“Wa” is pronounced just as it is written… Just like “wa” in “water.”
As for your other question, Gehn, I’m not sure what you meant. “Wa” and “desu” are completely unrelated.
As for your comment/question, kitsutsuki, the “desu” is basically just a sentence ending to dictate formality, statement vs. question, etc. LC would be able to correct me on that if I’m wrong, since my knowledge of grammatical explanations is fading rather quickly. It’s more instinctual for me =\
For example, using a sentence similar to the one I used earlier: “Watashi wa sutoa e iku.”
That means “I am going to the store,” even without the “desu.”
However, the fun part comes when you have to learn to differentiate between the uses of “wa” and “ga.”
But in this case, there is no expression of being. The “am” used in translating it to english is not copulative but is just the way we formulate the present progressive verb tense, no?
Like if I said “Watashi wa nihon-go o benkyoushimasen deshita”, there is a “wa” but no being. Or does it serve multiple purpses?
And just what is the difference between wa and ga? I’ve thought wa is the nominative marker while ga was the (I think) indicator of being the subject, as in more stress, right? But I’ve heard the opposite said also…
“Wa” is multi-use. I’m not sure if I was entirely clear earlier, but it isn’t exactly like the verb “to be,” but rather acts like it, depending on the situation. But, in the sentence we’re using, I believe the nominative form would be “Watashi wa sutoa e iku no desu.” I think (don’t quote me on this one) that the “no” is the nominative particle in this sentence.
It can also be nominative, as in the example you gave. I forget the exact situations (it’s been 6 years since I studied it formally), and LC is probably going to cry when he reads my explanations You have to remember that I don’t necessarily think of Japanese in grammatical terms, so it’s sometimes hard to remember what the proper explanations are.
As for your other question, that is a good summary of the basic differences, but there are many situations in which one or the other is right/wrong, and other situations where they are both “right,” but one is “more right” than the other.
first of all, japanese grammar is totally different from the grammar of western languages.
in japanese you use tiny non-independent words (actually word is the wrong term here, but I don’t want to become to linguistic here) called particles.
particles are used to mark words as subjects or objects.
watashi=ga sakana=o taberu
I (subject) fish (object) eat
“wa” is a focus particle. it means that everything that follows the marked word e.g. watashi=wa is explicitly valid for it. what makes it difficult is that focus particles may overlay (some) normal particles.
watashi=wa sakana=o taberu
I=(especially) fish(object) eat
kind of the oposite to “wa” is “mo”, it means that everything that is said is valid for the marked word as well.
particles have NOTHING to do with the verb to be. there are so called particleverbs that are used like partiles abut can change due to tempus.
the most important is the particlesverb “daru” wich is highly irregular and “desu” wich is more polite and belongs to the “desu/masu” style that simply makes phrases sopund more polite (like you would talk to an adult or some respectful person)
hon=da / hon=desu
this/there is a book
hon=datta /hon=deshita
this/there was a book
hon=daroo / hon= deshoo
this/there will/should be a book
So, Lord Craymen, what you’re saying is that the particles “wa” and “ga” are not strictly for case, or even necessarily for stress, but to distinguish the, inclusiveness of the marked word, so that they’re more akin to the particle “mo” in character.
So if I were just one American among, say, an undetermined or unimportant amount, I would say “Watashi ga Amerika-jin desu”; in the case of being particularly, or even exclusively, or importantly so, it would be “Watashi wa…”, and if I were to be refering to just being one member of a group, it could be “Watashi mo…”. Is that right, at least more or less? (That oughtta take a while to properly internalize :S )
Then, if you don’t mind, are there defined distinctions among the use of those particles with regard to the case of the marked word. Must they be nominative, or can the “wa” be shifted, like the “mo”, to a noun of another case if it becomes important to make the distinction?
Like “Watashi ga gohan wa tabemasen”, “I don’t eat rice(especially)” instead of just “I don’t eat rice”?
Thanks alot for all of your help. It really hasn’t been easy having neither anyone to ask nor anyone else who’s learning it.
I won’t answer the grammatical specifics, since as I have proven, I have forgotten almost all grammar, but I can answer whether or not your Japanese is correct.
The sentence “Watashi ga gohan wa tabemasen” is incorrect. The “wa” should be “o” (or “wo” more specifically). But, you could say “Watashi wa gohan ga kirai desu.” I’ll let LC explain when he comes back.
watashi ga sakana wa taberu is not gramatically incorrect (in theory that is), but pragmatically.
it should be
watashi wa sakana wa terberu
if you lay stress on the object you need to lay stress also on the subject, It sounds very odd if not. the = is only to show that the particle is connected to the word, like in chemistry atoms are connected to form a molecule.
but all this particle stuff is way to theoretical, I wouldn’t mees with it if you only try to learn some tourist japanese.
The problem with “Watashi wa sakana wa taberu” is that it doesn’t feel like a complete sentence. As LC stated, you’re emphasizing both the subject and the object, but there is an implied “but…” at the end.
For instance, a more natural sounding sentence would be:
“Watashi wa sakana wa taberu kedo, gyuu niku wa tabenai.”
(“I eat fish, but I don’t eat beef.”)
In that case, there is a reason to emphasize the fact that the subject eats fish. Otherwise, the listener of the sentence is left thinking, “You eat fish… as opposed to what?”
You have to remember that I don’t necessarily think of Japanese in grammatical terms, so it’s sometimes hard to remember what the proper explanations are.
