Please help me to read this English sentence:

[masaegu]

Originally Posted by girigiri

「さとり」。富士山の下に住んでいている｢おもいさん 」のような人。　（もしかして、「おもい様的な人」)� �????????????????????

That is 100% gibberish. No part of it makes any sense. How can you do that in what is so clearly supposed to an educational thread?

Don't play like that with our beautiful langauge, will ya?　

デタラメにも限度っちゅうもんがあるよ。日本語ナメた らいかんよ。

[girigiri]

Originally Posted by ゆりさん

In that case, my post should start like this:
"Have you been to the Café Du Monde Coffee Stand?
I’ve had the pleasure of going to the original Café Du Monde Coffee Stand (in the New Orleans French Market) in the US and to the Café Du Monde in Ikebukuro, Tokyo. Their beignets, three large ones for a serving in the US; six small ones in Japan, are delicious."

かんぺきです。　結構よく。

Originally Posted by masaegu

That is 100% gibberish. No part of it makes any sense. How can you do that in what is so clearly supposed to an educational thread?

Don't play like that with our beautiful langauge, will ya?　

デタラメにも限度っちゅうもんがあるよ。日本語ナメた らいかんよ。

下手な日本語のでごめんなさい。　

"Gibberish" is what most of my attempts at complex sentences tend to become.

「さとり」。富士山の下に住んでいている｢おもいさん 」のような人。　（もしかして、「おもい様的な人」)

however, is about 87% gibberish at most - ゆりさん did manage to decipher part of it at least.

Someone like おもいさん, a さとり, who lives at the base of 富士山. (I had thought さとり would have been well known mythological characters - wrong again...sigh). A being with the ability to speak aloud the private thoughts of someone else (among other attributes.)

[YuriTokoro]

Hi, girigiri.

Originally Posted by girigiri

Someone like おもいさん, a さとり, who lives at the base of 富士山. (I had thought さとり would have been well known mythological characters - wrong again...sigh). A being with the ability to speak aloud the private thoughts of someone else (among other attributes.)

Now, I see what you meant.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satori_(folklore)
I didn’t think you know about Yohkai.
Yōkai - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
OK. You asked if I am a psionic monster. My answer is “Maybe”.

[girigiri]

ゆりさんへ

The first reason would be that three large beignets are too much for a Japanese woman. The second would be that they hate getting their hands greasy. The third reason would be that they hate the flying powdered sugar.
So, we eat small beignets in one bite with a fork.
I prefer small beignets, which do you prefer?

With apologies, I was focused on the opening paragraph, and failed to properly address the later sections.

あっ。 なるほど。Beignetsが女性だけに供給されている。

Working on the middle section.
The first reason would be ... would だろう　→　might かも
too much for a Japanese woman. The second would be that they → Pronouns need to match their nouns for number. woman, she: women, they.

For local English, "hate" seems too strong a word to be used here.
I have written a passage in terms that I would use (with a different feel), and with what seems to be a missing piece of information added ...
You might like to use that as a start point, but the main body of your address is written in a chatty style, so you will need to make appropriate adjustments to maintain the tenor of your original.

The larger (US) beignet is not eaten with the aid of cutlery. Its size can be intimidating and it seems messy. Flying powdered sugar and greasy fingers no more appeal to the Japanese sense of table etiquette than does the slurping of drinks to that of the westerner. More to my liking, the smaller beignet is picked up with a fork. Which do you prefer?

ちなみに: If I may be permitted questions of my own -
Beignetsが女性だけに供給されている。
1. How is "beignetｓ" written in Japanese? ベイグネット？
2. My sentence looks to be incorrect. What is the proper word order there、and should I have used different words? もしかして、女の人に"Beignets"がだけ供給されている。(� ��している）？

へっ？　渡しているのは、なぜ「わたす」の漢字が� ��になったか？

[YuriTokoro]

Originally Posted by girigiri

ゆりさんへ

Hi, girigiri.
Sorry, but I will write my answer later.
I need a lot of time to write English. Very sorry!

[YuriTokoro]

Hi.
Could you correct my English?


"A Pet Cemetery"

I got a letter from a pet cemetery company today. It’s the anniversary of one of my cats’ death. They say to me to pay 10,000 yen to a memorial service.
When the cat died, I paid them 16,000 yen to them to cremate it. (Actually, the cats are my mother’s, not mine, but I have to pay for them.) After that, the company gives notice me to pay to have a service every year.
If I lived in country side and I had enough land to bury them, I would have a grave in a yard, but here in Kawasaki, people don’t have such space, so we call a pet cemetery company when our pets die.
I used the company twice, so I have to pay 20,000 yen every year. Isn’t it too expensive when I still have a cat of my mother? So, of course the cat named Chihsuke is very cute.
How’s in your town?

Thank you!

[Koir]

Originally Posted by YuriTokoro

Hi.
Could you correct my English?


"A Pet Cemetery"

I got a letter from a pet cemetery company today. It’s been another year since the passing of one of my cats, so I have to pay 10,000 yen for the memorial service.
When the cat died, I paid them 16,000 yen to them to cremate it. (Actually, the cats are my mother’s, but I have to pay for them.) After that, the company gives yearly notices for the memorial service.
If I lived in the countryside, I would have enough land to use some of it as a pet cemetary. But here in Kawasaki space is at a premium, so we call a pet cemetery company when our pets pass away.
I used the company twice, so I have to pay 20,000 yen every year. Isn’t it too expensive when I still have one of my mother's cats? The cat's name is Chihsuke, and it is very cute.
How does this work in your town/city?

Thank you!

I suppose my first question would be "What could they do if you don't pay? Would they dig up the remains and leave at your front door in the middle of the night?" But that is from the perspective of a person who is living in a country that has plenty of open space, so it's probably the wrong thought.

As for the composition of the post, there's quite a lot of information that only needs some rearranging and editing to read naturally and communicate the many concepts you want the reader to understand. It will come with time and practice, and I'm sure you will be successful.

Keep writing and gaining experience, Yuri. It will be a rewarded effort!

[YuriTokoro]

Originally Posted by Koir

I suppose my first question would be "What could they do if you don't pay? Would they dig up the remains and leave at your front door in the middle of the night?" But that is from the perspective of a person who is living in a country that has plenty of open space, so it's probably the wrong thought.

Hi, Koir. Thanks as always.
If I don’t pay, they wouldn’t do anything. They would not give a ceremony or pray for the cats. I’m thinking to quit paying.

As for the composition of the post, there's quite a lot of information that only needs some rearranging and editing to read naturally and communicate the many concepts you want the reader to understand. It will come with time and practice, and I'm sure you will be successful.

Keep writing and gaining experience, Yuri. It will be a rewarded effort!

Thanks a lot, Koir.
Thank you for your continued help.

[OzukakiBurasuki]

Originally Posted by YuriTokoro

Hi.
Could you correct my English?


"A Pet Cemetery"

I got a letter from a pet cemetery company today. It’s the anniversary of one of my cats’ death. They say to me to pay 10,000 yen to a memorial service.
When the cat died, I paid them 16,000 yen to them to cremate it. (Actually, the cats are my mother’s, not mine, but I have to pay for them.) After that, the company gives notice me to pay to have a service every year.
If I lived in country side and I had enough land to bury them, I would have a grave in a yard, but here in Kawasaki, people don’t have such space, so we call a pet cemetery company when our pets die.
I used the company twice, so I have to pay 20,000 yen every year. Isn’t it too expensive when I still have a cat of my mother? So, of course the cat named Chihsuke is very cute.
How’s in your town?

Thank you!

"cats’ death." - It should probably be "cat's death" because even though you mean one of your cats, the death is happening to one cat.

"to them to cremate it." - It would be more natural to just say "to cremate it." and leave "to them" out the second time because you already told us before "16,000 yen" that you were paying them.

"the company gives notice me" - Most english-speakers would probably of used past tense in this. It would most likely be worded as "the company gave notice to me" instead.

"If I lived in country side" - It would be countryside, not country side. Also, "the" would be needed before "countryside" to not confuse readers.

"I would have a grave in a yard" - It would be better to exchange "have" with "need" since readers would understand if you would need a grave yet if you just say they "would have" it doesn't explain your situation.

"but here in Kawasaki, people... " - It would probably be helpful if you dropped the "but" and started a new sentence with "Here in Kawasaki" because you have a large run-on sentence already with many commas. It might be fine the way it is, but it would be better to start a new sentence so it wouldn't confuse readers.

"when I still have a cat of my mother" - It would most likely be more useful if you change this sentence to "when I still have my mom's cat" since many English-speakers don't use "of" much. They prefer to use apostrophes to show possession. (i.e. mom's cat)

"So, of course the cat named Chihsuke is very cute." - Many American readers would probably not expect this and would write the same thing, but "So, of course" would need another comma after since you are using that "of course" as an extra, unneeded part of the sentence.

Besides that, nice translation.

[girigiri]

With some exceptions, I substantially agree with OzukakiBurasuki.

If I lived in country side and I had enough land to bury them, I would have a grave in a yard,

This being subjunctive, the wording is reasonably acceptable. Unless one prefers the academic "Were I to live in the country-side, with land enough to bury them in, they would have a grave in the (back) yard." that is. Note: it is the cats' graves, "I would have a grave" is unexpected - though understood. "I would give them graves" would pass without comment.

"When the cat died, I paid them 16,000 yen to them to cremate it." - "When the cat died, I paid 16 000 yen for them to cremate it." A variety of variants would be acceptable.

"but here in Kawasaki, people... " - I agree with the analysis for this sentence, but not with the proffered solution. "But" shouldn't be used to begin a sentence***, but "however" doesn't have that same restriction. " . However, here in Kawasaki" would preserve the contrastive structure.

still have a cat of my mother? - There were once three cats. "still have one of my mother's cats" - "mom" is American (and I believe, Canadian) English - it won't pass in British English or Australian without causing a raised eyebrow. "Mother" is perhaps formal, but it has international usage.

"So, of course the cat named Chihsuke is very cute." - "So, of course" declares the foregoing statement to be the reason for the stated following condition. Effectively, the statement is then, "the cat named Chihsuke is very cute because I still have her."

For ordinary purposes, the passage passes muster in its original form. Only careful reading will show any deficiencies.


*** Whoever made that rule ignored at least 400 years of normal usage in doing so. However, we are now stuck with the said ridiculous rule for written passages.