This topic contains 8 replies, has 3 voices, and was last updated by 
-
Posts
-
In the TF lessons on time it covers using 間 it say how long you’ve been doing something.
Does it matter where in the sentence the time period goes (before the noun or before the verb), or not matter at all?
The TF examples has it before the noun sometimes & before the verb sometimes, e.g.:
私は５年間アメリカにいます。I have been in America for five years.
私はトムさんを１年間知っている。I have known Tom for one year.
Thanks to the fact that every word in a sentence has a particle defining what part that word plays in the sentence, the order doesn’t really matter at all. Granted, if you mix things up too much, people might lose track of what you’re trying to say, but otherwise it’s not particularly important.
Mind you, there might be a slight difference in emphasis if you change the order – “I’ve been DOING the thing for an hour” as opposed to “I’ve been doing the THING for an hour” – but I’m not entirely certain on that point.
Thanks. I was assuming it was case of not critical, but a matter of emphasis.
On a related subject; in example sentences, 一年半 seems to be translated as both ‘one and a half years’ and ’a period of one and a half years’ via SpaceALC. Google search shows 一年半間 being used, but is the 間 optional when it comes after 半?
Edit: Or could it just be omittable in favour of context?
-
This reply was modified 11 years, 6 months ago by
Astralfox.
My understanding is that 一年半 is ‘one and a half years’ and with 間 after it would be ‘a period of one and a half years’.
Context – you may be right, things do seem to get dropped a lot in the right context.
A related question on periods of time.
で is used to mark a length of time that something occurs. 間 also to get used for a span of time. How do they differ in usage?
Browsing example translations, it looks like the focus of the sentences are different. With 間 the emphasis is on the amount of time, and with で the emphasis is on what can be done in that time.
That’s my thoughts, but does anyone have a concrete answer?
Not really. I was hoping the grammar dictionary would clarify, but it doesn’t really. Your idea sounds fair, though. =)
Afox – Good observation, I’m happy with that!
It did strike me as odd when both had the same definition, but nothing to differentiate them.
-
This reply was modified 11 years, 6 months ago by
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.