6

So in genki 1, it said that いい is changed to よ when being negative and it becomes よくない, and not いいじゃない. But I was watching a show and someone said いいじゃないですか. So now I'm kind of confused, can someone explain this to me?

Thank you

Infernoboy
  • 289
  • 1
  • 10

1 Answers1

10

いい is a colloquial form of the adjective よい and is used only in dictionary/prenoun forms. Adjectives are negated not by じゃない, but by conjugation: よい→よくない, 青い→青くない.

じゃない in いいじゃない means isn't it.

To clarify:

  • Xはよい=Xはいい：X is good
  • Xはよくない：X isn't good
  • Xはいいじゃない：X is good, isn't it? (よいじゃない as a combination should be less common, because よい is less colloquial and じゃない is colloquial)
sundowner
  • 36,445
  • 2
  • 19
  • 57
  • Basically, the negative of いい is よくない, never いいじゃない. Treat いいじゃない as its own separate fixed expression. – dvx2718 Feb 09 '23 at 00:59
  • 5
    It is worth mentioning that sometimes 「よくない？」 with a rising intonation can also mean, "Isn't (it) good?". Also with the addition of ん you can sort of negate adjectives with じゃない; however it's quite rare and a bit different in it's meaning. For example: 「いいんじゃない」with a lowered intonation could take on a meaning like, "It's not that (it's) good." Most of the time with a rising intonation it would mean the same as 「いいじゃない」= "Isn't (it) good:?" – levikara Feb 09 '23 at 01:59
  • "is used only in dictionary/prenoun forms" Isn't いいですね correct? – jarmanso7 Feb 10 '23 at 23:09
  • @jarmanso7 いいですね is correct. いい is in prenoun form. Cf 体言、副詞、形容詞、一部の助動詞の連体形、助詞「の」に付く。 – sundowner Feb 11 '23 at 12:22
  • @sundowner, okay, I guess "prenoun form" in Japanese does not really mean (only) "before nouns" strictly speaking, then. This is what I thought because you said "only in dictionary/prenoun forms". – jarmanso7 Feb 12 '23 at 02:26
  • With my limited knowledge of Japanese, I tried to come up with examples of いい where it is not modifying a noun, and that's what I found, いいです. Beyond that I couldn't come up with examples where よい is correct but いい isn't, maybe if you give some of them it would be helpful to understand your original point. – jarmanso7 Feb 12 '23 at 02:31
  • @jarmanso7 Sorry if it's inconsistent with learners' textbooks, but 連体形 (which I mean by prenoun form) refers to the form, not to the verb being in front of a noun. – sundowner Feb 13 '23 at 01:19
  • @sundowner except that a more accurate translation of 連体形 in English would be "attributive" form rather than "prenoun" form, wouldn't it? "prenoun" has a narrowly defined meaning in English regardless of the use you decided to give it liberally. – jarmanso7 Sep 01 '23 at 03:53
  • @jarmanso7 Yeah, possibly. Wikipedia uses attributive, too. But I don't think attributive is particularly more appropriate. It is just a name of the form meaning 'the form that appears typically in front of a noun' (連体 literally means 'noun-connecting', which, due to the Japanese syntax, should be the same thing as 'prenoun'). To me, 'attributive' connotates the usage aspect as opposed to 'predicative', which has nothing to do with 連体形. – sundowner Sep 02 '23 at 09:35