Hi, I hope you will enjoy this first part on the history of: da, dearu and desu! Please see my playlist for all videos I have made in this format: ruclips.net/p/PLGGdWQoxz4TKXd2cXbJ-cW1149Hizgsiw&si=9SE8VDorUrr_aqqq If you enjoy my content, please consider a small donation as these videos take quite a while to make: www.buymeacoffee.com/japaneseetymology 🙇 Nuances: In hindsight I did not explore たり enough. It still exists today in the form of 食べたり、飲んだり etc. When I do part 2, I'll give たる the justice it deserves. Typos: 0:58 - it should be 'be' not 'b'
I'm still only a beginner at learning Japanese, but thank you for posting these videos on the deeper historical origins of many words and grammatical aspects of the language. I find it helpful to have something to anchor on, to build a stronger "web" of the different words and concepts in my memory. Please keep up the good work!
Quick correction on the Spanish segment. Though it's true that we learn as non-native Spanish speakers that "ser" is the "permanent" copula and "estar" the "temporary" one, that's not actually accurate to how they differ in Spanish. "Ser," from the Latin copula "esse," is the identity copula (i.e. you use it to list the attributes or state the identity of a noun). "Estar," from the Latin verb "stare," meaning "to stand," is the situation copula (i.e. you use it to state the location (except for events; they use "ser"), emotions, or well-being of a noun). While the Spanish translation of "I'm a general," would be "Soy general." "I was/used to be a general," on the other hand, would be "[Yo] era general." You don't use the imperfect past "estaba" from "estar" here because "general" is a profession, which means that it pertains to identity, and you don't use "estar" with identity. Though, on a side note, I believe the Italian copulae "essere" and "stare" are used more similarly to "nari" and "tari" in Old Japanese than "ser" and "estar" in the Iberian languages. Otherwise, good video as usual 👍
I stumbled upon your videos recently, and as both a linguistics nerd and a beginner at Japanese I really appreciate these videos! They're quality and very informative & interesting, and help me grasp the grammar of the language a lot better. Looking forward to future videos!
So, I understand some Classical Japanese, not perfectly yet but mostly functionally (still waiting for my armor by the way) and I have two points to make. Given that なり is just a contraction of the combination of に and あり you can actually have a bunch of stuff in between them and it still make sense, usually other particles like は, て and こそ so you can get something like 我、武士にてこそあれ, (it ends in あれ because that's just the rule when using こそ in classical Japanese.) In addition, as far as I can tell, adding て to the original combination of にあり just makes things more defined and concrete. It's not necessarily an emphatic thing, just more specific. As you mentioned, the classical にて was essentially the old version of the modern で, and that sound change happened because the "i" in に naturally dropped and naturally made the て a voiced sound which is で. If you try to say "nte" really fast it just naturally ends up sounding like "de." Apparently, this was a normal things for all voiced sounds back in the day so they pronounced わが more like わんが, or so I'm told. Now, I'm no credentialled expert, just a nerd who likes studying Classical Japanese in his spare time so take everything I say with a grain of salt. I appreciate the work you're doing though. Keep it up, and if you have any questions feel free to ask. I can't promise I can answer them, but if we all put our heads together we might be able to do some mildly interesting things.
@@TalesofDawnandDusk hello! Thank you so much for such a detailed comment. That was really interesting, and helped me to understand にて more. I wondered where you'd learnt that information? Other than Bjarke Frellesvig's 2010 book, it's quite hard to find information on classical Japanese grammar, or I'm just bad at finding it! I had a quick look at your channel, I really like the content. The sound quality is definitely far more professional than my own 😅. If I could get in touch to discuss some parts of Classical Japanese grammar that'd be fantastic, just let me know the best way of doing so. Thanks again.
Haha, no worries. I was intended to make a video on だ, but I saw your comment the other day and was like, 'right, I'll do that as my next video then'. Thank you :)
@@FairyKid64 thank you! The people yearn for etymology! But in all seriousness, I think people like being told what the grammar they have to learn is actually made from. I could be misremembering, but I'm fairly sure Genki just tells you to learn かどうか to mean 'whether' as one set phrase. It's like no, it's made up of か particle + どう + か particle again. If someone had just told me that at the time, it'd not have felt so arbritary.
That's a great point! Understanding on a granular level does seem to help. Do you have any books or other resources you would recommend to get deeper explanations than what's found in Genki?
@@FairyKid64 Be warned, here comes a long list! (A good one to start with might be: 'Haruhiko Kindaichi, Umeyo Hirano, Mineharu Nakayama - The Japanese Language-Tuttle Publishing (2010)' - it has a bit of a 日本人論-tinge to it from time to time, but it is a pretty entertaining read that isn't too heavily academic/linguistic. (Handbooks of Japanese Language and Linguistics [HJLL]_ 1) Bjarke Frellesvig (editor), Satoshi Kinsui (editor) - Handbook of Historical Japanese Linguistics-Walter de Gruyter (2024) A History of the Japanese Language -- Bjarke Frellesvig -- 2010 -- Cambridge University Press Haruhiko Kindaichi, Umeyo Hirano, Mineharu Nakayama - The Japanese Language-Tuttle Publishing (2010) Etymological Dictionary of Han/Chinese Characters By Lawrence J. Howell Samuel E. Martin - A Reference Grammar of Japanese-University of Hawaii Press (2003) Yoko Hasegawa - Japanese_ A Linguistic Introduction-Cambridge University Press (2014) Haruo Shirane - Classical Japanese _ a grammar-Columbia University Press (2005) Shirane, Haruo - Classical Japanese reader and essential dictionary-Columbia University Press (2007) The history of the Japanese written language -- Habein, Yaeko Sato -- 1984 -- University of Tokyo Press The structure and history of Japanese _ from Yamatokotoba to -- Lone Takeuchi -- 1999 The history of the Japanese written language -- Habein, Yaeko Sato -- 1984 -- University of Tokyo Press
@@tonythesopranos5310wow - what a great list! I'm going to see if my local library carries any of these books. Thank you! And congrats on 900 subs now!
Hi, thank you for your comment. I am not 100% entirely sure myself, but my logic was the following: いる is the copula for animate objects. ある is the copula for inanimates objects. だ is the copula for nouns/'na' adjectives. (What 'na' adjectives actually are is its own contentious area) A coupla is ultimately a word used to link the subject of a sentence with a predicate. This seems to be what いる・ある・and だ do. (Remembering that だ is just a contraction of である). Therefore, all 3 of them could be the copula? But I consider there as only being 2, as again, だ is just a contraction of である which contains ある. I won't comment on です because there isn't an agreed origin, so it's hard to say with any certainty where it comes from, but it certainly seems to work as a copula? That would give us a total of '4' copulas. いる is the copula for animate objects. ある is the copula for inanimates objects. だ / です is the copula for nouns/'na' adjectives. (What 'na' adjectives actually are is its own contentious area) But again, I could be wrong about this, so please correct me if I am not on the right track.
to me it seems that aru *is* the predicate, and doesn’t really do what you say a copula does, since it really only describes that something exists, whilst, when you add a で to make である, you start describing *what* it exists as (it exists as the predicate), which would make it a copula (I think). I’m not an expert though and you may very well be right here, this is just me trying to rationalise that I’ve seen (for example in dictionaries) である、です、だ、でございます、じゃ etc etc, be put into the “copula” category, whilst ある and いるare classified simply as verbs. It’s confusing though, especially considering である is so obviously just a very common particle + ある, but if I’m right, you can think of it as how English “to be” isn’t a copula when it means “to exist” (to be or not to be) , but is a copula when it means “to exist, whilst having a certain characteristic” (to be good)
@@insectoid_creature I hear what you are saying, it's very interesting. Honestly, I am not educated enough in linguistics to argue either way. So, with that being said I won't debate any further either way, as I don't feel like I have the credentials to do so! I hope that makes sense. I am not saying you are wrong at all either, I just don't know myself.
Hi, I hope you will enjoy this first part on the history of: da, dearu and desu!
Please see my playlist for all videos I have made in this format: ruclips.net/p/PLGGdWQoxz4TKXd2cXbJ-cW1149Hizgsiw&si=9SE8VDorUrr_aqqq
If you enjoy my content, please consider a small donation as these videos take quite a while to make: www.buymeacoffee.com/japaneseetymology 🙇
Nuances:
In hindsight I did not explore たり enough. It still exists today in the form of 食べたり、飲んだり etc. When I do part 2, I'll give たる the justice it deserves.
Typos:
0:58 - it should be 'be' not 'b'
I'm still only a beginner at learning Japanese, but thank you for posting these videos on the deeper historical origins of many words and grammatical aspects of the language. I find it helpful to have something to anchor on, to build a stronger "web" of the different words and concepts in my memory. Please keep up the good work!
@@nathanhopkins7976 thank you for your comment. I totally agree :) I like to know where what I'm learning comes from
Quick correction on the Spanish segment. Though it's true that we learn as non-native Spanish speakers that "ser" is the "permanent" copula and "estar" the "temporary" one, that's not actually accurate to how they differ in Spanish.
"Ser," from the Latin copula "esse," is the identity copula (i.e. you use it to list the attributes or state the identity of a noun). "Estar," from the Latin verb "stare," meaning "to stand," is the situation copula (i.e. you use it to state the location (except for events; they use "ser"), emotions, or well-being of a noun).
While the Spanish translation of "I'm a general," would be "Soy general." "I was/used to be a general," on the other hand, would be "[Yo] era general." You don't use the imperfect past "estaba" from "estar" here because "general" is a profession, which means that it pertains to identity, and you don't use "estar" with identity.
Though, on a side note, I believe the Italian copulae "essere" and "stare" are used more similarly to "nari" and "tari" in Old Japanese than "ser" and "estar" in the Iberian languages.
Otherwise, good video as usual 👍
@@ryankramer8779 that's really interesting thank you, I learnt a lot from that!
@@tonythesopranos5310 you're welcome 😊
Thanks for this comment. I was breaking my brain trying to find a way to explain this!
@@AlexWhiteLanda de nada 😊
I stumbled upon your videos recently, and as both a linguistics nerd and a beginner at Japanese I really appreciate these videos! They're quality and very informative & interesting, and help me grasp the grammar of the language a lot better. Looking forward to future videos!
@@cetologist that's really kind thank you. I just saw your comment about 音便. You certainly know a lot more than when I was beginning!
I love these videos! Keep up the great work
@@quaz450 thank you so much!
Love the lesson and love the memes! Keep it up!!❤
Another great lesson, thank you sir!
@@danielmurphy123 thank you as always for your support!
So, I understand some Classical Japanese, not perfectly yet but mostly functionally (still waiting for my armor by the way) and I have two points to make. Given that なり is just a contraction of the combination of に and あり you can actually have a bunch of stuff in between them and it still make sense, usually other particles like は, て and こそ so you can get something like 我、武士にてこそあれ, (it ends in あれ because that's just the rule when using こそ in classical Japanese.) In addition, as far as I can tell, adding て to the original combination of にあり just makes things more defined and concrete. It's not necessarily an emphatic thing, just more specific. As you mentioned, the classical にて was essentially the old version of the modern で, and that sound change happened because the "i" in に naturally dropped and naturally made the て a voiced sound which is で. If you try to say "nte" really fast it just naturally ends up sounding like "de." Apparently, this was a normal things for all voiced sounds back in the day so they pronounced わが more like わんが, or so I'm told.
Now, I'm no credentialled expert, just a nerd who likes studying Classical Japanese in his spare time so take everything I say with a grain of salt.
I appreciate the work you're doing though. Keep it up, and if you have any questions feel free to ask. I can't promise I can answer them, but if we all put our heads together we might be able to do some mildly interesting things.
@@TalesofDawnandDusk hello! Thank you so much for such a detailed comment. That was really interesting, and helped me to understand にて more. I wondered where you'd learnt that information? Other than Bjarke Frellesvig's 2010 book, it's quite hard to find information on classical Japanese grammar, or I'm just bad at finding it! I had a quick look at your channel, I really like the content. The sound quality is definitely far more professional than my own 😅. If I could get in touch to discuss some parts of Classical Japanese grammar that'd be fantastic, just let me know the best way of doing so. Thanks again.
12:10 that's why classical japanese was making sense to me, well thats not exactly the difference between ser y estar but close.
Did I just a couple days ago request the exact video you were working on? 😹 Great! Thanks!
Haha, no worries. I was intended to make a video on だ, but I saw your comment the other day and was like, 'right, I'll do that as my next video then'.
Thank you :)
Man - your channel is exploding! Already at 872 subscribers! Congrats!
@@FairyKid64 thank you! The people yearn for etymology! But in all seriousness, I think people like being told what the grammar they have to learn is actually made from. I could be misremembering, but I'm fairly sure Genki just tells you to learn かどうか to mean 'whether' as one set phrase. It's like no, it's made up of か particle + どう + か particle again. If someone had just told me that at the time, it'd not have felt so arbritary.
That's a great point! Understanding on a granular level does seem to help. Do you have any books or other resources you would recommend to get deeper explanations than what's found in Genki?
@@FairyKid64 Be warned, here comes a long list! (A good one to start with might be:
'Haruhiko Kindaichi, Umeyo Hirano, Mineharu Nakayama - The Japanese Language-Tuttle Publishing (2010)' - it has a bit of a 日本人論-tinge to it from time to time, but it is a pretty entertaining read that isn't too heavily academic/linguistic.
(Handbooks of Japanese Language and Linguistics [HJLL]_ 1) Bjarke Frellesvig (editor), Satoshi Kinsui (editor) - Handbook of Historical Japanese Linguistics-Walter de Gruyter (2024)
A History of the Japanese Language -- Bjarke Frellesvig -- 2010 -- Cambridge University Press
Haruhiko Kindaichi, Umeyo Hirano, Mineharu Nakayama - The Japanese Language-Tuttle Publishing (2010)
Etymological Dictionary of Han/Chinese Characters By Lawrence J. Howell
Samuel E. Martin - A Reference Grammar of Japanese-University of Hawaii Press (2003)
Yoko Hasegawa - Japanese_ A Linguistic Introduction-Cambridge University Press (2014)
Haruo Shirane - Classical Japanese _ a grammar-Columbia University Press (2005)
Shirane, Haruo - Classical Japanese reader and essential dictionary-Columbia University Press (2007)
The history of the Japanese written language -- Habein, Yaeko Sato -- 1984 -- University of Tokyo Press
The structure and history of Japanese _ from Yamatokotoba to -- Lone Takeuchi -- 1999
The history of the Japanese written language -- Habein, Yaeko Sato -- 1984 -- University of Tokyo Press
@@tonythesopranos5310wow - what a great list! I'm going to see if my local library carries any of these books. Thank you! And congrats on 900 subs now!
Very interesting!
@@olegdeviatko4956 many thanks 🙏
I was under the impression that ある and いる were just verbs, whilst である and its derivatives were the only copulas. Is this wrong? Thank you
Hi, thank you for your comment. I am not 100% entirely sure myself, but my logic was the following:
いる is the copula for animate objects.
ある is the copula for inanimates objects.
だ is the copula for nouns/'na' adjectives. (What 'na' adjectives actually are is its own contentious area)
A coupla is ultimately a word used to link the subject of a sentence with a predicate. This seems to be what いる・ある・and だ do. (Remembering that だ is just a contraction of である). Therefore, all 3 of them could be the copula? But I consider there as only being 2, as again, だ is just a contraction of である which contains ある.
I won't comment on です because there isn't an agreed origin, so it's hard to say with any certainty where it comes from, but it certainly seems to work as a copula? That would give us a total of '4' copulas.
いる is the copula for animate objects.
ある is the copula for inanimates objects.
だ / です is the copula for nouns/'na' adjectives. (What 'na' adjectives actually are is its own contentious area)
But again, I could be wrong about this, so please correct me if I am not on the right track.
to me it seems that aru *is* the predicate, and doesn’t really do what you say a copula does, since it really only describes that something exists, whilst, when you add a で to make である, you start describing *what* it exists as (it exists as the predicate), which would make it a copula (I think).
I’m not an expert though and you may very well be right here, this is just me trying to rationalise that I’ve seen (for example in dictionaries) である、です、だ、でございます、じゃ etc etc, be put into the “copula” category, whilst ある and いるare classified simply as verbs.
It’s confusing though, especially considering である is so obviously just a very common particle + ある, but if I’m right, you can think of it as how English “to be” isn’t a copula when it means “to exist” (to be or not to be) , but is a copula when it means “to exist, whilst having a certain characteristic” (to be good)
@@insectoid_creature I hear what you are saying, it's very interesting. Honestly, I am not educated enough in linguistics to argue either way. So, with that being said I won't debate any further either way, as I don't feel like I have the credentials to do so! I hope that makes sense. I am not saying you are wrong at all either, I just don't know myself.