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 &#91;kʰũːɘ̃n&#93; (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  and  and the perfective ending, and one that started with t and gave rise to the particles  (also a verb ending) and  and the perfective ending.
 * 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 &#91;kʰũːɘ̃n&#93; (talk) 19:31, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

"if (when appended to a dictionary-form verb and followed by a present-tense sentence)"
??? —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 . Chuterix (talk) 04:47, 15 November 2022 (UTC)