Talk:と

can also mean with, as in: "tomodachi to ikimashita", or "hito to hanasu" (go with a friend, talk to a person) Fresheneesz 23:10, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Just one particle?

I have a hard time believing all these syntanctically and lexically varied uses share the same etymology. Is that really so? Korn [kʰũːɘ̃n] (talk) 01:09, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

The senses only look so separate and varied through an English lens.  :)

@Korn -- If you're interested in Japanese derivations, I've had Bjarke Frellesvig's A History of the Japanese Language recommended to me a number of times. I haven't had time yet to dive into this book, but if I correctly remember a discussion I had some time back with an acquaintance, Frellesvig makes a case for the existence of two possible copula roots in ancient Japanese, one that started with n and gave rise to the particles に (ni) and の (no) and the perfective ending ぬ (nu), and one that started with t and gave rise to the particles て (te) (also a verb ending) and と (to) and the perfective ending つ (tsu).

Looking at と as a kind of copula might pull these various senses into a better focus. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 18:14, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

As it happens, I learnt of and tried to learn the origin of the two copulae just last night. Won't ignore destiny's hint and take a look at the book. Domo takk. Korn [kʰũːɘ̃n] (talk) 19:31, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

"if (when appended to a dictionary-form verb and followed by a present-tense sentence)"

経験(けいけん)しないと分(わ)からない。

Keiken shinai to wakaranai.

(please add an English translation of this example)

??? —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 06:59, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Late response, considering that even your account is deleted and no longer exists, this is because this applies to negatives as well, also in it’s dictionary form ない (nai). Chuterix (talk) 04:47, 15 November 2022 (UTC)