Japanese Language - 2015-07-31

« first day (1521 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (3178 days later) »

9:35 AM

@snailboat: I did not get notified with your messages in this chat room. Luckily I visit this room. :-) Regarding your comment above, yes I am wrong.

Anonymous

You seem like a fast learner, @FriendlyGhost :-)

@snailboat Thank you. :-)

6 hours later…

Darius Jahandarie

3:19 PM

@snailboat Thanks for the recommendations. I think what I'm looking for is a "fun" book... something not too hard to follow, and the sort of book that makes you keep on reading even if you should really stop. I honestly haven't read enough even in English to really figure out what sort of book does this for me, but well, usually it's some sort of light SF or fantasy sort of thing.

The current book I'm reading is pretty good in terms of the flow of the text, but there's so much business and law lingo that it sort of negates that.

I saw レベル７ by 宮部みゆき when I was browsing 紀伊国屋 the other day, but I ended up not buying it.

Though I did buy an anthology of SF stories. I think it was like the top X of some decade picked by 日本SF作家クラブ. Haven't started reading it yet.

@snailboat What stopped me from posting it was that I couldn't figure out how to word it in order to make it non-subjective.

Darius Jahandarie

4:07 PM

Huh... I just wrote this sentence: 「もっと遅いかと思った」... and now I don't understand why it sounds right to have a か there.

3 hours later…

broccoli forest

6:46 PM

japanese.stackexchange.com/posts/25924/revisions

I'm super thankful for his edit but

> I believe this is mostly for historical reasons, but I've also seen a phonetician say in his book that phonetics should be its own discipline, independent from linguistics.

Is this sentence grammatically correct?

I imagine I'd say "I've also seen a phonetician says" or "said"

broccoli forest

6:58 PM

@DariusJahandarie I feel it sounds like "might" or "would" in English

@snailboat I agree with him that 誰はハンバーガーが欲しい？ is sometimes acceptable

at least in some situations like

well, I hope you could get my point...

like English "I met Justin Bieber yesterday." - "You met who?" kind of question word use

@Schoko 無助詞形も現れましたね…

Darius Jahandarie

@broccoliforest "say" is in fact correct.

broccoli forest

「へ」が使えて「に」が使えない場面なんて実質的にないのでは？

@DariusJahandarie can you explain it? it's revealed that my English is too poor :D

おにさんこちら、てのなるほうへ

これは絶対に「てのなるほうに」とは言わないですが

Darius Jahandarie

7:17 PM

Hmm... I'm generally not good at explaining English grammar, so take this with a grain of salt, but the verb under "to see" is always either in that form or the -ing form regardless of how "see" is conjugated. "I saw him eat(ing) a cat." "I had seen him forget to eat so many times." "I'm sure I'll see him mess up later tonight."

(The difference between the non-ing and -ing versions is that if you use -ing, it suggests that you only saw part of the process of them doing something rather than the entire thing.)

broccoli forest

@DariusJahandarie ah! it seems I was too confused

2

Q: Farewell message - 悔しさをバネに

On my last day my co-worker told me this. I'm not sure what バネに means. I tried looking it up but didn't get anywhere. ここでの悔しさをバネに、次のとこでもがんばってくださいね

eow.alc.co.jp/…

Darius Jahandarie

(In those examples, forgetting to do something is pretty instantaneous so I don't think "to see someone forgetting" would really working -- "to see someone messing up" is possible but that seems like a less likely thing to happen than "to see someone mess up".)

broccoli forest

> 失敗をばねにする
> use failure as a springboard

oshiete.goo.ne.jp/qa/8010687.html

> 「彼は試合で負けた。それ以降、彼はくやしさをバネに頑張っている。」

> He lost the game. After that, he has been working very hard bouncing back his frustration.

何かそういうidiomはないんでしょうかね…

Darius Jahandarie

I feel like I make more grammar mistakes in English than I do in Japanese... just typoed "work" to "working" there for some reason. sigh.

Accidental ones, anyways.

(As opposed to ones where I really just don't know what the correct grammar is, which I'm sure happens considerably more often in Japanese :-)

1 hour later…

Anonymous

8:51 PM

@broccoliforest Verbs of perception take bare infinitival clauses as complements

Anonymous

Most of them, anyway.

Anonymous

Most verbs that can take infinitival clauses as complements take to-infinitival, but there are a few exceptions, like all the auxiliaries, verbs of perception, verbs of causation

Anonymous

Help exceptionally takes either kind of infinitive

Anonymous

9:06 PM

@broccoliforest I found it in dictionaries under バネ

Anonymous

@broccoliforest English Echo questions have a very strong tendency to use who rather than whom regardless of position, but who is the default form today anyway

Anonymous

Unlike with other pronouns, where the accusative form is the default

Anonymous

> I would [like/*likes some ice cream].　←　auxiliaries

Anonymous

> I had/made/let/helped Bob [cross/*crosses the street].　←　causatives

Anonymous

> I saw/watched/heard Bob [say/*says his cat was evil].　←　verbs of perception

Anonymous

9:12 PM

(Actually, "I heard Bob says his cat was evil" is okay, but the grammar is different: it's "I heard [~~that~~ Bob says his cat was evil]".)

Anonymous

Also, note that if we replace Bob with a pronoun, it has accusative form: "I made him/*he cross the street." and "I saw him/*he [say his cat was evil]."

Anonymous

@DariusJahandarie I have that book! :-)

broccoli forest

@snailboat thank you, it's good to know the word "echo question"

Anonymous

@broccoliforest Yes, there are multiple types:

Anonymous

Reclamatory echo questions: "I went to Chicago last summer―" "You went where?" "Chicago." "Sorry, go on."

Anonymous

9:17 PM

The person asking the echo question is trying to get them to repeat themselves because they didn't hear very well.

Anonymous

Incredulity echo questions: "I dated the pope last summer―" "Wait, you dated who??"

Anonymous

The person asking the echo question is expressing disbelief.

Anonymous

In echo questions, the wh-phrase is never fronted, and who(m) almost always takes the form who if present.

Anonymous

Also, echo questions tend to have question intonation. But normal wh-questions don't:

Anonymous

> Where did you go last summer?↘

Anonymous

9:19 PM

> Wait, you went where?↗

Anonymous

Echo questions can also be multiple-wh:

Anonymous

> Wait, you saw who where??↗

broccoli forest

4

Q: Are sentences that have multiple "WH Question" words considered grammatical?

Are sentences that have multiple "WH Question" words considered grammatical ? For example, is the following sentence grammatical: Tomorrow, where are we meeting at what time to do what ?

formality questions

Anonymous

Yes.

broccoli forest

hmm

Anonymous

9:21 PM

English has plenty of multiple-wh questions. That doesn't mean every sentence with more than one wh-word is grammatical, but . . .

Anonymous

I would say:

Anonymous

> When are we meeting tomorrow, and where, and to do what?

Anonymous

Other people might phrase it differently.

Anonymous

I think it's easier to do multiple-wh in Japanese.

Anonymous

In part because Japanese doesn't have any wh-movement

broccoli forest

9:23 PM

actually I can't live without multiple-question sentences :D

Anonymous

In English we move wh-phrases to the front of interrogative clauses, but we can only do that with one wh-phrase per clause.

Anonymous

> Okay. Start from the beginning. Who did what?

Anonymous

> Alice bought a lollipop. Bob petted a cat. [ . . . ]

Anonymous

Here the question had two variables, and the answer comes in the form of a list

Anonymous

X1 did Y1, X2 did Y2,  . . .

Anonymous

9:25 PM

So that's possible in English, even in non-echo questions, even without coordination

Anonymous

But I think it's easier in Japanese overall :-)

broccoli forest

this kind of situation has much affinity with question-は, I feel

Anonymous

I was curious what connection exactly you saw

broccoli forest

> その時誰はどうするべきだったか

but on second thought, it's not real question because of suffixing か

generally it's not a real question demanding an answer when you use wh-は

I guess

Anonymous

Echo questions have some other characteristics normal questions don't

Anonymous

9:35 PM

You can replace non-constituents with what

Anonymous

> "I'm studying malacology at school." "Wait, you're studying what-ology?"

Anonymous

> "I pharmacologized his brain." "You what-ed his brain?"

broccoli forest

9:53 PM

@snailboat I didn't expect to see such a wording in English indeed :)

it's more than frequent in Japanese though...

"what-ed" seems to be impossible in Japanese too

question.ty.land.to/student/100qa.cgi?mode=ans&q=41

> 42. 最近、人に褒められることはしましたか？

> 人に何られる？読めない

あった

Anonymous

Haha, 何られる！

broccoli forest

but when I searched them, the predominant majority were OCR misrecognition of 得られる

Anonymous

10:12 PM

Ahh

Anonymous

@broccoliforest I've noticed that OCR errors tend to be considerably more frequent in Japanese

Anonymous

But OCR errors are already pretty bad in English

Anonymous

For some inexplicable reason, OCR folks don't want to use language models . . .

broccoli forest

they believe in brute force I think

[[counter-words]] [[counters]]

how to type tags?

Anonymous

[tag:blahblahblah]

broccoli forest

10:16 PM

oh thx

counter-words = counters?

Anonymous

I didn't realize we had two tags for counters. We can make one into a synonym of the other.

Anonymous

Which should be the master tag?

broccoli forest

colloquial-language = spoken-language?

Anonymous

counters seems nice and simple.

Anonymous

@broccoliforest There's a problem with definitions there

Anonymous

10:17 PM

Colloquial language is usually spoken, but it can be written. Formal language is often written, but it can be spoken.

Anonymous

But . . .

Anonymous

Specifically in the case of Japanese

broccoli forest

@snailboat I have no idea, I think it'll more precise to say "counter words"

do you mean the 口語 term?

Anonymous

Well, there is the old 文語 'written language' vs 口語 'spoken language' distinction

Anonymous

But after 言文一致

Anonymous

10:19 PM

文語 is more like 'Classical Japanese' or 'literary Japanese' and 口語 is more like 'modern Japanese' or 'colloquial Japanese'

Anonymous

People use 'literary' and 'colloquial' to reflect those terms

broccoli forest

yup

Anonymous

So there's 話し言葉 and 書き言葉

Anonymous

I don't know how much people distinguish 話し言葉・書き言葉 from 口語・文語

Anonymous

Or how confusing that is . . .

broccoli forest

10:20 PM

totally contextual :)

Anonymous

It seems that way

Anonymous

One other problem is that people who are tagging stuff often don't know all this stuff

broccoli forest

but generally, classical 文語 is more restricted in technical terms

Anonymous

So they might just be confused

Anonymous

If they see our tags the way they are right now

broccoli forest

10:21 PM

among Japanese linguistic folks

we only see such 文語/口語 in high school subjects

Anonymous

When we were adding translations recently I added 文語 to classical-japanese and felt good about that choice, but

broccoli forest

namely 口語文法 and 文語文法

Anonymous

Yeah.

Anonymous

That's the context I originally learned those terms in

broccoli forest

in everyday language 文語 = 書き言葉 and 口語 = 話し言葉

Anonymous

10:23 PM

But I've seen people online using them simply to mean "spoken language" and "written language"

Anonymous

I'm not sure how people here are using the colloquial-language tag

Anonymous

I've seen linguists use "colloquial language" to mean "not Classical Japanese"

Anonymous

But

broccoli forest

I've also found past future tense

Anonymous

I don't think that's how people on this site are using it

Anonymous

10:25 PM

@broccoliforest Argh :-)

broccoli forest

the tag wiki just says

> 口語. Words, forms and expressions used only in non-formal spoken language.

Anonymous

The tag wikis need lots of work . . . :-(

Anonymous

@broccoliforest In English, many linguists use tense to refer to a morphological system whose main purpose is to locate situations in time. So they'd say in English, we have exactly two tenses (present and past), Japanese has two (past and nonpast), etc.

broccoli forest

oh, I can't get it formatted...

Anonymous

Other people (especially in traditional grammar) use tense to refer to the semantic dimension of time reference. So, they call things like "I will go to the store" future tense

Anonymous

10:28 PM

But:

broccoli forest

African American Vernacular English

African American Vernacular English (AAVE) — also called African American English; less precisely Black English, Black Vernacular, Black English Vernacular (BEV), or Black Vernacular English (BVE) — is a variety (dialect, ethnolect and sociolect) of American English, most commonly spoken today by urban working-class and largely bi-dialectal middle-class African Americans. Non-linguists often call it Ebonics (a term that also has other meanings and connotations). It shares parts of its grammar and phonology with the dialects of the Southern United States. Several creolists, including William Stewart...

> Although AAVE does not necessarily feature the preterite marker of other English varieties (that is, the -ed of worked), it does feature an optional tense system with four past and two future tenses or (because they indicate tense in degrees) phases.

Anonymous

My impression is that テンス in Japanese tends to refer to the semantic dimension

broccoli forest

I agree

Anonymous

I'm not sure how that difference affects our choice of tags

broccoli forest

it's not even clear cut between tense and aspect

Anonymous

10:30 PM

eprints.lib.hokudai.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/2115/45642/1/…

broccoli forest

they're sharing the same た

Anonymous

@broccoliforest I wouldn't call all of those tenses

Anonymous

I see two morphological tenses along with some periphrastic aspectual markers (completive, inceptive, anterior, etc.)

Anonymous

anterior aspect = perfect aspect, but lately many people call the perfect in English a kind of tense

Anonymous

In The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language, English is claimed to have two tense systems: the primary tense system is morphological (walk vs walked), the second tense system is analytic (perfect have walked vs non-perfect)

Anonymous

10:33 PM

Because, they say, the main use of the perfect is actually to locate events in time (before some other events), and therefore it's better to call it a tense than an aspect

broccoli forest

so it seems

Anonymous

@broccoliforest Yes! :-)

broccoli forest

the name and reality doesn't always match

(doesn't? don't?)

Anonymous

I would probably say don't

broccoli forest

ok thanks :)

Anonymous

10:37 PM

The choice of singular or plural agreement with coordinate subjects often depends on whether you're thinking of the subject as a single unit or not:

Anonymous

> Peanut butter and jelly is my favorite type of sandwich.

Anonymous

Clearly a single unit

Anonymous

> The name and the reality don't always match ~~with one another~~.

Anonymous

They have to be conceptualized as separate, because you're expressing a relationship between them.

Anonymous

There are ambiguous cases where people will say either one

broccoli forest

10:39 PM

@snailboat that's a good explanation

Anonymous

Also, subject-verb agreement is one of the most common types of performance errors among native speakers of English

broccoli forest

oh...

tense and time?

> About time

> Grammar or words that express temporal information. Whereas tense is always relative to the moment of utterance, time is more absolutely located on an imaginary timeline.

Anonymous

> *Cognitive scientists seek to model the ways in which [ the ability to perform such tasks ] are acquired, changed or impaired.　←　The speaker accidentally used proximal agreement (made the verb agree with tasks because it was closer than ability)

Anonymous

@broccoliforest I wish I could see who wrote these tag excerpts

Anonymous

At that time the system didn't keep track, so it just says "created by Community"

Anonymous

10:44 PM

Right now the "tense"-"time" distinction in the tags seems very confusing!

Anonymous

What do you think we should do with tense and time?

Anonymous

Earthliŋ and I were trying to clean up the tags a little a few weeks ago :-)

Anonymous

But we can always do more cleanup!

broccoli forest

usage vs word-usage (I'm not sure)

Anonymous

@broccoliforest I'm not sure either! :-)

broccoli forest

10:48 PM

especially I have no idea at

> time is more absolutely located on an imaginary timeline.

part

do you know what it mean?

about datetime matter or something?

Anonymous

0

Q: Merge counter-words tag with counters

In chat, broccoli forest noticed that counter-words and counters were duplicates: counter-words: 助数詞. Suffices attached to a number to use the number to count things, people, or events. counters: 助数詞. Often called 'classifiers' in linguistics. I can make one into a synonym of the...

discussion tag-synonyms

broccoli forest

or calendrical thingy?

Anonymous

@broccoliforest I don't know. I don't think it makes sense.

Anonymous

Time reference can be absolute or relative.

Anonymous

Relative: deictic temporal expressions like 明日
Absolute: 2015年7月31日金曜日 15:50:59 PDT

Anonymous

10:52 PM

They both look like they indicate time to me.

Anonymous

@Earthliŋ Do you have any thoughts on any of this tag stuff?

Anonymous

@broccoliforest I could see having something like a time-expressions tag and tense tag

Anonymous

I think the description on that time tag is just wrong

Anonymous

It says "tense is always relative to the moment of utterance"

Anonymous

By the way, I think most learners are familiar with counter words or counters (I'm not sure which is more common).

broccoli forest

10:59 PM

@snailboat that sounds like a good idea

Anonymous

I don't think many learners are familiar with specifiers, numeratives, or classifiers

Anonymous

But those three terms are sometimes used in linguistics or in descriptions of other classifier languages (e.g. Thai)

broccoli forest

I've only heard of classifier in North American languages

or sign languages

Anonymous

Pamela Downing wrote a book on Japanese called Numeral Classifier Systems: The Case of Japanese

Anonymous

Samuel Martin calls them classifiers in his Reference Grammar of Japanese

Anonymous

11:02 PM

So I think some linguists do use classifier in reference to Japanese

Anonymous

I don't know how many do

Anonymous

But I've seen it in other papers / books as well

broccoli forest

なるほど…

Anonymous

Outside linguistics I've never seen anyone say classifier

Anonymous

It's always counter in books for learners and on web pages and so on

Anonymous

11:06 PM

Wikipedia says Japanese Counter Words :-)

Anonymous

Japanese counter word

In Japanese, counter words or counters (josūshi 助数詞) are used along with numbers to count things, actions, and events. In Japanese, as in Chinese and Korean, numerals cannot quantify nouns by themselves (except, in certain cases, for the numbers from one to ten; see below). For example, to express the idea "two dogs" in Japanese one could say 二匹の犬 ni-hiki no inu (literally "two small-animal-count POSSESSIVE dog"), or 犬二匹 inu ni-hiki (literally "dog two small-animal-count"), but just pasting 二 and 犬 together in either order is wrong. Here 二 ni is the number "two", 匹 hiki is the counter for small...

broccoli forest

is there any other meanings counter has as linguistic jargon?

Anonymous

But in the article they just write "counter"

Anonymous

@broccoliforest I don't think so . . .

broccoli forest

hmm

Anonymous

11:07 PM

Although there's a lot of stuff I don't know :-)

Anonymous

Classifier does have at least two other meanings

Anonymous

You already mentioned the sign language use

Anonymous

And there's another meaning: a morpheme which indicates the class to which a word belongs. So, people who use classifier this way would say -ly is an 'adverb classifier'

Anonymous

I think "counter word" is unambiguous

broccoli forest

so it literally class-ifies :)

just being curious, is it different than saying "adverb marker"?

spelling orthography

> Which sequences of kanji and/or kana form accepted ways to write a given word, particle, or other speech sound.

> 正書法. The standard way of writing the language.

maybe the latter is for discussing the writing system itself?

topicalization!

Anonymous

11:17 PM

Well, I don't use the word "classifier" that way myself. I would say -ly1 is a derivational affix that derives an adverb from an adjective.

Anonymous

I'd be perfectly happy with saying it's a morphological marker of adverb class :-) But it's indistinguishable from -ly2, which derives adjectives

Anonymous

@broccoliforest Maybe we could replace orthography with writing-system or something?

Anonymous

That might be a little less jargony for the people using this site

Anonymous

@broccoliforest Sometimes I make new tags like that, but then no one else uses them :-)

broccoli forest

respect

Anonymous

11:20 PM

The system automatically removes old tags unless ① they have a tag wiki OR ② they have at least 5 questions

Anonymous

So right now topicalization is on its way to being automatically removed :-(

It's a tag party now =)

broccoli forest

@snailboat maybe this one is suitable for it

5

Q: How to rephrase sentences with an ambiguous は to indicate the contrastive or thematic / 「主題」と「対比」の解釈の余地のある、あいまいな「は」の言い換え方

First, some background. My question is kind of an extension of this previously-answered question about the difference between は and が. While I am fairly clear on the different usages of は as a contrastive marker or a thematic marker, the explanation given on the page linked above included an exam...

grammar particle-wa ambiguity

@snailboat Any thoughts on tag stuff?

Err...

broccoli forest

@Earthliŋ and we're doing "tag matches"

11:26 PM

What's "topicalization"?

broccoli forest

but I think there isn't much room for topicalization outside particle-wa

Anonymous

Maybe it's a redundant tag

Anonymous

@Earthliŋ We've been discussing tags in chat, I thought you might have things to add to our discussion :-)

@snailboat Maybe...

Anonymous

If it's redundant, we can just let the system delete it . . .

11:28 PM

I wouldn't know how to choose between [spelling] and [orthography]

broccoli forest

@Earthliŋ translation for Japanese "取り立て"?

Anonymous

Spelling is more specific than orthography

Anonymous

Orthography includes things like punctuation, which direction you're writing,  . . .

Anonymous

'focus'

broccoli forest

@snailboat that's possible

Anonymous

11:29 PM

取り立て助詞　←　usually 'focus particle'

broccoli forest

oh

Anonymous

Wow! I didn't realize we had a spelling tag

Anonymous

I thought that was hypothetical :-)

Anonymous

spelling

Anonymous

I guess people do use English spelling to describe Japanese a lot

11:30 PM

We also have a spelling tag, which could also be merged into orthography. All (on-topic) questions about spelling will be about Japanese orthography, so... — Earthliŋ Jun 7 at 15:29

Anonymous

A-ha!

broccoli forest

respect → honorifics?

or it's for something like 待遇表現?

or [respect] → [keigo]?

maybe we should discuss one thing at a time =)

broccoli forest

> honorifics × 61 keigo × 44 anon
> dec 27 '11 at 17:06 0 pending (1)

Anonymous

Well, all 3 questions tagged with respect are about honorifics

broccoli forest

11:32 PM

japanese.stackexchange.com/tags/synonyms

Oh, 3 questions...

Anonymous

So we can probably just axe that tag . . .

broccoli forest

keigo to honorifics is already proposed

Yes, let me retag those questions...

Anonymous

@Earthliŋ Thank you! :-)

Anonymous

11:34 PM

@Earthliŋ Sorry, I haven't been feeling well so I've been jumping all over the place while I chat. Having trouble focusing :-)

One down, a gazillion to go!

[respect] is gone

broccoli forest

we really should topicalize one thing at a time

Anonymous

Hee

Anonymous

Um.

Anonymous

→ japanese.stackexchange.com/q/26082/1478

Anonymous

11:36 PM

> Kare wa okusan ni kusushite imasu.

Anonymous

くすすって

Anonymous

どういう意味・・・？

キスしています？

Anonymous

おお

(read on)

Anonymous

11:37 PM

Derp

So much for "trouble focusing" =)

Anonymous

Well, my mind is racing, so it keeps jumping from topic to topic

Anonymous

I'm feeling a lot better than I was yesterday, though! :-)

That's the way to go.

@broccoliforest I think [keigo] should be different from [honorifics]

Was [words] really renamed 279 times?

japanese.stackexchange.com/tags/synonyms

Anonymous

@Earthliŋ Er. Um. Whuh?

Anonymous

11:48 PM

That's odd . . .

That's a rename every few days...

Since the beginning of time, when JLSE was still JLU...

Anonymous

I edited the question to contain kana and kanji + furigana instead of rōmaji

Anonymous

(Am I the only human being alive who types rōmaji?)

Anonymous

@Earthliŋ I'm fairly certain none of us moderators ever look at this tag thingy. Or, you know, almost never.

@snailboat I type rōmaji =)

Anonymous

11:53 PM

@Earthliŋ I looked it up! It looks like "renames" means "People entered in 'vocabulary' 279 times, and all 279 times it was changed to 'words'"

But I type in neo-layout.org, so it's easy to type for me...

@snailboat I see, that makes sense

Anonymous

@Earthliŋ I added it to my input method dictionary

Anonymous

If I type おお I get ō :-)

Anonymous

I also added ' . . . ', which is an ellipsis made with Unicode non-breaking thin spaces

Anonymous

I use Japanese input for things other than Japanese :-)

Anonymous

11:55 PM

とれーどまーく　→　™

Anonymous

@Earthliŋ So the 'renames' thing is telling you how often a synonym gets used.

Anonymous

Apparently people want to ask questions about 'vocabulary' all the time.

and we tell them to ask about "words" instead =)

hm...

Anyway, any thoughts on [spelling]?

Anonymous

I dunno!

Anonymous

Apparently "spelling" makes sense to the people using this site, because people have tagged lots of questions with it.

« first day (1521 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (3178 days later) »

Transcript for

Jul '1531

Japanese Language

General discussion for japanese.stackexchange.com

japanese language nihongo

join this room
about this room

00:00

06:00

12:00

18:00

all times are UTC

site design / logo © 2024 Stack Exchange Inc; legal

mobile