetic that we cannot make any headway in doing so. I hope things change from the way they are now, and in that regard, yes, I am a true patriot. Having said that, if things don't change in the next ten years or so, I'm emigrating to Canada!

About “ね”.

“ね”which is added at the end of a sentence is 終助詞（しゅうじょし）.
You say ね when you ;

1．Get agreement or confirmation. （同意）
「これはいいですね」　This is good, right?
「今日は寒いね」It’s cold, isn’t it?
「疲れたね」(When all of you are tired.)
「ああ、そうだね」Yes, that’s right.

2.Comformation.
「これはあなたのカサですね↑」This is your umbrella, isn’t this? 「はい、そうです」Yes, that’s right.
「あなたも行きますね↑」You will go (like other people), won’t you?「はい、行きます」Yes, I will.

3. Making a point
After another person says something to you, you reply trying not to be overbearing.
それは違いますね。That’s not correct.
私は、そうは思いませんね。I don’t think so.

If you simply say それは違います, sometimes you sound a little bullheaded or gruff.

NB: pig-headed is more common.

4. Request and invitation
きっと来てくださいね。 Be sure to come, right?

5. Question　（This is elderly men’s way. If you say this, you would sound odd. However, when you read novels, you would see this way to say things.）
君は行くかね？ Will you go?

If you don’t understand, ask me.

Wow, that's really helpful ゆりさん. There are some very illustrative examples there. Quite a few kanji, but it's ok to practise!
I think I understood it all, and I have put it in my book. It will take a while to assimilate!

Originally Posted by YuriTokoro

＠　覚さんへ。

Can I say “They talked about how to determine what morally correct behavior is.”?
When you speak, would you say something like the sentence you wrote?

Hmmm. You can say that, but it is better to say "They talked about how to determine what is morally correct behaviour" as Koir rightly says.

To expand on this, you can say things like:

"What exactly is morally correct behaviour?"

"What is it that morally correct behaviour entails?"

"They talked about what it means to behave in a morally correct way."

"They talked about morally correct behaviour, and how it is defined."

"They talked about morally correct behaviour, and in particular, what exactly it is that defines it."

As far as the placement of "is", putting it at the end in this case does make it sound a bit like an incomplete thought. It would be acceptable, however, in the following instances:

"Do you know what the time is?"

"Do you know what time it is?"

"I want to know what morally correct behaviour is."

These are perhaps a bit more colloquial, and still give the impression of an incomplete thought, but here it is deliberate — we want the listener to complete the thought for us.

Thank you.

どういたしまして。

The next hiatus will be shorter!

覚

PS: ゆりさん, please publish your response to my comment on your blog!