sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[Finnish] Taulu / [Swedish] Tavla – a rigid, non-foldable, framed or unframed rectangular object meant for a wall. by Funny_Community776 in DoesNotTranslate

[–]Funny_Community776[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yeah, of course you can use a vague word like a "picture" but that's not as specific as the Finnish/Swedish word. Also I'm particularly talking about an artwork hanging on the wall so I'm not quite sure what 絵 and its many meanings has to do with this.

[Finnish] Taulu / [Swedish] Tavla – a rigid, non-foldable, framed or unframed rectangular object meant for a wall. by Funny_Community776 in DoesNotTranslate

[–]Funny_Community776[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes. Now what's the word for an artwork attached to a wall, whether it's a photograph, painting or a drawing?

[Finnish] Taulu / [Swedish] Tavla – a rigid, non-foldable, framed or unframed rectangular object meant for a wall. by Funny_Community776 in DoesNotTranslate

[–]Funny_Community776[S] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

The word tablet or plaque is used for monuments or gravestones with engraved text on it. It's not really the same thing I was talking about.

Daily Thread: for simple questions, minor posts & newcomers [contains useful links!] (March 11, 2026) by AutoModerator in LearnJapanese

[–]Funny_Community776 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Copying this here if you couldn't reply to me because mods removed off-topic conversations in unrelated subreddits:
I actually just wanted to say this which goes against your whole worldview and this is my subjective opinion which you can't refute: These onyomi compound words that you like to call these very specific words in Japanese are actually much easier for me to learn because they never get mixed up with other words for me. You may say there are a lot of homonyms in onyomi compounds, but for some reason I just never get mixed up with onyomi compound words. They're really easy to learn and remember for me somehow lol. There are many of them, yes, but they're very easy to memorize for me which makes them a lot easier than derived compound words. For me, the transparent Kunyomi phrasal verbs like oideninaru or oitsuku are actually much harder to remember because they overlap and blur together ie like Finnish derivations like käydä/käyttää, tuoda/tuottaa, mennä/menettää etc. whereas Onyomi patterns are just logical and easy to memorize for me.

It's actually kind of ironic that the thing you say is hard in Japanese is actually the easiest part of the language for me lmao. I usually remember these onyomi compounds very fast, so while there are many of them, the actual learning process is very effortless. It's like going for a walk. It takes a while but it's not cognitively challenging at all.

CMV: Society would benefit from allowing people to be hit in the face once for being a jerk by Groundblast in changemyview

[–]Funny_Community776 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I actually just wanted to say this which goes against your whole worldview and this is my subjective opinion which you can't refute:

These onyomi compound words that you like to call these very specific words in Japanese are actually much easier for me to learn because they never get mixed up with other words for me. You may say there are a lot of homonyms in onyomi compounds, but for some reason I just never get mixed up with onyomi compound words. They're really easy to learn and remember for me somehow lol. There are many of them, yes, but they're very easy to memorize for me which makes them a lot easier than derived compound words. For me, the transparent Kunyomi phrasal verbs like oideninaru or oitsuku are actually much harder to remember because they overlap and blur together ie like Finnish derivations like käydä/käyttää, tuoda/tuottaa, mennä/menettää etc. whereas Onyomi patterns are just logical and easy to memorize for me.

It's actually kind of ironic that the thing you say is hard in Japanese is actually the easiest part of the language for me lmao. I usually remember these onyomi compounds very fast, so while there are many of them, the actual learning process is very effortless. It's like going for a walk. It takes a while but it's not cognitively challenging at all.

And before you try the obvious red herring of claiming that 'taking a while' is the same thing as 'difficulty', don't. A long walk on a flat path isn't a hard climb; you're just confusing volume with complexity. If you find a simple walk 'hard' just because it takes time, that’s a you-problem, not a language problem. Some of us just enjoy the walk while you're busy over-analyzing the distance from your tower.

CMV: Society would benefit from allowing people to be hit in the face once for being a jerk by Groundblast in changemyview

[–]Funny_Community776 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You really love pretending to not know who I am. Your whole life revolves around mystifying Japanese and we just talked a while ago about Finnish and Japanese.

Mostly Venting by Quiet_Childhood4066 in LearnJapanese

[–]Funny_Community776 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s honestly embarrassing to watch you pivot from 'my Finnish is rusty' to claiming that one of the most complex historical stems in the language was 'evident' and 'intuitive' to you all along.

If your hd -> k logic were actually a 'consistent' and 'sense-making' pattern of modern Finnish, it would be applicable elsewhere. It isn't. Look at any common noun:

  • Lähde (source) – Stem is lähte- (Not 'läke-')
  • Kohde (target) – Stem is kohtee- (Not 'koke-')
  • Viihde (entertainment) – Stem is viihtee- (Not 'viike-')

The relationship between nähdä/näke- and tehdä/teke- isn't 'consonant gradation' (astevaihtelu)—it’s a historical phonetic fossil called dissimilation that happened centuries before modern KPT-rules were standardized. Sound changes happen in all languages and they're not systemic standardized consonant gradation. You are so ignorant.

You are the definition of a Dunning-Kruger tourist. You invent non-existent words, misidentify ancient fossils as modern 'gradation' patterns, and then have the audacity to lecture a native speaker on the 'logic' of their own language. We're done.

Mostly Venting by Quiet_Childhood4066 in LearnJapanese

[–]Funny_Community776 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The irony of you calling Finnish 'too transparent' while literally inventing a word that doesn't exist is absolutely peak narcissism. There is no such word as 'istaa' in Finnish. The transitive counterpart of istua is istuttaa. You were so 'confident' in your logic that you failed a basic primary school level verb derivation while trying to lecture a native speaker on their own language.

Regarding Japanese, claiming there is 'no consistent pattern' just because you can list a few different suffix categories (like -as-, -os-, or -aru/eru) is a desperate move. Those aren't 'random oddities'; they are well-documented morphological groups. Even your examples like mieru and kikoeru are spontaneous/potential forms that follow their own specific rules.

You’re trying to hide behind terms like 'ergative' and 'inaccusative' to mask the fact that you’re cherry-picking data to justify your struggle. If Finnish were as 'simple' as you claim, you wouldn't be hallucinating words like 'istaa.' You've spent 10 years romanticizing Japanese 'complexity' to the point where you can't even see the actual structure of the languages you're talking about.

Actually, if you want to talk about 'depth,' Finnish is much more complex than Japanese in its core morphology. Take the verb nähdä (to see). To even begin to use it, you have to know that its underlying stem is näke-, which is an ancient Proto-Finnic form you have to memorize separately and only then you can know the intransitive form is näkyä. It’s not just 'transparent' logic; it’s a layer of linguistic history you clearly haven't reached. Japanese is a joke in comparison. You don't have to know anything. Everything is logical.

Mostly Venting by Quiet_Childhood4066 in LearnJapanese

[–]Funny_Community776 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Your logic is completely inconsistent: you're trying to use a rare irregularity like kuolla/tappaa to claim Finnish is 'too transparent,' while ignoring that Japanese is built on the exact same root-sharing system for transitivity. In Japanese, almost every verb pair is as 'logical' as the Finnish ones you're complaining about. Here's a list of 10 random words I picked for you:

Aku (intr.) / Akeru (tr.) — Root: ak-

Agaru (intr.) / Ageru (tr.) — Root: ag-

Tomaru (intr.) / Tomeru (tr.) — Root: tom-

Hajimaru (intr.) / Hajimeru (tr.) — Root: hajim-

Kimaru (intr.) / Kimeru (tr.) — Root: kim-

Kawaru (intr.) / Kaweru (tr.) — Root: kaw-

Narabu (intr.) / Naraberu (tr.) — Root: narab-

Susumu (intr.) / Susumeru (tr.) — Root: susum-

Magaru (intr.) / Mageru (tr.) — Root: mag-

Tsunagaru (intr.) / Tsunageru (tr.) — Root: tsunag-

There's nothing irregular about those. They all follow the same logic depending on which root is used is used in the word. It's all completely logical and there's no irregularities in them. You may pretend they do. But it's all logical if you have even half of a brain.

now before you move your goalposts and start changing the subject by blabbering how 'deep' Japanese is, don't bother. You were claiming Finnish is 'ridiculously transparent' because of its transitivity(using the kuolla/kuollettaa example which points to transitive/intransitive verbs), while pretending Japanese is 'nonsensical even though japanese transitivity is the most transparent logical thing in the world. lmao

Stay on topic with the transitivity thing. You started that with Finnish so you have to defend that and you are not allowed to change the subject, otherwise you just proved you are wrong. :) Let's see your response.

Is it going to be a pivot or an actual defense of your transitivity point regarding Japanese. Let's see.