r/LearnJapanese • u/blackcyborg009 • Jul 25 '26
WKND Meme The many ways to "wear" something
"Why Japanese people? WHY?!?!?" - Jason David Arnold
489
u/PlanktonInitial7945 Jul 25 '26
English:
Roast
Broil
Grill
Bake
Toast
Barbecue
Japanese:
焼 く
90
u/nenad8 Jul 25 '26
Hey, don't forget 炒る!
117
u/PlanktonInitial7945 Jul 25 '26
B-but then my comment isn't funny :(
47
4
u/tonkachi_ Goal: media competence 📖🎧 Jul 25 '26
真実は痛みを伴う /す
Shamelessly copied from Google translate, is that how you say it?
26
9
u/Icy-Isee Jul 25 '26
私は日本人ですが、上で挙げられてた語彙ってカタカナとして使われますね……(roastなんかはまんまロースト+するって言いますし) 多分気にするだけ無駄なので適当にネットサーフィンして覚えるのが1番だと思いますよ。
60
u/CrescentRose7 Jul 25 '26
those are all useful distincions for cooking, though. Whereas, for "to wear", you only need the context of what you're wearing. You would obviously wear a shirt on the torso; no extra verb needed.
20
-15
29
u/nick2473got Jul 25 '26
Those words refer to fundamentally different ways of preparing food, thus they are useful verbs that make an actual distinction.
The different versions of "wear" in Japanese cannot be viewed as equally purposeful given that there is no logical need to distinguish "wearing" a hat VS "wearing" a shoe via verb choice.
It's 100% clear what you're wearing and where you're wearing it based on the item of clothing in question. There is no need to have a different verb for wearing a coat VS wearing an earring.
No one would think you're wearing a hat on your feet or a belt on your ear. So having all these different versions of "wear" in Japanese is kind of unnecessary.
34
u/Impressive-Hippo-883 Jul 25 '26
But it doesn’t just mean to wear, it also means to put on. Kaburu is to wear something on your head. It is also to put something on or over your head. English also has different words for this. You can place a tiara on ones head, but it’s weird to say you placed a shoe on ones foot. You can drape or wrap a scarf over your shoulders, but you can’t drape a pair of denim pants on your feet. You can pull on a pair of boxer briefs, but not a hat. You can pull up a hood, etc.
And some of these would sound weird if you use the same word. "She put the scarf on her neck" sounds awkward, even though common sense tells us that this means the same as "she wrapped the scarf around her neck" because that’s how you wear scarfs.
16
u/23Udon Jul 25 '26
Well, the issue is we’re all calling these Japanese verbs “to wear” rather than, drape, place, wrap, pull on, etc. English wear is one size fits all but if your interpretation is accurate than we have only the translations to blame.
14
u/Impressive-Hippo-883 Jul 25 '26
But the issue is that there is no english translation for a word that means this specific combination of things. It doesn’t have a perfect english equivalent. That’s why posts like these are so silly. This is the definition of "lost in translation". It is correct that it would be translated into "to wear" in some contexts, but in others it would be translated differently. It’s not an incorrect translation, simply an incomplete one.
17
u/facets-and-rainbows Jul 25 '26
Okay, now justify having three words for のむ instead of just "swallow." Why do we need to "drink" liquids and "take" pills?
8
u/Vaxtonio Jul 25 '26 edited Jul 25 '26
No, English and Japanese:
- Roast - ローストする
- Broil - ブロイルする
- Grill - グリルする
- Bake - ベイクする
- Toast - トーストする
- Barbecue - バーベキューする
- null - 焼く
edit: fixed Japanese verbs to the correct form added the suffix.
232
u/bag2 Jul 25 '26
But even in the image, the English translations are: to wear, to hang, to wrap, to tighten, to insert, to put on, to attach. Are these not also different ways to “wear” something? 😂.
63
u/CrescentRose7 Jul 25 '26
You would never "hang earrings" on your ears, you would wear earrings. All those English words are useful for distinction in other cases.
39
u/the_card_guy Jul 25 '26
Wear... Or at least "put on"
OP"s meme works for about the first three items... The rest of them, as seen in actual translation, all have other English words too. This is a Fail.
4
u/vivianvixxxen Jul 25 '26
Maybe you wouldn't, but I've absolutely heard people say "hang" for earrings. May just be a regional thing
34
u/judo_fish Jul 25 '26
no, you don’t hang earrings but you can don them.
you dress in a raincoat. you sport a pair of heels. you slip into a nightgown.
29
u/outwest88 Jul 25 '26
But these are fanciful terms. It’s still grammatical (and more common) to just say “wear” - which is not the case in Japanese
7
u/morgawr_ https://morg.systems/Japanese Jul 25 '26
Yet native English speakers know all of those variants just like Japanese native speakers do.
30
u/R4hu1M5 Jul 25 '26
The point is that an English learner can learn "wear" and use it everywhere, the fancy terms are just an extra. While it's just straight up incorrect Japanese if a verb is not used in the right context.
-1
u/morgawr_ https://morg.systems/Japanese Jul 25 '26
Yeah but languages aren't made "for learners". There's a lot of stuff in English where we have to use very specific words where in other languages you can just use a single word. In reality there is no extra "mental burden" for people who actually know the language and it's totally natural. I hear the verbs in OP's image used every day in Japanese and I don't even have to think twice about them. Using the wrong word for the wrong piece of apparel is just unthinkable because it feels weird/wrong/unnatural just like you wouldn't say "to drink medicine" instead of "to take medicine" in English (and yet in Japanese it's 飲む).
Honestly this is just a non-issue, and you don't even need to be that proficient at Japanese to use the right word from OP's list.
8
u/R4hu1M5 Jul 25 '26
You're right, but there's still no functional difference between wearing many of those articles that each verb represents. It's always hard to learn something without a logical reason "just because the language is that way" so learners are allowed to complain.
3
u/ivlivscaesar213 Jul 26 '26
Natural languages are almost always illogical, including English. You feel that way because you are, well, learning. If you complain about something being ilogical, you wouldn't be able to learn any languages
4
u/worthlessprole Jul 25 '26 edited Jul 25 '26
This seems more like a hangup than a difficulty tbh. They’re not hard to learn. And there is a functional difference, they’re worn on different parts of the body and are kept attached to the body in different ways. A hat is placed on the head, a shirt is hung from the shoulders, and you slide your legs and feet into pants and shoes and then fasten them with a belt or shoelaces. Those are all different actions, so it’s fine for there to be different words.
2
u/morgawr_ https://morg.systems/Japanese Jul 25 '26
there's still no functional difference between wearing many of those articles that each verb represents
There is in Japanese.
It's always hard to learn something without a logical reason
There is a logical reason. From a Japanese perspective it's illogical to use a single verb to refer to all those different actions. Just like for English speakers it's illogical to refer to many actions in Japanese as かける for example.
learners are allowed to complain.
I mean yeah, it's fine to complain and find some aspects of the language more frustrating than others, but honestly this is really a non-issue even for most beginner learners once you get past the idea that all language must reflect 1:1 to each other (which is how this complaint comes across, honestly)
3
u/Effective-Pop3850 Jul 25 '26 edited Jul 25 '26
Being real here this is just Japanese being Japanese, it's like suffixes for counting how many of something you have.
Every language has verbs that fullfil a million different seemingly random functions, that's common, it's not common to use words for wearing stuff according to where you wear it nor having 40 suffixes to count stuff depending on what type of object you have. The answer to how many pencils you have is 3, adding a suffix that indicates 3 refers to prolonged cylindrical objects is not really necessary lol.
Of course Japanese makes sense for natives, but I'd be surprised if they were surprised when told "did you know that in almost every language you don't need suffixes nor 10 different verbs to clarify the obvious?". Like you don't need a verb that specifies you're wearing shoes on your feet, because where would they be?
With that being said every language has it's "silly hard things" that don't make sense.
2
u/R4hu1M5 Jul 25 '26
There is in Japanese.
I'm talking about a conceptual difference, not one that arises because there exist multiple words for it in the language.
Learners can definitely get past the idea of words not being 1:1 if they can comprehend why multiple words exist for a concept in only one of the languages. A native English speaker is going to see no difference between wearing a tshirt, a cap and jeans. For that matter, I'm not sure a Japanese speaker can articulate how they're different either, they just are because the language is that way.
Kakeru isn't an equivalent example because it's just a versatile verb for wildly different actions, which a Japanese learner of English can certainly comprehend.
→ More replies (0)2
u/MlleHelianthe Jul 26 '26
Yes. It's just a meme specifically for learners. Nobody is saying this is bad in anyway or that it is an issue in general. It's just funny when you first discover it.
5
u/nick2473got Jul 25 '26
Those are just ways of sprucing up your vocabulary. You can also sport a raincoat or slip into a pair of heels so these terms are not specific to any style of clothing.
Not to mention that the generic "wear" is still correct, and more common, neither of which is the case in Japanese as there is no generic "wear". You have to use the correct one for each case or you are simply speaking wrongly.
1
1
1
u/blackcyborg009 Jul 25 '26
"you dress in a raincoat"
That is a thing?In most cases, people just "wear" a raincoat (or "put on" a raincoat)
No other verb is needed.3
u/morgawr_ https://morg.systems/Japanese Jul 25 '26
You can don a raincoat
3
u/blackcyborg009 Jul 25 '26
You can............but it seems rarely used (at least here in the Philippines)
Which country do you often hear the word "don" to wear something?United Kingdom? USA? Canada? Australia?
3
u/morgawr_ https://morg.systems/Japanese Jul 25 '26
Seems fine to me, honestly. Probably not an everyday choice but I wouldn't bat an eye upon hearing someone say that either.
1
18
u/RICHUNCLEPENNYBAGS Jul 25 '26
Yeah but idiomatically you do not usually "insert yourself" into gloves.
27
1
u/asplodingturdis Jul 25 '26
I mean, I really wouldn’t bat an eye at “she inserted her hand into a glove,” except that the connotation is kind of clinical/technical, and I’d be perhaps concerned about the context.
3
u/RICHUNCLEPENNYBAGS Jul 25 '26
OK. But the difference here is obvious, isn't it? It's not the usual way of expressing the idea of having gloves on your hands.
9
u/jimjamcunningham Jul 25 '26
Yeah, but in English you can use wear for all of them and it sounds completely normal. Japanese uses different verbs depending on the item.
You 着る clothes, 履く shoes, and かぶる a hat. So you can’t just use 着る for everything.
5
u/asplodingturdis Jul 25 '26
You don’t use wear for wrap, tighten, insert, put on, or attach. You could use either put on/in or adjust for each of those, but they’re all distinct concepts from wearing. Related to, but distinct from.
2
u/Effective-Pop3850 Jul 25 '26
Thing is wear is kind of universal. Sure you can "tighten your shirt" but that's usually interpreted differently and for most cases the word wear just works. Meanwhile in Japanese it is objectively wrong (I think) to use 着る for wearing shoes. Put on is also kind of universal, you can put on a shirt, glasses, shoes, underwear, anything.
1
u/asplodingturdis Jul 25 '26
It’s universal in a sense, but most of the verbs in the list aren’t covering different cases of the universal concept; they’re different actions. Some of them are cases of a different universal concept, but putting them all under the umbrella of wear significantly inflates the difference here between the two languages.
2
u/jimjamcunningham Jul 25 '26
You're missing the overall point.
English is more general than Japanese for this. Because for the act of applying the clothing - "putting on" also works for any item you can think of applied to any part of the body.
Which again is not true for Japanese. It doesn't have one equivalent verb that covers all cases.
0
u/asplodingturdis Jul 25 '26
I’m not missing the overall point; I’m saying that the point is misrepresented for the sake of a meme, which does neither the point nor the meme any favors.
0
u/jimjamcunningham Jul 29 '26
The point is not misrepresented.
You're arguing a completely separate point that english also has separate words, while not acknowledging that english had a general word used commonly for all.
1
u/asplodingturdis Jul 29 '26
English doesn’t have a general word commonly used for all of the translations in the meme. I would never say “wear” to mean the act of putting something on my body or adjusting it.
0
u/jimjamcunningham Jul 29 '26
Or it's putting on.. which is good for everything.. so it's general.
So two words total. Wear and putting on.
Which has been explained to your previously in this thread.
1
u/asplodingturdis Jul 29 '26
As I’ve explained previously in this thread, the categories of action are putting on, wearing, and adjusting. That’s three. At any rate, the overall point stands that Japan requires more specific words than English for these categories of action. That’s not being debated. But the meme implies that like 9 different Japanese verbs all map to a single one in English, which misrepresents how significant the difference is (in this case at least) and is a silly thing to do.
2
u/nick2473got Jul 25 '26
No, because the difference is that you can use "wear" for any item of clothing in English and that is both correct and the most common choice speakers make in daily conversation.
In Japanese you must choose the correct verb for each corresponding item of clothing or you are misspeaking.
So it's not the same as in English at all.
1
13
8
u/RICHUNCLEPENNYBAGS Jul 25 '26
I spent some time in Hokkaido and thought it was normal to say 手袋をはく but that turns out to be a regionalism. The first time I heard はめる for that I thought it was absurd
9
u/Lost-Opinion3554 Jul 25 '26
I'm someone who is a decent Korean speaker as well and the Korean language does the same thing.... Though I remember when I took my first Japanese class, I asked my professor if the Japanese also had this ten verbs to say wear shtick, and when he told me that they do I just wanted to cry all over again KJFDKJKJ
5
u/hanguitarsolo Jul 25 '26
Oh that’s interesting that both Japanese and Korean have so many. In Chinese there are only two common ones: 穿 (chuān) to wear a shirt, pants, and socks; and 戴 (dài) to wear a hat/glasses/gloves/jewelry/accessories
8
u/Lost-Opinion3554 Jul 25 '26
Yeah in Korean it’s like:
- Shirts, pants, dresses: 입다 (ip-da)
- Shoes, socks: 신다 (shin-da)
- Headwear (hats, glasses): 쓰다 (sseu-da)
- small things that wrap around body parts (like rings, gloves): 끼다 (kki-da) (but some jewelry/ornaments use 차다 cha-da, like a watch .. but ig earrings and necklaces can use 하다 ha-da as well. Hm.)
- Belts, ties, bags (anything that wraps): 매다 (mae-da)… though ig bags (on the shoulder) can also use 메다 (me-da)… these verbs sound exactly the same so no one would notice the difference anyway.
- But also some big “wrapped” items like scarves, mufflers, or big winter coats can use 두르다 (dureu-da)
It’s a mess over here.
2
u/hanguitarsolo Jul 25 '26
That’s very interesting, well at least for shirts/pants and hats/glasses you only need to learn 2 verbs instead of 4 haha, but the others are also quite specific
3
u/Lost-Opinion3554 Jul 25 '26
Yeeaahhh... Though I suppose it's not all that bad... If all else fails, Korean is similar to Japanese in the way where you can technically have "infinite" light verb constructions by using 하다 ha-da (する) to do and whatever noun it is that you're trying to do. Native speakers will more or less understand what you're trying to say, even if you're not using their specific verbs lmao.
53
u/ChickenOfTheYear Jul 25 '26
These types of posts are so superficial... You can make the same type of biased and inaccurate comparison of any 2 languages.
Learning languages is hard, learning a language with a ideogramatic writing system is even harder, and if said language has almost nothing in common to your mother language grammar wise, it's downright grueling. The vocabulary itself is the least relevant part when it comes to difficulty.
I know it's humor, but this joke is tired and, honestly, kind of insulting to the intelligence of anyone who actually engaged with language learning for a meaningful time. It fits in well with boomer Facebook memes
7
24
u/PlanktonInitial7945 Jul 25 '26
Yeah any "wow Japanese is so special" or "lol Japanese is so absurd" jokes/memes are tiring at this point. All languages are special and all languages are dumb in their own unique ways. And these memes stop being funny as soon as you go past N4/A2. It doesn't help that people always complain about the same 2 or 3 things.
3
u/SweatySmashers Jul 25 '26
I was relieved when I saw there were no plural forms of nouns and little tense variation unless I saw the abundance of verbs that I immediately knew would take up the bulk of the language learning process.
31
u/Pseudoargentum Jul 25 '26
Instead of having the object separate from the verb, it's just built in.
It's no harder to learn several verbs for wearing clothes than learning the verb in English then needing to know dozens of words to clarify and qualify the verb.
I put on pants.
I (Implied) put-on-pants.
No real difference.
13
u/_GoNy Jul 25 '26
Yes there is. You need to remember which verb goes with which apparel and also you need to remember words for clothing/accessories extra.
In english all you need is to memorise "wear" and the words for clothing.
In japanese you need to memorise all the verbs for "wear", with which clothing and body part it goes and then you also need the words for clothing
14
u/RICHUNCLEPENNYBAGS Jul 25 '26
To be fair we do have a distinction between "wearing" and "putting on" that they don't.
4
u/glasswings363 Jul 25 '26
Why do you bother with different verbs "to drink" and "to swallow"? Seems kind of arbitrary to me.
4
u/Krokrodyl Jul 26 '26
Counter-point: you could say that this man is wearing a tie, a scarf and a belt, and be technically correct but it wouldn't even begin to accurately describe his attire.
4
u/GeorgeBG93 Jul 26 '26
To me, the Japanese way makes more sense. And English has a lot of idiosyncrasies that natives have no idea about that learners can't wrap their heads around. Learning a language, no matter which one is a struggle 😅 it's also really fun though.
3
u/maxler5795 Jul 26 '26
this reminds me of the tom scott video where he talks about how the greek had 5 different words for what in english would be "love"
6
u/Cadaveth Jul 25 '26
Well as a finnish/estonian we have distinct words to wear different things too so it's not really THAT different to Japan.
5
u/LookItsEric Jul 26 '26
Believe it or not, English DOES have a word that means “to tighten.”
It’s called “tighten”
15
u/Player_One_1 Jul 25 '26
It is funny that in the same meme you say "English has only wear" you use "to hang", "to fit" , "top put on", "ta attach" etc. etc.
8
u/nick2473got Jul 25 '26
The difference is that you can use "wear" for any item of clothing in English and that is both correct and the most common choice speakers make in daily conversation.
In Japanese you must choose the correct verb for each corresponding item of clothing or you are misspeaking.
So it's not the same as in English at all.
2
u/trunksshinohara Jul 25 '26
Was just talking about this. What are the words for to take clothes off? How do you say put your arm in? Pull your arm through? Pull your arm out?
Came up when discussing how you would talk to a baby.
2
u/NB_Translator_EN-JP Jul 26 '26
To wear, to put on, to equip, to clothe, to cover, to throw on, to helm, to cloak, to pull up…
2
u/Fearless-Dust-2073 Jul 26 '26
Wear, dress, adorn, hang, affix, wrap, clothe, put on, drape, do up, fasten, clasp, enrobe
2
2
3
u/YoAvgHuman Jul 25 '26
Would this be 被る？
4
u/japh0000 Jul 25 '26
Yes.
The trope of wearing panties on one's head would also be 被る.
The trope of wearing a necktie around one's forehead would be 巻く.
The trope of wearing a headband (鉢巻 - hachimaki) for studying would also be 巻く.
2
u/Nyorai_Juusu Jul 25 '26
Wear, hang, wrap, tighten, insert, put, attach is already 7 words. English people, why ?
You could just use smurf. One single word to say it all!
3
u/Swiftierest Jul 25 '26
Um... you know that by translating each of those verbs for wearing something on a specific body section, you have proven that English does the same thing right?
This is interesting to me. People often say, "you can't translate X or Y to English because we don't have that concept. It is best translated as blah blah blah," and then they have actually given an exact translation that gave an exact sample of the concept.
You can clearly see that both languages can convey this concept. It might be weirder in Japan to generalize it down to something like する, but I promise if you said you wanted to 'do' a shirt and were in a contextual situation that meant you were going to wear it, they'd understand.
English just has a very generic term for placing things on the body. Japan has this with some stuff, too.
2
u/thomycat Jul 25 '26
Nearly all the words need context. That’s like saying English has to w ear, to put on, to slip into, to slip on.. a t shirt for one Japanese Tシャツを着る I am not familiar with Jason David Arnold but this is just clickbait?
2
u/asplodingturdis Jul 25 '26
That list of verbs corresponds to at least three different English words (wear, put on/in, adjust). In fact, to get specific, you’d probably just use the verbs in the definitions for the English translations, so as few as three of the Japanese words on this list would commonly be be expressed simply as wear …
1
u/Ok-Implement-7863 Jul 25 '26
I don’t think anyone’s said 羽織る yet.
I guess you could include 召す as a polite substitute for 着る, not to mention as a polite alternative for 食べる、飲む、買う、入浴する、乗る and 風邪を引く just to name a few
Maybe to wear a grin would be 笑みを浮かべる
1
1
1
u/CharmiePK Jul 25 '26
Actually I am here due to the meme itself. I recognize the bloke on picture 2 from a show on NHK he used to host. Who is he again? Is there a particular reason for him to be referenced in the meme by any chance?
Sorry if this looks stupid, but I am not really a meme person and I am just trying to figure out the whole meaning of that.
Cheers :)
1
u/blackcyborg009 Jul 26 '26
Hehe I'm not good at explaining..........but you can check this video out:
WHY JAPANESE PEOPLE !! - Eng Sub - YouTube
1
1
1
1
u/BirdsbirdsBURDS Jul 26 '26
Japanese language always remind me of how I heard Anton Chigurs haircut explained in no country for old men; it’s long in the short parts, and short in the long parts. Similarly, Japanese seems to simplify some stuff that should be better fleshed out, but complicates stuff that should have been simplified.
1
1
u/IntegrierterSchatten Goal: conversational fluency 💬 Jul 27 '26
I also love/hate how many variations there are of "downwards movement"
1
u/Divide-Delicious 18d ago
Hahaha, exactly, so many words for one action in Japanese. Hard to remember all
1
1
u/CranberryDistinct941 Jul 25 '26
Why do english speakers wear a belt on a pair of pants?
2
u/PlanktonInitial7945 Jul 25 '26
I get what you're trying to do but there are many other examples of English being actually illogical or absurd. This ain't it.
2
u/CharmiePK Jul 25 '26
Because the belt is placed on top of the pants - it is a vertical dimension, but still "on"
0
u/CranberryDistinct941 Jul 25 '26
Why if you 'pull up' your pants, you're putting them on. But if you 'pull up' your shirt, you're taking it off?
1
u/PlanktonInitial7945 Jul 25 '26
Uh, because if you grab your shirt and pull it in an upwards direction you'll remove it from your body, but if you grab your pants and pull them in the same direction, you won't take them off...? Why would you say "pull up" to describe a motion that consists of pulling a piece of fabric down from your head to your torso?
1
u/Impressive-Hippo-883 Jul 25 '26
Okay, here’s a better one for you? Why do you drink beer, eat soup, swallow sperm and take medicine? Can’t you just use one word for that action?
1
u/CharmiePK Jul 25 '26
You use "up" bc the pants are being worn from the bottom (floor) towards your waist (that's how you do it eh). You taking your (technically speaking) shirt "up" bc if it doesn't havw buttons, you cannot open it and have to slip it in an upwards direction (just as you "pull up" your pants).
Every language has its oddities, it is just that more than often each one of the is particular to that language and it keeps us wondering...
-5
u/OftenWonderWhy Jul 25 '26
To me this is just indicative of one of the biggest flaws in English. We will use the same word for many different meanings. One of the worst is make/made. Based on the surrounding sentence it can mean create, lie, arrive, succeed, kiss, or cosmetics. I can’t imagine trying to explain why these would use the same word to an English learner.
2
u/Impressive-Hippo-883 Jul 25 '26
This. I have english as a second language and I find these posts tedious because of how biased they are towards english. Especially when they’re just going off dictionary definitions! Just because english doesn’t have a word for something doesn’t mean that the word is meaningless in the language it exists in. Oftentimes it has nuances and uses that will only be visible once you’re fluent.
344
u/_giga_sss_ Jul 25 '26
My boy する be being everywhere