Secrets of the Japanese Language (2): Japanese Has No "Copula"
Mar 14th 2010 03:15
Roomy
Japanese
language
copula
Roomy
"This photo is my father."
This was a sentence I wrote in English a couple of years ago.
In proper English, this should be "This is a picture of my father" or "This picture shows my father." Logical errors of this kind are common to Japanese people when they speak in a foreign language.
The verb "is," as in the sentence above, is often defined as a "copula" which is also called a "linking verb." A copula links the subject of a sentence with a predicate, where the subject complement as a predicate renames or describes the subject.
For example, in the sentence "He is my boyfriend," the subject ("He") is linked by the copula "is" with the subject complement "my boyfriend."
Since the subject complement is in apposition to the subject of a sentence, you can form a sentence like "He, my boyfriend, loves me" (1).
Although common Japanese grammar describes だ ("da") and です ("desu") as copular verbs as if they were similar to the "be-verbs" of English in function, I dare say that there's no copula in the Japanese language.
The English sentence I mentioned at the top of this article showed the influence of the Japanese expression: この写真は私の父です。 In this sentence, 私の父 cannot be the subject complement of the subject この写真, but nonetheless this sentence itself reads as if it means "this photo is my father."
In the same way, it's not uncommon for us to say 今、日本は朝だが、アメリカは夜だ。("Right now it's morning in Japan, but it's night in America", literally, "Right now Japan is morning, but America is might.") or 今日、私はジーンズにスニーカーです。("Today, I wear jeans and sneakers", literally, "Today, I am jeans and sneakers.")
How should we explain these strange expressions?
I think the problem is that grammarians define "da" and "desu" as copular verbs.
In Japanese, predicate verbs can be often omitted when apparent from the context.
Although the prescriptive grammar of the contemporary Japanese language regards the omission of predicate verbs as irregular, it was frequently seen in classical literature, and it's still common in today's spoken Japanese (2).
As to the two examples I cited above, verbs and other parts of speech are omitted from the predicates where they should be, and "da" or "desu" only serves to wrap up the sentence.
In a sentence like そのワンピースはかわいいです("That dress is pretty"), "desu" is used to give politeness to the sentence そのワンピースはかわいい.
With the addition of "no" (often shortened to "n" in conversation) after them, "da" or "desu" has an explanatory effect on a sentence: これ、ほしかったんだ！ ("Kore hoshikatta n da!: I just wanted this!")
When we say "A is B" where B is a subject complement, we express it without a copula verb (ＡはＢ), and add "da" or "desu" afer it to provide grammatical functions like tenses, politeness or the effect of closing out the sentence:
1. 彼女は歌手。"She is a singer." (a basic sentence)
2. 彼女は歌手だ。"She is a singer." (a plain expression of 1)
3. 彼女は歌手だった。"She was a singer." (2 in the past tense)
4. 彼女は歌手です。"She is a singer." (a polite expression of 1)
Getting back to the starting point of this topic, it turns out that です in a sentence like この写真は私の父です is not a copula. Such an expression vaguely connects the subject with the predicate with an intuitive understanding that "this photo" is showing "my father," and wraps up the sentence with です to make a polite expression in the same way as in そのワンピースはかわいいです.
Unfortunately, modern Japanese grammar defined "da" and "desu" as copular verbs to make them consistent with those in Western languages. It caused common mistakes we frequently made in forming copular sentences in foreign language as I gave some examples above. I think this is a bad definition as in the case of "personal pronouns" I pointed out in the previous entries.
If you want to advance in Japanese skill and have no trouble in understanding what Japanese people actually mean, it's absolutely necessary to read what is implied in the omissions of words in a sentence.
ﾟ･*:.｡. .｡.:･
☆。・:*゜。・:*゜
Note.
1. In a copular sentence, the subject complement should be always in the same (i.e, nominative) case as the subject, as is evident in Latin, Greek and other inflectional languages.
This feature is somewhat obscured in English and French, as in: It's me; C'est mois.
2. 枕草子 (Makura no Sōshi), one of Japan's earliest prose masterpiece written by the court lady 清少納言 (Sei Shonagon) ca. 1000, begins with the famous sentence:
春は曙。["Haru wa akebono: (In) spring, the dawn." ] This means: "Speaking of spring, I like the dawn best."
Even today, we still use similar expressions like: わたしはケーキ！ ["(For) me, the cake!"] This means I want to have a cake. ^_^
This was a sentence I wrote in English a couple of years ago.
In proper English, this should be "This is a picture of my father" or "This picture shows my father." Logical errors of this kind are common to Japanese people when they speak in a foreign language.
The verb "is," as in the sentence above, is often defined as a "copula" which is also called a "linking verb." A copula links the subject of a sentence with a predicate, where the subject complement as a predicate renames or describes the subject.
For example, in the sentence "He is my boyfriend," the subject ("He") is linked by the copula "is" with the subject complement "my boyfriend."
Since the subject complement is in apposition to the subject of a sentence, you can form a sentence like "He, my boyfriend, loves me" (1).
Although common Japanese grammar describes だ ("da") and です ("desu") as copular verbs as if they were similar to the "be-verbs" of English in function, I dare say that there's no copula in the Japanese language.
The English sentence I mentioned at the top of this article showed the influence of the Japanese expression: この写真は私の父です。 In this sentence, 私の父 cannot be the subject complement of the subject この写真, but nonetheless this sentence itself reads as if it means "this photo is my father."
In the same way, it's not uncommon for us to say 今、日本は朝だが、アメリカは夜だ。("Right now it's morning in Japan, but it's night in America", literally, "Right now Japan is morning, but America is might.") or 今日、私はジーンズにスニーカーです。("Today, I wear jeans and sneakers", literally, "Today, I am jeans and sneakers.")
How should we explain these strange expressions?
I think the problem is that grammarians define "da" and "desu" as copular verbs.
In Japanese, predicate verbs can be often omitted when apparent from the context.
Although the prescriptive grammar of the contemporary Japanese language regards the omission of predicate verbs as irregular, it was frequently seen in classical literature, and it's still common in today's spoken Japanese (2).
As to the two examples I cited above, verbs and other parts of speech are omitted from the predicates where they should be, and "da" or "desu" only serves to wrap up the sentence.
In a sentence like そのワンピースはかわいいです("That dress is pretty"), "desu" is used to give politeness to the sentence そのワンピースはかわいい.
With the addition of "no" (often shortened to "n" in conversation) after them, "da" or "desu" has an explanatory effect on a sentence: これ、ほしかったんだ！ ("Kore hoshikatta n da!: I just wanted this!")
When we say "A is B" where B is a subject complement, we express it without a copula verb (ＡはＢ), and add "da" or "desu" afer it to provide grammatical functions like tenses, politeness or the effect of closing out the sentence:
1. 彼女は歌手。"She is a singer." (a basic sentence)
2. 彼女は歌手だ。"She is a singer." (a plain expression of 1)
3. 彼女は歌手だった。"She was a singer." (2 in the past tense)
4. 彼女は歌手です。"She is a singer." (a polite expression of 1)
Getting back to the starting point of this topic, it turns out that です in a sentence like この写真は私の父です is not a copula. Such an expression vaguely connects the subject with the predicate with an intuitive understanding that "this photo" is showing "my father," and wraps up the sentence with です to make a polite expression in the same way as in そのワンピースはかわいいです.
Unfortunately, modern Japanese grammar defined "da" and "desu" as copular verbs to make them consistent with those in Western languages. It caused common mistakes we frequently made in forming copular sentences in foreign language as I gave some examples above. I think this is a bad definition as in the case of "personal pronouns" I pointed out in the previous entries.
If you want to advance in Japanese skill and have no trouble in understanding what Japanese people actually mean, it's absolutely necessary to read what is implied in the omissions of words in a sentence.
ﾟ･*:.｡. .｡.:･
☆。・:*゜。・:*゜
Note.
1. In a copular sentence, the subject complement should be always in the same (i.e, nominative) case as the subject, as is evident in Latin, Greek and other inflectional languages.
This feature is somewhat obscured in English and French, as in: It's me; C'est mois.
2. 枕草子 (Makura no Sōshi), one of Japan's earliest prose masterpiece written by the court lady 清少納言 (Sei Shonagon) ca. 1000, begins with the famous sentence:
春は曙。["Haru wa akebono: (In) spring, the dawn." ] This means: "Speaking of spring, I like the dawn best."
Even today, we still use similar expressions like: わたしはケーキ！ ["(For) me, the cake!"] This means I want to have a cake. ^_^
- 374
- 52
- 4
Journals Statistics
| Total | 35 entries |
|---|---|
| This Month | 0 entries |
| This week | 0 enrties |
Latest entry
| Ten Principles for My Journal Entries (237) |
| Roomy's One-Year Anniversary (Roomy の１周年記念日) (260) |
| Passive Voice in English and Japanese (134) |
| Language and Woman (2) (91) |
| Language and Woman (1) (145) |
Latest comments
| Feb 23rd จั๊ก - ジャック -Juk -雅克 |
| Feb 19th Treehugger |
| Nov 18th Arwyn |
| Nov 12th がいか |
| Nov 02nd Syringa Vulgaris |
Entries by Month
| 2011 |
|---|
| - February (1) |
| 2010 |
| - November (1) |
| - October (1) |
| - September (2) |
| - June (3) |
| - May (2) |
| - April (2) |
| - March (3) |
| - February (3) |
| - January (3) |
| 2009 |
| - December (5) |
| - November (9) |
As a native English speaker, I never actually considered what "is" was - it comes naturally, just as a Japanese person would know where to use certain linking-type words.
Unfortunately, I'm not Japanese therefore I tend to throw "は", "わ", "の", "だ", and "か" around unnecessarily and I always considered "です" as a sentence-ender. So this entry is especially helpful to me - thank you for this informative entry!
Thank you for your comment!
I think most of the learners of Japanese would be at a loss as to how to understand Japanese expressions with a lot of omissions, or they wonder why Japanese learners often make strange mistakes in putting their thoughts into a foreign language. This article aims to shed new light on these issues.
I'm glad this post was of help to you. :)
あはは、例文です！＾＾；
Ha-ha, thank you for the compliment!
But I think there must be some mistakes in the English sentences used in this entry, and I'm waiting for someone to correct them. :)
This feature is somewhat obscured in English and French, as in: It's me; C'est moi.
Thanks, Terry! Touche! You win, XD
The English sentence I mentioned at the top of this article shows the influence of the Japanese expression: この写真は私の父です。(I am not confident in this correction but it sounds better to me because the usefulness of the example is still in effect. Does that even make sense LOL? I may be wrong~)
("Right now it's morning in Japan, but it's night in America", literally, "Right now Japan is morning, but America is night.") or 今日、私はジーンズにスニーカーです。
In Japanese, predicate verbs can often be omitted when apparent from the context.
Unfortunately, modern Japanese grammar defines "da" and "desu" as copular verbs to make them consistent with those in Western languages.
This causes common mistakes we frequently make in forming copular sentences in foreign language as I gave some examples above. (I put this and the previous sentence in present tense because this still happens, right...?)
If you want to advance in your Japanese skill and have no trouble in understanding what Japanese people actually mean, it's absolutely necessary to read what is implied in the omissions of words in a sentence.
I had come across this once in my Japanese textbook. A girl called her home and asked about her dad and her sister answered 今日はゴルフ, saying that he was playing golf today. In your example, though, I don't think I would have guessed that わたしはケーキ！would mean "I want some cake"!
I really hope that I'll be able to understand a Japanese person completely without any misunderstandings!
Thank you for correcting my text! I appreciate it!!
I don't know the difference between "can often be omitted" and "can be often omitted" or whether the former is grammatically wrong. It would be nice if you could explain it to me.
I'm sometimes confused about how to use the tenses of verbs because I can't figure out how they sound to the native speakers, but your advices really help me a lot!
As to grammatical terms like "copula" and "subject complement," I suggest you look up them in Wikipedia. It serves as a very useful reference.
> In your example, though, I don't think I would have guessed that わたしはケーキ！would mean "I want some cake"!
Let's just put it this way.
Suppose we were in a coffee house. If you ordered something you liked and I wanted some cake, I would say to the server, わたしはケーキ！：Ｄ
Looks as if the verb "want" is implicit? Could you explicitly say "I want cake" instead of "I, cake"?
And in the photo example "This photo [shows] my father" there's again a verb that although not explicitly mentioned, is there somehow?
What is implied in a verbless sentence varies depending on the situation.
わたしはケーキ！ might mean "I like cakes!" if I were asked "What do you like best?"
A literal translation of "This photo shows my father" would be この写真は私の父を示しています, but it sounds somewhat unnatural in spoken Japanese. That's why we usually say like, この写真は私の父です (This photo, my father, and "desu") instead.
In each case, we catch the implied meaning according to our reading of the situation.
I'm not quite a master of the English language so I'm afraid my knowledge is quite lacking. ^^;
I don't believe that, in those sentences, the tenses are a big deal. Most people, I'm sure, wouldn't find fault with it. I think I'm just confusing you more ha ha, sorry!
Oh, I see! Obviously, the situation plays a big role in "vague" sentences like that! I'll try to pay attention! ：D
Oh I see! I understood that the form "often be (verb)" is better. It is a good lesson for me!
As to the tenses, I'm not so confused now. Sorry for making you worry! ^_^
There are a lot of "vague" expressions in Japanese. It might look tough, but it doesn't mean there's no rule in those expressions.
Thank you for your extensive explanations.
You're welcome!
I wonder if Turkish is more like English than Japanese?
Getting back to the starting point of this topic my initial / first example, it turns out that です in a sentence like この写真は私の父です is not a copula.
It caused This causes common mistakes we frequently made make in forming copular sentences in foreign languages as I gave some like the examples (I gave) above.
I think this is a bad definition as in the case of "personal pronouns" that I pointed out in the my previous entries.
If you want to advance in your Japanese skill studies and to have no trouble in understanding what Japanese people actually mean, it's absolutely necessary to read what is implied in the omissions of words in a sentence.
["Haru wa akebono: (In) spring, the dawn." ] This means: "Speaking of spring, I like the dawn best."
["(For) me, the cake!"] This means I want to have a some cake.
I guess because I didn't initially learn from a formal textbook or class, I never really questioned the formation of sentences using だ / です. Actually, it's the first time I've heard of the word "copula"! Interesting comparisons...
添削ありがとうございます！
I'm a little surprised that you and other native English spealers know little about copulae or "linking verbs", even though they are very important in studying English grammar. To be honest, it's actually quite recent that I learned about them. :)
" I am cake !" ・・・なんてことも、うっかり使っちゃいそう。
これ、英語ネイティブの人が聞いたら、どおなんだろう。
ちょっとおかしいって思っても、ちゃんと通じてるのかな・・・？
When I learned English, however, we didn't do that. I know simple things such as adjectives, nouns, and verbs but other things I cannot remember. I know how the language works (well, to some extent as I'm still taking English classes!), but I don't know how to explain it in technical terms. ^^;;
Thanks for the explanation ^_^
I see your point that だ and です are not really forms of the verb "to be"
On the other hand, in the sentence そのワンピースはかわいい there seems to be an implicit verb, and that implicit verb is a copula of sorts?
そのワンピースは [is] かわいい
そうですよね！わたしもそうだったし、日本人はみんな最初はそうだと思います。「だ」「です」は英語の BE 動詞と同じだ、なんて教えてるのがそもそもの間違いで、だから「この写真は私の父です」や「今日の私はジーンズです」みたいなときに無理が出てきてしまうんです。それでもネイティブの人はなんとか理解してくれてるみたいですよ。ちゃんと直してくれてるもの。だけど「この人、頭が悪いのかな」って思われてるかも～ ＞＜
Kathryn,
Thanks for your explaining why native English speakers don't have good knowledge of grammatical terms these days. Well, I've heard of the change of teaching style that occurred in the recent decades in Japan, which is called ゆとり教育 (I don't know what is the appropriate English term for this, but it might be translated as "education with lighter curriculum). 'As a result of this change, even a lot of university students nowadays have poorer knowledge of Kanjis for everyday use than their elders. Their verbal aptitude is also said to have declined.' I read about it in the paper. So the situation in Japan might be the same with your country.
As for me, I've learned about English grammar on my own these past couple of years because I'm amorous of language studies. Before that, my English level was the same as that of just another girl. :)
L san,
I feel like it's been a long time since you commented on my previous post. I'm glad you came back!
There are sayings like, "Custom makes all things easy" or "All things are difficult before they are easy." Getting used to the Japanese ways of speaking may be hard, but your friends on Lang-8 are behind you all the way.
I think "desu" is a very useful word, but using "desu" too much sounds rather awkward. :)
FreeCat,
You're welcome! Glad to hear you say that. :)
In the sentence そのワンピースはかわいい there's no verb (は is a particle). This means literally "that dress, pretty!" You can add です after the sentence if you want to make it sound more polite.
If you say 僕は FreeCat です, the word です here looks like a linking verb, but I think it actually serve as a "sentence-ending word" that wrap up the sentence.
Thank you for your great text which tells us about something important.
I think your effort will surely bear fruit.
Thank you for sticking up for me!
I'm really lucky to have so many good friends. (ノ∀・【ﾟ･*:.｡. ☆ぁりがとぅ☆.｡.:*･゜】
ごめんね、最近添削できなくて。学校で色々忙しいよ。
休みのとき、いっぱい添削したいと思うよ。
今はまだ日記だけ書ける。あとはコメントもするよ！
ありがとうね！
＜３
忙しいのにカキコしてくれて、本当に友達っていいなって思います！
日記のスタイルって人それぞれ個性があっていいんじゃないかな。
みんな同じ書き方だったらつまらないし（笑）
また遊びに来てね☆
I'm happy to hear that! It would be nice if you can visit my page constantly and sometimes correct my entries. They're always welcome. :D
「です」と「だ」（中国語の文法書に「判断句」と呼ばれています）がないと、言う事はＸＸほしいという感じになりますよね！
それは、どんな状況で使うかによりますよ。
「ご出身はどちらですか？」と聞かれて、
Rijinseiさんが「ぼくは中国」と答えたとすれば「中国がほしい」、じゃなくて「ぼくの出身は中国だ」の意味になります。
Thank you for your useful information. ^_^
しかし、難しいなぁ。。。僕にとっては、英語はちょっと。。。
ところで、僕の英語でのニックネームはJukです。
Please don't call me "Jug".５５５
先生なんてやめてください（笑）
わたしも格闘しながら英語を書いています！
All right! I'll never call you "jug" again. lol
これからも宜しくね！ ^_^
It's been a while! I hope you can correct my entry again as you used to do. I'm going to post my new entry tomorrow.
I can see how the court lady Sei Shonagon felt and ruminated 1000 years ago.
Roomy さん：
おはようございます。
なかなか言えない一言だけど
いつも支えてくれてありがとう。感謝しています。
いらっしゃいませ！
わたしのページにお越しいただいて本当にうれしいです （＾－＾）
読みづらい日記ですが、これからもよろしくお願いします☆
For me, it's very hard to find out what's the omitted sentence/meaning...
うれしいな / うれしいよ I'm happy.
うれしいね We're happy (aren't we?)
うれしいの？ Are you happy?
I'm planning to write about these rules in my future entries.
("Today, I wear jeans and sneakers", or, literally, "Today, I am jeans and sneakers.")
This causes the common mistakes that we frequently make in forming copular sentences in foreign languages, as in the examples I gave above.
I think this is a poor definition, just as with "personal pronouns" as I've pointed out in the previous entries. ["Poor" sounds better to me with the type of formal language you're using throughout this entry.]
Thank you for your corrections. I appreciate them. :)
つまり、ご自身で例に挙げていらっしゃる "春は曙(がよい)" と同様に "この写真(に写っているの)は私の父です" とやるらしい。文法的な説明としてはこれで充分つじつまが合っていると思います。
むしろ、"かわいいです" の "です" なんぞ、完全に文法無視の用法だった訳で、そっちは "grammarians" がどう説明しているのかに興味がありますね^^。
改めて日本語について考えさせてもらいました、ありがとう！
「省略」の問題とおっしゃってる点に関しては、まあ普通の人はそう言うでしょうね。なぜかって言うと、その方が説明が楽だからです。人称代名詞もそうですが、外国人に聞かれた場合、「これはただ省略されているんだよ」って言った方が簡単で済みます。
現代の日本語文法は西洋文法の影響を受けています。活用形や助詞の様にどうしても西洋文法で説明できないもの以外は、無理やり西洋文法の論理に当てはめてきました。人称代名詞や、ここのコピュラがそのいい例です。
コピュラというのは数学の等式のようなものだと思います。"A is B." は A = B と同じです。でも日本語の「です・だ」が＜もともと＞英語の BE 動詞のような等価性を表す動詞だという根拠はどこにあるのでしょうか。たまたま「ＡはＢです」のような場合に "A is B." の構文と類似するから「です・だ」も BE 動詞同様にコピュラなのだろうと考えたのかもしれません。
日本語の文法を無理やり西洋文法の論理で説明しようとするために、もともと日本語にある「かわいいです」 の「です」の方が間違いだというような方向に行ってしまうんじゃないでしょうか。
日本語は非論理的だという言葉をよく耳にします。BE 動詞は「です・だ」に当たるんだよと教えられたために "This photo is my father." のような表現を何の疑問も持たずに使っている人をこのサイトでもよく目にします。実際は日本語やアジアの言語には西洋語とは違った独自の論理があるはずなのに、それを無視するから、そうなってしまうんだと思います。
勿論、私も "だ" は "A=B" だなんて思ってはいないし、そもそも日本語の "連結詞的動詞" なんて知らない^^;。例えば、"きれいです" は全く OK なのに "可愛いです" に違和感を感じるのは少し前の日本語が持っていた性質から来てる、今の日本語にその文法をあてはめようとすることには既に無理があると思う訳で、同様に "連結詞的動詞" を持ち出せば道理引っ込んでもしょうがないよね、みたいなことが言いたかった、ってなことかな^^。
んでまぁ、確かに素人といえども "省略" だけで済ますのは簡単すぎるのかもしれませんがそれを許さないと説明が非常に厄介になりそうですよね。最終的に "省略" なしに説明できるような "非構造主義的" 理論展開のソースをご紹介頂ければ後は自分で調べてみたいと思います。宜しくお願いします。丁寧な解説、ありがとうございました。
てなことを、Roomy さんのように英語で言えるようになりたいなぁ、というのが結論ですかね^^。ではではまた。
Useful article, interesting discussion.
ありがとうございます！！！
Спасибо!
According to his guide, 「は」 is a topic particle, not a subject particle. Thus, by speaking 「あの人は美しいです」, 「あの人」 is not the grammatical subject ("That person is beautiful"), but the topic, and overly literal translation would be something like "About that person - (he/she) is beautiful".
According to this explanation, the sentence 「この写真は私の父です」 should not be translated as "This photo is my father" not because 「です」 is not a copula, but because 「この写真」 is not the grammatical subject. This sentence literally translates to "About this photo - it is my father", and the meaning of this sentence is clear, even though it sounds awkward in English.
I know that you have since written an article about the 「は」 and 「が」 particles, the latter of which Tae Kim describes as a "real" subject particle. I read it some time ago, and I'll re-read it in a short time, because I have forgotten some things you have written there.
Anyway, what do you think about the explanation above?
PS I would be very grateful if you could comment on my latest journal entry ;) But don't force yourself :)
Please notice that I've never described は as a subject particle anywhere. Rather, I mentioned it as a '"topic marker" that, like the English phrase "as for", mark the topic of a sentence' in my article on the particles は and が.
The important point that I tried to emphasize in this article is that だ and です which can be used to wrap up sentences are not copular verbs, as are often explained in ordinary Japanese grammars. My conclusion would remain the same even when I changed the Japanese sentence in question to この写真 'が' 私の父です.
I believe that there remain some 'unfathomed abysses' in the Japanese language. I don't always agree with 'Grammar Mavens' who try to explain the Japanese grammar from their biased standpoints based on the grammars of the Western languages. As with the 'copular verbs' I discussed about in this article, the so-called 'personal pronouns' in Japanese have the same problem.
To me it's very interesting and exciting to have 'another look' at these points.
Oh, I'm sorry I didn't comment on your latest journal entry. I'll go and read it. :)
You're right that explaining Japanese grammar in terms taken from Western languages is deemed to fail at some point or another, since Japanese is very different to them conceptually. I have some experience in translating from Japanese (involving heavy usage of dictionary and some amount of guesswork, but still) and I clearly remember moments, when (after reading/listening to the sentence several times and looking in a dictionary) I could clearly understand the Japanese sentence, but had to think for quite a long time before I was able to write it in Polish or English. Literal translations of Japanese sentences into Western languages almost always sound totally unnatural and weird, and sometimes translation is even impossible. I think the same is true the other way round - when translating from Western languages into Japanese. When translating works of fiction for general audiences, there are also cultural differences to be accounted for (eg. high school classmates calling each other "Mr. <surname>" would be unthinkable for Western audiences, even though 「<surname>さん」 is typical among Japanese highschoolers), but that's a topic for another discussion.
But I think that giving some approximate of the Japanese grammar in terms of Western grammars is necessary for learning. I couldn't understand the purpose of the 「は」 particle and it's difference to 「が」 at all, before seeing an explanation to treat it as "Speaking about ...". I know that it should be taken account for, that such translations are not entirely accurate, but I think that they are necessary to give a first impression, which would then be clarified by articles such as yours, and actual use of the language.
If someone asked me, "あなたのお父さんってどんな人ですか？(What does your father look like?)," I would answer, "見て。この写真が私の父です (Look! This photo is my father)".
I agree with you that it's necessary to give Westerners a rough idea of what the specific items in the Japanese grammar mean, based on comparisons with the Western grammar; otherwise, they would be hardly able to understand the Japanese language.
I noticed that common misunderstandings which Japanese-learners tend to have about the Japanese language is often caused by the confusion with their mother tongue. What is true for their mother tongue isn't always true for Japanese, and vice versa.
The use of the honorific ending さん in Japanese is even used among friends, as you know. Unlike Mr. or Ms., さん can be attached to not only surnames but also given names. Calling other people without a honorific ending is called 呼び捨て and, in many cases, could offend the feelings of the person you talk to. Even if you were my boyfriend, I would call you マテウシュさん! (Just kidding, haha! ^^) (It depends on the person, though; for example, a ill-bred girl might call you マテウシュ!) These facts tell you that we often use さん when we call someone affectionately.
When I speak or write in a foreign language, I have to totally change my way of thinking, because literal translations between extremely different languages could end up sounding unnatural and weird. I believe this holds true for Japanese-learners.