Existence verbs in the Kansai Dialect

Multi tool use
Multi tool use

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
8
down vote

favorite
1












In this part of this Wikipedia article, it states




In other areas such as Hyogo and Mie, いる /iru/ is hardly used and おる /oru/ does not have the negative usage.




What I want to know is, does this statement mean that おる is used in nearly all of the instances いる would be used in Standard Japanese? Does おる also replace the duties of ある? How does おる work in Hyogo and Mie?




verbs dialects word-usage subsidiary-verbs kansai-ben




share|improve this question
























    up vote
    8
    down vote

    favorite
    1












    In this part of this Wikipedia article, it states




    In other areas such as Hyogo and Mie, いる /iru/ is hardly used and おる /oru/ does not have the negative usage.




    What I want to know is, does this statement mean that おる is used in nearly all of the instances いる would be used in Standard Japanese? Does おる also replace the duties of ある? How does おる work in Hyogo and Mie?




    verbs dialects word-usage subsidiary-verbs kansai-ben




    share|improve this question






















      up vote
      8
      down vote

      favorite
      1









      up vote
      8
      down vote

      favorite
      1






      1





      In this part of this Wikipedia article, it states




      In other areas such as Hyogo and Mie, いる /iru/ is hardly used and おる /oru/ does not have the negative usage.




      What I want to know is, does this statement mean that おる is used in nearly all of the instances いる would be used in Standard Japanese? Does おる also replace the duties of ある? How does おる work in Hyogo and Mie?




      verbs dialects word-usage subsidiary-verbs kansai-ben




      share|improve this question












      In this part of this Wikipedia article, it states




      In other areas such as Hyogo and Mie, いる /iru/ is hardly used and おる /oru/ does not have the negative usage.




      What I want to know is, does this statement mean that おる is used in nearly all of the instances いる would be used in Standard Japanese? Does おる also replace the duties of ある? How does おる work in Hyogo and Mie?





      verbs dialects word-usage subsidiary-verbs kansai-ben





      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked Aug 29 at 5:48









      PearApple

      5412




      5412




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          8
          down vote



          accepted










          That statement basically only applies for おる as a simple existence verb. Non-humble おる is very common in Kansai. As a subsidiary verb, various forms including とる/ちょる/よる are commonly used instead of standard (～て)いる, but there are considerable regional variations even inside Kansai. See this discussion.




          • 太郎はおる。

            There is Taro. / Taro is here. (≒太郎はいる)

          • 太郎は来とる。

            [Chugoku/Shikoku] Taro has (already) arrived. (≒太郎は来ている)

            [Osaka/Kyoto] Taro is (now) coming. / Taro has (already) arrived. (≒太郎は来ている)

          • 太郎は来よる。

            [Chugoku/Shikoku] Taro is (now) coming. (≒太郎は来ている)

            [Osaka/Kyoto] (Damn,) Taro will come! (≒太郎は来やがる)



          おる does not replace ある for inanimate objects. 本がおる is incorrect. (The article says the opposite (先生がある) happens in parts of Wakayama, but I'm not familiar with that.)






          share|improve this answer






















            Your Answer







            StackExchange.ready(function()
            var channelOptions =
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "257"
            ;
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
            createEditor();
            );

            else
            createEditor();

            );

            function createEditor()
            StackExchange.prepareEditor(
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: false,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            );



            );













             

            draft saved


            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fjapanese.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f61178%2fexistence-verbs-in-the-kansai-dialect%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest

















            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes








            up vote
            8
            down vote



            accepted










            That statement basically only applies for おる as a simple existence verb. Non-humble おる is very common in Kansai. As a subsidiary verb, various forms including とる/ちょる/よる are commonly used instead of standard (～て)いる, but there are considerable regional variations even inside Kansai. See this discussion.




            • 太郎はおる。

              There is Taro. / Taro is here. (≒太郎はいる)

            • 太郎は来とる。

              [Chugoku/Shikoku] Taro has (already) arrived. (≒太郎は来ている)

              [Osaka/Kyoto] Taro is (now) coming. / Taro has (already) arrived. (≒太郎は来ている)

            • 太郎は来よる。

              [Chugoku/Shikoku] Taro is (now) coming. (≒太郎は来ている)

              [Osaka/Kyoto] (Damn,) Taro will come! (≒太郎は来やがる)



            おる does not replace ある for inanimate objects. 本がおる is incorrect. (The article says the opposite (先生がある) happens in parts of Wakayama, but I'm not familiar with that.)






            share|improve this answer


























              up vote
              8
              down vote



              accepted










              That statement basically only applies for おる as a simple existence verb. Non-humble おる is very common in Kansai. As a subsidiary verb, various forms including とる/ちょる/よる are commonly used instead of standard (～て)いる, but there are considerable regional variations even inside Kansai. See this discussion.




              • 太郎はおる。

                There is Taro. / Taro is here. (≒太郎はいる)

              • 太郎は来とる。

                [Chugoku/Shikoku] Taro has (already) arrived. (≒太郎は来ている)

                [Osaka/Kyoto] Taro is (now) coming. / Taro has (already) arrived. (≒太郎は来ている)

              • 太郎は来よる。

                [Chugoku/Shikoku] Taro is (now) coming. (≒太郎は来ている)

                [Osaka/Kyoto] (Damn,) Taro will come! (≒太郎は来やがる)



              おる does not replace ある for inanimate objects. 本がおる is incorrect. (The article says the opposite (先生がある) happens in parts of Wakayama, but I'm not familiar with that.)






              share|improve this answer
























                up vote
                8
                down vote



                accepted







                up vote
                8
                down vote



                accepted






                That statement basically only applies for おる as a simple existence verb. Non-humble おる is very common in Kansai. As a subsidiary verb, various forms including とる/ちょる/よる are commonly used instead of standard (～て)いる, but there are considerable regional variations even inside Kansai. See this discussion.




                • 太郎はおる。

                  There is Taro. / Taro is here. (≒太郎はいる)

                • 太郎は来とる。

                  [Chugoku/Shikoku] Taro has (already) arrived. (≒太郎は来ている)

                  [Osaka/Kyoto] Taro is (now) coming. / Taro has (already) arrived. (≒太郎は来ている)

                • 太郎は来よる。

                  [Chugoku/Shikoku] Taro is (now) coming. (≒太郎は来ている)

                  [Osaka/Kyoto] (Damn,) Taro will come! (≒太郎は来やがる)



                おる does not replace ある for inanimate objects. 本がおる is incorrect. (The article says the opposite (先生がある) happens in parts of Wakayama, but I'm not familiar with that.)






                share|improve this answer














                That statement basically only applies for おる as a simple existence verb. Non-humble おる is very common in Kansai. As a subsidiary verb, various forms including とる/ちょる/よる are commonly used instead of standard (～て)いる, but there are considerable regional variations even inside Kansai. See this discussion.




                • 太郎はおる。

                  There is Taro. / Taro is here. (≒太郎はいる)

                • 太郎は来とる。

                  [Chugoku/Shikoku] Taro has (already) arrived. (≒太郎は来ている)

                  [Osaka/Kyoto] Taro is (now) coming. / Taro has (already) arrived. (≒太郎は来ている)

                • 太郎は来よる。

                  [Chugoku/Shikoku] Taro is (now) coming. (≒太郎は来ている)

                  [Osaka/Kyoto] (Damn,) Taro will come! (≒太郎は来やがる)



                おる does not replace ある for inanimate objects. 本がおる is incorrect. (The article says the opposite (先生がある) happens in parts of Wakayama, but I'm not familiar with that.)







                share|improve this answer














                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer








                edited Aug 29 at 8:16

























                answered Aug 29 at 6:31









                naruto

                138k8126245




                138k8126245



























                     

                    draft saved


                    draft discarded















































                     


                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function ()
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fjapanese.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f61178%2fexistence-verbs-in-the-kansai-dialect%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                    );

                    Post as a guest
































































                    Mk6t7dF4
                    -
                    L v0iiaLU,FlVugPAi4Dx M0y22Wg0,4Ip rt6P lydx0CW5wllY tsHY I,8C4Lz5ULnf5IMdukG5H3q6XKWl,E2P XHVNS68KhcVqQk5lJ93

                    這個網誌中的熱門文章

                    How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

                    圖片
                    Clash Royale CLAN TAG #URR8PPP up vote 2 down vote favorite My aim is to smooth the terrain in a video game. Therefore I contrived an algorithm that makes use of Bézier curves of different orders. But this algorithm is defined in a two dimensional space for now. To shift it into the third dimension I need to somehow combine the Bézier curves. Given two curves in each two dimensions, how can I combine them to build a surface? I thought about something like a curve of a curve. Or maybe I could multiply them somehow. How can I combine them to cause the wanted behavior? Is there a common approach? In the image you can see the input, on the left, and the output, on the right, of the algorithm that works in a two dimensional space. For the real application there is a three dimensional input. The algorithm relays only on the adjacent tiles. Given these it will define the control points of the mentioned Bézier cur...
                    閱讀完整內容

                    Propositional logic and tautologies

                    圖片
                    Clash Royale CLAN TAG #URR8PPP up vote 0 down vote favorite Taken from P. Suppes "Introduction to logic" pp16 Starting from the sentence "If $P$ tautologically implies $Q$, then.." Question: Is it true that, at least within propositional logic, we are able to prove only tautologies or do I mis-understand something? If yes, is propositional logic special in some way? Is the notion of tautology meaningful only in propositional logic? logic propositional-calculus share | cite | improve this question edited Nov 29 '17 at 18:53 Mauro ALLEGRANZA 60.8k 4 46 105 asked Nov 29 '17 at 16:32 Alvin Lepik 2,448 9 20 add a comment  |  up vote 0 down vote favorite Taken from P. Suppes "Introduction to logic" pp16 Starting from the sentence "If $P$ tautologically implies $Q$, then.." Question: Is it true that, at least within propositional logic, we are able to prove only tautologi...
                    閱讀完整內容

                    Distribution of Stopped Wiener Process with Stochastic Volatility

                    圖片
                    Clash Royale CLAN TAG #URR8PPP up vote 0 down vote favorite Let $(W_s)_s geq 0$ be a Wiener process and $tau$ be a random variable with an exponential distribution with parameter $lambda$. Suppose that $W$ and $tau$ are independent. In this question, we see that the distribution of the stopped Wiener process $W_tau$ corresponds to a Laplace distribution with scale parameter $fracsigmasqrt2lambda$ where $sigma$ is the instantaneous variance of the Wiener process. Suppose now, that the variance $sigma^2$ also follows a stochastic process such that we have: $$dS = sigma SdW_s \ dsigma^2 = alphasigma^2dt + xisigma^2dW_sigma$$ where $alpha$ and $xi$ are independent of $S$ and $dW_s$ and $dW_sigma$ are independent Wiener processes. My aim is to derive the distribution of $log S_tau$. First, if $barV_T$ denotes the mean variance over some time interval $[0,T]$ defined by $$barV_T = frac1T intlimits_0^Tsigma^2(t)dt,$$ it is easy to show (Lemma of Îto) that $$...
                    閱讀完整內容