should vs. had better, part 1

  •  
  • 935
  • 23
  • 11
  • Japanese 
Apr 20, 2016 15:57 英語と日本語の違い
下の1と2では、どちらの文章が強い感じしますか?

(1) You should take medicine.
(2) You had better take medicine.

この9年間日本人に英語を教えた経験からは、英語を勉強している日本人の90%以上は1番目の文章が強いと言うと思います。しかし、それに賛成する英語のネイティヴはどこにもいません。

英語のネイティヴと比べて、多くの日本人はなぜこれらの文章を反対の意味で理解しているのかについて2つの理由があります。1つは、学校で「should」=「すべき」と習っていることです。「should」は強くアドバイスしたいときに使うことは出来ますが、ネイティヴが「should」を使うとき、「した方がいい」の意味で使うことの方が多いです。2つ目は、「した方がいい」=「had better」と習っていることです。これもちょっと間違っています。「had better」について、次の投稿に書きます。

つづく
In your opinion, which of the following sentences is stronger?

(1) You should take medicine.
(2) You had better take medicine.

Based on my nine years of teaching English to Japanese people, I'd say that over 90% of Japanese people studying English think that (1) is stronger. However, there's not a single native English speaker that would agree with that.

There are two reasons why Japanese people have a different understanding of these sentences compared to native English speakers: The first reason is that Japanese people are taught in school that 'should' = すべき. While 'should' can be used for strong advice, it is more often used by native English speakers with a meaning that is best translated as した方がいい. The second reason is that Japanese people are taught in school that 'had better' = した方がいい. This is also not quite right. I will explain the meaning of 'had better' in my next entry.

To be continued...