朝、私はクマと歩く。
In the morning , i walk with my bear.
Under the grammar point と with
Does the sentence feel weird or just me? Do you walk with a wild animal? Or does Japanese keep bear as pet?
2 Likes
The sentence makes me think of a teddy bear. 
3 Likes
Not weird as such, just quite specific. I can think of two definite situations it would be used. One would be an answer to a question of what someone is doing tomorrow, and the other would be when the speaker is stating a plain fact in hopes that the listener picks up the subtext.
For example in the first case:
A：明日の朝、何かをする予定ある？
Do you have any plans tomorrow morning?
B：朝、私はクマと歩く。
Morning? I’ll walk with Kuma.
The second:
朝、私はクマと歩く…（でも午後なら予定はないので）
In the morning I will walk with Kuma… But If it’s the afternoon then I’m free.
If anything is weird, for me it’s the translation. Instead of ‘my bear’, Kuma is probably a friends name/nickname.
4 Likes
The translation literality put “my bear” which seem weird and also make me think that it is a bear rather than a person. It will be mistaken that it could be use with an animal.
Maybe can put other name that clearly sound like a person for the sentence rather than a name that sound the same as bear or other things.
Yep, I’ll change the translation. But to be fair, there is nothing technically wrong about the current translation apart from it being unexpected. This is something you’ll see a lot of in fantasy novels or storytelling in general. Sentences like this can be really useful for confirming your understanding of events that wouldn’t usually happen in everyday life.
7 Likes
Are you saying there is nothing wrong with the translation???
If we are talking about a passage or a story where there will be context. It will be fine. But all we have is a sentence and a translation which I think is wrong but you said it is right. Moreover, it is on a low N5 level which create more misunderstanding. Is this suppose to help people learn or to make people more confused?
“You are dick”
But to be fair, there is nothing technically wrong about the current translation apart from it being unexpected. This is something you’ll see a lot of in fantasy novels or storytelling in general. Sentences like this can be really useful for confirming your understanding of events that wouldn’t usually happen in everyday life.
Dick is person name and can also mean other thing. Without context how do you know which? Why is there a need to use such name for a sentence in that potentially create more issue?
Firstly, I apologize for the poor experience you’ve had. When the staff answer questions on the forums, we try to answer in a way that assumes that any user could potentially read the answer, rather than just the person asking the question. Because of this, we try not to leave any gray area of ‘oh I thought this was right but I guess it’s wrong’, when someone apart from the original poster is reading the response. We never know what one person is struggling with compared to another.
When I said that there is nothing wrong with the translation, I meant that the current interpretation is perfectly correct in certain situations, and that the クマ that is in it very well could be either a person, or a real bear, or even a stuffed animal. Being unsure about the context and wondering whether your translation or interpretation is correct or not is an important part of learning, and something we feel will help users in their pursuits.
5 Likes
Dude, chill out! Asher already acknowledged that the sentence in question might be confusing, even though it is technically correct, and that he would change it to be less confusing, so why are you being so aggressive towards him?
9 Likes
Take the following sentence: “Chodzę z kotem.”
A correct translation of this could, in fact, be “I walk with my cat.” But where is “my” on there? Literally, the words used there are “(I) walk”, “with/of/from” “cat (instrumental)”. In context, it could mean that you walk with your cat in your arms, that you walk alongside your cat, that you walk with someone nicknamed cat, perhaps it means something completely different with certain innuendo that we have no access to. Would translating such a sentence with “my cat” be technically wrong? (Mind you though, I’m not a native speaker of Polish, haha.)
Perhaps the issue at hand is that your command of English doesn’t map to the expected nuance of the translation? Have you considered that perhaps that your expectation for the translation doesn’t account for certain possibilities when dealing with context-free sentences?
5 Likes
There are plenty of “weird” sentences here on Bunpro, when I see them I just laugh, it’s part of the fun. Some people just like finding things to complain about unfortunately😅.
6 Likes
There is nothing wrong with saying “I walk with my bear”
9 Likes
Just like in the climax of the movie ‘A Time to Kill’: now imagine ‘私’ is Christopher Robin.
3 Likes
This is where my question come from if based on English.
Do you walk with a wild animal? Or does Japanese keep bear as pet?
But because it is another language which might have different rules. Different language has different interpretation like certain part can be used for living thing and non living things. Example, Is tree considered as living thing or not for japanese or othe languages.
The point is whether can it be used with animal.
It doesn’t matter if the person is walking with a wild animal or if this person keeps a bear as a pet. It does not matter at all. You are getting hung up on the wrong things.
The translated sentence is a valid sentence, the scenario in which the sentence would be said does not matter.
4 Likes
Precisely, different language have different way and rules of usage which is something confusing and need to figure out.
The thing is whether it can be used with animal?
The definition state “people or object”. In this case, it did not state animal or does the animal belong to object or people in this case?
When と is used as ‘with’, it means that both/all people or objects are equally involved in the action. However, に highlights that one person is the target (destination) of an action, so will result in something sounding a lot more one sided.
1 Like
Yes some feels weird if we use our native language to interpret. So it get confusing whether it can be apply the way or not?
Ah now I see where the confusion is. I think you have a valid point. The issue isn’t really with the sentence although I can see how it came to the sentence. It’s more about how と is said to work in the grammar point.
The “people or object” part of the definition given is poorly worded. I think it makes more sense if you read it as
“people and objects”
Because the point itself doesn’t care which it is so long as they are nouns.
" Noun (A) + は + Noun (B) + と + Verb"
”私” is a noun and ”クマ” is a noun and “歩く” is a verb.
It’s the way they defined that could need to be changed, but the sentence itself does work because it follows the structure
P.S. Fair warning I’m a learner also so anything I say can be wrong and you should seek additional verification
1 Like