1656
Is 亡くなる is a polite form of しぬ?

What is the difference in nuance between these two sentences:

  1. ディックは１０歳のとき亡くなった。

  2. ディックは１０歳のとき死んだ。
CC BY-SA 4.0
2011-06-30T06:05:44.290
1648
2021-03-03T09:03:42.303
2021-03-03T09:03:42.303
31389
264
question
words nuances
Is 亡くなる a polite form of しぬ?
Yes.

> 死ぬ = too direct, rough and generally rude when talking about a person.
>
> 亡くなる = polite way of saying it.

Same exact nuance exists in most languages, English included:

> 死ぬ → to die
>
> 亡くなる → to pass away / to pass on / to be deceased (when using past form)

While you _could_ say "I heard that your grandpa **died** ", saying "I heard
that your grandpa **passed away** " would be consider much better form.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2011-06-30T06:10:50.340
1649
2011-06-30T07:43:44.727
2011-06-30T07:43:44.727
290
290
1648
answer
Being the rudeness level, I think it's also a matter of shock level.
Characters in anime and movies are likely to use '死ぬ' because it's very
shocking to say it like that, where in real life people are a little more
likely to have some restraint.

Let's face it, "お前はもう死んでいる" has more impact than "お前はもう亡くなっている". (Both mean
"You are already dead", but the first is a direct quote from the anime Fist of
the North Star's Ken.)
CC BY-SA 3.0
2011-06-30T13:13:07.783
1653
2011-07-01T11:22:48.257
2011-07-01T11:22:48.257
393
393
1648
answer
亡くなる is a [euphemism](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism) for 死ぬ. 死ぬ means
“to die” directly, and it is often appropriate to replace it with the less
direct 亡くなる when one is talking about the death of a person. As Dave wrote in
his answer, euphemisms for death exist in other languages, too.

死ぬ can be used for a person or an animal, but 亡くなる is usually used only for a
person.

逝去する, mentioned in Derek’s comment on Dave’s answer, is a 尊敬語 (respectful
form) of 死ぬ/亡くなる and raises the status of the person who is mentioned. 亡くなる is
_not_ a 尊敬語. For example, it is correct to use 亡くなる when talking about the
death of a family member to the outside, but it is incorrect to use 逝去する in
this case.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2011-06-30T15:05:40.850
1656
2011-06-30T15:05:40.850
15
1648
answer