Will expression retain the same definition if particle is changed?












3
















自分を奮い立たせるために、わざと自分の考えを声に出し行動を始めた。




I came across the expression 声を出す on jisho.org. I don't know if replacing the expression's を with に (because を is already used earlier in the sentence) will allow me to use the 声を出す definition when translating. Is this allowed?






particles particle-に particle-を







share|improve this question





























    3
















    自分を奮い立たせるために、わざと自分の考えを声に出し行動を始めた。




    I came across the expression 声を出す on jisho.org. I don't know if replacing the expression's を with に (because を is already used earlier in the sentence) will allow me to use the 声を出す definition when translating. Is this allowed?






    particles particle-に particle-を







    share|improve this question



























      3












      3








      3


      1







      自分を奮い立たせるために、わざと自分の考えを声に出し行動を始めた。




      I came across the expression 声を出す on jisho.org. I don't know if replacing the expression's を with に (because を is already used earlier in the sentence) will allow me to use the 声を出す definition when translating. Is this allowed?






      particles particle-に particle-を







      share|improve this question

















      自分を奮い立たせるために、わざと自分の考えを声に出し行動を始めた。




      I came across the expression 声を出す on jisho.org. I don't know if replacing the expression's を with に (because を is already used earlier in the sentence) will allow me to use the 声を出す definition when translating. Is this allowed?






      particles particle-に particle-を




      particles particle-に particle-を






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 4 hours ago









      Chocolate♦

      48.2k458121




      48.2k458121










      asked 6 hours ago









      Toyu_FreyToyu_Frey

      46719




      46719






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          0














          I will assume you know how to connect verbs with the te-form




          晩【ばん】ご飯【はん】を食【た】べて、寝【ね】る。I will eat dinner and (then) sleep.




          So, usually in texts/books, etc. There's a more formal way to do so, which is using the dictionary form instead.




          晩【ばん】ご飯【はん】を食【た】べ、寝【ね】る。I will eat dinner, and (then) sleep.




          but sometimes, writers do that without using a comma in between verbs/words, and that is what might be throwing you off. So what you have there is 声に出し、行動. We could rewrite it as:




          自分を奮い立たせるために、　わざと自分の考えを声に出して、行動を始めた。In order to cheer myself up, I started acting my thoughts out loud.




          In your specific case though, I believe we should not use a comma, because it might be using the following pattern 声に出して＋verb/noun that usually means "Doing something out loud".




          声に出して読む - To read out loud.






          share





















          • 1





            Wait a minute, its possible to connect verbs via no-te form?!? I never knew this... thanks for the information.

            – Toyu_Frey
            5 hours ago











          • Yes, it is still called "continuative-form" but it uses the "dictionary form" instead of the "te-form" :)

            – Felipe Oliveira
            5 hours ago











          • @Toyu_Frey Wait a minute, if you did not know that, why did you romove that part from your question? You were initially asking whether this 出し is a noun or a verb, but since you removed it, I thoght you were aware of that grammar :D

            – naruto
            53 mins ago



















          4














          声を出す cannot take another object because 声 itself is the object of this transitive verb. What is said as a word is not important.



          声に出す is an "incomplete" expression because it lacks a direct object. It should be preceded by an object or a quotative-と to show the content of the speech. 声に itself is like an adverbial expression "as (physical) voice" or "aloud".





          • 彼は謝罪の言葉を声に出した。

          • 「ありがとう」と声に出して言いなさい。




          See this question for more examples: What does "声が出る" mean?






          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',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            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%2f65931%2fwill-expression-retain-the-same-definition-if-particle-is-changed%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            0














            I will assume you know how to connect verbs with the te-form




            晩【ばん】ご飯【はん】を食【た】べて、寝【ね】る。I will eat dinner and (then) sleep.




            So, usually in texts/books, etc. There's a more formal way to do so, which is using the dictionary form instead.




            晩【ばん】ご飯【はん】を食【た】べ、寝【ね】る。I will eat dinner, and (then) sleep.




            but sometimes, writers do that without using a comma in between verbs/words, and that is what might be throwing you off. So what you have there is 声に出し、行動. We could rewrite it as:




            自分を奮い立たせるために、　わざと自分の考えを声に出して、行動を始めた。In order to cheer myself up, I started acting my thoughts out loud.




            In your specific case though, I believe we should not use a comma, because it might be using the following pattern 声に出して＋verb/noun that usually means "Doing something out loud".




            声に出して読む - To read out loud.






            share





















            • 1





              Wait a minute, its possible to connect verbs via no-te form?!? I never knew this... thanks for the information.

              – Toyu_Frey
              5 hours ago











            • Yes, it is still called "continuative-form" but it uses the "dictionary form" instead of the "te-form" :)

              – Felipe Oliveira
              5 hours ago











            • @Toyu_Frey Wait a minute, if you did not know that, why did you romove that part from your question? You were initially asking whether this 出し is a noun or a verb, but since you removed it, I thoght you were aware of that grammar :D

              – naruto
              53 mins ago
















            0














            I will assume you know how to connect verbs with the te-form




            晩【ばん】ご飯【はん】を食【た】べて、寝【ね】る。I will eat dinner and (then) sleep.




            So, usually in texts/books, etc. There's a more formal way to do so, which is using the dictionary form instead.




            晩【ばん】ご飯【はん】を食【た】べ、寝【ね】る。I will eat dinner, and (then) sleep.




            but sometimes, writers do that without using a comma in between verbs/words, and that is what might be throwing you off. So what you have there is 声に出し、行動. We could rewrite it as:




            自分を奮い立たせるために、　わざと自分の考えを声に出して、行動を始めた。In order to cheer myself up, I started acting my thoughts out loud.




            In your specific case though, I believe we should not use a comma, because it might be using the following pattern 声に出して＋verb/noun that usually means "Doing something out loud".




            声に出して読む - To read out loud.






            share





















            • 1





              Wait a minute, its possible to connect verbs via no-te form?!? I never knew this... thanks for the information.

              – Toyu_Frey
              5 hours ago











            • Yes, it is still called "continuative-form" but it uses the "dictionary form" instead of the "te-form" :)

              – Felipe Oliveira
              5 hours ago











            • @Toyu_Frey Wait a minute, if you did not know that, why did you romove that part from your question? You were initially asking whether this 出し is a noun or a verb, but since you removed it, I thoght you were aware of that grammar :D

              – naruto
              53 mins ago














            0












            0








            0







            I will assume you know how to connect verbs with the te-form




            晩【ばん】ご飯【はん】を食【た】べて、寝【ね】る。I will eat dinner and (then) sleep.




            So, usually in texts/books, etc. There's a more formal way to do so, which is using the dictionary form instead.




            晩【ばん】ご飯【はん】を食【た】べ、寝【ね】る。I will eat dinner, and (then) sleep.




            but sometimes, writers do that without using a comma in between verbs/words, and that is what might be throwing you off. So what you have there is 声に出し、行動. We could rewrite it as:




            自分を奮い立たせるために、　わざと自分の考えを声に出して、行動を始めた。In order to cheer myself up, I started acting my thoughts out loud.




            In your specific case though, I believe we should not use a comma, because it might be using the following pattern 声に出して＋verb/noun that usually means "Doing something out loud".




            声に出して読む - To read out loud.






            share















            I will assume you know how to connect verbs with the te-form




            晩【ばん】ご飯【はん】を食【た】べて、寝【ね】る。I will eat dinner and (then) sleep.




            So, usually in texts/books, etc. There's a more formal way to do so, which is using the dictionary form instead.




            晩【ばん】ご飯【はん】を食【た】べ、寝【ね】る。I will eat dinner, and (then) sleep.




            but sometimes, writers do that without using a comma in between verbs/words, and that is what might be throwing you off. So what you have there is 声に出し、行動. We could rewrite it as:




            自分を奮い立たせるために、　わざと自分の考えを声に出して、行動を始めた。In order to cheer myself up, I started acting my thoughts out loud.




            In your specific case though, I believe we should not use a comma, because it might be using the following pattern 声に出して＋verb/noun that usually means "Doing something out loud".




            声に出して読む - To read out loud.







            share













            share


            share








            edited 5 hours ago

























            answered 5 hours ago









            Felipe OliveiraFelipe Oliveira

            2,003720




            2,003720








            • 1





              Wait a minute, its possible to connect verbs via no-te form?!? I never knew this... thanks for the information.

              – Toyu_Frey
              5 hours ago











            • Yes, it is still called "continuative-form" but it uses the "dictionary form" instead of the "te-form" :)

              – Felipe Oliveira
              5 hours ago











            • @Toyu_Frey Wait a minute, if you did not know that, why did you romove that part from your question? You were initially asking whether this 出し is a noun or a verb, but since you removed it, I thoght you were aware of that grammar :D

              – naruto
              53 mins ago














            • 1





              Wait a minute, its possible to connect verbs via no-te form?!? I never knew this... thanks for the information.

              – Toyu_Frey
              5 hours ago











            • Yes, it is still called "continuative-form" but it uses the "dictionary form" instead of the "te-form" :)

              – Felipe Oliveira
              5 hours ago











            • @Toyu_Frey Wait a minute, if you did not know that, why did you romove that part from your question? You were initially asking whether this 出し is a noun or a verb, but since you removed it, I thoght you were aware of that grammar :D

              – naruto
              53 mins ago








            1




            1





            Wait a minute, its possible to connect verbs via no-te form?!? I never knew this... thanks for the information.

            – Toyu_Frey
            5 hours ago





            Wait a minute, its possible to connect verbs via no-te form?!? I never knew this... thanks for the information.

            – Toyu_Frey
            5 hours ago













            Yes, it is still called "continuative-form" but it uses the "dictionary form" instead of the "te-form" :)

            – Felipe Oliveira
            5 hours ago





            Yes, it is still called "continuative-form" but it uses the "dictionary form" instead of the "te-form" :)

            – Felipe Oliveira
            5 hours ago













            @Toyu_Frey Wait a minute, if you did not know that, why did you romove that part from your question? You were initially asking whether this 出し is a noun or a verb, but since you removed it, I thoght you were aware of that grammar :D

            – naruto
            53 mins ago





            @Toyu_Frey Wait a minute, if you did not know that, why did you romove that part from your question? You were initially asking whether this 出し is a noun or a verb, but since you removed it, I thoght you were aware of that grammar :D

            – naruto
            53 mins ago











            4














            声を出す cannot take another object because 声 itself is the object of this transitive verb. What is said as a word is not important.



            声に出す is an "incomplete" expression because it lacks a direct object. It should be preceded by an object or a quotative-と to show the content of the speech. 声に itself is like an adverbial expression "as (physical) voice" or "aloud".





            • 彼は謝罪の言葉を声に出した。

            • 「ありがとう」と声に出して言いなさい。




            See this question for more examples: What does "声が出る" mean?






            share|improve this answer






























              4














              声を出す cannot take another object because 声 itself is the object of this transitive verb. What is said as a word is not important.



              声に出す is an "incomplete" expression because it lacks a direct object. It should be preceded by an object or a quotative-と to show the content of the speech. 声に itself is like an adverbial expression "as (physical) voice" or "aloud".





              • 彼は謝罪の言葉を声に出した。

              • 「ありがとう」と声に出して言いなさい。




              See this question for more examples: What does "声が出る" mean?






              share|improve this answer




























                4












                4








                4







                声を出す cannot take another object because 声 itself is the object of this transitive verb. What is said as a word is not important.



                声に出す is an "incomplete" expression because it lacks a direct object. It should be preceded by an object or a quotative-と to show the content of the speech. 声に itself is like an adverbial expression "as (physical) voice" or "aloud".





                • 彼は謝罪の言葉を声に出した。

                • 「ありがとう」と声に出して言いなさい。




                See this question for more examples: What does "声が出る" mean?






                share|improve this answer















                声を出す cannot take another object because 声 itself is the object of this transitive verb. What is said as a word is not important.



                声に出す is an "incomplete" expression because it lacks a direct object. It should be preceded by an object or a quotative-と to show the content of the speech. 声に itself is like an adverbial expression "as (physical) voice" or "aloud".





                • 彼は謝罪の言葉を声に出した。

                • 「ありがとう」と声に出して言いなさい。




                See this question for more examples: What does "声が出る" mean?







                share|improve this answer














                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer








                edited 5 hours ago

























                answered 5 hours ago









                narutonaruto

                160k8153299




                160k8153299






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Japanese Language Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid …



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fjapanese.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f65931%2fwill-expression-retain-the-same-definition-if-particle-is-changed%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    -

                    Popular posts from this blog

                    If I really need a card on my start hand, how many mulligans make sense? [duplicate]

                    Image
                    5 This question already has an answer here: How do you calculate the likelihood of drawing certain cards in your opening hand? 3 answers There is a funny modern deck where you play Treasure Hunt, but you really need to have it on the starting hand. How many mulligans should I take, if my deck contains 60 cards and contains 4 copies of Treasure Hunt? magic-the-gathering probability share | improve this question asked Nov 23 '18 at 12:12 dan dan 152 4
                    Read more

                    Alcedinidae

                    Image
                    Alcedinidae Martin-pêcheur à dos bleu ( Alcedo azurea ) Classification (COI) Règne Animalia Embranchement Chordata Sous-embr. Vertebrata Classe Aves Ordre Coraciiformes Famille Alcedinidae Rafinesque, 1815 Les Alcédinidés ou Alcedinidae forment une famille d'oiseaux plus connus sous les noms de martins-pêcheurs et martins-chasseurs. Sommaire 1 Description 2 Répartition et habitat 3 Systématique 3.1 Liste alphabétique des genres 3.2 Liste des espèces 4 Chez les Anciens : l'alcyon 4.1 Étymologie (Littré) 4.2 Oiseau « fabuleux » ? 5 Notes 6 Articles connexes 7 Liens externes 7.1 Bibliographie Description | Ce sont des oiseaux compacts de taille petite à moyenne (10 à 46 cm), au bec droit et long, en forme de poignard. Leurs pattes sont courtes, et ils portent un plumage aux couleurs vives. Répartition et habitat | Cosmopolites, ils fréquentent surtout
                    Read more

                    Can an atomic nucleus contain both particles and antiparticles? [duplicate]

                    Image
                    9 $begingroup$ This question already has an answer here: What happens if we put together a proton and an antineutron? 2 answers Is it theoretically possible to make a "deuterium" atom containing a proton and an antineutron in its nucleus? Would the strong nuclear force cause attraction between a proton and an antineutron? Would such a nucleus be stable, or would the proton somehow annihilate the antineutron when close enough? nuclear-physics antimatter share | cite | improve this question asked yesterday
                    Read more