JP2014229087A - Method for automatically translating japanese sentence into chinese sentence - Google Patents

Abstract

PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To solve such problems that both languages of Japanese and Chinese are different in grammar and word order, so that the automatic translation between them cannot be performed well, and for example, the form becoming "if A, B, ... " cannot be distinguished from " if it is A, B..." or "if it is A and B, ...".SOLUTION: When both grammars of Japanese and Chinese are watched well, word orders are almost the same, and have the word orders of "topics-time-places-status words-operations". The difference is only that each element is "entity words-postpositional particles" or "prepositions-entity words". Then, the present inventor considers a method of translating Japanese while comparing with Chinese by taking a correlative expression in Japanese. Furthermore, a Japanese sentence such as "if A, B" is literally translated as letters, and then the final decision is left to an interpretation of a reader, and thereby the translation is achieved in this form.

Description

  The present invention relates to a technology for automatically converting Japanese sentences into Chinese sentences using a computer.

  Conventionally, automatic bilateral translation by computer has progressed through two stages. That is, in the first stage, the source language was grammatically analyzed and converted into the target language based on it. This method has been useful to some extent for translating between homogenous languages like European languages, but between heterogeneous languages, the processing time increases exponentially with just a little longer sentences, and grammar analysis Just a little misaligned, it became a completely unknown translation, which was far from practical.

  Therefore, in the second stage, we create a lot of parallel example sentences between the source language and the target language, extract the model example sentence by comparing which translation example sentence is close to the translation example sentence, and determine the translation word by comparing with it. The method is now taken. In addition, minimal grammar analysis was also performed at this time. This is called “statistical method”. According to this method, although the translation accuracy is somewhat improved, the amount of prepared example sentences is enormous, and therefore the example sentence collation time increases at an accelerated rate. In addition, an enormous memory location is required to store example sentences.

  Currently, in English-Japanese translation, there are currently over 5 million example sentences in the dictionary with the total number of translated example sentences, and over 20 million words in terms of words. However, as is well known, the degree of perfection of a translated word is not yet at the stage of use when it exceeds 10 words. And if it says only in Chinese, there is not much literature, but there is no sign that the same trend continues and new technology is announced.

For example, “The translation series translation engine (converter = transfer) and module (example sentence)” is, and there is an outline as follows.
“Continuous development and development global new technology” is translated as “Continuously developing world-leading new technology”. At this time, the original text is “Continuous d development v Reference v World n new a technology n (← d: adverb, v: verb, n: noun, u: particle, a: adjective), etc., and the idea of how this would be the correct meaning. However, what is troublesome is that there is a part-of-speech tag that is an unnecessary “break-open” or “departure-investment” branch (inhibiting correct translation) in the middle, which makes the break position wrong.

  Furthermore, the standard can be set as “target”, and it can be shaken as “whether it will lead the world, such new technology” or “development”, and “whether new technology will be developed”

  Next, when converting from Japanese to Chinese, this is surprisingly less error-prone than Sino-Japanese translation. This is because the overall structure of Japanese and the overall structure of Chinese are very similar, so there are few places where grammatical analysis is mistaken compared to Japanese-English translation. Excite translation, which will be described later, shows the significance of this point, and the results often appear in translation. It is quite excellent translation software.

  However, regular Japanese example sentences are fine, but in Japanese there is a convenient word “particle”, so the order of words can be changed freely, and it is difficult to understand which is a main verb or a side verb. Easy to collapse. There are punctuation marks to prevent this, but the Japanese government has not decided exactly on this, and the place where it is hit is probably emotional and sometimes misleading.

  The biggest problem comes from the structure of the word order. For example, if there is a sentence “A, B”, how far will this “If” take, then “If A, B,” When that happens, the question is where to start. Even if such an ambiguous sentence is written, even if it can be easily judged by a human being, it is not obvious in the electronic brain, and this is a big problem.

Japanese is seen as a heretical child of the world, and in any case, mutual translation with Chunichi or other languages is difficult, and immediate improvement is expected.

Japanese Patent Application 2012-226923

Published by Takashi Kinoshita, “Chinese to be interpreted from the front by common sense and responsiveness” Kazeensha 2011 Published by Takashi Kinoshita, “Translating Japanese into Chinese from Word to Word,” Kazeensha 2011

  One way to study the world's languages is to examine the word order of "subject-verb-object (→ SVO structure)" based on English-style ideas. So this idea seems fundamentally wrong. The biggest inconsistency is a sentence in the form of “Elephant has a long nose”, which is unfamiliar with English grammar. This inconsistency is called a “dual subject” problem, but most of the Japanese sentences are written in this dual subject format. Translation is difficult.

  By the way, what about the Chinese idea? In the traditional English grammar idea, it was said that Chinese has the structure of SVO structure, but in fact, it is a “topic-subject-verb” that has exactly the same structure as Japanese in terms of interpretation. It can be interpreted. Then can Chinese be interpreted in the light of Japanese grammar? Of course you can. Therefore, this part of research seems to be the biggest issue in automatic translation of Japanese-Chinese languages. In addition, automatic translation based on English-style grammar requires a fundamental change of mindset even if more than 5 million example sentences in English are saturated and translation accuracy is not improved. I don't wait for that.

  In the global language classification, Japanese belongs to a stale language. The meaning of agglutination means that these two words are so strongly coupled that they cannot be broken in the “entity-particle” or “entity-verb” connection. Here, "substance" means "thing that can be recognized as a painting" and will be called "real word" in the future. Also, “particle / verb” is a word that explains “verb” and is called “imaginary”. By the way, all words other than “verbs” are called “imaginary words”. Then, Japanese creates a broad “single phrase” with “verb-imaginary”. In other words, the characteristic of a sticky word is that “sentences” continue one after another without being influenced by the order of words. In other words, the place where “imaginary words” come to the end of clauses / sentences is similar to the “object-verb” structure in English grammar, so Japanese also belongs to the “OV” structure. It will be.

  How about Chinese? Chinese is said to be an isolated word. This means that there are no words that connect the unique kanji in one word, and the words are barely connected. However, when interpreted in English, the structure of “virtual-verb” is similar to the structure of “verb-object” in English, so Chinese is “(subject) -verb-object”. ", Or" VO "structure.

  Earlier, it was said that Chinese could be interpreted as Japanese "topic-subject-verb", but to do so, it would be necessary to review Chinese in terms of "sentences". This idea has shown that if this method is used manually by the present inventor for “Chunichi” translation manually, good results can be obtained in normal translation (Non-Patent Documents 1 and 2). Similarly, it has been found that automatic translation yields good results as well. Therefore, how to use it as a means of automatic translation is shown below.

If you look closely, the word order of Japanese and Chinese is surprisingly similar when taken out by phrase. For example, the following statement:
If the sentence is “I talked with my friend in the cafeteria”, it is “I talked with / with my friend / in the cafeteria” if divided into phrases, and “I / the other party is my friend / the place is a cafeteria” in equivalent Chinese. / Talked ”, in Chinese, it would be“ I / Watomo / Restaurants / ■ End ”. Not all sentences are like this, but many sentences can be decomposed in this way, and can be interpreted according to the idea. The fact that Japanese-Chinese translation is surprisingly good is actually the secret.

Let's take a closer look. "Sum friend" is, strictly speaking, "partner, friend" instead of, "to sum is, my friend," but it is, this can be re-interpreted as "a friend". "Standing cafeteria" is, "Is there, dining room's" in, this can also be sensibly interpreted as "in the cafeteria."

To interpret the Japanese to Chinese, "a friend" is "to sum, friends, it and" was converted to "sum friend" as mediation, or "in the dining room", the "location, cafeteria is to be converted translated word as "standing cafeteria" therethrough in. " As long as this translation method is followed, automatic translation between Japan and China can be done relatively well.

How do you interpret “talk”? "Talking-talking"? This is the case in English. It is not. Isn't it a single “verb”? That's right. If interpreted so, the previous sentence becomes a “subject-situation word-verb”, and the main structure becomes a “subject-verb” sentence. But it's not enough. Why is “situation word” the same as “object”? If so, let's try a sentence that matches the object. Let's say that we talked about politics.

At this time, in Chinese, “ speaking -politics”, that is, “ conversational politics”, is surely, but in the sentence “about a certain political issue”, “Seigo Yuichi personal politics is completed” and “politics” The phrase comes first. Interpretation is "related to a certain politics and talked about it", and the word order is exactly the same as in Japanese. In Chinese, the part of the Japanese word “to” is rewritten with some kind of situation word, and at some times it can be interpreted in English or Japanese. And Chinese inflections can be interpreted as particles or verbs in Japanese, but it is a secret to easily convert between Japanese and Chinese languages.

Chinese-Japanese translation has historically devised various ways to match Japanese to Chinese. That was the inverted expression based on the “correspondence structure” or “re-score”. Therefore, in the daytime and translation, as previously described, always in the middle "to sum ‥‥, it and" "location is ‥‥, where" Given that incorporate the structure of a substantial portion Will be translated into the planned range. It is no exaggeration to say that the means of solving the problem is to justify the correspondence.

  This type of theory is described in detail in the “mid-to-day” translation method of the previous application, as well as in the aforementioned non-patent literature. Furthermore, it is also written in our upcoming book “Ultimate Japanese-Chinese Fusion”.

  The present inventor has organized the “intermediate representation of both languages” according to the theory described above, and has completed the present invention. However, the words are infinite, and the above theory is not useful for all words. After all, it is inevitable that some example sentences are necessary.

  Currently, there are “Yahoo!”, “Excite”, and other things in the automatic translation software for Chinese and Japanese currently available in Ichii. Therefore, let us compare the performance of the “translation” by this translation software and the “scheduled translation” by the present invention. There is no big difference in short sentences, but it should be clear that the difference is obvious in long sentences. “Scheduled translation” refers to a translation result sentence that is expected to be obtained if this translation technology is applied faithfully.

First, let's start with a short sentence, even a long sentence.
Original: Long ago, I heard that there was no mountain in the Dali region yet.
Yahoo: Hearing of the first thought, departed flight Situation before the Dali region
Eki: One-on-one. Previous things, hearing, vs. Uri region.
Main translation: Before Eku Ekyu, an essay, Dairi district.

  Compare in a table. Yahoo tried to make a table forcibly, although it was hard to make a table. Since Chinese simplified characters cannot be used in this specification, Japanese characters were used instead of simplified characters, and some notes were given when it was not possible.

  This will be described below. Yahoo translation is incoherent and has no correspondence with Japanese. This is probably because it was translated based on grammar, but the present inventor has no idea how to interpret the original text.

  On the other hand, excite translation is almost identical to the original Japanese text, and it is a sentence that can be used as meaning roughly in Chinese. To explain a little, “the long time ago” at the beginning is also “old / old times” and “very old” in Japanese, and the Chinese expressions for these are various. To make this decision, it is necessary to search for idioms to some extent, and any translation is not particularly funny.

  It should be noted that the “no mountain” part has a structure of “no mountain yet” in Chinese, so there is no way for “not yet” to separate. Even in this translation, it is necessary to consider which word the last “not” was received, but it is assumed that the excitement is also doing the same operation.

  Lastly, in the planned translation of the present invention, the part of “Not yet” is “End of death (/ remaining)”, but “Not yet” is linked and “Not yet.” "... is", so if you grasp the part grammatically, there is no big problem. In this case, if you don't know what you don't have, if you say "absence" without showing the "verb" you receive, the reader will search for the words you want to receive properly. Will be the same. In other words, you can translate in this way. The present inventor uses such a method when a complicated language is ambiguous.

  Also, a minor but grammatical problem is the syntax of “end of life”. When the “not yet” structure is adopted, the meaning of “possible” in the future is included, so even if it is in the form of the past tense, in general, it is not attached. From this point of view, in this translation, “OK” must be removed, but mistakes are not a big problem. There is no big problem with “mountain”, either “mountain” or “mountain east-west → mountain”. If the latter, emotions similar to Japanese will occur. This can be done according to the interpretation circuit of whether or not emotion is added to the whole sentence.

  The “to” part of “For the Dali” is a problem. What does “to” mean? “Ni” represents “place”, “ha” represents “topic”, and collectively means “talk about the place”. Then, it seems that the translated word should be “present…”. However, even in Japanese, “Dari region” means “(the place) is a story of Dali region”. The same is true for Chinese, and there is no need to express it in detail.

  Next, let's try a slightly longer sentence.

Original: Wave splashes were higher than the mountains, so the sun was above the surface of the water, and the burned seawater was burned.
Yahoo: Splash of waves, water on the surface, sun, and ignited seawater.
Eki: Nanami Hiyama High, Innocent, Solar Top surface of the surface of water, Combustion seawater, Fire burned Nasama.
Interpretation: Naniwa Hiyama High, Sun On the surface of the water, ■ (← fire consideration) seawater ■ (← hot spring) like a good image.
Translated by: Naniwa Hiyama High, Sun On the surface of the water, good image ■ (← fire consideration) obtained seawater ■ (← hot fire) 乎乎.

  Compare in a table.

  This will be described below. Yahoo translation re-translated the translation, saying, “It ’s up to the splash, the sun is on the surface of the water, and the igniting seawater is burned (/), and then from the mountains. It ’s high, it ’s like that, ”but it ’s now translated into a sentence that is similar to the original.

Excite translation can be translated almost literally, but it is passive enough to be burned, but only this part is quite strange. In Chinese, active also passive even without strict distinction as English, "burn" is dual the meaning "is to / ~ ~" in the "burn". Japanese has the same idea.

  In the planned main translation, “translated” was interpreted as “as in a circle…”, but if translated like this, it could be said that it was almost a perfect score. In order to put such a translation, it is a metaphor for "burning with seawater", but it depends on whether it can be determined. Making such a translation circuit requires a lot of example sentences, but as of today, no perfect circuit has been made. However, since it does not burn with "seawater" like translation, it is not so difficult to make it a "metaphor" by common sense judgment from this level.

  Let's compare more complex sentences.

Original: Girls didn't have fundamental autonomy, and if they didn't like it, they had no choice but to go home from their husbands.
Yahoo: Holiday Nyojyo Nemoto defunct Independence, parallel and deliberate story, deceased "Departed from the House" and others.
Eki: Ruth of ruling independence of roots, defeating Na individual, “retirement of obedience” deceased.
Interpretation: Women's Vs. ■ Independence of Nemoto Independence, Necessary Unexpected things, “Department of Deputy” Excluded Except for Nasoji Ji ■ (← Power C) method.
Main translation: Yuko vs. Atsuko Nemoto Independence, Necessary, Unexpected things, “Departed from the family”.

  Let's make it a table.

  This will be described below. In the Yahoo translation, the beginning is “If the girl does not have autonomy”, it does not match the original text. And "~ not," is "concurrent and", but this is meaningless. A reasonable interpretation of this part is that the sentence that receives “if” is from the beginning to “dislike”. In other words, there are two clauses in the part received by “Nara”, and both are received. Therefore, “Katsu” is used as a word to connect the two, but the meaning of the original sentence is not.

In such a case, if the original sentence has a “ if ...” responsive structure, the Yahoo translation will be correct, but the original sentence does not have it, so Yahoo mistranslates. In such a case, the most irresponsible but safest translation may be a translation that leaves the reader to judge. That is, it is only necessary to attach “if yes,” to the last part, and “same as required”. In this translation, this method is used in principle when the first vocabulary of “if” is not known. Excite translation also makes the same kind of error.

In addition, Yahoo says “I dislike it” as “Naha debate”, but the meaning is “I dislike it, girls ”, and in this translation, the meaning of “it” cannot be taken, and this is translated. Absent. In addition, in the Yahoo translation, the beginning of "Holiday ..." will be so far as "if you don't like", but the meaning is "if you don't have autonomy and you don't like it", and the original text doesn't mean this.

  The next excitement translation will be "If you don't have autonomy" because it comes with "Yoshika" at the beginning, but the textual meaning is not like this, as with Yahoo translation. “Nara” only applies to the word “I hate”, and excite translation has this “I hate this” floating in the air. Normally, such isolated words such as “I hate this” are linked to “Topic” with “˜ha” attached, but even if they are interpreted as such, they are not connected here.

  Then, if you reverse-translate “Exclusion is not 决定 女 决 子”, it will be “There is no XX except to determine the girl (/)”, but this does not make sense of what is missing. This is because there is confusion because the word “has” and “in” in Chinese are translated into Japanese, and both have “~” at the end of the sentence. So, in this case, if you say “I'm alive”, it makes sense in terms of shape, but I don't know how to translate an unnecessary “woman lion”. In other words, “I have no choice but to leave” is translated as “Excluded, except for Sadako Nadako”, but “Except for determining the girl”, “Girl” is the phrase at the beginning of the sentence. It is unclear why this word jumps so far.

However, an interesting phenomenon occurred when the text was changed a little. Actually, in the beginning, the fact that there is no “independence” is for “marriage”, so if you add this to the sentence “Girls have no decision-making power on marriage ”, the translation is “ Nejichi vs. Marriage Independence (→ Absence), Na Individual Debate, ... ", and translations other than" Rika "are close to the correct answer. In other words, "If fundamentally, there is no autonomy for marriage, I hate it ...". When this happens, the correct translation is a little more. In addition, when the original was changed little by little, it became a different sentence, sometimes approaching the meaning of the original and sometimes moved away. Generally speaking, the judgment based on how to interpret sentence breaks causes instability of translation in this way, but with this method, translation is still not complete. What should I do? The following translation method is used, and as I mentioned earlier, it seems that the translation method that the reader is allowed to judge half is the best. Even if it is difficult for a computer to make a decision, the reader may be able to make a decision in an instant.

  The last is the main translation. Whether it's Yahoo or Excite, it makes no sense if you make a mistake. How can I get it right? This is where long sentences are difficult.

This is not possible because it tries to determine this mechanically. Yes, let the reader judge . In other words, the main translation can be translated exactly as it is written, and the judgment of the results can be left to the reader. The text is confused in this way because the responsive relationship of “if…” is unclear. So, if “if”, add it to the shortest phrase or phrase that it takes, or do not add it at all, “if you like that, you do n’t want it like that” Such an error disappears. In the text, the “if” part is enclosed in punctuation marks, so it can be seen that the first word of “if” is after “,” and there is no major problem. In other words, the range surrounded by “punctuation marks” can be regarded as a phrase with “if”. This translation also incorporates these standards.

The next problem is that there is no subject in the sentence “If I dislike it”. what to do. In such a case, it is sufficient to inherit the subject of the previous phrase. The basics of Japanese interpretation. If it does so, it will become the meaning of "If a girl dislikes it." In that case, “dislike” should be in the form of “I don't want” to be “unexpected things”. However, this judgment is difficult. If you can't do that, you can use "Women's 這 Individual Discussion". In any case, it is difficult to translate the sentence with the subject omitted, and if you make a circuit that always makes you know what the subject is for "verb", most problems are Solvable. In this case, if the verb expresses emotion or action , it is assumed that the subject is “person”. This circuit is not so difficult.

  From the above, the following can be said. That is, any commercially available automatic translation software has no major mistake as long as it is short. However, if the sentence is long, the subject is omitted, or the beginning of the assumed phrase is not clear, it may not be translated correctly. Some interpretations may be far from the original for the sake of judgment.

  On the other hand, in the main translation, in principle, the meaning of comprehension is to make a single phrase within the range of punctuation marks, and if that does not make sense, let the reader who has read the translation judge and reduce major errors. And make automatic translation more correct.

  The first barrier to automatic translation of Japanese into Chinese begins with dividing Japanese into sections by word. To that end, it is important to determine how the usage words are used. In this regard, the technology has already been established to some extent and is not an important element of the present invention. However, in general, automatic translation software developers have weak knowledge of correct Japanese, and the meaning of ambiguous Japanese expressions can be grasped. It is impossible. In addition, there are many places that have the same idea as the English sentence regarding the use of passive and messengers, which may cause incorrect usage in Chinese conversion. In this specification, the basics of Japanese will also be described.

  Next, look for breaks in phrases. In Japanese, the punctuation is clarified by the punctuation, but the government does not indicate the rules for punctuation, and it is left to the individual's judgment. It is necessary to establish some punctuation rules to get the original text.

  That is, the phrase captured by “toha” often represents a topic / subject. Since this is an important element of the sentence described below, it is punctuated to make it stand out. You don't have to hit it, but it's easier to understand how to hit it. In addition, there are cases where it is preferable to put punctuation marks in order to make the words stand out. In this specification, this point will be clarified in the following scenes.

The Japanese sentence that has been processed as a basic sentence for automatic translation by punctuation must be adjusted to the difference between the word order of “verb / imaginary” and the “intermediate” expression in the daytime. For example, if the "Shanghai", "location, Shanghai, in" and, if "I caught a cold,""cause, common cold, the order to" "cause, suffering was, in the cold, so / because it's ”Is necessary.

  This is a kind of dictionary creation. Not difficult.

  Finally, since the sentence made in this way is rough for Chinese, it is necessary to re-convert it into an appropriate China with reference to this sentence. In other words, the original translation is changed to the main translation.

  Roughly speaking, the “best mode for carrying out the invention” is as described above. However, this is not enough to discuss automatic translation, and will be described in detail for each item below.

  In order to understand this description, it is necessary to carefully read the two non-application documents listed above. “Chinese interpreting from the front with common sense and responsiveness, Feng Shusha” “Further Japanese interpreting Japanese into words from the front, Feng Shusha” Also, the present inventor will add a third booklet soon. I wrote the theory of intertranslation between Japan and China.

Chapter 1, description of the basic structure of Chinese (topic, subject, object) In Chinese, in principle, words (nouns) are simply placed in the “topic”, “subject”, and “object” expressions. And the words that correspond to Japanese “particles” are not added. This is the biggest difference in structure. In Japanese, this is distinguished by “ha / ga //” etc. However, if this particle is removed, in principle, it can be converted into a sentence that can be used in Chinese as it is. In this way, the meaning of the sentence can be understood because there is an implicit understanding that "person is the subject of action (subject)" and "thing is the object of action (object)". Even in Japanese, even if “ha / ga / mo” is omitted, the literary meaning is not broken because this principle works. Even in a global language, this principle applies to any language. So, depending on the language, there are words that may or may not have a particle equivalent.

However, Chinese sometimes wants to clarify "ha / ga /", and at that time, an appropriate interposition may be added. It will be described sequentially.
<Ha>: It is difficult to use the Japanese word “ha”. “Ha” is said to be a particle of “take-up”, and near the beginning of the sentence, it is taken up as “topic”, and in the sentence, it is taken up and “emphasized” or some “emotion” is added. Emotion may be taken as an emphasis, or vice versa. Then, “ha” represents “topic proposal / emphasis”.

“Topic” often serves as “subject”. For example, the sentence “I go to the company” may be understood as “Speak my story (topic), I am the subject”. In other words, Japanese becomes “topic / subject-object-verb”. In Chinese, this is extremely simple and only “Ikutsu Kouji”, but this structure may be understood as “topic / subject-verb-object”. Then, as for the difference between Japanese and Chinese, first describe the "topic", and then describe the elements of the sentence as either "verb-imaginary" or "imaginary-verb" It will be a difference. Then, “ha” is a word that stops there and clearly shows the premise of the sentence.

Then, when “ha” represents emphasis next, it is more difficult to judge itself. Interpretation can be expressed simply as “especially in this case” with the meaning of “I don't know otherwise, especially in this case”. The other is “ opposite in other cases, but in this case it is an exception”, which can be simply written as “in this case it is an exception”. For example, in the sentence “I will go to Kyoto tomorrow,” the meaning of “I will go everywhere, especially tomorrow, go to Kyoto” and “(usually) go to Osaka, but tomorrow is an exception. It can be interpreted to mean “go”.

  After all, this judgment can only be said to be interpreted differently depending on the situation at that time. To translate into Chinese, there is no other way than to ignore such “ha”. In other words, readers will be judged. However, there are a few words that show some emphasis even in Chinese.

  That is, next, let's mention the case of expressing “ha” in Chinese. “U” often expresses the meaning of “ha”. That is, “us” means “presence / premise” in the same meaning as “present”. In other words, “present” means “something” such as “location / time / motion”, and “used” means the same as “at” and means “with (...)”. This leads to “put” and represents the “premise” in which “thing” such as “topic / location / time / starting point / comparison / situation” occurs. When this is displayed in the responsive expression, “the situation is (... / is) in...”, That is, this “in” corresponds to “ha”.

  In addition, “Ze” may also be read as “this” and “Ze” may indicate emphasis. Still there. When a sentence is cut once, it may be indicated only by a punctuation mark “,”, which is similar to Japanese.

“U” is translated as “Ha” in the case of “Uo” and “Ou”, and the majority is “Ou”. “Uo” is placed as “Uu = Ai”, and it is interpreted as “ What is now Oo”. In the case of "○ Yu", in this ○ enter and "through / verb / adjective", and regarded as "Oite is on", the "Yu" is the "highlight", "it is" and substantially Similarly, this translation can be either “ha” or can be ignored. To put it the other way around, if there is a little emphasis in Japanese, “U” will be added, but this type of “U” has the meaning of adding “ha” and cutting the sentence once.

  Let's show it in a table. Bold type is often used.

  Next, let's talk about other cases where “ha” is used.

  The Chinese word “Ze” indicates the content of “It is…” in response to the beginning of the sentence. In a general grammar book, it is “~”, but when Chinese is interpreted from the front, it is the same as “~ ha” in Japanese.

  It is possible to add “employment” to this “correction” and make “employment” an emphasis form as “employment”. Interpretation will be "I will take it ...", and the Japanese translation will be "That's", "Joshiga". However, because “employment” expresses some emphasis and emotion in response to various words, the translation is not limited to these two.

What is more interesting is that even a sentence that does not normally need to use “Ze” can be changed to “Topic- Ze --its contents” after the topic. This kind of “Ze” is the same as “Ha” in the Japanese sentence, but in Chinese, unnecessary “Ze” is further used, which means that it is emphasized. Therefore, this can be called the “correction” of emphasis. This “sore” can be placed before “adjective” or “verb”. When attached to the front of the verb, and the end of the sentence in the form of Concord of "~ manner", concludes with the statement as "it is ‥‥ I / place he / it's time".

  Let's show it in a table.

  Finally, let's talk about a Japanese idea that uses “,” to indicate the meaning of “ha”.

In Japanese, when a “topic / subject” is clarified, a punctuation mark “,” is often used after the word. If it is not as good as Japanese but it is better to break the sentence too long in Chinese, type ",". However, whether or not to interpret this point in the meaning of “ha” is not definitive, and may be interpreted in the meaning of “and”. In short, it is there to cut some emotions.
Example 1:
中文 ： 截止 To November 4th, 20:00 , 5 people in need of affairs, 2 people alive, 2 people suffered, 1 person lost.

Motoyaku: cut stop, in the till November 4, 20, fell into difficult five, during the trip, 2 people survived, two of whom are in distress, one person was missing.
Example 2:
中文 ： 7 points in front, Chen Xing Liu Car Stopped 110 national highway , snow on the ground Yes 50 Kokusai depth.

Interpretation: After 7 o'clock the night before, Chen Xing Liang's car stopped, on National Route 110, and the snow on the ground was 50 centimeters deep.
Example 3:
中文 ： Chen Xing Liang head car late ,是 Nishinobu 20 long public car , ■ (← Meya) like ■ (← up and down) on the car , 22 只 ■ (← Ono) cow ■■ (← mouth mug cow 2) Scream.

Motoyaku: After Chen Xing Liang top car, it is, as Nishiki is extended, it is a long traffic jam vehicle of 20 kilograms, and, where, in the top of her track, the cows of 22 head, a cloud, Cried desperately.
<Ga>: Next, let's move on to “ga”. “Ga” is said to be a particle of “selection / explicit”, and “select” a certain thing from among many things, or “specify” a certain thing. For example, "there is the school" or "I is the principal" use as. Then, in Japanese, "I, ‥‥""I,‥‥," but it is necessary to distinguish between, in this case, a simple distinction is "the" recognition of "the brain" (generally recognized) "Ga" is recognized with a feeling ( individual recognition) that follows the fact of "in front of you". This distinctive expression is confusing even in Japanese, but if you translate it into Chinese, the particle equivalent will disappear in any case, so there is no need to pay attention to the difference in the original text.

On the other hand, "but" is, "I am, music likes", "but" of such a statement, it is necessary to distinguish between "wo". In other words, generally the case that represents a "presence / recognition / nature / love / wish / possible" of the operation, but to not as "a ~""~is", this "but" the evaluation in English flow Since it represents the object, the distinction is necessary here. However, its usage is influenced by English, and “ga” is changing from “possible” to “possible” in the backward direction from the rear of the above category (“existence possible”). For example, the not "swimming can be,""swimming as possible". However, there is no equivalent particle in Chinese, and translation into Chinese does not require consideration of the original text.

  However, when “ga” is distinguished from “ha”, there is a kind of “emphasis” meaning. When this emphasis is expressed also in Chinese, there is a word representing it. “Come” and “Temple”.

"Come," said statement, such as the "I come做○○". Interpretation is "I come here and do XX", and this "Come here" is equivalent to "GA" and means "I do XX". In addition, “ga” may be used to mean “ga” when used as a proverb. For example, "這些events we come" is, "this thing, I have come here, to" from, "this thing is, I, to" become.

"就" is something that is the meaning of "Osamuru" or "take" is to there, specifically, "If anything, immediately / Well, something happens" naturally result that (the order Represents the effect of contact. In this, “employment” is interpreted as “just, it is ...” from “it is ...”, and this “ga” is “job”.

  Finally, let ’s go to “O”. “O” represents “control / instruction” of the object. “Domination” is a case where the object is strongly restrained, and is expressed as “bunch” in Chinese. “Instruction” refers to pointing to an object that is far away, and in Chinese, no instruction is written for this meaning. Since a verb / interposition is a word that describes its substance, the “thing” may be placed naked after the “verb” that is an explanatory word.

These differences in Chinese are similar to the distinction of “ha / ga” in Japanese. When the object is indicated abstractly, “物 ○” is indicated, and when specific instructions (ie, control) are given. Is “ pick ○ 做”. The latter sentence form is called “fitting syntax”. If this is evaluated in English, all of them become “objects” of movement, and all of them become “to” sentences in Japanese. Therefore, it is necessary to distinguish whether or not to use the “concept” in the translation of “O” written in Japanese.

  For example, the following distinction:

  The “book” of “reading” does not specifically represent any “book”. If the “book” in such a case is converted into Chinese, it becomes “reading”, and “book” is placed directly after the verb.

In contrast, in the statement of "I read this book", "read, this book," but can also, "grabbed, this book, and, I read" can also be expressed as. If the Chinese, the former "completing reading這本Form", the latter "bunch這本Manual completing reading", and the former is an abstract representation, the latter is sentences specific expression (bunch syntax).

  Let's take a look at the significance of the syntax. “Reading” represents a single action of “reading” in a different way of viewing (general form), and “reading this book (← reading this book)” in the syntax is “reading a book” Is a two-element sentence representing the “motion” and its “object” (individual form). It is necessary to pay attention to this distinction when translating into Chinese. However, even if the expression of the object is somewhat longer, it can often be expressed as “做 XX things”, and it is necessary to make a certain standard for whether or not to make it a kind of emphasis.

Next, let's talk about other particles. The usage of other particles is almost the same except for “ni”. Here, we will describe “ni / he / te / de /////////”.
<Ni>: “Ni” seems to come from the Chinese word “■ (← Lee) Knee” that means “you”. Represents a point on the opposite side . In English, it feels like “at”. By the way, “ha” cannot be said that the pronunciation is similar, but it has commonality and comes from “I wow” (in old Japanese, “A line, Wa line, Ha line” Has the same homogeneity), and " widely represents this side ".

  On the other hand, in Chinese, which is a painting language, there are many words corresponding to “ni” in order to clarify the other side. It is a verb (/ verb) such as “present / existing / arrival / versus / directed / due / subject / use / transfer / scream / pay / contract / decree”. The reason for this complexity in Japanese is to change the verbs at the end of the sentence to distinguish the forms such as “intransitive verb / transitive verb”, “passive / serving role”, and “loss of profit and loss”. In words, at the end of a sentence, it seems that it is difficult to indicate it by changing the verb, and in the vicinity of the beginning of the sentence, the relationship with the other party of movement is finely divided and expressed by affecting the mode of movement. . In other words, all changes in Japanese verbs apply to the above-mentioned form of intern. However, each word does not correspond to a change in English style.

  Let's think again.

  In order to express the other party with “ni”, there are cases where the interpersonal relationship such as “place / time / purpose / object” is not included, and “passive / usage / defeat” including the interpersonal relationship.

  The former is expressed as “present / present / arrival / versus / directed / deal” or the like. In this case, the expression is different only in the case of “present / present”, but it is the same in other cases. Here, “present / present” is described.

“Present” means “where and where there is what” and “ownership”, and “present” means “what is there” and “existence” itself of the object itself. The two seem to have different essences, but in Japanese, “A” is expressed at the end of the sentence, so the distinction is vague.

For example, "to me, there is a house" is a "Fusako our presence" in the sense of ownership, "there is a house" is "Fusako standing" in the sense of existence. However, the latter is virtually the same as the "Fusako Yes", rather than to be compatible, but "Fusako standing" bad sentence itself is of sitting. In translation, it is better to rewrite “where there is” to “Yes” in the form of “Yes” with an implicit understanding of “where and where” for this sentence. In the present invention, this is a natural premise.

  Rather, in Japanese, it should be noted that “is” for people and “is” for things, and these are both converted to “present” or “present”.

When “in” in Chinese represents “location”, there are two corresponding Japanese modes. In other words, "where and where" is, and "where and where". The former is, "at one point (← clarity), there" in the sense of the latter's case be expressed as "the range smell Te (← vague), to".

  Japanese has such a distinction, and this attention is necessary for Chinese-Japanese translation, but not for Japanese-Chinese translation.

But, in the case of the former, "in Shanghai, go" in the sentence, such as, in the Chinese expressed only as "removed by Shanghai", not a "× removed by standing Shanghai". “Last” represents “movement” and “present” represents “stillness”. When I think, "in Shanghai, I live" is, put a "standing" as a "living standing in Shanghai". In other words, “Still, the place is Shanghai”. The easy to distinguish, the meaning of "removed by" to "go ... to" is provided from the beginning, but in the "housing" is, simply means "has been quietly", then the "place" Just think it is necessary.

Still complicated. The "go" to the meaning of "line arrive" is, along with the "arrival" to the verb, for example, "reaches arrives purpose" or "reached, throughout, to where anywhere of interest" is required to be . But translation doesn't have to be difficult. “Residence” and “Delivery” are listed in this form in the dictionary, so you can follow them. If it is not in the dictionary, it can be determined whether it means “getting it” or not.

  Next, let's move on to interpersonal relationships. This is extremely complex.

  In English, intransitive and transitive verbs are strictly distinguished. This is because it is important that the movement is your own movement or the other party. In general, painting-related words emphasize the distinction between these pictorial elements, but it is not important to distinguish between intransitive verbs and transitive verbs in terms of the role of the subject, the object, and the object. Absent. For that reason, in Old Japanese, there was no such distinction, and all actions were performed with neutral expressions. However, about 200 years ago, Japanese responded as soon as it was influenced by the West. This is because the distinction was easily expressed as a change in the verb. For example, “receive (neutral)” → “receive (passive) / receive (automatic)” changes.

  On the other hand, in Chinese, the change cannot be expressed with the words, so the distinction is still ambiguous today. It ’s just about whether to add “object” after the verb. The above-mentioned “reading” is an intransitive verb if you read “reading”, and a transitive verb if you read “reading a book”. In short, in the translation from Japanese to Chinese, the standard of “abstract / concrete” is more important for the operation, and the standard of “automatic / transitive” is not so important.

In English, the distinction between active, passive, and servicing requires a clear distinction between them in order to indicate which direction the action was taken from. On the other hand, in Japanese, there are individual actions that express active and passive, and it is not necessary to distinguish between them. For example, "surprised" does not need to be as being "surprised" Te daringly, "Father, die" is "the father, was accustomed death" there is no need to be. That said, when Japanese came to be influenced by English, it was accepted that English style was distinguished by ending changes, and that was why Japanese changed significantly over the last 200 years.

  On the other hand, in Chinese, the ending of the verb does not work, it is accepted only as a change in the aspect with the other party, and the active / passive / usage classification is still ambiguous. For example, "cover" represents "passive", but when only "person" and "thing" are involved, the roles of people and things are determined in advance. Is not used. And when people are involved, it is necessary to clearly indicate the direction of movement by using “covers” to generate damage.

A service is a mode in which a certain person has some influence on the other party as a result of a certain action. Every action has some effect on the other party, and every action has utility. No, there are other ways to view the servants. The interpretation is that a person uses the other party as a tool to achieve a certain result. The former is Japanese and Chinese, and the latter is English.

  Japanese can also adopt the idea of the English style, and recently, some expressions of the English style, but it seems that this idea is not accepted by the Japanese. This is because the word “sake” sounds too strong. In such a case, the Japanese language often expresses the loss of “get / do”. Chinese feels similar to Japanese and does not adopt English-style ideas.

  Actions that damage others are part of the actions that affect them, and the distinction between use and passive is ambiguous. Therefore, in Japanese, the standard for the difference is often “do / get”, but the standard is not the same as “salary” in Chinese. Therefore, Japanese “passive / serving” is partly simplified and partly complicated in Chinese.

Since the above-mentioned verbs (verbs) are well known, they will be briefly described.
"The": "Turning the (→ getting caught), to Daredare, and, what people are is" to lead. In Japanese, “over” is not translated, so in the daytime translation, if “being” appears, determine whether it is “interpersonal” or “damage” and attach “over” .

If it is an “objective” operation, it will often be another evaluation operation in Japanese, so follow it. For example, “surprise” motion, motion with “interest”. Japanese represents the beneficiary of the person in the form of a “payer” if it is a “beneficial” action for that person. For example, if you get “~”, “Sayer ○○”.
"Using": "Send the use intends / use, the Daredare / in, and, if get to / to be" connected with. In Japanese, if you want to be "~", you can be a "messenger". Therefore, in view of the strength of the servant, “mess” is often replaced with “screaming / giving”. In other words, “messenger” is a word on paper, “scream” is a daily word, and “zure” is a word that includes a wide range of “loss”. See below.
"Yuzuru": "(the initiative) Ru Yuzuru, to Daredare, and, why do / to get / make / is the" lead. "Use / passive / benefits / benefits" represents anything. Then, the meaning of this “delegation” is unclear, but it represents the meaning (delegation) of entrusting decision-making rights to the other party. If a complex interest is expressed in Japanese, it is best to leave the judgment to the reader, not the computer. In such a case, it can often be expressed by “transfer”, and the present invention follows this.
"Retribution": "part yelled, to Daredare, and, what people make / to ask / say" to lead. In this case, it is not known whether or not the “result” has occurred, but it is judged by another word.
"Paper": "to with the paper, to Daredare, and, I'll make / is the" lead. From the expression “A supply B”, it can be seen that an action has moved from A to B, but it is not known which of B and B has occurred. “Salary” expresses such a feeling. In Japanese, there are several words to express this, but “salary” is used when it can be determined that “A salary B goods”.
"請": "to ask (請 intends), to Daredare, and, Daredare is, if as us to" connect with. Note that the feature of this sentence is that it becomes Japanese when everyone's part is expressed twice. In normal Japanese, the sentence is completely reversed as "Ask everyone to ask ...", and the phrase "Give me (profit), ask (beg)" is entered. In the case of translation, the meaning of the sentence is determined based on the words “give me, ask”.
“Ordinance”: “Ordinance” means “instruction”, but the connection is special, and in Japanese, “I do not think…” appears in a spontaneously similar translation. The “decree” is “(the environment of the place) will command, who, and unintentionally, (nobody) will do anything”. In Chinese, it is in the form of a “ commander做”.

Up to this point, it has supported the basic skeleton of Japanese and has been described in terms of differences from Chinese. From here on, similarities will be described. As described above, Japanese is expressed in the order of “verb-imaginary”, but in Chinese, it is only described in the order of “virtual-verb”, and it is not particularly difficult or complicated. Summarize and briefly describe.
“To”: “ To ” represents “where and where to do”, “end point” of the motion and “movement” there. Since it includes the end point, it is similar to “ni”, which mainly represents the destination, and “until”, which represents the end point. Although the meaning in Japanese expression is somewhat different, in translation, it may be treated as “to” = “to / to”. If these distinctions are required in Chinese, the usage is usually listed in a dictionary, so follow it.

To represent the "to" in Chinese, usually "arrival" and use "arrival ○○做○○" → "throughout the will, where there, there to, to ~, what the" or in the form of, The verb itself includes the meaning of “how to…” and is in the form of “做 ○○” → “to…”. An example of the former is “carrying luggage to Tokyo”, and “going to Shanghai” in the latter.
“Te”: “Te” is a word that includes the meaning of “hand” and represents “connection”. It is connected as “Perform an operation 1 and perform an operation 2”.

To express this meaning in Chinese, when “Action 1” and “Action 2” are lightly connected, remove the action without entering a word like “做 1- 做 2”. Connect with out. Then, when you want to put out the meaning of "And (→ won its operation)", in other words, "won the operation 1, and, operation 2" If you want to A, "做1-obtained -做2 ”And“ gain ”in the middle. For example, if "heard seen in", and "hearing obtained ■ (← Tatsukokorohen canopy weight)". However, “listening (← standing weight)” means almost the same meaning, and whether or not “profit” is included is conventional and subjective. It may be determined whether there is a meaning of “possible” based on the meaning of the sentence, and whether or not “profit” is given. Even if there is no “profit”, there is no big translation error.

“Action 1” and “Action 2” have a causal relationship, and when they are connected by sentences, they are connected by “ Meta ”. “Meta” is linked to “Perform action 1 and then act 2.” “And” at this time includes the contents of “So (order)” and “But (reverse)”. The determination may be made from the content of the sentence, but may be determined later in relation to the action 2.
“De”: “De” is often “de” due to phonemic relations, and it can be seen that “te” and “de” are the same. However, the case represents the location of the "Tokyo" in the first "in", "in" in this sense, "location, Tokyo's" changes to a continuous form of "It's a (assertive)" of the "in" It may be handled in the same way as “te” in “to do”.

However, in Chinese, the case, such as "Tokyo" is "location, Tokyo in" → "standing Tokyo", and will be represented in the via.
“From”: “From” represents “starting point”. This is the case of connecting like “Where and where to go from Tokyo”.

There are two ways to express this in Chinese: “subordinate” and “self”. “Subordinate” becomes “subject to follow from Tokyo” → “ subordinate Tokyo”. "Self" is, "the source (= self) is (naturally) where from where" the issue a feeling of, for example, "self all over the country".

If you made a "from" a "to-women come theory" → "The against the women, then, speaking" as, in front of the verb "to come", the better to translate "from" good . “Kara” is used for such “to kara do”.
“Up to”: “Up to” represents “end point”. This means almost the same as “ni / he”.

To express this in Chinese, there are “to” and “to”. Both have the same meaning, but “To” often refers to a specific “point”, and “To” often refers to an abstract “point”. There is no particular confusion when used in reverse. In addition, there are verbs with “Go, where and where” and “Up” from the beginning, such as “Go (→ Leave)”.
"Yor": "Yor" is a word derived from the Chinese word "Yu" and has similar pronunciation and meaning. “Starting point / cause / reason / comparison” etc. “More” used to represent a subjective “starting point”, but is now gradually replaced by “from”. The meaning of “comparison” is difficult to express except for “more”.

To represent “more” in Chinese, “Yu” may be used in the classical sense, and in modern terms, “Yu” may be used. In the case of comparison, for example, “ ratio XX high” → “compare, XX and higher” is used.
“So”: “So” cannot be directly connected to connect “verb” and “te”, so connect “no” in the middle. The meaning of “so” is exactly the same as “te”, and its meaning often represents “order”.

In Chinese, the word “de” of the tangent is expressed in various words according to the strength of the tangent, such as “− /, / employment / cause / cause / place / cause / (in)”. Is done. In the case of the translation is, in case of receiving a single element, such as "so became sick in →" is the "in-○○", also, if you want first to inform that it is a "cause" is, "Intame "→ as" the cause for Sunowa, ‥‥ since "," because of then connect meaning "is," why "→" of the place (the result) is a thing of the following (so) ‥‥ and "It will be" → "That's it."

This concludes the relationship between Japanese and Chinese. This alone is quite inadequate, but this area has been written as a general theory, and has been explained in detail in the authors of non-patent literature.
(Basic Chinese Structure) Chinese is a painting-like word that expresses a sentence. Roughly speaking, it's a word that looks like a line of emojis and the ability to decipher them. How do you arrange emoji? Let's talk about that here.

The Chinese word order is "Topic-Time-Place-Situation-Action". This word order is exactly the same as in Japanese, and unlike Japanese-English translation, there is no particular difficulty with Japanese-Chinese translation. Here, although it is a detail, we will see what happens when it includes a “descriptive word” such as “what (like / like)” and when it includes a perceptual action like “sayed / seen”. It is necessary to keep. The conclusion is that in the case of explanatory words, the structure is the same as in Japanese, but the perception is reversed.
<Unified explanation word>: First, let us describe the structure of the explanation word (modifier).

In Chinese, if you want to attributive description, a "~ specific ○○", because hitting the "target" is "no", exactly the same structure as the Japanese. However, in Japanese, “no” changes to various words depending on the nature of the previous word. In the case of "common noun", but in the form of a normal "no" well "of the common nouns ones" in some cases may be omitted to "no". For example, “My home → My home” “Japan economy → Japanese economy”.

Next, when the explanation word is “abstract noun”, “no” is changed to “ na ”, and it feels like “something like that”. In other words, the "abstract (noun) ones". Generally, the words of this "abstract noun", referred to as "adjective" or "adjective", there is no particular need related to this name. "Quiet Forest""a peaceful world,""scruffyclothes". However, even if it is said to be normal or abstract, there are cases where it cannot be distinguished, and “no / na” is mixed. For example, "a quiet forest ← → quiet of the forest".

If you translate this into Chinese, they are both the same "- specifically East and West". No effort is required at all. Sometimes “target” is omitted, but the omission method is the same as Japanese sense, so this is not a problem. “My house” “Japan economy” “Low-cost housing” “Peaceful world”.

  Next, move on to "Verb / Adjective".

In Japanese, in the case of a verb explanation using “verbs / adjectives”, it is directly connected in the form of “prescription-thing” without using a connecting word. On the other hand, in Chinese, always connect with “target”. This occurs because, if you do not if put in the "target", - becomes a "verb noun", which when viewed in the normal sense - have a structure of "Kyoshi real lyrics", "was what people" Therefore, “target” is necessary to avoid this. For example, "runway human" is, "are walking, the road, kind of, people" → If the "pedestrian on the street", and "toys mini-孩子", "are playing, kind of, small children" → " It ’s like “toddlers playing”. If there is no “target” in this expression, the “runner” will be “walking, road, person ○ ”, and it will be difficult to interpret this “○” part. If you adopt the “subject-verb-object” sensation in English, you can make a super-interpretation of “walk, make people on the road”. I need it.

In the case of adjectives, there is no confusion like a verb, so there is no point in omitting “target”, but “target” is usually added. In Chinese, the difference between “verb / adjective” is small and both are treated as “imaginary”. For example, "white basis Umihama""dark manner night road". When omitted, there are words such as “white” and “beauty agency” in everyday cases.
<Concurrent explanation word> When explaining (modifying) a verb, the explanation "structure" is the same during the day, but the word "word" in Japanese differs greatly depending on the word. Japanese is performed by “adverb / adverb phrase” or “adverb phrase”. Chinese is generally described as "~" (like "~"), but "earth" is omitted, and there are other forms as well as Japanese. In the present invention, for the sake of brevity, the expression is added with “~ ground” as much as possible.

“Continuous explanation” is an explanation form of how to explain “verb” and “adjective”. First, if there is an adverb that specializes in explanations, such as “ smoothly flowing” or “ dokanto hit”, and if the word needs to be translated, the dictionary can be searched and converted into Chinese as it is. . In this case, the "■■ land (← ■■ is, Kuchihana, Kuchihana) Nagaregi""Todorokifu ground magnetic".

The following is a case where “Noun” is given a descriptive word as a continuous explanation. For example, in the case of "pass like a gale in the round", "a round, Gale, as such, pass" Tosureba well, in Chinese, in addition to "image gust wind pass" or "earth", "image “One-pass wind uniform ground passage” can be used. In the case of the latter form, it is used to clarify the terminal word when the “gale” part is a long explanation. When it is difficult to understand the end of “requirement”, it is the same procedure as “requirement… a true story ”.

The third is to explain verbs from verbs and adjectives. In the case of a verb, the “i” type or “te” is used to connect down. “I” is “living” and is connected in the sense of “doing so”, and “te” is a particle specializing in connecting. For example, "read-only write", "read, write". In Chinese, such a connection is made by ignoring the connection word. There are cases in which everyday words are connected by “profit”. If there are words in the dictionary, follow them.

  The fourth is when connecting with sentences. In this case, it is a case where sentences are connected by “connectives” rather than a combination of clauses, and is not described here.

The fifth is when modifying with adjectives. In the original Japanese, such as "beauty rather than behave", attributive form of the adjective is was a "V", recently, such as "behave not beauty", in the type "i (noun description)" More than 90% of people connected. Therefore, in the case of adjectives, it is necessary not to distinguish between “ku / i” in the grammar.

In order to express it in Chinese, it becomes “Beautiful Land Action” regardless of “Ku / i”.
<Expression of outline action> If there is a sentence "I saw what he did," how do you translate this into Chinese? This involves the root of the description of painting texts.

When disassembling the "who is how to, how to", the previous stage of the "Who, What do you want to do" and the subsequent "it, how to" be divided into. Here, the former stage is referred to as “substantive action”, and the latter stage is referred to as “outline action”.

  In Japanese, this is displayed in the order of “substance-outer shape”, and in Chinese, on the contrary, in the order of “outer shape-substance”, it can be forcibly expressed and vice versa. This is because the sentence is expressed in the order of “verb-imaginary” in Japanese, and the opposite is “virtual-verb” in Chinese, so the above expression seems to be a normal expression. It is.

  Not only “sent / seen” but also “not (not)”, “to be / seen (passive / useful)”, “do / get” Etc. ". In other words, these are also in the form of “substance action, what did it do” in Japanese, and “outside action, what kind of action it does” in Chinese.

The problem here is, "‥‥ (A), ‥‥ (B), and said," If there is a statement such as, "entity operation" of "said" the thing of where Calaca. Translation is easy if the head word of the actual action is indicated by the responsive expression as in “ If (A),... (B)”, but confusion occurs when there is not. As can be seen from the Yahoo and Excite translations shown in the vicinity of the accuracy comparison (Table 3), this point is difficult to translate correctly because there are underlying ideas between each language.

  Where does it appear? Appears if there is only one or two or more substantive actions surrounded by the outline action. If there is only one but there are two or more, it will result in a translation that does not resemble, even if they are similar.

For example, how much did you say “I said” in the sentence “I had a meal and told him good morning”? To put it more simply, is “me” or “he” the “meal”? If you “have a meal” you can say “I am”, but it ’s only a little different, but if you “have a meal”, you can say “he”. Although it why it so, in the sense of if there is a "te", "and", cut in there statement, "I have to eat, and he ‥‥ to" structure to be visible. Then, when is "was,""the the meal," he said, "was" is because because the form of continuous use explanation, appear to be "‥‥ to him was a meal." But does the cyber judge such a thing correctly? And it is not guaranteed that it can always be expressed correctly in different languages. This part looks simple, but in fact it is almost impossible to interpret correctly. Actually, as shown in the section “Effects of the invention”, actual translation software does not meet this requirement at all.

  Then why do you make that decision? That's not difficult. The trick is to get the reader to do it. The inventor tried to translate various sentences and seemed irresponsible, but came to the conclusion that the reader should be able to make this decision in an instant. I decided to give such instructions to the program. However, there is no need to get the reader's hand when there is only one "substance action" or when it is delimited by punctuation marks. Therefore, when the range of “substance action” is not known, the part of “speaking” is translated as “speaking like that”, so that the affirmation is avoided.

In terms of the statement of the above, if "a meal", "I, to eat, element, to him, good morning, so, said," I interpreted as, "I Domomeshi versus other Hayaue good Nasu It is translated only as “the end of the state”. A big difference as to the "I Domomeshi versus other ..." than to "I pair Domomeshi manner other ..." is, will be somewhat close their eyes to this area. Anyway, translate as described and leave it to the reader's processing.

If “I ate, I said good morning to him”, I connected “~” to the word feeling later, and said, “I ’m good at other places like other locals. The Chinese should interpret it as “I like the other way of thinking.”

By the way, "I, you a meal, he ‥‥" What if was. The translation at that time would be the same as “meal”, but it can also be interpreted as the meaning of “meal” and this is not correct. In other words, correct interpretation is already difficult. If you think about it, you can only say that the original text is ambiguous.

In any case, there is no perfect translation method around here, and if you make a translation, you will be wondering which is more likely. Although I said earlier, the correct interpretation is, "I was a meal, and, to him ..." will depend on whether the "and" or words of meaning are present.

  It is a little off the main point, but it returns to the way of translating the outline motion. The expression of contour movement according to the present invention is translated (primary translation) in exactly the same word order as Japanese, and after that, it is understood to the extent that the relationship between the contour movement and the substance movement can be grasped. create. If this is not possible, leave the original translation as it is, and convert it using a method that translates it into a real translation.

This problem occurs when there are two or more actual actions. At that time, whether the sentence is broken by punctuation marks "," , and whether there is a sentence break word such as " and " Will be determined.

  Explain with example sentences.

Let's consider with the sentence “He said it will rain tomorrow” (hereinafter “.” Will be omitted as appropriate). When making a Motoyaku, "he is, tomorrow, rain, so, said," become "the other Tomorrow under rain 那様land SetsuRyo" from. In this case, from where to where is the content of “sayed”? We will go back one sentence at a time from “Yoni”. “It rains” is naturally included in the contents of “Like”. How about next “Tomorrow”? “I said tomorrow” is funny. If you make use of “Tomorrow”, it will be “I will say tomorrow”. Therefore, it will be connected to “It will rain tomorrow”. Before that, “He” was connected to “He said”, the real action “Yo” was fixed to “It will rain tomorrow”, and the outline movement was fixed “He said” .

  Thereafter, final correction is performed on each operation. The problem is "I said". In Chinese, it is only “theory”, not “theory”. This is because what I said is still alive.

  In this way, the final translation will be “Other narrative rain”.

Let's take another look at the original. Punctuation marks have arrived , "He is . " How do you evaluate this? Yes, this is a sentence that provides a topic here as "a story about him". Then, it can be determined that the sentence below it becomes “substance action”. If such an operation can be automatically determined, the content of “Yo” only needs to be determined as “motion”. In this case, “Tomorrow” is not an operation. “It will rain tomorrow” is confirmed as the actual action.

  The presence of punctuation marks is used for such judgment.

Next, let's consider “He went to school and heard that the student played tennis”. Let's translate it. “Other students from school, ending Amikyu- Nashichi”.

In this case, the actual action is “go to school” and “play tennis”, the problem is “go to school”, and “go” is “he” or “student”. If humans judge, it is easy to decide “he”, but if it is a computer, it is quite difficult. But if you go to school, it ’s easy. Since “and” is attached, the sentence is cut here, and “go” is confirmed as “his” action. Then, the final translation will be “Other School Listening Student Completion Netball”. In detail, it is better to specify "school" and "listen". You should do it. Since the original text has punctuation marks, you should type “,” in the translated text. In addition, "was the tennis." Also may be left of the original form does not need to be in the past tense. Then, the complete final translation will be “Other Schools, Listening Students Percussion Balls”.

  Next, let's examine the variation.

One sentence: "He heard that the student went to school and the student played tennis."
2 sentence: "He, students heard and to play tennis and go to school."
Three sentences: “He heard that a student who went to school played tennis.”
4th sentence: “He heard that the student went to school and played tennis.”
5 sentence: "He heard the students to play tennis and go to school."
A subtle difference cannot be judged correctly. Who is “going to school”? One sentence is “Go” for “Go” and “Student” for two sentences. The difference is in “ Yes ”. The present tense represents “present” or “future”. Then, you can see that it is connected to “Go to school…”. Since the three sentences continue with "Student who went", "Go" is the student's action. It can be seen that the four sentences continue as "I went and ...". The five sentences mean “go, then do”.

  So how do you translate these? One sentence has no punctuation in “Go”, but it is relatively simple because there is “~ te”, and the sentence is considered to be broken here, and becomes “Other school listening student hitting ball”.

  In the three sentences, “going” is a student's action, so it can be easily translated into “other listening, school-riding student batting netball”.

The four sentences also have “students” at the beginning of the actual movement, so they can be easily translated as “other students who have gone to school and stadium ball”. However, there may be a difference with 3 sentences. “Students who went to school” and “ Some students go to school” are different in a strict sense. This difference is often due to differences in the original text rather than the quality of the translation.

Go to the problem statement. The second sentence is whether the computer correctly judges “to do”. To "other removed by school students Daamidama 那様land聴了" stage of Motoyaku is, it's easy, but if the next is whether the "other removed by school 聴了 ...""other 聴了 students removed by school ..." is It is not easy. In this case, if there is no other element that determines “go”, it is not easy to conclude “go” beyond the original translation. At this time, even if human beings can judge, it is impossible to make an electronic brain. This is a future issue.

Five sentences are difficult to interpret. It depends on whether or not the computer can understand the meaning of “students now …”. If the meaning of “do” is interpreted as “from now on”, the result will be correct. However, I don't know if this is true in all cases. Then, in the sense that the reader decides, it seems appropriate to organize the program as “(From now on)”. The final translation will be “Other Listening Students (currently) School Departures”.

  In the above, several examples were examined through the example of “tennis”. However, in the case of “research”, the above analysis is not necessarily applied to all cases of “travel”. The utility of “punctuation” is a way to make it a little correct. This point will be explained later.

Chapter 2, Application to Japanese Words and Chinese Sentence (Generation of Words) In Japanese, there are no gaps between words, and how far to grasp as a basic word is a difficult part. For normal words that are not used, the punctuation of the words can be understood from the dictionary, and for those that are used, the basic word form can be reached if the stem of the word is assumed. The technology is already established and need not be described here. It's a snake leg.

The trouble is when an unknown word comes out in a sentence requiring translation or there is a slight mistake. In that case, the translation of that part is given up and left blank or in the original sentence. Here, in order to translate it as correctly as possible, Japanese word source analysis is performed mainly on the words used. This is where the knowledge of cyber software developers is greatly lacking.
<Generation of verbs>: Old Japanese words are shaped as "Yamato words" over a long period of time by seafarers who have drifted from Indonesia around ten thousand years ago. Although there are objections, here we go ahead without any problem.

The first word was created based on the most basic phoneme of “A”, “I”, or “Kah / Wa”, followed by “A / I / U…” etc. It seems that they created a basic vocabulary / word source by connecting words. Among them, there was a word with "~ ru". “Ru” has the same rhyme as “U-”, and the dragging of the sound gives a sense of dynamism. In other words, could the basic operation of "Oh Ru / have Ru / jar Ru / e Ru / Ru o". Basic vocabulary started with this kind of tone.

  Furthermore, it seems that real words were created through a similar process. The inventor analyzed in this way, but this point is described in the non-patent literature at the beginning of the specification, and the inventor's Chinese book “Japanese” There is also a detailed description in “Unraveling” and the book “Study Self-Study with Emphasis on Principles / Japanese”, which was compiled by Mikami.

Next was a long time later, a few thousand years ago, there was a person who came from the continent, who had kanji and borrowed kanji to create Japanese verbs. This is the verb "to Kanji". For example, “eat / write”. The basic verb in Japanese, is made from the "Turning / be."

  This may have come before "su", but now we have an action word to add "u / ku / (su) / tsu / nu / fu / mu / yu / (ru)". This is because these include the common phoneme “u”. The mode of meaning differs depending on the nature of the phoneme. Generally, it looks like this, but there are many exceptions that cannot be determined. Inventor's research may not be achieved. There are few things other than the verbs listed below.

  “Ru”: “Neutral” motion expression without “automatic / passive” or “passive / usage”. Compared with the Chinese character “one-letter verb”, its meaning is well understood.

  “Su”: Chinese kanji with endings, movement endings that come from “Nasu (← make it like that)”. the above.

  "U": It comes from "Get (Get)" and ends with the other party's action. “Buy / Say / Bee / Meet”.

  "Ku": An action ending that comes from "coming" and expresses "movement / change" of an object. “Brighten / Blossom / Cook / Receive”.

  “Mu”: An action ending that comes mainly from “to” and “to” there. “Pumping / Knitting / Knitting / Abomination”.

  Language changes with the times. In modern times, the change has become even faster. When the computer detects a new word or an unknown word, using the above judgment will give some convenience to the interpretation of the movement.

As will be described later, in the present invention, the interpretation of "clause" is expressed by a set across the difference between the always real lyrics between the imaginary lyrics, "go, Shanghai, to", "buy, clothes, wo" And so on. In other words, it is a translation of “Go to” and “Buy ...”. This is the basic principle of the present invention, which is very different from the place where many automatic translation software is based on using grammar.

This ending “RU / SU / U / KU / MU” is a great reference when grasping the relationship between verbs and imaginary words in deep psychology. This part of the technique is not used directly for automatic translation, but is a simple judgment technique used when an unknown word is encountered.
<Occurrence of auxiliary verbs>: After a long time, basic endings were attached to these basic actions, and changes representing the distinction between “self / others”, “acceptance / use”, and “assertion / inference” occurred. Among them, the categorized ones are auxiliary verbs such as “being / being”, “making / making”, etc. In addition, there is also a comprehensive additional integral word that is integrated into the word by the same method. I came out. That is the endings of “A / A”, “I / A”, “Uru / Usu”, “E / Esu”, “Ta / da”, “I will”. It is not the end of all words, but is used as needed. These auxiliary verb endings are very useful in expressing motion, in order to change the motion from static to dynamic.

  First, I will start with the basic ending “A / I / U / E”. "O" is common to "A / U" and is used only for a special meaning.

"A": "A" in the sense of "a", "Turning a" adds the meaning of "consisting so" to "Turning", representing the "intransitive verb meaning". "To a" is added to the meaning of "to do so", is changed to "causative meaning". For example, "受Ku → that either receive", "□ Ru → Ru anger (have or) Ru / anger (your child)", "be it works → dynamic", "fly → to be flying", "be open → be either bright "," go → line or be "very often, and the like.

“I”: “I” adds the meaning of “living / entering”. "Otsu → Chi that / fall drop", "→ us perfect that-out Jin".

“U”: “U” means “get” and adds possible meanings. “Get” changed to “Get”. "Yes" → "Ru was obtained (U)", "Ru release (Tuesday)" → "release (e) the Hare Ru".

“E”: “E” is “Eru”, adding the meaning of “acquiring” and generally creating “possible” or “transitive” meaning. Most of the secondary verbs belong to this class, and many of them are recent. "Be open → Akira only that", "View → see example Ru / Mami Ru e", "food (is) no → food (was) base that", "evil → Re that呆(Aki)", "hidden ( nuclear) Ru → Ru is hidden "," away (flower) Ru → away is Ru ".

The auxiliary verb “re / re” is a fixed ending attached to all action words. “Red” includes the phoneme “ e → Get”, and “R” includes the phoneme “a e R”. At the same time, create a meaning that combines “respect / passion / possibility / voluntary”. The common meaning is that a certain operation result can be obtained ( regardless of the intention of the person). Also, what is simply “ e ru” represents only “possible” and is called “possible verb”. Today, the expression word is said to be “Language” simply by “Let” and “L”, but from the formation process of the word, “Ra” is not missing. Single addition or superposition addition.

The auxiliary verb “give / make” includes the phoneme of “ s e ” as in the previous paragraph, and has the meaning of “usage”. By the "s e""Turning e you", she is the meaning of "the operation, so as to obtain". For example, "row or cell", in "Oh e Ru go", "Feeding" is "that allowed Oh eat".

  In order to interpret this into Chinese, no special technique is required. This is because Chinese verbs, in principle, have no distinction between “passive / serving” and “automatic / passive”. If so, are you troubled? Usually, no problem. Judgment is made by taking into account the human relationship between the “people” on this side and the other side.

  If you don't have an opponent, "A" can use the corresponding verb in a stripped manner, and leave it to the reader.

If there are partners, to determine the relationship, the operation word before "the / use / Yuzuru - people" in putting words such as only applying a tie to the "main verb", what of the additions to this verb I don't need words.

  In some cases, “A” is followed by “E” to become “Passive”, but at that time, the interposition is limited to “Subjected / assigned”. The difference is that “damaged” things are “covered” and others are “given”.

"I" is, when the meaning of "there", because this represents the "continue", if you use the meaning of "is now just ... you", added the "positive" before the verb, simply If it's just a continuation, put " wear " after the verb. To express the meaning of “enter”, Chinese uses its own words. In many cases, it is “ advance -motion” and is usually found in the dictionary.

"U" is, because the addition of a "get", - the "Operation obtained". In Chinese, even if the actions are arranged, there is a meaning of "what you do, what you do", so using "gain" is necessary when you need to be explicit. Use only idiomatic things and ignore others.

“E” is a representative of “get”, and in Chinese, just “ action -thing” becomes a transitive verb. Even if there is no “thing”, there is no distinction between “self” and “other” in Chinese, and the “motion” word may be used in accordance with the Japanese motion.
<Occurrence of assertion / inference word>: There are words that make the action “determined” and, on the contrary, make it unclear (floating). As such operations endings, could words to be "was / u". "It was" changes as "I", "U" is used in the form of a "wonder".

“Ta / da”: “ta” represents “determined” and has the meaning of “conclusive / past”. "Clean →'s clean,""peace→'speace"."To → the", "kicking → kicked", and "swim → swam".

“I will”: “I will” will be decomposed into “Da” and become “Da (determined), B (tone), U (floating)”, but the last “U” has priority as a whole. Represents "guess". "I would be cloud", "would be nice", "good will marginally adequate".

To express this in Chinese, the meaning of “ confirmation ” is “matter / thing”. In the case of “matter”, there is something called “adjective verb (abstract noun)” in Japanese. This is a situation indication word (similar to an adjective). “Sato (很) Rest ”. In this case, “很” plays the role of “Ze”.
Using the "completion" to represent the "past", - the "Operation Ryo". Japanese “past” includes the meaning of “complete” in English, and “past” is treated the same as “complete”. Also, in Japanese, “~” has been used to mean completion, but this “completion” often means “completion” when “bad things happened”. In that respect, the Chinese language is all expressed as “OK” regardless of whether it is good or bad, so there is no need to consider the Japanese word “~”.
<Change to Adjective / Noun>:
“I / I”: “I” is connected to “I / I” and ends with “state”. These words are called “adjectives”. This adjective was thus made. In other words, there was the word "be,""be fine (← read unknown)" marked with the Chinese, but "i" type of this word that has changed with the "fine city". And nowadays, “shi” has been changed to “i”, and “i” has been superimposed on “i”. For example, “thin”, “round”, “beautiful”, “delicious”.

  Then, an interesting phenomenon occurred. In the case of “~ i”, “~ i” except for “i” had a “stem” feeling, and “i” became an abstract noun. "Beauty", "drop", "ahorashi", "suffering".

“Yaka / Raka”: “Ka” is a strong pronunciation, expresses a strong meaning, and indicates “question / antagonist”. And the ending with the emotional word “ya”, “I don't know if that is the case”, was created. This is "Yaka / Raka". "~ Burned" is "Ya" is "easy", "~ Yaka" gives the emotion that "It's really like that." "Korea Jaca / fine burned / light burned / Ade burned". Quite a lot.

And "Raka" is, "~ et al.," Represents the feeling of the "lazy lead", was the word that gives the feeling that "there is such a feeling" as "~ Laka". "Akira Raka / cheap Raka / Kiyoshi Laka". not many.

“Mi”: “Mi” comes from “taste”, and “~ mi” means “has such a property (/ has taste)”. "Shallow Mi / Kiyoshi Mi / blue Mi / fine-Mi," "try to beauty Mi / Megumi". You can change as many adjectives as you like, and you can do as many as you like.

"Of": "is" come from "like", the meaning of the "there is such a situation" in "- is". "Beauty / loveliness," "taste / cleanliness", "depth / shallow / darkness". This is also a lot.

  How do you express this in Chinese? There is no distinction between “adjective / adjective verb (abstract noun)” in Chinese. When translating Chinese into words that emphasize grammar, they are simply distinguished as such for convenience of handling. In that sense, Japanese can be converted into Chinese by placing the corresponding word.

No, there are a few things to watch out for. The word should be preceded by “sore” or “很”. This distinction may be “good” if it is “instantaneous” and “很” if it is “ideal”. However, when comparing, in many cases “ratio” is used in front of it, so “很” is not used and it is treated as “verb” alone.
(Japanese correction) Languages are constantly changing. You can correct the dictionary, but it is not easy. In recent years, Katakana has become more flooded than it is, and politics, performing arts, technical terms, promotional words, etc. are usually incomprehensible to ordinary people. Some words are used incorrectly. On the contrary, the government, the media, and large corporations are trying to destroy the Japanese language, saying that it is a poor language. Even in such a situation, Japanese must be translated into a foreign language, and in the present invention, it must be translated into Chinese.

Yes, there is no choice but to translate while correcting the Japanese using the remaining Japanese endings. For that purpose, the result of the word source analysis just described becomes very effective. This is an issue for the future.
(Conversion to Chinese sentences) If Japanese sentences can be divided into words and their meanings are determined, then how to convert them into Chinese sentences. The basic concept of the present invention is to convert a Japanese sentence from a sentence head into Chinese as it is. This is an untranslated translation, but if it is translated into Chinese, it becomes 2 or 3 words, and this is converted to at least “imaginary-verb” Chinese. This can also be done, and this is called “translation”. For example, it is a translation of the if "Shanghai to go (→ Shanghai Ita那 k),""removed by Shanghai", if "he", "feeding the other."

The problem is that for slightly longer sentences, it is not easy to add “interposition / verb” to the beginning of the phrase. In that case, there are also detailed work such as the existence of “punctuation marks”, creation of “sentences / phrase phrases” by “response”, and analysis of “semantics and grammar”, but sentence conversion is performed through such work. In this section, we will describe the basic method, semantic understanding, and grammatical analysis of sentence conversion.
<Basic method of transliteration>: Here, as described in Example 1, “Wave splash is higher than the mountain, so the sun is above the surface of the water, and the burned seawater was burned.” I will describe how to do this.
The first level breaks down the original text so that Japanese can be understood as “verb-imaginary” pairs. The underline of the imaginary is as follows:

1 "wave splash, is" 2 "from the mountain, high", 3 "So", 4 "the sun, the" 5 "on the surface of the water, located in the", 6 "burnt seawater, is", 7 "burn "It was enough ."

Next, we will use “correspondence expressions” for these phrases and express them in an intermediate language to create a minimal translation.
1 clause: "wave splash, is" → "wave splash" → "Naniwa". There is no need to translate “ha” unless there are special circumstances.
2 phrase: “ Higher than mountain” → “Mountain, compared to mountain, higher than that” → “Hiyama high”. “From the mountain” becomes “Hiyama” when “Compares the mountain”. “High” is “high” when it is “high” while receiving “ratio”. Looking at this as a whole, "higher" is, "to compare the mountain, higher than that", and is as described above.
Third phrase: “ So ” → “(temporary interruption)” → “,”. There are various expressions of “So”, and it is “Usore / Meta / Job / Cause / Beyond /,”. This will be described later. Here, there is no need to show the connection. Therefore, it becomes “,”.
4 phrase: "the sun, is" → "the sun" → "sun就". This “ha” represents “topic”, and no inflection seems to be necessary, but it is better to assume “junction” with “from ( because it is higher than the mountain)” in the connection from the front. ".
5 phrase: "on top of the water surface, located on the" → "on the surface of the water, place, on that, there is" → "on the standing surface of the water." Although “above the water surface” should be “above the water surface”, such “above” is regarded as “ place is over…” and is regarded as a place as a whole. Then, it becomes “present… up”. Considering again, “up” plays the role of Japanese “particle”. In Chinese grammar, this is called "complement".

The next is “Yes”, but light words like “I am / Yes” / “I am” in Chinese are always “ Place is there …” Presence is " There is ...", and " There " is unnecessary.

Next, the continuous form of “Yes” does not need to be described in characters, and only “,” is sufficient.
6 phrase: "burnt seawater, is" → "burnt, obtained, such, seawater" → "■ (← Hiko) obtained seawater". “Burned seawater” becomes “burned and gained” → “■ (← fire consideration) gain”. If it is simply “■ (← fire)”, it means “burned”. What do you do with "Such"? “Target” may be entered, but “Toku” and “Target” have the same pronunciation, so one word may be omitted.
Phrase 7: “It burns, it was just enough ” → “It is like a circle, it burns,” → “(Good) image ■ (← hot water) Nasama”. In another plan, it may be “It burns and fills up,” and at that time it becomes “■ (← hot water) 乎乎 的”. Then what do you do with the cyber If it is in the dictionary as an idiom, use that word. Since “■ (← Yuka) 乎乎” is not in the dictionary, it is called “Image ■ (← Yuka)”.

  Try the following example: Example 2 “Girls had no fundamental autonomy, and if they did n’t like it, they had no choice but to go home from their husbands. This is broken down into clauses.

1 "is a girl", 2 "fundamentally", 3 "there is no autonomy", 3 "if it is unpleasant", 4 "from the husband", 5 "the priest", 6 "other", 7 "no It was "to become.
1 clause: "The girl" → "girl, she for" → "woman孩子pair ■ (← woman Shinya)" → "versus woman孩子".
2 phrase: "fundamentally" → "root, so" → "root". “Like” is “Nasama”, but “Nemoto” inherently includes the meaning of “like”, and “Ni” is not necessary. In other words, the abstract noun includes the meaning of “like a word” as an adverb / adjective as it is, and no connecting word is required.
3 phrase: "autonomy is, without" → "not yet, is autonomy" → "Botsuyu autonomy". The translation of "ga" of "sovereignty is" not required. This is fine, but “Exclusion” is an outline action (state), and the outline action is usually added at the beginning of the actual action. Then you have to search for the beginning of the actual action. The question is how to look for it. It will be described later.
4 phrase: "If it's disgusting," → "If, hate, it, Why" → "If you do not want, it, if it" → "necessary Shi Once Upon a那事". “I dislike it” becomes “I dislike it,” and “Discuss things”. This is fine, but it's normal to say "I don't want it", as above. The problem is the position of “Hello” in “Hello ...”. It will be described later.
4 phrase: "from the husband" → "At first, her husband, Kara" → "subordinate husband".
Phrase 5: “Get out of home ” is a “verb” and is linked to “Get out of the house from my husband ” and becomes “Departure of my husband ”.
6 phrase: "other" of "is" is unnecessary translation.
Seventh phrase: “I did n't” followed by “I didn't have anything else”. “ Exclude what you do, otherwise you do n’t.” Sonaruto, the "JoRyo那様land做than Botsuyu". "I never have been" is written in "current form" in the fact that it may in the future to change. Again, the problem is where to place the “exclusion” of the outline action, which will be described later.
<Position for placing an outline action>: In the sentence of Example 2, the positions at which “None”, “If”, and “Not” are arranged in order. Why do you find that position?

The position where the “outer motion” is placed is next to the “topic”. However, in Japanese, it is not always necessary to place the “topic” at the beginning of the sentence, and there may be no “topic”. Also in Chinese, you have to put in various positions and think specifically about what you are denying. The clue is “ha /, / specific other words”. Consider the following.
“None”: When “verb” is denied, it is usually placed before it, but when there is a “situation word” directly connected to the verb, it is placed before the situation word. In the text, it follows that “Girls do n’t…”, so put them in front of “Girls”. Interpretation is "still, the girl does not ... is."

Depending on the sentence, the position of an appropriate negative word may not be determined. At that time, the word “action / state” is negated. In this sentence, “Girls don't have autonomy” → “Magoko ’s independence” is exactly the same as Japanese. This method may not be perfectly appropriate, but it is not a big mistake. There is no help in getting the reader's judgment and taking the meaning.
"Cod": "cod" is in conjunction with the "If ‥‥ cod", to the position of "if" in Japanese may if you put the "necessary Shi". But what to do if there is no "if"? There is no problem in the text.

The “………” part of “If ………” has the form of “Who do what?”. So search for "who / what". In this paper, I found "it", "If it is, ‥‥ cod" leading to easy as.

In general, if the meaning of “assuming” is expressed without “if”, even if the part of “…” is long, even the Japanese cannot grasp the exact meaning of the original text. Then, the word to receive “if” should be short, and if it is a little long, there should be instructions in the sentence as it is. For this reason, the word for “Nara” should be “1 phrase” or “,”. Then, the position of the above “if” is known. In the present invention, this method is used to search for the word “if”.
"I never have been": In this paper, "the other, the method has Tsu Naka" is connected to the. The question is where to make the negative form. If you put it in front of "Others", "You still ca n't remove other things, there's no way", and if you put it in front of "Methods,"you'll still have no way if you remove other things. " Become. The important thing is that the outline expression “not” is attached to all words below. Then, when you put it in front of "others", it will be as above. From the point of view of writing, “no” is good if you deny only “method”. That is, it may be as described above.

So what will the cyber do when it doesn't understand? The last is here. If you don't understand, leave it to the reader's discretion and place it in the same position as Japanese.
<Semantic analysis>: New words can be made 50 or 100 words a day. There may also be some mistakes in the original text. Still, when translation is necessary, if the dictionary does not contain the phrase, the translation software must extract the meaning from the original text or correct it.

  In the present invention, this method is dealt with by the above-described word source analysis. If “a” is added to an unknown “verb”, it is interpreted as “automatic” or “use”. If “e” is added, it is interpreted as “possible” or “transitive verb”.

  If “u” is added, it means “floating” and is interpreted as “present / future” or “inference”. If “I” is attached, it is interpreted as “state” and “being in that state” in the meaning of “continuation”.

  This interpretation is not definitive for correctness. Therefore, it is necessary to inform the reader to that effect. At that time, for example, “this part may be given the word“ confirmation required ”in the original text.

For example, it is assumed that there is a notation “get up”. This means that "cause-out that / cause this Ru" of 2 Tsudaga, rather than the two of distinction in Chinese, need only "cause". But, in the sense of "force-out that" it is "standing up", "Turning cause this" is quite different in the sense of "newly arising". In fact, when you are using the China Chinese characters as Japanese, both distinction is required, "cause" is something that has been changed to "Turning cause this" and "cause-out that".

By the way, when it is expressed in Japanese as “raise”, can it be converted to “ki” because both are the same in Chinese? In fact, the root of this problem lies in the fact that “Koru” may have been mistaken for a similar meaning of “Koru”. “Xing” means “ to become prosperous ”.

Because Japanese pronunciation is flat, more homonyms are more likely to occur than Chinese. If the notation from the beginning as a "cause-out that", because it is certainly not not that the meaning of "Turning cause this", sufficient If you're looking for the "cause" of the meaning of the "rise" in Chinese. If On the other hand, the notation of "place" in Japanese, there are three possibilities of "force-out that / Ru cause this / Xing Ru This", which Chinese characters (meaning) in Chinese is appropriate or study I have to do it.

For example, "a person, cause Ru" if, must be translated even with the "rise" be construed to the meaning of "human caused RaiRyo". And, if "doubts were raised", this is not a "become popular" in the sense of "occurrence", no Senebanara and "caused suspicion". And, "industry had caused" Naraha, no Senebanara as "Xing industry" in the sense of "flourished".

  In short, whether such conversion works is based on the significance of the word source “i / o”. "I" is "continuation" and "o" is the middle of "A / U". To do this, you may be able to do just word source analysis, or you may need to put an example sentence in the dictionary.

For the time being, to the "cause" may be translated by the premise of the including the meaning of mistake there is a sense of 3-like "force-out that / Ru cause this Ru / Xing this". It will be a future challenge to be able to separate this completely.

Such an example, may be written in hiragana "fit" is the meaning of such "meeting intends / case intends / Brief intends / 遭 intends / even u", also "hot" is "not hot / not hot / has a thickness / not Atsushi "also occurs in such.

It seems that only the “example sentence” of the “dictionary” can be distinguished finally. After all it is future problem. However, the current Japanese grammar analysis method focuses on only the grammatical matters of “being / being able” and “making / making”. However, in Chinese, these treatments are light (distinguishable). , These are useless Japanese analysis, and unnecessary words such as “subjects / messes” are added to Chinese sentences. In that sense as well, a technique that emphasizes the basic word and the ending change of the present invention is useful.
<Grammar analysis>: Many imaginary words have ending changes, and it is necessary to investigate how the words are connected by grammatical analysis. This is done by using a verb / adjective / adjective verb / auxiliary verb usage table. The changes are almost the same as the endings of “A / I / U / E / O”, but the word changes from line to line and is not complicated, but it is extremely complex. This section is omitted because it is not related to translation technology.

Chapter 3, vocabulary responsive expression (general theory of responsiveness ) In order to convert Japanese into Chinese, the present invention is performed through an intermediate language process using responsive expressions. The same is true when translating Chinese into Japanese. This has already been described in the patent document “Japanese Patent Application No. 2012-226923” and also in the non-patent document. Therefore, the general theory will be simplified, and here, “outline action” and “connecting words” will be described in detail.
<Inconsistency in word order>: Different languages are different not only in words but also in word order. From one language, I want to be confused as to why it can be meaningful in the order of other languages, but it is the same from the other side. Is there a way to adjust both languages? is there. There are roughly two methods, “grammar analysis” and “logic analysis”.

  In the method using grammar, a phrase is broken down into “subject” and “verb”, and the meaning of the sentence is grasped. Even the rough method of grammar can give a rough meaning, but the details cannot be taken. The idea was to prepare a number of example sentences, and then use the grammar as a reference to grasp the meaning in relation to it. Even with this method, when the original text becomes long, there are few examples of the target long text, and practical use is the first story.

  Under these circumstances, it has been found that the rough method of “grammar” is not suitable for working on the delicate mental activity of “translation”. Therefore, the present inventor studied the “principle / logic” contained in the word, and decided to convert both languages based on human ideas. In this way, we found that the relationship between the “source language” and the “target language” becomes clear when the paired phrases are expressed side by side using the “response relationship”.

  The word order of “Japanese / Chinese” words is similar in the outline, so if you use the responsive relationship, you can translate between the two languages. Since the present inventor is Japanese, the “Chinese / Japanese” translation made a sentence that can be roughly understood simply by showing an intermediate language based on this responsiveness. On the other hand, with Japanese / Chinese translation, it is difficult to accurately translate from Japanese to Chinese-specific phrases. In particular, it is difficult to place the “outer motion” and “logic word”.

In order to solve this problem, the present inventor has devised an interpretation method that can take the correct meaning even if the sentence is somewhat irregular. That is the way to take into account the reader's mental effects . In other words, readers (usually Chinese) are shown direct translations of Japanese sentences, and their interpretation is translated into Chinese-like expressions. In a metaphor, it's like transforming a child's sentence into an adult-like sentence. By the way, if you are Japanese, literal translation Chinese is as close to Japanese as possible, so it is easier to understand, and plain expression is a big benefit for both Japanese and Chinese people. Become.

In the creation of an intermediate language using the responsive relationship, it is possible to translate it by clarifying only the places where the expressions of “imaginary” and “real” differ. In order to make a Chinese kanji “imaginary” into Japanese, divide it into two, and make it into the form of “leading word-body word-particle (/ verb)”. For example, if the "standing Shanghai", "location, Shanghai, in" a.

On the other hand, in order to change from Japanese to Chinese, you have to create a word equivalent to “de” to “place”. This is difficult. But that's not the case. do this. You can search for the equivalent word with "de" by pairing " present " with " place is ...". In other words, it is only necessary to list what body words (verbs) are associated with “de”. This method has already been shown in the basic Chinese structure near the beginning of Chapter 1.

Basically, “Japanese / Chinese” can be translated almost correctly by this method. What is not easy is "outside motion" and "connecting words". This will be described later. Here, a basic example is given first.
"Place": The location, is sometimes referred to as "Where there is / where to go." In the former, “ Yes ”: “Where is ...” or “ Present ”: “It is ...”. In the latter, even to some things that do not exhibit the "on" just as "removed by location", there is also what is referred to as "living standing place". The latter is in the dictionary.
“Time”: The expression of time is almost the same in both Japanese and Chinese. In Japanese, it is "to ... (when)", the conventional expression "yesterday", "now" does not use the "in". Chinese is the same. In Chinese, it may be expressed as “time (← idiom)” or “present… (time) (← complicated time)” or “… target time /… target time (← long expression)” This is the method. Even if the method is wrong, there is no particular problem with the meaning of the sentence.
"Status": The status expression word is various, to show a "partner" is, like "paper people", "versus people", "the people", "sum people" may be adjusted to the Japanese. There are many, and each one has its usage in the dictionary.
“Adverb”: Adverb is a word that explains the action more clearly, and can be expressed almost the same using the responsive relationship. For example, "most likely": "probably would ‥‥", "Maybe": "might possibly be the ‥‥", "essential": "not necessarily ‥‥ Senebanara", "応該": "Of course ‥‥ It should be. "

Adverbs also have only the first half, and the second half has different vocabulary for each sentence. For example, “Nature”: “ Naturally ...”, “Self”: “ Do it yourself ”, “ One person ”: “ One person ”. These words can be left to each verb translation in the second half.
"Verb": verb, there is intransitive and transitive verb, "rain", "day sunset", "the tennis", such as "become friends", depending on the "rain / day / tennis / friend" The way to say is decided and it is in the dictionary. In turn becomes "under the rain", "sky black," "hitting net balls,""做friend".
(Theory of responsiveness) Words that cannot be easily found in responsiveness are words related to external movement.

For example, if it is “know”, what is the content of “know”? Simply "I know the cat" When was the statement of, "know" is, "the cat, you know," → "know, cats" → can be converted to "Tomomichi cat", usually of There is no difficulty in writing.

The difficulty is, in the case where part of the "cat" is set to "things", "I, that it was rain yesterday, you know." So, if that. In the Chinese, but the "I Tomomichi last heaven ShitaRyo rain", whether or not put the "Tomomichi" When you are in between the "I" of "yesterday". This is done by searching for the word that corresponds to the “subject” of “Chidō” or by searching for the foreword of “the matter”. It is only necessary to find a corresponding “subject” for all “outer motions”, but this is not the case. At that time, you must search for the foreword of "thing". what to do.
<Direct translation>: First, make a direct translation anyway. This story explained that with the sentence “Girls don't have autonomy”. If you just like, "I, that it was rain yesterday, and I am know" → "I, yesterday, it rained, that thing, you know," → "I, yesterday, raining was, you know, that thing "→ the" I last heaven ShitaRyo rain Tomomichi那事". Anyway, this makes sense for now. Then, the subject of "know" from this statement in the clue that it is a "person,""I, know ‥‥" If Sagashidase the relationship, the statement of "I Tomomichi last heaven ..." can make.

"I" in there is no statement of, to leave the "last heaven ShitaRyo rain Tomomichi那事". Here, if there is no “subject”, it is not necessary to understand “textual meaning”. The thinking circuit that uses this as a gold coin is a method that uses "grammar". I try to look for things that I don't have, so I make the mistake of identifying the wrong word as the subject. In the present invention, this is not the case. That is a translation method that uses logic. If there is no subject and it is unstable, readers can think about it.

Next, what should you do with the “... say so ” statement like “say / command”? For example, "My father, I told him to buy the phone" s statement. This statement, "My father, to me (/ against), the phone, buy, so said" from Motoyaku is "■■ (← Chichitomoe two) Taiware purchase hand machine 那様place theory Is finished. Like the previous sentence, if you search for the subject of “say” from this sentence, you can find “ person (= father) say” and you can translate it into “■■ (← two fathers) theory versus my buyer”. . But this sentence is not perfect. This is because the basic structure of Chinese is “actor-partner-its movement”. Furthermore, it is checked whether there is a “person-person” relationship, and if it is found, the word order must be changed to this order. In this way, the translation of "■■ (← Chichitomoe two) Taiware theory Offer hand machine" is completed.

By the way, from the example sentence, "he says" can also if it is certified that it is the meaning of "instructions", further "■■ (← Chichitomoe two) yelled We Offer hand machine". This is a normal example sentence.

Motoyaku can sentence to be combined with "做那事" and "那様land做". Later, in order to make a main translation, if the subject of the verb is “human” or if a more advanced main translation can be judged from many example sentences, the target translation can be made. The important thing is not to take the idea of searching for a relationship forcibly.
<Connecting words>: It is easy to say that “connecting words” are easy to use because they are already used, but it is quite difficult to find the acronym for the phrase corresponding to the end of the phrase. For example, "If, ... if" So, if the "if" in the statement is missing.

  Compared to Chinese, Japanese has a lot of connected words, and it is quite difficult to grasp the true meaning of connected words. However, it is difficult only when there is a responsive relationship, and in other cases, even if the Japanese is complicated, there is often no need to translate it into Chinese.

  Let's start with a simple connection.

“Te” is a typical Japanese connection word, which is also called “de”. For “te”, translation into Chinese is usually unnecessary. However, when there is a "get" meaning the "I got it" to "te" is, there is a case where even in the Chinese put the "give", that time may be left to the conventional. In addition, there are cases where a sentence is cut out and expressed, but at that time, there are words such as “n / n” and “in”, but the original sentence for this is also broken, so it can be followed.

"Even" is attached words such as "even," said then continuous format "reverse connection / negative" is expected to continue. There are various similar words such as “But / But / But / Gaga / Taga…”. The problem is that there are many cases where “reverse connection prediction” is not “reverse connection”. Therefore, it is necessary to judge the relationship between the preamble and the poster. This is done using example sentences. If there is no example sentence, it will be literally translated according to the usual way of the present invention, and the judgment will be made to the reader.

  On the other hand, in Chinese, the simple “reverse connection” is “However”, but there are other “possible / missed”. However, it is difficult to make a judgment based on the strength of the reverse connection, so it may be difficult to make a decision. Usually, it is strongly expressed at the beginning of a sentence. Since “To” in question here is often “To” in the sentence, it is likely to be “Fail”.

When a causal relationship is recognized in the context, connect with "meta". The meaning of “Meta” is a combination of “and / but” but corresponds to the Japanese word “~”. Furthermore, if you want to say that the cause-and-effect relationship is the opposite, “reject”. Use it when it says “To and (due to be), but unexpectedly”. In this case, the original text often contains a certain word, so follow it. For example, when there is a word of “emphasis” at the beginning of the sentence, “I am sure …”. If there is nothing, do not use "reject". Then, when you want to say "That's a natural result", you say " Immediately ... (do / do / do)" and so on.

Semantic comprehension is complicated when “recognizing” in Japanese, but the same is true in Chinese. However, if you look closely, it is easy to judge the actual action from these responsive relationships by human eyes, but it is almost difficult to do it with a machine. This is the case like "if ... if " shown above.

When connecting sentences, if the meaning of the sentence becomes clearer when using “Correspondence”, “Causality”, “Forward / Reverse Connection”, “Natural / Concession”, and “Assumption / Condition” are expressed.
“Causality”: To express the cause-and-effect relationship in Japanese, use the form of “ Because it was ”. In Chinese, it is expressed in the form of “-”, “cause”, “˜cause”, and “place”. As you can see, everything except "~ Koko" is the reverse of the Japanese word order. "Because ~" is a different feeling than "~ So" because it is connected to "So, ..." on the back.

By the way, this "In此" is, collectively that has been variously talking before, but phraseology to express together such as "became so because these things / these things."It's a word that makes the phrase head ambiguous at the same time that it's all right. It is similar to the translation of the “reader” that the present invention takes. So, as long as the beginning of the sentence becomes clear, it is better to choose the form of “causal”.

Why do you find the beginning of a phrase? This is done in the same way as previously described “ if ”. And when it is not found, leave a plain translation in the form of “cause”.

For example, the sentence "I haven't been home for months because I was busy" is:
Analysis of the sentence "work, was not busy, because it is so, I, already, for many months, not back, to the house" → direct Motoyaku "work忙了In此 We已経几个Tsuki也Botsuyu times house ", and, this translation now is" Intame work 忙, we已経几个month deaths times the house ". Description. The first word of “So” immediately identifies “I was busy”, so I replaced “Cause” with “ Cause ”, and put the symbol “ , ” at the end of this phrase. To "was" Since it is the middle of a sentence in the sense of "original display,""currentform" of "was busy". “End (← Completion means change)” means “ I was busy”. "Also," there is no particular meaning of "many months". And the meaning of “「 ”is included in the meaning of“ 几个月 ”. In other words, “几” is a word with the meaning of “question”, and this includes the meaning of “many” in the sense of “how much I don't know”. In many cases, the verb negation is only “Death”. “Yes” may be left.
“Forward / reverse”: If you simply represent the forward, you don't need to specify “forward” because the sentence can be read in a natural way. In Japanese, the meaning of "~ te" or "~ i," "I ~" in the form of. This is already mentioned.

Junsetsu slightly stronger if you jump to conclusions "And immediately the ‥‥" and "consisting If so ‥‥" is "就 ~".

For example, "The Lion, also without looking after, was Tsu逃去" the interpretation "lion, Hatewa, behind, without looking, immediately, was Tsu逃去", directly Motoyaku "猴子communication Kisakihen Shinya not Nursing 就逃掉Is finished. The main translation may be the same.

The "If, if you do not come out, I immediately'll cut you in half with scissors", the interpretation is "If you can not come out, Well, I, immediately, with a pair of scissors , grabbed you, to cut,'ll "and, directly Motoyaku is" essential Shi ■ (← Lee Er) poor workmanship Ryo 那様specific story we 就 scissors bunch ■ (← Lee Er) disconnected ". In this sentence, if you try to translate with "if it is", it will be "needed ... Nasama story", but if it is lightly "~", you can use ",". Next, since the result is expressed, it will be in the form of “If so, let's get into the result of …”.

In the case of reverse connection, if you try to find that it is reverse connection when you begin to speak a sentence, a “conclusion” will be derived naturally. Such case, in Japanese, is often shown in the form of a "certainly ‥‥ But". In such a case, it is shown in Chinese as “■ (← Mouthworm) But ... But”. “■ (← Mouthworm)” does not have much meaning just to lead “reverse connection” and does not agree with “definitely”, but Japanese correspondence can be understood in this way.

For example, "It is very tight here of life, it is very pleasant", the interpretation is "certainly, life here is very nervous, but this is the case, however, a lot of fun", and direct Motoyaku is "■ (← mouth worms) natural這里life很tension 那様situation Tadashize很pleasant", and this translation is "■ (← mouth worms) natural這里life很tension, Tadashize很pleasant". Although it is a detailed thing, the position to put “certainly” may be “life here” as “topic”, and “life here is certainly very nervous ...”. This judgment is difficult, but since the sentence is short, it may be possible that “ga” is hanging from the beginning of the sentence, and the notice of “reverse connection” is easier to understand if it is near the beginning of the sentence. May be in its foremost position.
“Natural / Concession”: In the case of “Natural”, “... will be / will be natural ”. In Chinese, these adverbs are usually expressed after “topics”. Because it is an adverb, placing it in other positions is not a big mistake. “That / That / Natural” is used. It is sufficient to match the original Japanese text, but if there is no corresponding character, “the” may be used.

For example, "We, of course we should respect the different opinions", the interpretation of "We, of course, grab, the different opinions and,, to respect, we should do so", and direct Motoyaku is "I ■ (← Imon ) Naturally, it becomes “ Incomprehensible Opinion, Respected Correspondence ”, and the main translation is “I ■ (← Imon ) Corresponding Respect, Disagreeable Opinion”.

  Description. “Naturally” responds to “should” but the word cannot be seen from the beginning of the sentence. When you come to the end of the sentence, there is a word “should”, “natural” and “should” overlap, and you can see that it can be replaced with “so…”. “Respect for different opinions”, “respect” takes the form of “respect disagreement” as a verb. Note that “disagreement” does not represent a specific matter, so it cannot be “conspicuous”.

"Concession" is, "even if it's if (/ for example) ‥‥, ‥‥'s" take the form of. It is a kind of “assuming”, but the place to put the other party's opinion in the first half is different. Chinese is “ Immediate (/ exhaustive) ..., Ya (reverse fact)”. If the interpretation is, it becomes "even if, ‥‥ But, so Again, ‥‥".

For example, "(for example), even the dead of winter, it is not that this harbor was freezing" the interpretation is "for example, time, midwinter of the season, even so, this port is still also, once frozen, it there is no "next to, direct Motoyaku the" immediate use standing Takashifuyu season那様這个harbor Shinya follow non-ice ", and this translation is" immediate use standing Takashifuyu season,這个harbor 也従non-frost ". Description. “Even though…” becomes “Immediate use… Nasama (even if it seems like…)”. Replace "Nasama" at the end of "~ even" with the 逗 number ",". And "unprecedented ‥‥" is, there is a form of "subordinate non ... (→ also ... not as was and follow the starting point)" as a written language. Of course, it can also be seen from the “exclusion of the past”.

Next, let's try the “exhausted tube” example. "Even if you get sick, did not rest day" in the sentence of, interpretation of "if, occur, and so, to the disease, but still, even one day, rest Do, bought was" next to, direct element translation is "尽管 NamaRyo disease 那様 firmament Shinya died rest Ryo", and this translation is "尽管 NamaRyo disease, firmament Shinya died rest". Description. "Sick" is, in the form of a "complete" and "change". “Naruto” should be changed to “逗”. Of "single day", "also" it is regarded as "still also" represents the emotion.
"Assumptions and conditions": the "assumption" is, in the sense that "the future, and do not know whether that thing happens, and if happen", the "conditions", in general regardless of the "In the future, that it If it happens, show what the result will be. " They are different concepts, but they are the same if you don't know the outcome. In that sense, they are both expressed in such as "if / if ‥‥ If / Then".

In Chinese, the word “required / definite” is basically used. "Necessary Shi" is, in the simplest sense, "from now on, it is such that, as a result," in much, and the meaning of "if, ‥‥ if, it ‥‥". “Rika” is a case where you want to say something about the result, and that it means “If you say the result freely , this will happen”. Therefore, following “Rika”, words that rush to the conclusion such as “Naka (← hemp ■) / Na / Osamu / Rule” are attached. There are other "holiday", but just "if you say the result freely", it means almost the same as "Yu". In the present invention, it is not used.

Give an example. "If, if anything, I please call to" consider the. If the interpretation is "If something, if any, to me, to telephone, so to please", and direct Motoyaku is "necessary Shi Yes Inmo (← hemp ■) thing specific story Kyuware hitting phone ■ (← mouth Tomoe) The main translation is “Necessary Yes (← Hemp ■), Paying Phone ■ (← Mouth)”. Description. “If ...” in this sentence is “required” because it is the simplest form. “,” Is enough for “the story” of “if”. In this sentence, you don't have to worry about what the "subject" should be. The last “please” is “■ (← mustache)” in the sense of “Let ’s do that”.

Next is a complex example. "If, if you have a problem, let us help" → "If there be (to you) in trouble, (I to you) Let's help you" consider the. Interpretation says , “ If you have some difficulties, then I can help you in this state , you may do so.” ) Yes Difficult Nasama I could be salary ■ (← I 爾) ■ (← Japanese width) salvation ”, the main translation is“ Rushua ■ (← I 爾) Yes difficult, I can ■ (← Japanese width) salvation ■ ( ← I 爾) ”. Description. "If there is ..." may be "required", but if you look at the latter half, there is a word that rushes to the conclusion "let's give it", so change it from "required" → "success". Of course, it may appear that there is not much difference from the previous example, so of course it may be left as “necessary”. Because “Nasama” is light, change it to “,”. What to do with the last “Let ’s raise”. It captures the meaning of "may do in this situation ". Then, the word “Can ■ (← Japanese width) salvation” appears. Finally, what happens if you just say "I'll help you if I have a problem". Of course, it can be translated as the wording, and it can be translated as follows: “It ’s difficult, could ■ (← Japanese width) salvation (/ ■ (← Japanese width) salvation (← verbal))”. There is no word "who", but the situation determines "I" or "you", and this decision is left to the reader. It is very difficult to judge this with an electronic brain.

Chapter 4, Punctuation and Sentences of Phrases (Punctuation) The role of punctuation is to cut the sentence once to make it easier to understand. Previously, it was attached to prevent sentence confusion, but today its significance has changed. However, there are no rules for punctuation (national rules), and it is left to the individual's judgment. When translating into Chinese, it is necessary to judge whether it is necessary based on the actual sentence.

To make the sentence easier to read, punctuation marks are struck for various purposes, but if you hit too much, it will be difficult to read, but if it is too little, the reader's attention will be placed where the author is calling attention. Will not reach. Therefore, when writing Japanese, a mark is placed on a candidate site where punctuation marks should be placed, and the final position of punctuation marks is determined by looking at the whole sentence. Therefore, in order to translate this Japanese sentence into a Chinese sentence, it is determined whether the Chinese word “,” corresponding to Japanese is necessary.
<Punctuation marks>: Candidate sites for punctuation are performed at the following positions. If it explains in detail, it will be quite long. The details are in the book “Self-study with a focus on principles / Japanese”.
1 Proposal of the topic: After “ha” 2 Clarification of the background: After “time”, “place”, and after “premise of thinking” 3 Separation of movements: “to,” “to,” “to” If so, etc. 4 Conjunction explicit: “But” “Also” “..., Ie, etc.” 5 Emphasized adverb explicit: “Maybe,” “Why,” “Masaka,” etc. 6 Parallel Explicit: “Apple, banana and oranges” 7 words, etc. Adjusted: “Yes, so ...” “~~, people,” etc. 8 Erasing punctuation: Appropriate when “Phrase” or “Too many” "Topic" to delete: The biggest effect of punctuation is the explicit "topic". This is the same as writing an English subject in the English subject. So, if there is a sentence “Today is a good weather”, it is said to be “Today is a good weather”. You don't have to type punctuation, but it will be stable if the sentence is anyway.

  On the other hand, the Chinese language does not clearly indicate the “subject” unless there is a risk of misreading. Similar to Japanese one hundred years ago. However, it is useful to add the “,” to the “topic” in Chinese. It is attached when the “subject” part is long or when there is a risk of misreading if there is no break.

For example, suppose there is the following sentence without the 逗 sign “,”. “Emerging Takayama Fisting Water (← Left from the tree)” Now, how do you get the meaning from now on? In plain terms, “new and emerging, such a high mountain (grass), grabbed , water, and obstructed, the place is (/)) the east side,” The connection of the "grab" part is not clear. "I emerged, there is a high mountain, and, grabbed" or of the "kind, high mountains, it is, grabbed" or from. If you read it quietly, you will find that it means the latter, but in any case, if the “topic” is too long, it will be difficult to read the sentence. In such a case, hit “逗” and take a breath. Do as follows.

What will happen if it is “Newly emerging Takayama, water catching ■ (← with the tree biased to the side)”. In Motoyaku "newly emerged, such, high mountains, (and it is), grabbed, the water, and, blocking was, the east of the surface", and likely much to read. If you review it again, it seems that the sentence is once cut off at “Takayama”, and only the part of “Takayama” is continuous as the subject of the latter sentence. Yes, in the case of a sentence with no subject, the Japanese method is used to succeed the subject of the previous sentence. In fact, the same method is used in Chinese. Especially in Chinese sentences, there are no words to connect, and the sentences continue down to the bottom.

From the above, if a long “subject / topic” comes in Japanese, you can type “逗” in the Chinese text.
“Background clarification”: In Japanese, “Time, when, when”, “Where, where,” “What, what”, etc. There is a sentence. This seems to be an infant sentence, although it is easy to understand, probably due to the influence of English. But if you don't make it clear, readers may read out one of the time or place. In that sense, it is often preferable to specify only one of the “background” next to the “topic”. At that time, it is often the case that only “time” is delimited.

On the other hand, in Chinese, there is no way to specify the background by separating it with a 逗 sign “,”. If so, it is a special case. Therefore, it is not necessary to clearly indicate the “situation word” that comes after the “topic” in Japanese by separating it with a 逗 sign “,”, and this type of Japanese punctuation mark “,” may be ignored.
"One action break": In Japanese, "," is entered in the sense that after a series of actions, a new action starts from the next. In this respect, Chinese is the same. However, what is used as a separator is a problem. In the end, there is a broad sense of behavior in Japanese, and if there is a “,” there is no choice but to think that it is a break even if it is an inappropriate break. In other words, it is up to the reader to determine whether the break is really valid. Even in Japanese sentences, there are people who have many punctuation marks, but there are few people, but at that time it would be better to have “,” here, but in Chinese sentences there are also such sentences in translated sentences as well. However, the reader should correct it appropriately.

  In order to simply continue the sentence in Japanese, punctuation is not used, usually in the form of “~ te”, and in Chinese, “verb” is simply continued.

For example, consider the following sentence:
“The years passed, the days passed , (1) and the water flowed over , (2) the ditch became deeper and deeper , (3) and soon it became an 18 stream , (4) one mountain separated divided, it became the peak of the (5) 19 seat. "
How do you handle this long sentence? It is clear that this sentence is divided into five verbs, and "," was given beforehand. Let's interpret it.

"Year, passed, day, passed, and (1), water, over, flow and, (2), the groove is, more and more, deeper, and (3), and then immediately, is it, 18 muscle And (4) one mountain was divided and separated, and (5) became 19 peaks. "

  The phrase “years and days have passed” before (1) is just a stack of similar phrases, and these do not have to be two “sentences”. The original Japanese has such a structure, and “,” is not entered here. (1) is followed by “and”. This “and” is also a delimiter, but it can be received even if “time” is clearly specified, and if it is applied to Chinese, it also appears as “premise”. Chinese doesn't hit “,” after “time,” but it ’s better to hit the letter “,” just like the beginning of the sentence, and hit “,” again. And "translation" is unnecessary. In other words, in the present invention, if the 逗 sign “,” is entered, the subsequent “and” is ignored.

  The sentence “Water flows over,” before (2), this sentence is “Beyond, then flow”, but of course this is a series of connected actions. In Japanese, only “te” is connected and there is no “,”. Therefore, even in Chinese, this part can be regarded as a series of actions and the verbs can be simply continued.

  After that is a punctuation mark ",". What to do with this. Except for the following sentence, the subject changes from "water" to "groove". When that happens, the behavior is different in terms of meaning. Therefore, it is better to type "," in Chinese. If it is a sentence that you do not understand, it is sufficient to follow the original.

After the sentence of (3), "then immediately" word to rush to the conclusion that is followed by (in this case, "immediately" is "就"). Then, in the previous sentence, it is better to type the 逗 sign “,” to clearly indicate the break. And there is no problem with the Japanese original text ",". By the way, what to do if there is no punctuation mark "," in Japanese. In Chinese, when the 逗 number “,” is needed, follow it.

  The sentence of (4) is “Become a mountain stream”. Here, if you look into the following sentence (5), "mountain" will come. Then, it is better to add a sentence break here. Of course, there are also punctuation marks “,” in the original text. By the way, what to do if there is no "," in the original Japanese text? In this case, there is no word to rush to the conclusion in the latter sentence. Then, follow the instructions in the original text, but in this sentence, there is a subject in the latter sentence. If there is a subject, it is better to add the “,” sign in the sense that it is different from the subject in the previous sentence, and it will meet the request for the sign.

  And (5) Sentence, when you see the next, there is no subject, and there is no verb or adverb that rushes the result. Then, this part is not attached with the 逗 sign “,”, and the operation is simply connected.

Then the direct translation is as follows. The imaginary words are underlined. "Year over day over (1), water overflow (2), deep groove Yue (3), 就 formed ■ (← for) Article 38溪流(4), troupe mountain minute intervals (5) formed nineteen seat bong" .

This sentence must be further translated into the main translation, but the document itself is easy, so there is no particular inconvenience. However, “year passed, time passed” has the phrase “Yoshifuka Hinkyu” in Chinese, so you can follow this, and you can use that word if you list it in the dictionary.
“Connectives”: Conjunctions are words that clarify the relationship between previous and next actions when an action ends and an action related to the result starts. The simple ones are “and / so / if that”, etc., and further indicate tangent / reverse, “so / from / so / so”, “but / but / but / but / but / but / but / reject”, etc. . This is the normal mode. Furthermore, there are many more connected words that express a somewhat special relationship, such as “note / and / or / ie, for example”, “particularly / among others”, and “add / just”.

In Japanese, when these conjunctions come, punctuation marks are put before and after them. However, do not hit the beginning of the sentence. In addition, if the previous sentence is received with “so”, it is sufficient to make a dot after the phrase, but if there is a need for punctuation for other reasons, there will be an excessive number of punctuation marks. May be omitted. Japanese punctuation is overwhelmingly more than Chinese, so it is not worth discussing this kind of punctuation.

In Chinese, “connectives” are not used to represent simple connection relationships. So, if like "year is too over-tricks date" of the above. Japanese translation at this time, and "te / element". And when we start a new sentence, we sometimes put a word of connection in the sense of some kind of greeting. In Chinese, the place where the 逗 sign “,” is put in front of the connected word is similar to Japanese, but it is rarely put after the 逗 sign “,”, and the word to be put is roughly decided. Therefore, the necessity of the 逗 sign “,” after the conjunction may be determined by Chinese judgment. For example, come to the beginning of a sentence "Tadashize," "possible Shi," "从此," "Hara come," "after years," "At that time,""于是," after, such as hitting a ",". This is probably because the content described later is very different from the previous content. However, when using “but”, “possible”, etc. with a single character, do not type the 逗 sign “,” after that. Because it has a light meaning. The example sentences will be described in the next section “Highlighting Adverb”.
“Emphasis adverb”: In Japanese, in order to emphasize a passage in a continuous sentence, the adverb that is placed there may be highlighted with punctuation marks “,”. This type of adverb is rarely emphasized in Chinese, and it is only necessary to consider whether or not the emphasized adverb should be a normal adverb.

  Let's look at an example. Suppose you have the following statement: Underline the word before the punctuation mark. The Chinese character “,” could be hit in Chinese for the punctuation after this.

Sentence: "originally, is姚有goods, at that time, when he was still the prodigal son, when there is, when you are eating and drinking in a private school, and see by chance that the Tomataken is sitting in the corner of the place, he is, painful face of Shubi And I was drinking and drinking. "
Interpret this sentence separately by adding “,”. "Originally, the姚有goods, at that time, still, the prodigal son, was, time, when there is, in a private school, has been eating and drinking, when, Tomataken is, of corner, to place, sitting, of the, by chance, see " He was closed with his eyebrows, bitter, face , and drinking alcohol."

Let's examine whether the 逗 number "," is necessary one by one. Is a "originally," and the "originally → original come" in the beginning of a sentence there is a habit of the "original come,". It doesn't have to be, but punctuation marks are included in Japanese, so add them here. “姚 有 品 が” is not translated in Chinese and “ , ” is not typed. “ At that time ” is not treated as a normal adverb in Chinese. "When," is, this is hit the逗号"," because it is time for a little long expression "specific Jiko 儿," as. “At some time” is linked to “when you are drinking”, and there is no reason to make “sometimes” stand out by hitting the 逗 “,”. The 逗 number “,” is given after “when drinking”. “Looking” is connected with “Looking by accident” by the appearance act “Looking”. At this time, “Looking” needs to clearly indicate the end of the action. Later, hit 逗, ",". “He is” is a word that indicates the subject, and it is not necessary to clearly indicate it by separating it with a 逗, “,”. “He is” may be omitted because the subject is “Kang Tang”. “With a painful face” is a phrase connected by “te”, and in Chinese, it is not necessary to hit the dot “,” unless the “subject” is changed or there is a special reason. Here, there is no problem with “bittering and drinking”.

  Make a direct translation and then present the main translation.

Motoyaku is "Hara years,姚有goods year Kaeze个花flower Kimiko specific Jiko 儿, Yuichitsugi standing Kanko village Domokatsu, Tomataken standing corner落里Suwazai bunch那事even-look, he Shubi Kumabutachi bunch liquor Katsu悶". Once you have come to this point, you can make a full translation with a simple rearrangement. The main translation is “Hara- no- Hori, the current repatriation of Hanaka Koiko's time-sequel , Yuri Ichikan Tateri , Kami Karen Kenzai Kakuri , (and others) Emei-no-buchichi-dori”.
“Parallel”: For example, if the words “school classroom desk” are lined up, this means “school classroom desk” or “school and classroom and desk” (or “school, classroom and desk”) "" Cannot be distinguished. In such cases, you can make a distinction in both Japanese and Chinese.

  In this case, in Japanese, the punctuation mark “,” is entered, but in Chinese, it is indicated by the “to” sign instead of the 逗 sign “,”. In other words, “school, classroom, desk”. It should be noted that the Chinese “To” “,” has no meaning for the “逗”, but simply indicates a delimiter, “Parallel”. At this time, it is possible to connect with “Japanese” to form “School Japanese Classroom Japanese Machine”, but what to do will follow the description in Japanese.

Let me give you an example.
“He was about to climb the mountain at the time, but he was on the road to a wild beast (a spider , a lion , a wolf , and a symbol of lust , ferocity , and greed) with three fangs and claws. Suppose there is a sentence that says, “The situation was very dangerous. First, try to disassemble and interpret the original text.

"He was just about to climb, then to the mountain, but it was three, tense, fangs, and stripped nails, that kind of beast (豹, lion , wolf , and, lust, berserk, to those) that symbolizes the greed, was blocked, the road, Then, the situation will become very dangerous, it was. " Based on this, let's examine whether a part with a punctuation mark "," becomes a connecting sign "," or a parallel sign ",".

“I tried to climb”, “pick my fangs”, “I encountered it”, and “blocked the road” represent normal connections, and there is no particular problem. On the other hand, in parentheses, "leopard, lion, wolf and,, lust, berserk, things that symbolize the greed" of each individual element word, something that represents a parallel. The judgment is based on whether “thing” or “thing” is simply a continuation of “thing”. Since this part is not a sentence as a whole, it can be easily understood that it is merely continuous.

  There is a "and" on the way, how do you interpret this? Since the nature of the “things” in the first half and the second half is different, it can be interpreted as the meaning of the normal 逗 sign “,” or simply as a parallel end word. Difficult, but in the text, it is an internal breakdown item enclosed in parentheses. In this case, it can be viewed as a parallel component. In the present invention, such a determination is made. Even so, there is no particular problem.

  Based on the above assumptions, I will make a translation and a main translation.

"Other positive main climbing mountain, retirement three only Chokiba Maitsume basis beast (leopards, lions, wolves, symbolizes lust, violent, covetousness) the other ■ (← Lee Gate) ■ (← the Kihen of column Tehen) Housing “End road, the situation is urgent enough”.

Next is the main translation, but there are some difficult points. It ’s a passive part of being “obstructed”. In Chinese, "I was caught, in Daredare, and, - has been" a. In this case, who is "who"? Going forward in the sentence, it becomes a “ wild beast ”, but this beast is accompanied by three explanatory words: “Sanjo”, “Zhang Fang”, and “Maikotsu”. Now, going back to here, the question is “Who” is always found. There is a high possibility that mistakes will be made if all sentences are automatically judged by the computer. It is necessary to take some measures.

  Although this will be described later, if the first word is easily understood, the word “subject” is added in front of it, and if it is not found, the subject is received in the form of receiving “before / after” (← gate) " That way, readers should be able to make appropriate decisions.

Then, this translation is, if the first word is not found, expressed remains Motoyaku of the above, if found to happen as the body, and "Taseiyo climbing, retirement the Santada Chokiba Mai claw basis beast ‥‥" To do.
"Tone adjustment": In Japanese, there are times when you put a word that adjusts your breathing near the beginning of the sentence and type "," to make it stand out. Since Chinese does not use such a hand-style description method, these “words” can be ignored. Good. For example, in Chinese, words such as “欸,” “■, (← 口 草 又)”, “■, (← 口 A)” are often used. Even if you feel a little uncomfortable with words like a Japanese hand, it is enough to find the closest word in the dictionary and apply that word.

For example, “Ah, it ’s raining” is “■ (← Mouth), end of rain!”. If “Oh, why did he come home?” He said, “欸, other 怎麼 (← hemp ■) run?
“Erasing punctuation”: Japanese has more (/ too) punctuation than Chinese. Therefore, when converting to Chinese, the punctuation marks may be deleted to make sense. This is enough if you think about Chinese.
“Summarization of punctuation marks and numbers”: In Japanese, punctuation marks are a technique that allows readers to read the sentence quickly and accurately. On the other hand, in Chinese, there is a meaning of giving a mark so as not to make the reader misunderstand.

The rough standard of the Chinese word “,” is used to specify “long topic”, “different behavior of subject”, and “premise of complex logic”. Therefore, when interpreting Japanese and making a direct translation, it is sufficient to focus on whether there are any errors in these three points and put the Chinese word “,”.
(Sentence of sentences) Japanese is written in the order of “verb-imaginary”, and Chinese is written in the order of “virtual-verb”. "From China, there is always a problem of" tail dashi ". So why do you do this? This is largely related to Japanese punctuation.

“Cueing” has many punctuation marks in Japanese, so you can create a sentence equivalent to a Chinese sentence except unnecessary punctuation marks. . Further, if necessary, it may be determined whether or not “,” is necessary in Chinese-specific expressions. For example, “However,” “Yes,”. For “Tail Dashi”, the last word in the phrase may be the phrase tail. The present invention is based on this technique. Details will be described below. Note that the phrase head and phrase head here refer to the head or tail of the phrase excluding punctuation marks until the Chinese equivalent.
<Beginning of phrase>: The beginning of a phrase is related to the word “ba” from “Tomorrow excursion but if it rains tonight”. In this case, if the Japanese has the structure of “If ...”, then “Ba” knows that the position of “If” is the beginning of the phrase, but if there is no “If”, it is appropriate. You have to find the phrase head of “B” by means.
“Cueing one action”: To do this, first adjust the punctuation marks to Chinese sentences, and then change the sentence to indicate only the position where the Chinese character equivalent “逗” is added. Then, “Tomorrow excursion, but if it rains tonight”. From this sentence, it is sufficient to determine the word with “B”. The phrase from “Tonight…” is obvious.

Therefore, if a simple translation is made from now on, it will be "Mingten Yuan Excursion, Necessary Rain tonight ...". That ’s one thing. Furthermore, if “tonight” is the emphasis, it would be unclear if it would be a bit more highly “tonight ’s raining tonight,…”. Don't be. In fact, this statement, "Tonight" is only included with the "under rain", "if" is not a word to rule directly. So, even if it is “rainfall that needs tonight”, it is not a big mistake. In other words, the action words in the phrase are strongly influenced by “if”. So, if you create a logic circuit that can correctly discover even the operating words, you will not be misled.
"2 the operation of the beginning": near the beginning of "the effect of the invention," listed a sentence similar to "the girl it is not other that priest if unpleasant there is no autonomy". In this statement, Excite translation software, the wrong translation because it was a "girl ..." the beginning of a sentence the head of the sentence Boys'"If". In this sentence, there are two operation words, “ no independence” and “it is no ”, and the problem is that it is difficult to determine from which word “if” is applied.

Try to put punctuation marks in Chinese style. The "there is no autonomy to the girl, if it is unpleasant, is not other to be priest." From now on, it will be obvious that the phrase head will be “ girl ” or “ it ”. Either one. Both can be interpreted. Try to interpret it so that it is clear. "If if, there is no autonomy to the girl, and still and, it is bad if," "In fact there is no autonomy to the girl, in which case, if, it is disgusting if" and become.

Can the computer automatically distinguish between the two? Even if you do it with a human head, you don't know whether "the absence of autonomy" is a fact or an assumption. However, in this sentence, you can see that only "if you don't like" is definitely bound by "if you". If so, “if” is enough to multiply “if” only for the most recent action. Thus, the normal translation is "if you don't like it". Therefore, the original translation will be “Deceased vs. Reiko Independence, Necessary Unnecessary Things, Absence from Exclusion (← Power C)”.

  The above is sufficient if you need the help of the reader to add some factual facts, but depending on the sentence, the factual relations may not be as above. In such a case, when there is no description of “if” in the original text, neither “girl” nor “dislike” can be determined.

Then what should we do. Is to present such statements, many when the author is that it's also "self-evident" if there is no "if", Well, multiplied by the "if" in only one operation, may be as "If hate if". However, you may have forgotten "Hoshi", and depending on the sentence, that may be the case. At that time, it is possible to obscure the position where “if” is applied, add “if” to the end of the phrase, and leave the final judgment to the reader. Can almost do. Then it becomes like this. “Deceased vs. Reiko Independence, Unexpected Things, Necessary Narratives, Absence Except for Termination” (← Power Ha) Law ”. This is the sentence with the intended content of the original text.

In the present invention, a new method of waiting for the reader's judgment is also adopted, and the translation is made to be in the same format as Japanese, which is a major feature of the present invention.
<Comment of tail>: The end of a phrase always occurs when "imaginary" precedes, and if "if" does not end at the end of "if", it also occurs at that time.

But somewhat incomplete sentence, "but if tomorrow excursions, rain tonight, would be discontinued,""but excursion tomorrow, if tonight rain, would be canceled," said the there is a comparison statement that the . Can this be translated correctly? Candidate word take "if" is, 2 Tsuda of "but excursions" and "rain Ri later".

“Da” is “Confirmed / Confirmed”. If “If” takes an “excursion”, it becomes “If it is an excursion (if)”, but this does not make sense and this does not continue. . The next "later (prefecture) Ri", this is in the ending word of the operation, "If, if later that" next to the word leads. The latter Motoyaku is "Tomorrow Yes excursion, the main Shi ShitaRyoame, it can be stopped ■ (← mouth Tomoe)", and this statement satisfy the spirit of the original.

In this sentence, if "Hoshi" is at the top, it is impossible to translate, but if it is left in "Hoshi", the word that is hung can be vaguely translated. No. The original translation is “ necessary underlying facts (target story ), Meiten Yuan excursion, torrential rain tonight, possible stop ■ (← 巴)”, but the relationship between “Tomorrow excursion” and “Tonight rain” is not known , This sentence is not significant. In this case, some translations must be made even if the translation is not possible, but at that time, it is only necessary to add an annotation that “the word“ if ”is unknown”.

From the above, as long as “if” is in the correct position, the tail of the phrase can be made.
“Two end of motion”: What happens if there are two motions after “What”? Given the following statement: “ If it rains tonight, water will accumulate in the playground, and the athletic meet will be canceled.” The two actions can be “ if it rains” or “ if the water accumulates ”. And the original translation of the sentence that made "if" ambiguous would be " Needs rain tonight, water accumulation athletic field, cancellation of athletic meet required", but it does not deviate from the original text.

By the way, the question is, does the sentence mean “if you collect”? Normally, if the form of the "necessary Shi ... specific story," in Chinese "necessary Shi" is consuming word in as far as the "target talk", if not with a "target talk", the first operation is to end the operation. Therefore, the second operation is not “if”. This is where readers come in. If the reader judges correctly, the sentence will be correct. In that sense, it is effective to make a plain translation with Japanese expressions left to the reader.
<Conclusion of the beginning of the sentence>: If you change the original Japanese sentence to a sentence that reduces the number of punctuation in the same way as the Chinese sentence, the beginning of the sentence and the end of the phrase will be revealed. Based on the sentence, it becomes possible to “cue the sentence and start the tail”. Therefore, “if” corresponding to “if” and “if” corresponding to “if” can be easily found.

  If there are two or more actions involved in "if ... if", then if only the first phrase is involved in "if ... if", no major mistakes will occur, and in this case the reader will be able to complete the sentence If you can expect a proofreading translation, you will be able to create a translation with no problems.

  From the above, the original Japanese text can be translated into the corresponding Chinese text if translated according to the wording. In the present invention, this is performed.

As for the actual cyber processing of Chapter 5 and the premise day translation of the brain processing, what has been described from Chapter 1 to Chapter 4 may be executed by the program. There are various types of program processing, and there is no room for general discussion here, and the present inventor is not a program expert. What can be said is that the translation method according to the present invention is characterized by simple grammar analysis and faithfully converting it into Chinese according to the description in Japanese. Therefore, program creation is extremely easy. However, this programming method is rough, and if it can be reprogrammed by an expert, better automated translation software should be created.

So how do you program it? Roughly speaking, the Japanese statement with a simple grammar processing using the dictionary, is decomposed into each word, stored in the cyber it as a string, while writing using the visual Peishikku in spreadsheet software Excel, from head It is characterized by converting into Chinese while performing a certain process. Of course, if a better programming method is found, it may be used.
(Pre-processing of word confirmation)
The words that make up the sentence have various imaginary words in the form of explaining the verbs, and in Japanese this structure is in the form of “(virtual) -virtual- (virtual)”. Verbs are not used but are listed in the dictionary, but imaginary words are often not used because words are not found directly in the dictionary. The most important of these is the "noun-particle" combination form.

When automatic translation is performed using a computer, the important thing is that it depends greatly on how the words in the sentence are used in the dictionary and whether or not the words are used. In terms of grammar, the part of speech is divided into 10 types. The words that are not used are nouns, adverbs, particles, conjunctions, conjunctions, and interjections. The words that are used are verbs, auxiliary verbs, adjectives, and adjectives. The important thing from the top is whether the word is verbal or narrative.
“Verbs / imaginary words”: When words are classified, they are divided into verbs and imaginary words. The representatives of the verbs are “things / things”, and the representatives of the imaginary words are “action / state words”. In other words, the “what-how” combination is important. Incidentally, real words and imaginary words are differentiated by being guided by a certain purpose, and their properties overlap to represent complex intermediate properties. Therefore, the classification of 10 parts of speech is not very important.
"Nounistic words": This is a representative of verbs and includes things and matters. The typical thing is “common noun”, and “pronoun / indicative pronoun”. The representative of “Matter” is “abstract noun”, the one derived from it is “adjective verb (na adjective)”, and also changes to some “adverbs”. Adverbs will be described later.

Nouns are in this form because they are not used. Adjective verbs can be handled as abstract nouns in the form of “abstract noun + da ”, but they are used as a special noun in Japanese grammar because they are specially used as “no → na” only in the case of a combined explanation. It is called “adjective verb”. Because the handling is different from English grammar, it is often called "na adjective".
“Verb-like words”: This is a representative of imaginary words, and includes words representing actions and states. A typical action is a “verb”, and a shortened version is a “particle” (described later). The verb ending specializes in the “serving / passive / possible” verb, and the one ending in the formalization is the “auxiliary verb”. The adjective is a word that indicates the continuation of movement. This changed further and became an "abstract noun / adverb". Abstract words representing concepts go back and forth between verbs and imaginary words.

  Use verbs, find stems from translations and find dictionary forms of the words. There are verbs that are a mixture of modern, ancient, and katakana, but it's awkward, but the use itself is line-by-line, so if you look at each note from the beginning, you can find the dictionary form. “Adjectives” are also used, but it is not difficult to examine because the endings are “I / Shi”.

Next, “adverb” will be described. An “adverb” is a word that describes “action / state / whole sentence”, and is also like an “abstract noun”, and also has the properties of a “special verb”. When explaining “entire sentence”, it is placed near the beginning of the sentence, and when explaining “action / state”, it is placed “before the word”. Adverbs are not used and appear in the dictionary in this form.
“Other words”: As other words, there are “descriptive words (combinations) of things” and “related words (interjections) with the whole sentence”. The explanation word for the action is classified as “adverb”. Conjunctive words are words that describe “body words (nounistic words)”, and their forms are fixed in the form of “nounness + no / ga / na” and “verbality + ru / ta”. . It can be seen as a variant of the explanatory word from the noun and verb. Since it is not used, it is listed in this dictionary.

Interjections are words that express “calling / inquiring / replying / joining hands”, etc., which are not used and appear in the dictionary in this form.
(Participants) Many of the particles have fixed meanings in the form of abbreviated verbs, and one of them is important. In the grammar, everything that is not used in imaginary words is included in the particle, so there are many types and the handling is troublesome. However, since it is not used, it can be found by searching while examining the meaning.

  As for the particle, the basic word is “te / ni / o / ha”, and “/////////” is also important. In other words, these words determine the skeleton of the sentence. In addition, the Japanese “Kiyaku” sound changes relatively freely, so there is little reason to distinguish them. On the other hand, in Chinese sentences, since the sentence continues without distinguishing the most important “ha / ga / o / te” in Japanese, the translation of “day → middle” seems to be easy to see, but the original meaning Translations of words that are ambiguous can sometimes make big mistakes.

There are other particles, including final particles, connection particles, and logic. Final particles are similar to auxiliary verbs and interjections, connected particles are similar to conjunctions, and logical particles are similar to adverbs. The handling of “final particles” is similar to Chinese and is a word added to the end of a sentence. “Connective particles” are literally similar to conjunctions, the difference being that if you add it to the end of a sentence, it becomes a particle. The relationship with Chinese is almost the same. "Logical particles" are the same as logical adverbs except that their grammatical handling is different from adverbs. Handling is handled using the responsiveness relationship. This point of processing is an important part of the present invention, and is described in detail in the utterance of the verbs. From the above, particles other than basic particles need not be discussed here because they can be processed similarly to other words.
<Case expression>: “Case” is to indicate what role the word represents in the sentence. To put it simply, what “real words” that represent entities represent in “topic / subject / object / location / time / starting point / ending point / cause relationship / reason / causality” and other factors. Say something meaningful. The handling in Japanese grammar textbooks is a little different from this, but handling with emphasis here is more important for translation.

  Here, such a meaning is changed to “case”, and the name is represented by a representative particle, “ha / gaku ...”, and the like. Then, basic particles are classified as follows.

Note: In this table, the term “forward / reverse” refers to other compatible forward / reverse terms, and “u” refers to all the words “Udan”.
(Organization into phrases) To convert Japanese into Chinese, you must first organize the Japanese. In general, the order is as follows: word division, investigation of a combination explanation word, investigation of a combination explanation word, and investigation of an operation (/ state). The middle of the sentence has a structure in which “action word” comes to the end after repeating the relationship of “verb-particle” and “verb-particle” several times.

When the phrase is finished, the last step is to change the Japanese punctuation mark to the Chinese character “,”. If there are no punctuation marks in Japanese, scrutinize the Chinese sentence and look for places where "," is required. I mentioned it in the section “Creating phrases”.
“Word division”: The word division can be performed by various methods, and the method is fixed to some extent. Here, the following method is adopted. Of course, another method may be adopted.

Take the clear real words of the sentence and color the rest as imaginary words (shown in italics here). Next, the particle combined with the verb is picked up to make a combination of “verb-particle”. In this operation, words that are not well understood only by kanji appear, but I will tentatively take them as real words.
“Combinatorial explanation”: Next, in order to check whether there is a relational relation word (community explanation word), in the form of “no / ga / na / ru / ta” at the end of a noun or verbal word Look up word forms in the dictionary. The operation up to this point reveals the relationship of “case of verbs”. Conjunctive descriptive words are not present in all noun-related phrases, and are investigated in order from the front until there are no more phrases.
“Investigation of repeated explanatory words”: According to the Japanese grammar, the explanatory words “time / place / situation” are all explanatory words “motion”. However, the “consecutive explanation” here is not a “consecutive use” in such a broad sense, but an “adverb / adverb phrase” or “adverbical phrase” that directly explains “operation”. The details of this point were explained in the basic structure of Chinese.

  The structure of the direct explanation is the same in Japan and China, and the phrase is not used. If you find an adverb in the explanation, you can convert the phrase into Chinese as it is, and then continue the operation word. Good.

In this respect, it becomes a problem a little when it is a structure that "does like ...". Chinese corresponding thereto is a "(as ○○ in ← circles) image ○○" further when part of a general or "○○" is long phrase, "‥‥ land / ‥ …… “Uniform ground ” is indicated with “Ground (←…, like that)” at the end. For example, "■■ land (← ■■ is, Kuchihana, Kuchihana)", "Todorokifu land". The structure in this case is “(image). Whether or not an “image” is added is determined by whether it is a “metaphor”, a simple “onomatopoeia / mimic” or “situation explanation”. In addition, it should be noted in this case, the phrase take even an abstract noun with adverbs, it is to become the "noun Description Language" and "- specifically" in the same form. This can be easily distinguished by whether the next word is "noun" or "verb".
“Investigation of action words”: Action-related words may be combined explanation words or end sentences.

  To do this, first use a dictionary to look for words that are not in use (stem / one word). Adverbs and logical particles come up. Since this affects the interpretation of the whole sentence, a mark (for example, underline) is attached. Next, in order to extract verbal (inclusive adjective) words, extract the dictionary stems excluding the inflection endings and the sentence together. Next, whether or not an auxiliary verb is attached to the word, it is extracted while comparing with the auxiliary verb table, and this is taken as one word.

  Lastly, after the verb, it is checked whether there is a final particle word, and this is also set as one word.

  After these operations are completed, interjection-type words remain, but since they are not utilized, they can be easily converted into Chinese even if they are left as they are.

  Let me give you a specific example. Suppose there is a sentence that says, “I put something important in a big box.”

  First, nounistic phrases are extracted. The unprocessed part is shown in italics, and “/” is put in the completed process. This is a mark, and there is no particular problem if it is not included.

The "I put the important things on a large deal of the box.". Next, we will make a combination of verb-particle.

The "I / large deal of the box to / important things / put was.". Next is a survey of combination modifiers.

  "I am / big / box / important / something / put." Next is a survey of verbs.

"I am / big / box / important / something / put ." Next is a survey of auxiliary verbs.

  "I am / big / in a box / important / something / put /." This completes the word search for example sentences.

  Consider yet another example: "He came all the way from Tokyo." Follow the same procedure as the previous example. First, from extracting nounistic phrases.

" He came all the way from Tokyo ."

  "He came all the way / from Tokyo." Absent. Next is a logical word.

  “He came all the way / from Tokyo /”, and the next was a survey of auxiliary verbs.

"He is / are all coming / from Tokyo / come" and the word search for the sentence is over.
“Phrase making”: After word division, it is necessary to determine the phrase that is the smallest unit of sentence composition. Roughly speaking, it is a way to create a frame of a sentence by merging a unit explanation word with an explained word to create a phrase. In other words, based on this, the phrase "topic phrase-subject phrase-time phrase-place phrase-other situation phrase-action phrase" is created.
(Organization of punctuation marks)
In general, Japanese has many punctuation marks and few in Chinese. Therefore, it is necessary to consider whether to leave punctuation marks in the original sentence for words divided into words. In other words, the punctuation left here is the Chinese word “,”. In summary, “,” is entered in “declaration of sentence premise” and “separation of actions for changing subject”. Details are given in the description of the basic structure of Chinese in Chapter 1. Chinese is written in the order of "topic- (subject) -time-place-situation-action" and is exactly the same as Japanese, but if you continue the sentence, what will be the "topic" or "end of sentence" What do you do? The problem is how to handle long “situation words”.
“End of sentence processing”: In Japanese, the end of a sentence is indicated by “.”, Which is the same in Chinese. In this case, since the translated sentence is easily confused, in the present invention, “.” In Japanese is also put in “.” In Chinese. Even if the operation causes some modulation in Chinese, there are few mistakes.
"Clarification of the topic": The topic is specified in both Japanese and Chinese. So what will become a “topic”, this is also the same in the daytime, “time / place / situation”. The problem is that “person / thing” is the subject, and in Chinese, it is normal not to type “,”. The present invention also follows this principle. However, when the subject is long, the subject cannot be distinguished from the topic, and “,” is entered. The criterion is whether or not the subject has an explanatory word.
“End of one operation”: what is “end of one operation”? Among the action (/ state) words with the subject, those that are not the combined explanation words are applicable. This definition need not be exact. This is because if you don't add ","it's hard to understand the connection. Because it must not.

In summary, whether or not you can type the 逗, "," in Chinese can be easily determined by examining whether the word before the Japanese punctuation mark is an action word. There will be a "," in accordance with this simple method.
(Dictionary creation) Next, I will describe how to make a dictionary as a premise for making a phrase. Dictionaries are made using commercially available dictionaries.

  “Nouns” are used as they are because they are listed as they are. The Chinese translation is selected from this dictionary, but when there are a wide variety of Chinese translations, the selection is urgent. Since a specific noun is often combined with a specific verb, if a combination of “noun-verb” is clarified in advance as a premise of conversion, it is easy to select a translation. For example, “eating and eating” and “drinking and drinking”. In this way, if there is a mistake such as “drinking rice,” “eating” can be corrected to “eating” by inserting “eating” as a similar word to “drinking”. If "Drink water" is also "Eat water," this can also be corrected. In the present invention, “related words” are listed for correcting such a phrase. The same method is used for the following other words. One interesting example is that in Japanese it is “drug, drink”, but in Chinese it is “drug, eat (← （medicine)”.

  “Participant” is investigated using the case dictionary of particle. Also in this case, since “noun-particle” is usually connected, a table is created so as to know whether the connection is present.

“Logical verb”: This includes “adverb / logical particle”. This is linked with “verb / whole sentence”, and this part is described so that the sentence can be grasped in the form of “response”. For example, in the above example sentence, list all the words related to "Harubaru" in the " Harubaru ... coming" part. If you look at the dictionary, there are other things such as "Harubaru ... Cross / Harubaru ... Open".

“Verb”: When a verb is an intransitive verb, it is linked with “subject”, and when it is a transitive verb, it is related to “object” and creates a dictionary that shows the relationship. For example, "~ is ... a", "- to ... there", also, "to - to ...""to - the ...""be at ~ ...", further, "... to - the ... help to ~""~"... and say (,)".

  “Terminals (auxiliary verbs / final verbs)”: These are essentially the same, the difference between use and non-use. In other words, it is a “auxiliary verb” if the word is connected further down, and it is a “final particle” if it is a word-cut form. Since these words become the same sentence if they are converted to Chinese, it is better to make a batch dictionary as the last word.

  "Connecting words (connectives / connecting particles)": These are similar in terms of verbs, and are the difference between the beginning and end of sentences. Since many of these words are “responsive”, a dictionary that clearly indicates “responsiveness” is created.

Since the description about these was described in detail in the description of the basic structure of Chinese in Chapter 1, it will not be described further here. The table is briefly described below.
Examples of noun tables ... Underlined items are often used. The following parts of speech table is the same. In other words, the connection is first investigated, and if the connection is not known, the conversion to Chinese is considered, assuming that the connection is with the first particle.

Example particle table

Example of verb table ... "Ru / Su / U / Ku / Mu" type is the basic type of action, as shown in the Japanese word source. “U-type” refers to other “Udan” word bases. “E-change” refers to a word whose ending has changed to an “e” type and converted to a “transitive verb”. “Type a” refers to an “intransitive verb”. The “Suru” type is a “Suru” type verb with “S” added to the Chinese character.

Table of logical verbs ... Adverbs mainly determine the logic of the whole sentence, but auxiliary verbs also carry it. In Chinese, adverbs and auxiliary verbs are similar in placement on the sentence.

Table of final words: Minor changes in movement, questions / antagonists, and other emotional words. “E” is the sound of the stage.

Table of conjunctions: Connected after most imaginary words, plays the role of forward, reverse, and other connections.

(Translation of translation into Chinese) After organizing Japanese phrases, the next step is to translate the translation into Chinese. There are a plurality of Chinese words corresponding to Japanese, and it may be necessary to select a phrase, but it is possible to determine in advance from the whole sentence which category of words is appropriate. If it cannot be judged, the first word in the table is the Japanese translation. When a specific translation is required, it can be changed to the translation by instructions. Also, if there are words with different word origins or words with different parts of speech for the same Japanese, the words are registered with different headings.
<Creating a Japanese-Chinese Dictionary>: Create a conversion table from Japanese to Chinese, as shown in the table below. The conversion table may require modification of items as necessary, and does not have to be fixed in the form below. Here is a conversion table for nouns and verbs, but other parts of speech can be done in the same way.
Noun conversion table

Verb conversion table

(Making a translation) A noun word can be easily converted into Chinese using a Japanese-Chinese conversion table, but how to determine a Chinese "interposition" from the subsequent "noun-particle" combination?
“Operation reference”: The meaning of “location” and “person” is greatly different even if “ni” is the same. In the case of location, there are words such as "in-there / are""~ to go / Forward", which for over corresponds the "presence / Yes", "arrival / direction / forward", to determine this Is performed in relation to “operation”.

Ahead of "I, the big box put something important." Of the sentence if, from leading a "... put on", in the "on" in this case fit the "arrival". In this case, “N” is not decided without referring to “Operation”. Rather, it can be said that a certain “motion” is associated with a specific “particle”. In this sentence, "~ to ... put""~ a ... Buy" and, at that time "arrival" of "bunch", "through" to enter.
"People related operations": And, when associated with a person with "the people" is, complex changes, such as "people in ... the / make / get / do", through to the "in" is "/ It is necessary to pay attention to “Send / Get / Do”. Actually, these are cases of “passive / usage / profit / loss” and this corresponds to “subject / use / pay / pay”. If it is related to a person, the “verb” will be determined after seeing the “verb change”.
“No action reference”: On the other hand, a specific “particle” may be determined only by the previous word regardless of the action. For example, “~ de (meaning“ ← ”is)” is often preceded by “tool / means / place-de”, so the corresponding Chinese is “ " However, there are few words that can be decided without referring to “motion” in this way.
<Completion of the original translation>: As the previous stage of the translation, for example, “To box” becomes “To Hakoko”, but when a combined explanation is added, “To” is preceded by the combined explanation. Must be placed. Therefore, at the work stage, the character string of “boxed” is temporarily arranged in word order. However, it is possible to leave it as it is and to put only “interposition” at the beginning of the phrase in later processing.

In this way, it is checked whether there is a “community explanation word” in the sentence. If the "big box", "large" is found, which, in addition to "target" of the attributive description language, is converted to "large basis". Once you have this conversion, because when combined with the string that was made before a "large basis Hakoko arrival", transferred the "arrival" at the forefront to convert to word order of "arrival large basis Hakoko".
(Making a translation)
For example, "I, the big box put something important." Statement Boys 'translation of, from the "I / gotten Tekihakoko / bunch important manner East-West / release NyuRyo.", Each individual statement' Day is Determine the elements and determine the overall word order. And become a problem, in the place for the "~ a", if it comes with a "attributive description language" to represent the number in this part, the word order of "the bunch thing verb", if not, with the exception of the "bunch" to word order of "verb thing". In the case of the latter, it becomes an associated verb in the form of “to do…” in the form of “verb thing”. In this example, because there is attributive description language to "bunch thing" shape, "I gotten Tekihakoko bunch important manner East-West release NyuRyo.", And is the translation completed. However, it may not be easy to determine whether it is an “individual” in a similar word to “important”. At that time, take "textualism".

Chapter 6, Specific Description of Program From this chapter, the specific description of the program will be described. I analyzed the sentence "I put something important in a big box" earlier, so I will explain the electronic brain processing of this sentence step by step on the assumption that this sentence will continue.
First step: This sentence is manually assigned to the “B2” frame of the Excel cell, and the sentence cut to the punctuation mark is assigned to “B3”. Since the “Dictionary” and “Work” sheets will come out later, this table is set as the “Main Table” sheet. In the following, “B2” indicates this table display.
B2: “I put something important in a big box…”. ... The sentence to be translated was assigned.
B3: = LEFT (B2, FIND (".", B2)) → "I put something important in a big box." ... "B3:" means "What is in the B2 frame?" In meaning, the contents after ":" indicate the contents. same as below.
Second step: Cut out from the first letter of B3 while increasing the number of letters sequentially, and determine whether it is a noun word in the dictionary. This work is performed on the “work” sheet. If the character is found, the value is assigned to “B4”.
Work! B3: = LEFT (this table! B3,1) → “I”. (The meaning of “→” indicates the computer processing result of the program).
Check if this word is in the (verb) dictionary.
Work! C4: = MATCH (LEFT (this table! B3,1), dictionary! B: B, 0) → "14" (← If "I" is on the 14th line of the dictionary sheet, for example) Then, work! C4 frame will have 14 characters. “Dictionary” means an Excel work table “dictionary” sheet.
If the work C4 is not “# N / A (← dictionary has no solution)”, then it is checked whether it is a “noun word” in the form of “I am”.
Work! D4: = MATCH (LEFT (this table! B3,2), dictionary! B: B, 0) → "# N / A". The dictionary has no words in the form of “I am”. In addition, whether or not there is a word of “I ○”, rewrite the value of “work E4” to “I ○”, investigate the dictionary, and in turn check for the word of “I ○○” in “work F4” Check the condition. The program at that time is as follows.
Work! E4: = LEFT (this table! B3, LEN (work! B3) +1) → “I ○” (In fact, this is not possible because there is no word “I”). Also, “I ○ In the case of “Yes”, it becomes “Work! B3 + 2”.
Return to the original, because there is no corresponding character in the stage of work! D4, substitute the value of C4 in the previous frame into B4.
B4: = Work! B4 → “I”. The number of words in the dictionary is counted.
B5: = LEN (B4) → 1. ("B4 (←" I ")" has one character).
3rd step: Find out what “ha…” is after “I”. Because it is a "particle", it should be extracted as an "imaginary". Perform the same operation as in the second step. The work frame should be “Work! C15”, which is a little far away to prevent confusion. Whether or not there is the word “ha ○” is sequentially performed in “Work! D15”.
Work! C15: = MID (this table! B3, LEN (this table! B4) +1,1) → “ha”. The next step is to check whether “ha” is in the “dictionary”.
Work! D15: = MATCH (LEFT (this table! C15,1), dictionary! B: B, 0) → “100” (← The character “No” appears on the 100th line). Next, is “ha” in the dictionary?
Work! E15: = MATCH (MID (this table! B3, LEN (B4) +1,2), dictionary! B: B, 0) → “# N / A” (← there is no word “ha”) . Therefore, the word break here is “ha”, and the character “ha” is substituted for “C4” and the number of characters is counted.
C4: = Work! C15 → “Ha”.
C5 = LEN (C4) → “1”.

The same operation is continued, and the values of “C4 / D4 / E4...” And “C5 / D5 / E5...” Are obtained and “I / ha /, / large / na / box / in / important / / Thing / put / ta /. "And" 1/1/1/2/2/1/1/1/2/11/2/2/2/1/1 "are obtained. Up to this point, the sentence “I am ...” has been completely broken down to the word level.
4th step: Once the words have been divided, the next step is to make a phrase. In other words, look for the form of “noun + particle”. From the dictionary, we know that B4 is a "noun" and B5 is a particle. In some cases, the next particle may be a particle, so check it. Here, it is “,”, so here is the “sentence”.
Work! B16: = B4 & C4 → "I am". The particle may still follow. To investigate D4.
Work! C16: = B4 & C4 & D4 → “I am”. The phrase ends here because “,” has come. The values so far are substituted into this table.
B6 ： = B4 & C4 & D4 → “I am”. Transfer the values created on the “Work” sheet to “This table”.

The same method is used for frame processing after E4. Then, B6 is added, and the next character frame string is obtained.
“B6: I am”, “E6: Big”, “G6: In the box”, “I6: Important”, “K6: Things”, “M: Put”, “N: Ta.”
Step 5: Next, convert Japanese phrases into Chinese. There are a plurality of Chinese words corresponding to Japanese, and it may be necessary to select a phrase. However, it is possible to determine in advance from the whole sentence which category (specialized) is appropriate. If it cannot be judged, the first word is translated into Japanese. Here, character conversion is performed as a general sentence. Therefore, “I: I”, “Big: Large”, “Box: Hakoko”, etc. The description of this part is complicated and will be simplified.
B7: Dictionary! C14 → “I”. (← Assuming that the translation of “I” appears in column C of row 14 of the dictionary). In this case, when the appropriate translation is in D14, that word is adopted. Assuming that the main translation is in column C, C7: Dictionary! CXX, D8: Dictionary! CXX, E7: Dictionary! CXX, ...

  The particles are converted by the method described in “Making a translation”. Since the description method is complicated, only the result is described. Since “Ha” → “−”, “,” → “−”, “Na” → “Target”, “O” → “Fine”, “Ta” → “End”, B7: I. H7: Target. J7: Target. I7: Gum. N7: OK. It becomes.

The end of the conjunction is “no / na / ga / ru / ta”, but the word itself is in the “combined form” and is in the dictionary as it is. there,
Work! B16: MATCH (this table! E4 & “N”, dictionary! B: B, 0) → “20” (← “Large” appears in the 20th line of the dictionary).
Work! B17: MATCH (this table! I4 & “N”, dictionary! B: B, 0) → “21” (← “Important” is the 21st line).
Find out as. If you have these words, make a “community explanation” by adding “target” to the end of the word,
E7: “Large” & “Target” → “Large”. Furthermore, I7: “Important” & “Target” → “Important”.
Step 6: Create a phrase. The converted Chinese character string is arranged so that the particle is arranged in front as an interposition. If you can do this, you will have a phrase. Usually, a particle should be put before an actual word, but if a complex explanation is attached, an interposition is arranged in front of the word.

Change from the beginning of the string. The problem is that there are two places where there is a description of the union, and they merge at the position of the first word. The frame to the merged area should be blank. In addition, “.” Is added at the end of the sentence.
B8: = B7 → “I”.
E8: = H7 & E7 & F7 & F7 → "Large box box".
I8 ： = L7 & I7 & J7 & K7 → “Essentially important east-west”.
M8: M7 & N7 → “End of release”. And the blank part
C8: = “” → “_”. D8 = “” → “_”. F8: = “” → “_”. G8: = “” → “_”. H8: = “” → “_”. J8 = “” → “_”. K8 = “” → “_”. L8 = “” → “_”. N8 = “” → “_”. It becomes.
Step 7: Compile phrases and create a complete translation. The detailed description is long and cannot be written here.
B9: B8 & E8 & I8 & M8 → “Our big box box is important.
The text translation is completed by the above operations.
Examples: Next, examples will be described. First, it is an example sentence, but it is difficult to know whether the translated sentence is a correct one at a glance even if it is converted into Chinese by performing a certain conversion on the required translation sentence. Therefore, the completed Chinese sentence translated into Japanese is used as an example sentence, and the process according to the method of the present invention is tried on paper to verify whether it is correctly converted into Chinese sentence. I will write it down. Japanese sentences are long, so program sentences cannot be shown. However, annotations were added so that the character conversion process can be understood.

  The sentence I'm going to cover is newspaper news about "The Great Snow in Beijing".

Example sentence: From the night of 3rd to last night, in Kyoto Castle, the next cold wave had the greatest influence.

      Note (1), (2): When the time is expressed as “○ to ○”, in Chinese, “to to” is not used, and “to” may be “to”. The original Chinese used this method. Of course, you can easily understand "obey ... arrive ...".

      Note (3): It is difficult to understand from the top of the shape that "to ~" means "solstice". In order to do this, in the verb table, “to / go” is put in the related word of “kake” so that the related word is picked up as necessary. Even if you can't, you won't make a big mistake.

      Note (4): First, the meaning of “kake” is not clear. Here, it means “time”, so it means “from here to that time”. Therefore, “arrival” is devoted. List these relationships in the dictionary. Next, the meaning of “,” is interpreted as “beyond the story”, but it is better to put a dot “,” in Chinese. In the present invention, when a slightly long “hour” is assumed, “,” is put at the end of the assumption.

      Note (1): “Kyojo” usually means “place”, but since it is the beginning of a sentence, it can also be understood as meaning of “subject”. Such a “place” is a “small premise”. The conversion of “small premise” into Chinese is not a “topic”.

      Note (2): “Ha” represents “topic”, but it is ignored and not translated when “sub-premise”.

      Note (3): This “,” is “,” for “minor premise”, so conversion to “,” is unnecessary.

Note (4): to "這次" in Chinese, contains the meaning of the vague "Now the next / now following (← adverb / Rentaishi)", and "the → target" is unnecessary.

Note (5): “From (Ni)” is more precisely “Ni (Point) / Yori (Cause)”, but is regarded as “Cause” as a whole. In addition, "cause" was shown in the form of "in-‥‥" clause of the so make the (phrase), from the clarity of expression, "in Nasu (→ by it)". same as below.

Note (1): The true meaning of “influenced” requires conversion to “affected” in order to convert to Chinese. However, in Chinese, there is no distinction between “ha / ga / o”, so these are only Japanese problems.

Note (2), (3): “Impact” should be “Influence” in the text, but in this case, the subject is “Kyojo”, so “Kyojo is (→ Yes)” There is no meaning of "There is ..." nor "Kyojo is ...". It means “I was influenced by Kyojo”. Word that can be interpreted as "noun" as "verb" such as "influence" is, in advance to make an example sentence of the verb "have an impact" → passive meaning of "affected" to be able to introduce. Both Japanese and Chinese languages need this attention because there is no clear distinction between “active / passive / serving”. The original Chinese language interprets “There is → receive” as “I happen to receive” and uses the word “evening”. “Receiving” related to a disaster can be interpreted as “accidentally receiving” if the dictionary is upgraded.

    Note (4): “Ta” represents “determined” of the action, but does not have an independent meaning, but is expressed as the last word of the verb, and is handled in Chinese as well. Since this word can be treated in the same way as a “particle” for a verb in Japanese, it is expressed as a postfix “interposition” (→ this is called a complement in the grammar) so that it can be compared with Japanese.

Note (5): What is the placement position of “Receiving”? In other words, it should be the "wo ... to" So "the bunch ...". “Hatch” means “to grab (proactively)… to do”, so it cannot be used here. Since it is to reduce the specific gravity of the "wo", "received, influence" in the form of precede the "receive". Note that the “bunch” syntax is not used in passive element sentences, but “buck” is used in “usage” sentences. This type of conversion can be done with a simple conversion by marking the dictionary.

Example: Rain, snow and thunder, which caused a drop in temperature and winds, affecting various parts of Beijing.

    Note (1): It is an expression of “to”, but it is not decided how to put “to” in Japanese. When things are in parallel, you can put them all in, but the sentence gets longer. Therefore, it seems reasonable to put it last in the English style. Where Chinese characters are not included, it is common to distinguish them by adding “,” in Chinese. However, such a distinction is not necessary for words that are frequently used every day. Here it is “rainy snow”. Adding "," doesn't make a mistake.

Note (2), Note (3): it is set to "Ameyukiwa Raiden," cut in, then while receiving it in "their", "by Re their". This expression is an emphasis expression. In order to emphasize what should have been originally “In the Rain and Snow and Raiden”, it is more conspicuous to select “………, Ina…”. Therefore, it is more effective to use such a method. In the original Chinese text, the word “cause” is not used, but “it rained, the temperature fell ...” is followed by a flat plate.

Note (4), (5): “Temperature drop” can be “temperature drop”, but it is connected in the form of a noun with “~ and a large wind”. If you tie this in the form of a verb, it will be “falling temperature meta and big wind”, which is fine, but it is followed by “there is”, so using this word is faithful to the main translation. Therefore, we adopt the structure of “Yes… Temperature drop sum big wind”. “Temperature drop” means “temperature drop (← noun expression)” and “temperature drop” means “fall, temperature is (← verb expression)”. Note that “temperature drop” is also a two-letter word “fall” in contrast to “heavy rain”. In the original text, “cooling” is used. If necessary, vocabulary selection from the dictionary can be made finer in this way.

Note (6): “There is ~” means “was” in terms of meaning, but the sentence still leads down. When such is, in Japanese, and "- there was, and - there was a" do not like a, simply tie in the present tense, "was ~" last only. The same is true for Chinese. Again, “existing” is only “existing”.

Note (7): The expression “has” is the end of a phrase in Japanese, but is the beginning of a phrase in Chinese. In order to unify both expressions in terms of expression, “Yes” → “ Ana-sama ( target )” (← There is such a thing) is set. This is just for the ease of viewing the translation.

Note (1): “Everywhere in Beijing” means “Everywhere in Beijing” means “Everywhere in Beijing”, but here it means “the subject” instead of that meaning. This can be seen from the place that has become a "Beijing various places." In Chinese, “ga” is not displayed. In addition, “everywhere in Beijing” means “everywhere in Beijing”, but “no” cannot be entered in either Japanese or Chinese.

Note (2), (3): The expression "Affected", the previous example, "there was, effect" as both "(the wind and snow) effect gave a" splendid also. In Chinese, it can be interpreted as “noun” or “verb” like “influence”, and in the case of “verb”, it is troublesome to interpret words that must be decided to “passive / serving”. The principle of translation is literally. Here, it is “influenced”, so “influenced, affected”. It should be noted that because there is “O”, it may not be the “figure” syntax, but in Chinese “influence” and “incoming influence” are linked together in a single word. In addition, the original Chinese is expressed as “influenced in various parts of Beijing (→ affected in various parts of Beijing)” and “useful”.

Example sentence: Beijing Meteorological Observatory, according to comprehensive statistics on rainfall and snowfall, yesterday's precipitation amount exceeded the historical extreme at noon yesterday.

    Note (1): “Meteorological Observatory” with place name has no distinction between “Beijing Meteorological Observatory” or “Beijing Meteorological Observatory”. It's safe if you keep the text.

Note (2): "~ Meteorological Observatory," of "," is, how to interpret. It is difficult to judge whether it is a “topic” or just a “subject”. For the time being, it is a word with "descriptive words", so it may be taken up as a "topic". The original text is "subject".

    Note (3): Is "comprehensive statistics" "comprehensive statistics"? In many cases, “no” is added in Japanese but not in Chinese. So, if there is no "no" in Japanese, in principle, you should not add "no" in Chinese.

Note (4), (5): “According to” indicates the basis. In the meaning of "based on ...", in Chinese, it is shown in the form of "foundation ...". Although Finally "," is you need, the expression "rationale" is, "roots, what Tsu bases is ‥‥'s" be in the sentence syntax with, it can be interpreted as "1 operation" . For sentences that can be interpreted that way and are relatively long, it is reasonable to type "," after that. This is the case in the present invention.

    Note (1): “Yesterday” is often used as a “premise” in Japanese and is written as “Yesterday / Yesterday”. In Chinese, such a short phrase is not a “topic / premise”.

    Note (2): Whether to include “target” in “no” of “all cities”. “All cities” (← adverb nouns) only has the meaning of “all cities”, and “target” is unnecessary.

    Note (3): Whether this is the “topic”. “Precipitation in the whole city” can be interpreted as a long “subject”. Here, we will type “,” according to the original Japanese text. Of course, it is not necessary to hit ",".

    Note (1): “Noon” means “hour” by itself, so “ni” is unnecessary. That is, “noon / noon”. If it is “from noon,” it will naturally be “noon”. Also, if “ha” is attached, such as “at noon”, it is ignored.

Note (2): what to do with "the" in "the history of the extreme". Abstract nouns represent the meaning of “adverbs” as well as their own “nouns”. Thus, the "history" also includes the meaning of "historical / historical" in addition to "history". However, it is doubtful whether to use the theory in this sentence and it is difficult to judge. Given this, it is reasonable to translate the translation literally. The original Chinese text is “history extreme”.

    Note (3): In this case, the true meaning of the adverb “Asari” is unknown. If the meaning is wide-ranging, the translation is determined in combination with “verb”. In this case, it will be “lightly ... exceeded”, so this “lightly” means “smooth / no resistance”, and “in order (← means to follow / follow)” in Chinese. Become.

Note (4): it is the meaning of "was" in the "exceeded" but whether "past" of the "what" are. The meaning of "excessive" in Chinese, "closer Itekite, pass, and go away" in a series in the sense of, in terms of the grammar terms will mean with "Finish". In other words, it is the meaning of "more than" rather than "beyond went." Speaking in Japanese, this word is a “particle” -like word, and you do n’t have to add “OK” to those words.

Example sentence: And the amount of snowfall in Yanqing became the largest snowfall since 52 years.

    Note (1): “And”, how to use different words. Conjunctions that have the meaning of “and” are “meta / usore / adhesion / follow”, etc., and “meta” (←, but… so / but) ”represents some kind of“ causal ”,“ us (← situation) It is, that is, ...) "is often attached to the beginning of the sentence and shows a relationship that has nothing to do with the previous sentence, but cannot be said to be completely unrelated, and is" bonded (← and what follows ...) " Indicates that something “follows” occurs, and “after (← then after…)” indicates that something follows naturally strongly. The judgment is very difficult because it must be compared with the previous action. There is no choice but to use the simple method. First, if you are in the middle of a sentence, use "Meta", and if you are at the beginning of a newline sentence, use "Ure". If there is “time connectivity”, use “adhesion”, and if there is connectivity, there is “time later” if there is no time connectivity. After all, if the judgment cannot be made, “meta” is used as a general term.

          In the case of this subject, it becomes “meta” indicating the cause and effect from the above judgment. Using other words is not particularly wrong. The original Chinese uses “meta”.

Note (2): “Chinese 52” is logically interpreted as “coming from 52”, but when Chinese is imported into Japan, it is strangely expressed in the same format. It was. What to do with the "the" in "52 years". “Adverbs” contain connected words such as “ni / no / to” within themselves. Therefore, in this case, the “no → target” conversion is unnecessary.

Note (3): whether or not the "maximum of heavy snowfall" of "the → target" is necessary. If “maximum” is “(abstract) noun”, “target” is necessary, and if it is “adverbic”, it is unnecessary from the theory of note (2). This judgment is still difficult, and there is not much difference in meaning with or without “target”. When it is difficult to make a decision, you can follow Japanese notation. That should match the Chinese colloquial expression. In the present invention, “textualism” is adopted.

Note (4): What to do with "Naru". “Nari / Fun / Tai” corresponds. “Naru” becomes “natural”, “for” becomes “artificial”, and “nari” is in the middle. If it can be judged easily, it will be followed. Next, it can be seen that “Nata” represents the current situation of “ being ”. “Past” or “Present” is difficult. In the case of the text, it can be interpreted either way. Again, “textualism” is adopted. In addition, the original Chinese language uses only “for”, not “for completion”.

Example sentence: As of yesterday at 20:30, the road was frozen, a yellow warning was issued, and it still continued.

Note (1): following the "yesterday" to "time" is not the "yesterday". “Time” includes the meaning of “to”.

Note (2), (3): In the "In the current", but "in" the meaning of "at that time", "is" the "topic of explicit". The Chinese word for “in” in the topic display is “in ... (← the situation is in ...)”. Therefore, “currently” becomes “exist”. The following is, "at present," the "," and "," but it is whether or not to, because it is "time" representation of the beginning of a sentence "," should hit the, in the present invention follow it. By the way, the original Chinese text is “Last year yesterday…”. In other words, “It ’s time to cut…”. This is better, but there is an unavoidable aspect from the Japanese expression that it becomes as described above.

Note (1): "freezing" is like a one of the verb "ice stretched," but, strictly speaking, "signed, the ice" in the words of the, put the object further "road" after this I can't do anything. However, if you look closely at “road ice”, you can interpret it as “the subject” when you can interpret it as “the road is / is”. “Roads” cannot “freeze” by themselves, but it can be said that this is a feature of Japanese and Chinese languages. In short, it can be converted according to the Japanese text. Incidentally, the original Chinese text is “road ice”.

Note (2): "put out" is, "can Azuka警(→ alarm, came out)," but say even, taking the meaning, the "Azuka警issued (the warning was issued)." No, or "to be issued" in passive. In Chinese, the distinction between “passive / active” is vague, and if “object” is the subject, “object” acts as an object of the object to be operated, and the meaning of passiveness remains “promulgated”. Represent. This distinction will become the "people issued" if "people were issued", "thing promulgated" if "things were promulgated promulgated has been / things".

    Note (1): “Still” is both “noun” and “adverb”. Since it is the beginning of a sentence, it may be “still”. Although it does not become a problem in particular, I confirmed the similarity between "abstract noun" and "adverb".

Note (2), (3): "Continuation" means "I 'm doing it" by itself, and the word "Kaku" is unnecessary. But “Chaku” plays the same role as “final particle”. Adding final particles is similar in both Japanese and Chinese. Looking at the Japanese text in the main text, “it was ” in “followed” is a word that is close to unnecessary and an expression close to tone. Thinking like that, even in Chinese, adding “wear” is not particularly funny. You can stick to writing.

Claims (1)

When translating Japanese into Chinese, as the first step (analysis), firstly, the Japanese sentences from the given series of sentences until the punctuation mark “.” Are extracted, and each word is translated from the first word using a dictionary. In this case, if there is a word with an unknown meaning, a noun corresponding to the noun is created based on the interpretation of the word source, and the verb is specifically defined by adding the auxiliary verb and the particle. Confirm the action, and then select the joint explanation word and the joint explanation word and place them before the body text or the prescriptive word to clarify the relationship with the explanation word. Furthermore, the Japanese punctuation mark “,” In Chinese, it is determined whether the Chinese character “,” is necessary, or whether the Chinese original Chinese character “,” is necessary, and the Chinese character “,” is placed. For each phrase, first the outline phrase is what element of the sentence. Location / time / means / method / cause / reason / starting point / end point / other situation / logical word / connecting word), and then the combination of “entity-particle” that defines them Investigate how it corresponds to the combination of “substance” using a separate table, replace Japanese phrases with Chinese sentences, and in the third column (the main translation), ”Is moved to the beginning of the explanatory word, and if there is a“ consecutive explanatory word ”, the corresponding treatment is applied if necessary and placed in front of the prescriptive word. If there are decision-making logical words or connected words, they are arranged in the same word order as the corresponding Chinese sentence. However, if the phrase that the logical word takes is ambiguous and cannot be determined, take the necessary measures. Place in the same position as Japanese, and in the last broad motion expression The mode of “verb—entity word” or “interposition—entity word—verb” is determined according to the difference in the concreteness of the entity word and arranged in the corresponding word order, and this cannot be determined. A translation method characterized by automatically translating a series of these operations using a computer, but adding a certain additional word to make a completed Chinese sentence if necessary in the original word order.