Japanese/the Japanese

[Rachel Adams]

Hello.

This question is from the book Let's Talk About it by Craig Drayton. There is no article before 'Japanese'. Is it a mistake or is the article optional?

'What do Japanese throw at Setsubun?'

 

[Tdol]

Optional IMO.

 

[GoesStation]

Hello.

This question is from the book Let's Talk About it by Craig Drayton. There is no article before 'Japanese'. Is it a mistake or is the article optional?

'What do Japanese throw at Setsubun?'

It needs the definite article for me.

 

[Rachel Adams]

Optional IMO.

Is it also optional before 'the French' and 'the Russians' and similar words?

 

[Tdol]

Russians is fine without an article. French less so- you could use French people without an article. I think I would have been more likely to say the Japanese when I lived in Europe.

 

[emsr2d2]

The people of certain nationalities can be described using the adjective plus an "s". It doesn't work for all.

Russians :tick:
Americans :tick:
Australians :tick:
Canadians :tick:

Italians :tick:
Belgians :tick:

Some use a variant:
Spaniards :tick:
Spanishes :cross:
Brits/Britons :tick:
Britishes :cross:


And it can't be done with some at all:
Chineses :cross:
Chinese people :tick:
the Chinese :tick:
Japaneses :cross:
Japanese people :tick:
the Japanese :tick:
Dutches :cross:
Dutch people :tick:
the Dutch :tick:

 

[Rachel Adams]

I have learnt that the article is usually used before 'Japanese' and 'French' when talking about the whole nation. Or without the article there is another option by saying French people and Japanese people. That's why I was surprised they didn't use the article.
French, Chinese, and Japanese don't work without the article. I should either say French/Chinese/Japanese people or The French/Chinese/Japanese without 'people'.

 

[emsr2d2]

I have learnt that the article is usually used before 'Japanese' and 'French' when talking about the whole nation. [STRIKE]Or[/STRIKE] Without the article, there is [STRIKE]another[/STRIKE] the option [STRIKE]by[/STRIKE] of saying "French people" and "Japanese people". That's why I was surprised they didn't use the article.

"French", "Chinese", and "Japanese" don't work without the article. I should either say "French/Chinese/Japanese people" or "The French/Chinese/Japanese" without 'people'.

Did you mean that you learnt that from this thread or that you had previously learnt it?
You were right to be surprised - it's wrong without the article in the original context.
Your final paragraph is correct as long as you are talking about the people of that nationality.

 

[Rachel Adams]

Did you mean that you learnt that from this thread or that you had previously learnt it?
You were right to be surprised - it's wrong without the article in the original context.
Your final paragraph is correct as long as you are talking about the people of that nationality.

No, previously. Yes, I was talking about the people.

 

[Rachel Adams]

Did you mean that you learnt that from this thread or that you had previously learnt it?
You were right to be surprised - it's wrong without the article in the original context.
Your final paragraph is correct as long as you are talking about the people of that nationality.

Do you also say 'The Spanish'?

 

[emsr2d2]

No, previously.

There wasn't really a need for the present perfect there. You could have said "I learnt". It would be more natural to say "I already know ...".

 

[emsr2d2]

Do you also say 'The Spanish'?

Yes.

 

[Rachel Adams]

There wasn't really a need for the present perfect there. You could have said "I learnt". It would be more natural to say "I already know ...".

It was my humble attempt to focus on the result.

 

[emsr2d2]

It was my humble attempt to focus on the result.

The thinking behind it is understandable but the learning all took place in the past. If you put it into the passive, it might become clearer (that's not something I have ever said before!)

I was taught that we say ... :tick:
I have been taught that we say ... :cross:

As you can see, the passive would clearly use the past simple, so if you change the verb to "learn" (and, obviously, use the active voice), the same applies.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

Do you also say 'The Spanish'?

I say Spaniards.

 

[Tdol]

I see nothing wrong with Japanese eat ramen.

 

[Rachel Adams]

The thinking behind it is understandable but the learning all took place in the past. If you put it into the passive, it might become clearer (that's not something I have ever said before!)

I was taught that we say ... :tick:
I have been taught that we say ... :cross:

As you can see, the passive would clearly use the past simple, so if you change the verb to "learn" (and, obviously, use the active voice), the same applies.

Are there situations in which 'I have been taught' and 'I have learnt' would still work? For example, if I was attending a language course now and told my teacher 'I have been taught' or 'I have learnt (while attending the course) that native speakers don't use the present perfect with words that refer to a completely finished period of time.' Would it be correct?

 

[GoesStation]

I see nothing wrong with Japanese eat ramen.

It doesn't work for me.

 

[Tdol]

It doesn't work for me.

We'll have to agree to differ. ;-)

 

[Rachel Adams]

The people of certain nationalities can be described using the adjective plus an "s". It doesn't work for all.

Russians :tick:
Americans :tick:
Australians :tick:
Canadians :tick:

Italians :tick:
Belgians :tick:

Some use a variant:
Spaniards :tick:
Spanishes :cross:
Brits/Britons :tick:
Britishes :cross:


And it can't be done with some at all:
Chineses :cross:
Chinese people :tick:
the Chinese :tick:
Japaneses :cross:
Japanese people :tick:
the Japanese :tick:
Dutches :cross:
Dutch people :tick:
the Dutch :tick:

'The Russian' isn't used in the same way that 'The Chinese' or 'the Japanese' are. Right? If I add 'the' to 'Russians' or Italians' it will be understood as I am speaking about specific Russian and Italian people. Am I right?