Great explanation! Thank you so much! It is still a little bit vague to me, but at least my doubt cleared. I just have another question. So basically, te-aru and te-oku mean almost the same thing but have a different focus, and viewpoint, right? Like the first one shows the result, the other one shows the action. However, what about we say まどをあけてある。and まどをあけておく。Is there any difference between them? Or using まどをあけてある is not grammatically correct? Thank you so much!
Congratulations! The relationship between 〜ておく and 〜てある is an excellent insight. They are indeed related. But the important thing to understand is that they are _the opposite sides of the same coin_ - they are not the same side so it is important not to confuse them. Let me explain. 〜てある is, a _stative_ verbal expression. This means that it expresses a state, not an action (this is always true of ある). And the state that it expresses is the _state resulting from the equivalent ておく expression_ . So if I say まどをあけておく I am saying that I open the window and leave it that way (put the action in place). If you say まどがあいてある - you are talking about the window that I opened and left open. まどをあいとある is ungrammatical because を marks the thing acted upon by the が-marked subject of the sentence (the A-car). But with あいてある the subject of the sentence is not acting upon anything. It is in a state of _having been acted upon_ itself. Does this make it clear?
Thank you so much for raising the awareness of falling jars of marmalade. This is an epidemic of our time, and we must act quickly to secure the safety of future generations. Also, your brief explanation of "TEOKU" was perfect. Thank you.
You know there is something wrong (or right) when you binge watch a grammar series instead of watching anime or playing a visual novel... Especially when the channel promotes immersion and minimal formal study. This stuff is too good.
Well, I mean immersion takes a ton of time, but it's necessary since you'll never be able to use your System 2(your slow, thoughtful mind) for speaking with anybody in Japanese, it's just too slow and mistake-prone.
I think I've seen 置くused in some situations where a person (or group) leaves someone behind, fits perfectly with your explanation. I'm sure you've read this countless of times, but you really are doing god's work here
Cure dolly sensi - I'm so sorry and sad that you will never be able to see this post, but you have been life-changing to me. I will be moving to Japan for work and was recommended to watch your videos. I have been doing a "cure dolly bootcamp" if you will, and watching your videos has armed me with the knowledge and abilities that I think otherwise wouldn't have been possible in such a short amount of time. You are so remarkable and kind and wonderful to share your knowledge with the world and I only wish I could have joined your community earlier to thank you "in person". From the bottom of my heart, ありがとう 先生 and rest in peace.
Another fine lesson! ほんとにありがと! As you say in the video, you're developing your KawaJapa style of J-J translations. I do find them very helpful to learning… which, of course is your goal. I sometimes refer to such translations as "learner's translations". Oftentimes, as you know, the translations in anime subtitles not only translate the words but they completely rephrase the sentence. What you get is a phrase that an English-speaking person would likely say in that situation-even when it has little to do with the original Japanese words or phrase. There’s nothing fundamentally wrong with that for anime subtitles because those are what I would call "reader's translations". They’re written for the audience that is interested in the story, but hasn’t (yet) developed the interest in learning the wonderful language of Japanese. But, a learner of Japanese does need to realize that "reader's translations" often can't be taken literally. There is of course more than a little confusion when J-E textbooks or websites use such "reader’s translations". (Your frequent example of “I like coffee.” is a reader’s translation-not a learner’s translation.) And, it’s quite important for learners of Japanese to understand this very early, so that someone in the early stages doesn’t get so confused as to give up. This, I believe, is the real importance of what you’re doing: helping learners avoid such confusions, so that their learning-and their *interest* in learning-can continue to grow! By the way, could you sometime show your KawaJapa-style learner’s translation of your closing sentence "Kore kara mo yoroshiku onegai shimasu." with the train engine & railcars (and color coding if needed)?
Yes, the distinction between readers' translations and learners' translations is very important. If you are actually translating an anime or manga for the general public "I like coffee" is correct and translating receptive sentences into the English passive is also correct in a large number of cases - "correct" meaning making the characters use natural English and say something close to what the original text said. Of course how far one should go in making Japanese characters talk as if they were American characters is a creative decision. To some extent it is inevitable - and it is interesting to see that two different translations are rarely the same. In more extreme cases a character is almost remolded to be more like who she would be if she had been born in America. But that is really a whole different point. I am always surprised by how textbooks etc. present these loose translations to learners as if they were what the words were actually saying. It is really so unhelpful and sows problems that just get deeper as they go along. The thing about yoroshiku onegaishimasu is that it isn't regular Japanese grammar. It is a kind of keigo (ultra-polite Japanese) called kenjougo (humble-speech) and the grammatical formation of the sentence is a little different from regular grammar. It isn't difficult and I probably will map it with trains some time, but probably not until we get to learning some keigo. But to summarize what is going on if you are interested, in kenjougo instead of using a verb straight out as in normal Japanese we first use the honorific "o", then the verb in its い-stem form (making it a noun) and then suru to turn it back into a verb again! The verb here is negau, wish, or beg and yoroshiku is the adverbial form of yoroshii, good (a slightly fancier form of ii or yoi) in its ku adjectival form. So in all it means something like "(treat me) well, (I) humbly entreat" - and it is kind of old-fashioned like that, except that it is so often used that it doesn't feel old fashioned - just as "Good bye" = God be (with you) doesn't feel old-fashioned in English because it's just a part of everyday speech. I would recommend learners not to worry too much about keigo (there are two other forms as well as kenjougo, all used together) - even Japanese people can have trouble with it. The heroine in _Fruits Basket_ uses keigo all the time and gets it wrong all the time (a part of her character that I imagine can't help getting lost in translation!) No one will ever expect you to use it (unless you work for a Japanese company). People in customer service situations will use it toward you and you will encounter it in anime etc, so we do need to cover it when we have the basics firm, but luckily it is much easier to understand than to use correctly. It isn't really _that_ difficult to use but it will take a few lessons to get a handle on it. And we'll definitely do that!
Took me a long while to internalize that concept, but it became much clearer now. I believe I can ever include that in my vocabulary ^^. Thank you very much, sensei!
I first watched this video a few weeks ago, and I enjoyed it. But I'm currently about 30 videos further ahead in the series (wrapping up the ghost story), and I came back to this lesson as a review (one of your helpful cards in the video sent me back here). All I can say is, wow! It makes so much more sense now. It feels more intuitive, what with the extra practice and concepts (and vocab) under my belt.
This really is important. I can't recommend enough that learners come back to earlier videos after some (more) immersion. However clear they seemed the first time you will find new understanding as you know more.
OMG I'm just reviewing ている, てある, and ておく recently using a textbook. Even though I watched this video before, I decided to re-watch this. Your explanation really closes the deal of my confusion! Thank you for this great explanation! I had lots of "Aha!" moments while listening to your explanations.
I just want to say thank you so much for these videos! A lot of these concepts can be challenging to grasp as a native English speaker, but you really do have a great way of teaching them. Also the fact that you have so many visual representations of what is going on is so helpful. Textbooks so often tend to over-complicate or over-simplify things. They're either too wordy or they don't explain enough, and then I become lost lol.
Thank you so much Sensei. I've been learning Japanese for almost a year now and due to the vague translations in the English textbooks, which at the moment seemed rather easy, I still keep wondering about things and translating in my head whenever I hear these in dramas and anime. Your videos are really helping me to slowly get out of this mess. Although, I think these concepts are much easier to grasp for Asians like myself than it is for any European or Americans because we use a lot of double verbs in daily conversations. But it has to be done sooner or later in order to stay away from constant translation in the head, which is exhausting.
Ah this makes so much sense now. I often watch Let's Plays of video games and often the TH-camr will say 「セーブシておきます」. Now it makes sense why they use 置く!
I quickly paused the video just to say: WOW! I understood the first part of the on-going story "naturally" as I read it, without having to make too much effort. If I stumbled upon the same sentence before discovering this playlist, I'd have a grasp of the meaning because of the visual reference, but I wouldn't be able to pin point the particles functions and stuff. This means you're doing an excellent job, Cure Dolly sensei. The merit is all yours, I'm just a regular person with slightly above average intelligence @_@ much love to you! I'm excited to finish this playlist :D
Thank you Cure Dolly! I had studied Japanese for a year but I was still having to guess bits of grammar, or I couldn't quite understand the rules of everything - and the logic behind them. I discovered your videos and by watching the first 20 I already understand concepts so much better than I used to. I now use your videos to teach myself grammar rather than from my teachers as they fall into the pitfall of explaining everything with an English lens which after a while starts to break down.
Yes that's the problem. The English lens appears to make things (a little) easier at first but it's like putting the ladder on uneven ground. The higher you go the wobblier it gets.
The relationship, and their seperate distinctions are well explained and made clear through good examples. ておく has been a bother to me for a while, no more, thanks to you. ありがとう。
That is a really good explanation of ている、てある、ておく forms. The subtlety of the explanation is almost like an exact science, which really leaves Japanese with no Indeterminate explanations. Rather if you understand the actual weird translations of these sentences, it only becomes much more easier to translate it into English. ありがとう先生.
Since in the jar's case ておく doesn't have an implication of "doing in advance as preparation", what's the difference between the ておく form and just 「アリスがびんを」うまくとだなの一つへ通りすがりに置いた? My main issue with this form is than sometimes I can't tell why it's used instead of the form without it.
Hi, I really like this video series and have been taking notes for each lesson so far. I got a little confused at 6:24. Here you say that the jar existed in a state of having a label pasted on it. To me, it seems like it would be the label(marked by が) that is existing in a state of being pasted on the jar. The meaning is sort of the same, but after focusing on が-placement for so many lessons your wording here got me questioning wether I am missing something.
Ken M I’m far from an expert but since Sensei Dolly didn’t respond, I thought I would try. I think the issue here is that you are reading the ga-marked subject “label” with the wrong verb. “Label” is the ga-marked subject only of the subclause which has the verb はる or paste. The main or “core” sentence is determined by the verb ある. There is no stated subject of this verb, it is simply omitted. In this manner, the core sentence has a zero-ga subject, as Sensei Dolly has been teaching from her early lessons. But we can infer from context that the zero-ga subject is actually just “it” or, in this case taking a hint from the wa-marked topic, “this jar”. So the core clause could more closely be translated to “As for on this jar, [it] existed [in a state]. Then the sub clause expands on that state by defining it as a “label is pasted” state. So back to the original point, there are actually two different が marked subjects in this sentence, but one of them is omitted or silent as happens frequently in Japanese sentences.
@@susie2251 I can kinda see how this explanation works in the context of this sentence. However, I think Dolly explained it (her? it?)self in bits and pieces throughout the video (1:56 and 7:20). I think the key is in 1) what's actually being marked by the は particle and 2) what と is doing in the sentence. Basically, what I think is going on (and what's suggested at 7:20) is that there are two separate core clauses, with the second ある contained entirely within the second clause (i.e. there is no zero-が). The topic marked by the は particle can be translated as, "As for (what was) on that jar...". The first clause indeed says that the label existed in a state of being pasted. Pasted where? On the jar (since that is the topic). The second clause is similar; the words "orange marmalade" existed in a state of being written. Written where? On the jar. The particle と essentially replaces が as the subject marker (again, see 7:20). As was stated in a previous lesson, only the last verb in a compound/complex sentence indicates the tense of the sentence (hence why the second ある looks different from the first one).
First of all thank you so much for this series, really reignited my drive to learn japanese. So I finally started with anime immersion and I still need to frequently come to some lessons to clear some doubts but I found something that I'm not sure if it has something to do with the ～ておく verb the sentence is the following 「お弁当ちょっとデカいけど硬く握っといたから大丈夫」in the anime a girl gives someone a very big rice ball so she starts announcing the subject the she describes that even thought it's very big she made it tightly (don't think is the right way to say in english but anyone that has made riceballs understands) so the other person shouldn't worry about it coming apart. My problem is the way 「硬く握っといた」is formed , is this a te oku form in past tense? Where instead of saying 「硬く握ておいた」the て and お get fused into っと, the sentence makes sense like that but I just want to be sure if this is the case or if this is something completely different.
You probably already learned that on your own long ago, but in case someone else stumbles upon this - yes, ~とく is a colloquial contraction of ～ておく, much like ～てる is a colloquial contraction of ～ている。
So i guess it could be considered also be considered as also ( leaving it) or leave it置いておいた putting it down and leaving it same thing with the other examples! Thanks a ton! who knew that a robot could explain Japanese grammar so well! We need more robot teachers and less human teachers haha
Heehee I agree with you. But that sort of thing worries a lot of humans. "Robots will take our jobs!" Will we? Well the short answer to that is "yes". In 1900, 80% of Americans worked on the land. Now it's 2%. Does anyone think that was a disaster? I don't think so. If you'd told people in 1900 that it was going to happen (and they believed you), would _they_ have thought it would be a disaster? You can bet your carbon they would have. Things will change. But it will be all right .
Idk if anyone is gonna see this and be able to help, but I'm confused by the literal translation she gives for the first part. In the window example まど is marked as the subject by が, therefore it is the actor as in "the window exists in a state that is opened." Now in the sentence of Alice, she says "the jar existed in a state of having a label pasted onto it." But the jar here is marked by には as the topic, while ラベル is marked by が. Shouldn't it be something like "as for the jar, the label exists in a state in which it is pasted onto it."? Further she says something similar for the second part, where と replaces が marking the quote as a subject, but translates it as "it (the jar or label) exists in a state of having those words written onto it." Even according to the note below the quote is the grammatical subject, but the fact she kept the same structure makes me think it isn't a mistake.
Hi, at 1:06, could you explain why there is a に attached to the びん. You taught us that we can turn a noun to an adverb by adding a に, but in this case, I don't think it is an adverb, right? Is it something like ては？Thank you. I love your videos.
Thank you! This is the plain location-marking use of に telling us where the marked noun is (in this case on the label is on the bottle. The addition of は makes it a topic and therefore adds slight emphasis to the label "as for on the bottle" - which gives an emphasis pattern slightly (but not so strongly) like "what was on that bottle? A label was on that bottle". If you find "double particles" confusing you may want to watch this video th-cam.com/video/iPiLVZoYhfM/w-d-xo.html If you find the subtler qualities of は confusing I should say that this is a slightly advanced question that you will get used to over time. It is a bit difficult for English (and non-Japanese generally) learners as most languages don't have topic-marking. If you want to go into this at this stage I have a pair of videos that explain it more: th-cam.com/video/_nXHpkTTfGs/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/o-hK4-qv9Yk/w-d-xo.html The second one is about the implications of は as in this sentence (and many others) but it would be best to watch the first one first to get the concepts on which the second one is based. But if you don't want to go that deep at this stage don't worry! The reason I don't talk about it in these early lessons is because easier to take on when you have more experience.
Sensei if I am not mistaken, the particles answer a question about the verb, right? So that means at 10:08 the へ particle answers the questions "in which direction" about the verb 置いておいた, right? So why is へ particle used then? I believe Alice would have placed the bin in(に) the cupboard and not in the direction of the cupboard otherwise it would fall!
That's a very good question.. The text just says へ, which is a _little_ unusual being the "direction" rather than the strict "target" particle (though they overlap considerably), probably because she was passing by and had to reach toward it rather than calmly place it (this is also implied by うまく, since there is no skill in just putting something on or in a cupboard under normal circumstances). So essentially I would say that we don't know for sure. It is very possible to specify either とだなの中に or とだなの上に. One could argue that since putting something on top of a cupboard is unusual and nothing was specified one should assume the normal action. On the other hand that would have involved opening the cupboard in passing, putting in the jar, and ideally closing it again. Was she falling slowly enough for that? I think we have to conclude that the text doesn't tell us.
Since in Alice's example she isn't putting the jar back on the shelf in preparation for something, what's the difference between saying 「通りすがりに置いておいた」 or just 「通りすがりに置いた」?
Not much, just as in English there are various minor variants that don't make a lot of difference "she cleaned the kitchen" vs "she cleaned up the kitchen". ておく adds the sense of putting the action in place - i.e. (in this case) doing it in order to make the situation the way it should be.
Hello, Cure Dolly sensei. First of all, I have to thank you for creating wonderful, easily understandable lessons, something that you can't really find anywhere else. It is Japanese as Japanese and not merely English as Japanese and this is what makes your teaching style extremely unique. However, I have a question about this lesson, I think I have understood most of it, but there is something that really intrigues me. -Te oku" means to put the action in place, and in the sentence "umaku todana-no hitotsu-he toorisugari-ni oite oita." Alice is literally putting the jar literally into place/she's putting that action into place. But in this particular sentence, could this not be interpreted as Alice having a purpose; the purpose of not wanting the jar to fall into the hole? Which would correspond to the uses mentioned in the textbooks, i.e. to do something in advance or to do something for the purpose of something else?
The textbooks aren't wrong. They just don't explain _why_ Xておく means what it does which a) makes it harder to learn and b) doesn't cover all its uses clearly because they are only using rough English equivalents. But yes absolutely she was putting the action in place for a purpose and that is what it generally implies.
is using te aru serving the same purpose as using the receptive helper verb??? both indicate how the window has been opened by someone else and both of them place the window as the subject with the particle ga.
I think I have a vague idea of おく now... But as with a lot of things in Japanese, I find it difficult to understand why and when it would be used, especially with a subtle distinction in meaning. For example, what does the おいて おいた in the story mean? I gather that it basically means "She put it on the shelf and left it there" whereas just おいた on its own would be "She put it on the shelf". Am I close?
Yes that's right. This sort of thing can't really be learned in the abstract. It is good to know the structure, but the "why and when it would be used" question is has only one answer: immersion, immersion, immersion. You don't get the "feel" of a language from abstract explanations.
Thank you for your videos. Your way of teaching Japanese is very understandable to me. I have a question regarding the the ~ておく verb. All the examples implied that the amount of time the subject is gonna stay that way, is rather large. Could ~ておく also be used for a smaller amount of time? Does this song natural / is it correct? 私は前の赤い光に止まっておいた I want to say that, I stopped in front of a red light and imply that I stood there until the light turned green. Also, is it true that: 1) Non tense is used when, creating a general statement 2) Past tense is used when, the action is actually done 3) The present tense does not exist? I'm not sure how the present tense could be used, since it is not known whether the thing kept staying that way, at that time
I can't answer your question about the use of ておく, but shouldn't it be 赤い光の前に since we're interested in 'the front of the red light', not 'the red light of the front' ?
I noticed while reading some stuff that する was also used as an existence verb ("前にした") with a definition on jisho as "to be (in a state, condition, etc.)". How does it differ from いる and ある?
On rewatch I paid more attention to the 2 sides of the coin with てある and ておく. In the example of the window, would these two sentences represent a similar idea? 私が窓を開けておく (I opened the window so that it would be open). 私に窓が開けてある (The window was set into the state of being open by me). Is the difference between the two that with ておく I am expressly opening the window so that it stays open? I guess in the てある form I'm also opening the window so that it will be open and stay open but the emphases is on the window not me. Thanks in advance for your answer (as always)!
Yes you have the idea right but we don't usually have a に-marked actor with 〜てある. It isn't ungrammatical but it isn't the way it is generally used. We are just describing the state of the window (implying but not stating an outside actor).
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 excellent that clears it up. Given there isnt a に marked actor in a てある sentence it makes it clean which to use given the circumstances. Thanks as always!
Does the い ending of い-adjectives have any connection to the い of the verb いる? You've mentioned that い-adjectives have the copula function built in: could it be because they are acquiring it from the stem-form of いる, like あか + いる - る = あかい? If so, then that might explain why ‐ている can be applied to inanimate states of being, just as い-adjectives can be applied to inanimate objects as well. It would _almost_ be like using ている to turn a verb into a verb-derived-い-adjective-ish statement-of-a-state-of-being! Like 'window opens' to 'window is-open' or 'is-open window'. 🤔 Thank you for your wonderfully insightful videos! They are sooo helpful! 🤗 💖 👧🏻🤖🎎 [Android dolls can experience love, gratitude, and appreciation, too, right!? (Who says they can't, ね??!) 😉😄]
Well the history is a bit more complicated than that. It is also important to remember that what adjectives (so-called い-adjectives are the only adjectives - so-called な-adjectives are nouns) what they contain is the _copula function._ The copula function and the verb of being are confusingly the same word in English (is, am, are etc.) But they are _not_ the same thing at all. And in Japanese (as in many other languages, like Spanish) are not the same word. More on the copula here: th-cam.com/video/euHYPcMoao4/w-d-xo.html
I've been reading a book on the history of Japanese and English language contact and for a lot of weird katakana pronunciations, the reason they sound weird is that they were copied by eye rather than by ear. So ラベル sounds different but it "looks more like" label than レブル. It's like in my first month of Japanese class when I learned to write my name, リャン
That may be the reason in some cases though more often it is because the word, while resembling English, actually comes from a related European language. For example エネルギー has a hard gii-sound rather than a soft jii sound because it is actually from German _Energie,_ not English "energy". Similarly "theme" is テーマ because it is from German _Thema,_ not English "theme". Fun fact: both words are originally from ancient Greek. Incidentally Japanese transliteration of place names is usually closer to the real local pronunciation than the English versions. For example Paris is パリ which is nearer to how the French say it. Prague is プラハ which is nearer to how the Czechs say it etc.
Seeing as it is rarely mentioned (I've personally never come across it in any textbook) and that your channel is full of these insightful videos, it'd be great if you could someday make a video on rendaku (I believe it is called)! I'm sure the consonant switch confuses a lot of beginners (including myself) and can be unintuitive, so I think it'd make for an interesting (if not unusual) video.
I actually wrote about this in my book _Alice in Kanji Land_ - Alice calls it "ten-ten-hooking" and sees the ten-ten (the double-mark that turns an unvoiced consonant into its voiced equivalent) as a little double-hook that attaches a word to the word that comes before it. I did say a little bit about it in one of the videos too. I have noticed that the concept of voiced vs unvoiced consonants is difficult for some people (they don't see how k/g, t/d etc are related) though for most people they are easy to teach by just getting them to say the sounds in isolation and notice what is happening (presence and absence of vocal chord engagement). I have actually done a few pronunciation-based videos of that sort too (like the one on small tsu th-cam.com/video/qsOMQf5MxrQ/w-d-xo.html ) though I have to say that when I make a video about _anything_ except pure grammar structure the videos get far less views, so I'll likely sandwich it into a grammar video. Really it isn't much different structurally from the way English often doubles letters when extending words (hot→hotter, job→jobbing, etc.) except that it is more concerned with joining two words into a compound concept and it does affect the pronunciation, but in an absolutely regular way. So regular that it can be done to form new words _ad hoc_ with full understanding. For example, when my little sister Kinoko was staying in Japan her host family (who know her well and are on familiar terms) referred to her little room not as kinoko no heya (Kinoko's room) but as kinokobeya (the mushroom-room). Kinokobeya is not an established Japanese word but it is easily formed by ten-ten-hooking (rendaku) and sounds instantly understandable and kawaii.
I see - I found your channel a mere two days ago so I haven't been able to go through all your videos yet, and have only read unlocking japanese so I was unaware. Thank you for taking the time to reply (and in such detail too!). Keep up the good work, looking forward to any and all of your videos regardless of content!
very nice. how does te-shimau fit in with that if its related at all? ive read it to mean to finish completely or to imply some sort of usually negative unintentionality. maybe to highlight the lingering effects of a completed action without the volition of te-oku? or perhaps its a selfmove/othersmove difference? not related at all? :3
Te-shimau isn't really related here, I think. It has a variety of uses, not really easy to encapsulate (and is very often used in the truncated form ちゃう, especially in the past tense). A good analogy in English, at least for the past tense form (which gives a handle on the rest) is the expression "done" as in "the dog done ate my dinner". This is used in many very similar circumstances to 〜てしまいました・〜てしまった・ちゃった (the past form of 〜てしまう in descending order of formality). So we very often say things like 忘れちゃった: "I done forgot". As with "done" it very often expresses something negative, sometimes something unexpected with usually at least one of those two elements present. For example non-negatively we can say "I done won the lottery!" which works equally well with ちゃった. Since しまう really means "close" the same notion of stressing the fact that it has actually been done (for better or worse, believe it or not, etc,) applies. The main difference is that しまう is not restricted to the past tense and already-accomplished facts. So you can say things like "I'll done get fat" (太ってしまう) which of course is impossible in English. Incidentally しまった used on its own and often likened to a dirty word in English (there's nothing dirty about it but some English speakers would unfortunately use a dirty word in the circumstances where it is used) means something like "that's done it" in the bad sense. It refers to a turn of events which has brought about a final "closed" result of a bad kind - from breaking a plate to missing a train.
Going back to the 3 types of Japanese sentences: A does B, A is B (だ), A is B (い). Would you say the sentence 窓が開いている is an A is B sentence, or an A does B sentence? It seems to me like it can't be A is B because there's no adjectival function going on here, even though it seems like it in English... So, if it really is A does B, would the meaning be something like "the window exists in a state of being opened", or am I all wrong?
You are entirely right. Nothing that ends in a verb is ever anything but an A-does-B sentence. It is important to understand that Japanese very often regards as "actions" what English regards as "states". It is best to ignore what it _would be_ in English and just look at what it _is_ in Japanese. That's what you did and got it right. On the states/actions question, see this video: th-cam.com/video/wLrK_YxdPoM/w-d-xo.html
They are different ways if expressing a similar idea. There is always a "difference" between expressions but it doesn't necessarily amount to much. Language is not math. People like to vary what they say.
Great video, really cleared up てある and ておく for me (until now I had just been interpreting てある to be basically the same as ている, and was quite confused about ておく. One question just out of curiousity: is this a standard japanese version of Alice in Wonderland, or have you written your own that suits the grammar you want to teach in each video?
It's a bit of a mixture, using several translations and a bit of my own - mainly to keep the structural complexity to something we can handle at this point and of course to raise points we need to cover.
So beautifully explained, dear robot-sensei. Wouldn't this translate, in English, in the difference between "The window is open" (simple description) and "The window has been left open"/"Someone left the window open" (someone did it and left it in that state)? Or between "She put it in the cupboard" and "She left it in the cupboard"? P.s. just wondering, English not being my native language, as you can tell.😁
The main difference between Japanese and English here is that in てある constructions the central actor is the window that was left open, not the person who left it open. English always wants to bring the human actor back into the sentence if it can. There are many expressions like this in Japanese hat aren't really translatable into English at except by falsifying them by turning them passive. There is no passive in Japanese. More about this phenomenon here: th-cam.com/video/wLrK_YxdPoM/w-d-xo.html
Ibuki Yagami: "I'll quit high school and get a job to support Godai-sensei!" Kyoko: "ま、リアリティーのないその話はこっちに置いといて…" as she motions to the side with both hands.
Hello, I'm going through your whole course and I find it EXTREMELY clear. I'm mostly interested in reading and listening, rather than writing and speaking, and for that I'm practicing by reading novels (キノの旅 at the moment), and deconstructing each and every sentence with your method. It's working wonders, but I've stumbled on a sentence I just cannot manage: まるで自分に言い聞かすような、誰もいないところへ向かって喋るような口調だった。 To the best of my understanding, this means "as if he was talking to himself, with a tone as if he was talking to no one". It's mostly fruit of intuition, but I cannot really grasp the grammar underneath. Do you have any pointers?
The core sentence is ∅が口調だった. Everything else is a big modifier for 口調 - telling us what kind of tone it was. - it was a [just as if one were talking-and-causing-to-listen to oneself, directed to a place where no one was kind of] tone. Does this make it clearer? It may help to recall as I have explained elsewhere th-cam.com/video/Ft_zw0mdeyI/w-d-xo.html that まるで and ようだ (な) often sandwich a simile/comparison phrases, which is exactly what is happening here.
Thank you very much, your explanations were fascinating as usual! And, I have a question: Is the difference between「窓が開けてある」and「 窓が開けられる」the fact that the first one indicates that the action of 開ける was put into place, so that its results remain whereas the second one does not? Like, the first one is the receptive of 「窓をあけておく」whereas the second one is the receptive of (at least in terms of meaning) 「窓を開ける」? Also, can you also use に in てある sentence to remark the performer of the actual action (as in receptive)? Thanks.
Languages often have minor differences in the way they say similar things at different times. The differences are what they are, which is why I explain structure: 窓が開けてある "The window is in a state of having been opened" (the opening itself obviously happened in the past). This never identifies the opener so you can't use に. 窓が開けられる "The window gets opened". In the present (or future). These are different statements.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Sorry, I actually meant 「窓が開けられた」in second example, not 「窓が開けられる」. My mistake. But I think I understood the difference. Thanks.
sensei I have a question, not about a specific sentence but a thing that I see been repeated in many ways in Japanese but I quite don't understand it. I'm talking about なく I know it can mean cry and other things but I see this in like 食べたくなかったけど食べたくなった。I know that it is te negative form of たい but why the second part that means "became wanting to eat" it is in the negative too? why not 食べたなった? also like in this sentence ”うちの子供はプールに入るのお理由もなく怖がる。” I can't understand at all why なく it's been used here, if you could explain me or mention a video that you talk about it I would be grateful.
This なく is not a word in itself. It is the negative helper adjective ない in its く-stem form with the verb なる attached. And in this case it is in the past tense. The second instance is not in any sense in the negative. I'm not sure why you thought it was. 食べたくなかったけど = (I) was not in a state of wanting to eat but. 食べたくなった = (I) became in a state of wanting to eat. The adjective is たい and its helper verb is なる(become) in the past tense. Once again this is the negative helper adjective ない in its く-stem form. お理由もな is the adverbial form, so it means "without any reason (verb)". If you want to learn more about adjective stems, please see this video: th-cam.com/video/uoj5l8-Ppws/w-d-xo.html
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 thank you very much again, I thought it was because the textbook just show me the "Formulas" and did not explain what it means, now I totally get it, thank you very much. you are helping me so much, just wanted to say, really, thank you.
Is it common or possible to use the ておく for questions / requests? Like asking someone else "Can you put x action into place" or "Please put x action into place and leave it in effect.
Seeing the example of the windows, I started wondering whether a sentence like this 水が飲んでいる would be still gramatical, as for using water as the subject
@@tomaskopecky9348 Understanding structure is about seeing how things actually fit together, not about constructing unlikely combinations and saying "look! It's legal! I can do it!". That just leaves one speaking strange foreigner Japanese. the Xてある construction is used in cases (usually with a relatively limited range of verbs) where something exists in a state of something having been done to it. When would we ever see water in a state of having been drunk? (And yes there are funny answers to that - but seriously....)
I was trying to consider possible nuances you could create with てある. Is it possible to use it to create a sense of mystery, or even use it in a spooky story about who the actor could be? For example, a story where someone walks into a room, maybe is looking around, and when they look back at the door. ドアが閉めてある Might this be used to give the nuance that someone might be nearby and push the listener/reader to wonder who the actor is?
No it must be other-move because it always implies that someone else did it to the object of which it is predicated. So you can't say 窓が開いたある only 窓が開けてある because you are saying what in English would be probably translated by the passive construction "the window had been opened (by someone)". Note that it is _not_ passive in Japanese.
@@TzeJun-ps9le There is no reason that it must be though it often is. We are putting the action in place, not necessarily putting any thing in place. For example 黙っておく - put in place the action of saying nothing (for the purpose of not giving away a secret perhaps). This is not other-move.
Ah sensei a quick question! This came up in a conversation with a friend in Japanese. The friend explained that てる as in 書いてる implies an action that I (the speaker) have done. As opposed to てある which implies a state of having been done as you explained. She suggested that ておく had a similar connotation as the former and I wouldn't use 書いておく to describe something she had done. Is that right? Is ておく usually only used to describe your actions or the actions of a group you belong to? To give more context, I was talking to her about something she'd written on her bio. Thank you!
I'm a bit confused about the use of には in the first sentence of the video "その びんには..." I was wondering if you could tell me why には is used and what it does grammatically? Edit: Wouldn't the meaning of the sentence stay the same if は was not used here?
th-cam.com/video/iPiLVZoYhfM/w-d-xo.html I'm not sure if you're willing to jump through several lessons but she's done a video on this topic in the course.
This, to me, seems to be indicating that ある is the other-move form for the いる self-move form. As ある is to treat it like an object (something that must be moved by others) and いる is to treat it like a being (something that can self-move). But, since you said that ある is the mother of all self-move verbs, this might be thinking about it too much.
Other-move word (他動詞) doesn't refer to _being moved_ by other, it refers to moving other. Really I would say that while people often say that いる refers to anything that breathes and ある to anything that doesn't, the actual difference is _will,_ not breath and this "will" is extended metaphorically (and perhaps in older animistic thinking not metaphorically) to the idea that Xている refers to being in a state of X independently (metaphorically "by its own will") while Xてある refers to being in a state of X very clearly because another will has put it there.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 I do appreciate it, and that makes sense. That both this distinguishing nature, and the particle が being on objects are the case, is strange, but I suppose two views of the world can exist. Or perhaps が doesn't indicate will at all, and thus doesn't really mark the subject (the doer). If so, then が only marks the thing affected by the verb, and it all seems to fit together. At least, unless I misunderstand what subject is.
@@LordOfEnnui Japanese thinks a little differently about agency than English. Just as an object "does understandable" (分かる) even though the understanding itself comes from outside it, so in AがXてある the actor is A, The point in this case I think is that the actor of ある (being) is A, even though the actor of creating situation X was B (another entity).
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 I completely agree with your idea of the source of whatever action the verb describes being the thing attached to the が, after all, that's the only way the grammar and particularly the particles make any sense, but why is this idea of agency associated with verbs? - given agency's poor definition, I define it as will. Aren't verbs at their core simply describing actions? - I would think that is their purpose at least. So then, "I ate food" or maybe even (though I lack experience with japanese) 「私が食べ物をたべた」 can be taken as an event instead of an action, without the listener needing to think about the will that came before the action of eating. If the listener is not thinking about that part, even though the implicit understanding exists that all actions have a will existing in something/someone before they happen (and the word unwillingly is strange in that it should really be un-desiringly if so, and yet makes sense somehow, so maybe this is not quite the understanding that exists or will is defined as desire after all), the information is not being conveyed to the listener or they would see that the will exists as they hear the sentence. So then, if the doing is removed, it feels less clunky and is just "exists in the state of understandability". Or perhaps, my mind lacks the frame of reference to comprehend an animist view just yet and my brain is doing its usual thing of justifying my hunches.
@@LordOfEnnui I think the concept of "will" here is only to be taken fairly lightly. It isn't in this form common to Japanese in general, but it is I think the underlying reason for the distinction between Xている and Xてある the first shows something simply existing independently in a given state (comparable to a willed being) and the second makes the clear point that the state was brought about by another entity (making the doer of being in the state more comparable to a non-willed being).
This might be a pretty beginner question but at 6:19 why is it 書いてあった and not 書いたあった or 書くあった i think this might solve of my great issues with the て form お願いします！m(__)m
書いたあった or 書くあった are not possible because you can't just pile up two verbs. Just as in English you can't say "I ran walked". What you can do is link two verbs together to make a verb compound. And for this we use the て-form. て-form is always linking something to something else. In this case a verb to a helper-verb, which is one of the fundamental structures of Japanese. I hope this helps - feel free to ask if not.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 that makes sense, but why wont the て form of 書く just mean "and", also do you have any videos where you further explain this form of linking two verbs? I love how you explain things so good and you are most definitely my favourite japanese teacher on all the internet•̀.̫•́✧thanks a lot for helping me and us❤️
Why, thank you so much ೭੧(❛▿❛✿)੭೨I did a video a while back in my earlier series where I talk about て-form with some of the most common helpers. I think this might be the kind of thing you are looking for th-cam.com/video/PsTsliRe2Cg/w-d-xo.html
3:22 Sensei you said that its okay to use self move or other move verbs with te-iru while te-aru is for other move verbs only. So does that mean its safe if we just use te-iru?
てある and ている mean different things so you should use the one you mean to express. ている has the simpler more basic meaning, so best to stick with that at first - especially as you can use it with any verb.
Thank you so much! I'm afraid what I am using is a mish-mash of several translations because I have to shape the narrative toward teaching purposes Lots of considerations, like not introducing ten new points in one sentence for example and lots of little issues, like in this case wanting a sentence that separates the pasted label from the writing on the label (so I can show how 〜てある works in each case. I use the public domain translation on Aozora Bunco (plus some odd bits of the Nursery Alice there) as a basis and then shoehorn in little elements from several other translations. A bit of a task but I think it produces something very useful to work with.
I think I understand this, but I do want to confirm something. If I wanted to convey the idea that Sakura opened the window, could I say 「さくらが まと゛を あいて いた」? Or must I say 「さくらが まと゛を あけて おいた」 (for which the translation would really be "Sakura put into place the action of opening the window")? If either of my above sentences work, is there a way to tell which construction you should choose? Thank you!
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Oops. My mistake. That should have been あいた. :P So, presuming I write either of those correctly ("Sakura opened the window" OR "Sakura put the action in place and therefore the window is open."), is one of them superior to the other? Or is it just that one implies continuation of the action (ておいた) and the other makes no implication either way?
@@cincysoprano4714 Superiority isn't an issue. It depends what you want to say. The two sentences are not equivalent at all. Do you want to express that Sakura was (at some time in the past) engaged in the action of opening the window (a piece of narrative)? Or do you want to express that the window is now open because Sakura has opened it?
Re-watching this, hearing 置いておいた、reminded me of a bit of anime dialogue that puzzled me for a long time. Our MC, in quote marks makes an embarrassing request to himself and makes the female repeat it, with the sentence; と言っておいてくれるかな。 I wonder if you could say that for me? Or rather, I wonder if you could diagram that for me?
Xと言っておいてくれるかな is approximately "X-put in place the act of saying kindly do I wonder" or in slightly more natural English I wonder if you would kindly put in place the action of saying X" - the "put in place" part is pretty much untranslatable as there is no expression like that in English.
How about the expressions, beforehand or for the record? "I wonder if you could say that beforehand for me." So that in the unlikely case that any of this should come to a court of law, I could truthfully say, "Your Honor, she asked for it, she begged me for it, I had her explicit permission to do it. But I didn't even do it because I chickened out. It wound up with me giving her only a very chaste and brief shoulder massage." But going back to grammer is the core sentence just ∅がという？ with helper verbs おく、くれる、and the I ask myself sentence ender かな？ Or is くれる the sentence ending verb?
@@stanleykparker I think we are in danger of getting a little structure-bound here. Structure is important for understanding but once we get into ways of expressing very particular things structure dumping can be almost as bad as dictionary-dumping: learnjapaneseonline.info/2018/08/25/on-dotards-and-dictionary-dumping-getting-japanese-words-right/ The correct way to approach problems like this is as far as possible to find actual linguistic precedents: th-cam.com/video/1FdhiQH8TS8/w-d-xo.html
Organic Japanese with Cure Dolly Assuming you meant region, I come from eastern Pennsylvania, though I doubt it’s a regional thing, probably just casual. Maybe used more by kids and teens or something. Not sure it’s too common but I’m pretty sure it exists. At least it seems to fit the idea of て置く.
I would say "paste" (if I thought keywords were a good idea, which I don't) for this one but the problem with the Heisig system is that you need a unique keyword for each word and he'd probably already used "paste". That's why they get increasingly obscure.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 hmm, he uses neither ‘paste’ nor ‘stick’ as a keyword in volume 1 at least. My only thought is maybe he didn’t want it to be confused with actual glue-paste, which he gave as a primitive meaning to 寸.
@@mattheww.4726 Yes that's true. I was thinking of the verb "paste" not the noun. Heh. Just as well I don't make keywords. (I'd think it out a bit more if I did).
Is te aru unusual for taking a subject but implying another do-er of the te verb? I guess te hoshii is kind of similar in this regard. The notion that verbs might be piling up at the end of sentences with different subjects is stressing me out here
A helper verb can have a different subject from the verb it is attached to. With the receptive (so-called "passive") and causative helper verbs it always does (the subject is the receiver of someone else's action or the causer of someone else's action). And as you say, in constructions like てほしい and てもらう the subject is desiring or receiving an action from someone else. So this is not unique. The subject of the recieved/caused (etc) action being unspecified is not unusual either - it often is in the with the receptive helper verbs れる・られる and もらう. The only really unusual thing about てある is that the causer of the state is always implicit. We never identify her with に as we can in the other cases.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Of course, i didnt think about the other examples eg: te morau that know. You're right in singling out the *implied* other grammatical subject in te aru, i think this was my issue. Thanks for your response!
For my fellow Indian learners, ~ておく is much more easily translated and much more natural in Hindi as "रख दिया". Like in Hindi we say "सबजी काट कर रख दी". "Kept" seems like a close enough English translation, but "I have kept the vegetables cut" or "I have left the vegetables cut" sounds weird in English
My interpretation of the lesson is that ておく means to perform an action which alters the condition of a thing from one state, into a different and ongoing state. Or in other words, to alter it's ある condition.
I felt this lesson VERY useful. Indeed it's a thing rarely explained this well and sometimes not explained at all, and I found one of the more difficult lesson I have to date. I have a little request since is difficult to grasp how is used in practice. With that I mean I feel the need of more practical examples of ておく in actual context and in relation with てある・ている. Sure, immersion help to recognize the usage but I feel immersion don't help much in producing phrases with this kind of construction, at least in this specific case. Can you help me somehow?
Did you see last week's video on how to use sentence databases? This is a very good case for that. (you can find it here th-cam.com/video/1FdhiQH8TS8/w-d-xo.html ). If we pop "ておく" (in quotes) into Webliio as explained in that video we get a huge number of examples. Let's take the first one. It's quite interesting: 信じておくよ。 I'll believe you. Notice that it is "I'll believe you", not "I believe you". I believe you would be 信じている (I exist in state of believing you). 信じておく on the other hand means "I put in place the action of believing you". This gives us the subtle difference from "I believe you" - I don't just happen to believe you. I am making a conscious decision to put in place the condition of believing you.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Thank you, I did see that video but I forgot to use it like that. I'll use it now more for sure! Besides, I noticed for some reason I didn't receive the notification for this answer, this already happened in the past and I checked all is right on my part and apparently it is. I wonder if it is because you need to put the nick of the person you answering to in the actual answer, like I just did at the start of this message. I just checked out for this answer now because I know you always respond to your followers. (and I glad for that)
@@umascariatuerich2014 I've had a few reports from people about TH-cam's notifications not working properly. I'm afraid I can't do anything about that so I hope they'll fix it soon!
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 this one indeed came in. The only difference between this and the one before is this have my name in and the one before that do not. But maybe is only YT who goes awry for unknown reasons.
1- your voice is awful 2- every 5 min you saying everyone else is wrong is annoying, you can just provide your theory without saying that. BUT 1- content is very good.
1. What a charming gentleman. I do my best to sound human. Sorry if I don't quite make it. I keep trying 2. Since people have so much misinformation put into them I consider it necessary to point out that there is in fact a difference between the actual structure and what they have been taught. Otherwise people would be likely to try to reconcile the two, which would lead to further confusion. 3. Thank you so much. Genuinely happy for your kind appreciation.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 I appreciate that you intentionally point out where your approach differs from traditional textbooks. To your point, I would otherwise attempt to reconcile these differences and would end up super confused. ありがとうございます！
![[UNCUT] The Loyal Pin ปิ่นภักดิ์ EP.15 (3/4)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/IVwR87OH0_A/mqdefault.jpg)
Great explanation! Thank you so much! It is still a little bit vague to me, but at least my doubt cleared. I just have another question. So basically, te-aru and te-oku mean almost the same thing but have a different focus, and viewpoint, right? Like the first one shows the result, the other one shows the action. However, what about we say まどをあけてある。and まどをあけておく。Is there any difference between them? Or using まどをあけてある is not grammatically correct? Thank you so much!
Congratulations! The relationship between 〜ておく and 〜てある is an excellent insight. They are indeed related. But the important thing to understand is that they are _the opposite sides of the same coin_ - they are not the same side so it is important not to confuse them. Let me explain.
〜てある is, a _stative_ verbal expression. This means that it expresses a state, not an action (this is always true of ある). And the state that it expresses is the _state resulting from the equivalent ておく expression_ .
So if I say まどをあけておく I am saying that I open the window and leave it that way (put the action in place). If you say まどがあいてある - you are talking about the window that I opened and left open.
まどをあいとある is ungrammatical because を marks the thing acted upon by the が-marked subject of the sentence (the A-car). But with あいてある the subject of the sentence is not acting upon anything. It is in a state of _having been acted upon_ itself.
Does this make it clear?
KawaJapa CureDolly Thank you so much for more detailed explanation ! You are the best)))
@@vasimahmudova6925 I'm happy that I was able to help.
Thank you so much for raising the awareness of falling jars of marmalade. This is an epidemic of our time, and we must act quickly to secure the safety of future generations.
Also, your brief explanation of "TEOKU" was perfect. Thank you.
If we don't act now, what will it be next? Strawberry jelly? Apricot preserve?
@佐藤和真 いい考えです。
You know there is something wrong (or right) when you binge watch a grammar series instead of watching anime or playing a visual novel... Especially when the channel promotes immersion and minimal formal study. This stuff is too good.
fr, im taking notes for the first time thru and then probably going to watch again, she just truly was a saint
Well, I mean immersion takes a ton of time, but it's necessary since you'll never be able to use your System 2(your slow, thoughtful mind) for speaking with anybody in Japanese, it's just too slow and mistake-prone.
I think I've seen 置くused in some situations where a person (or group) leaves someone behind, fits perfectly with your explanation. I'm sure you've read this countless of times, but you really are doing god's work here
Thank you!
Cure dolly sensi - I'm so sorry and sad that you will never be able to see this post, but you have been life-changing to me. I will be moving to Japan for work and was recommended to watch your videos. I have been doing a "cure dolly bootcamp" if you will, and watching your videos has armed me with the knowledge and abilities that I think otherwise wouldn't have been possible in such a short amount of time. You are so remarkable and kind and wonderful to share your knowledge with the world and I only wish I could have joined your community earlier to thank you "in person". From the bottom of my heart, ありがとう 先生 and rest in peace.
I’ve come across て置く before but never found a satisfactory explanation, so thank you! Already looking forward to next week’s lesson.
Welcome to the channel! So glad to help and glad to have you aboard!
Another fine lesson! ほんとにありがと!
As you say in the video, you're developing your KawaJapa style of J-J translations. I do find them very helpful to learning… which, of course is your goal. I sometimes refer to such translations as "learner's translations". Oftentimes, as you know, the translations in anime subtitles not only translate the words but they completely rephrase the sentence. What you get is a phrase that an English-speaking person would likely say in that situation-even when it has little to do with the original Japanese words or phrase. There’s nothing fundamentally wrong with that for anime subtitles because those are what I would call "reader's translations". They’re written for the audience that is interested in the story, but hasn’t (yet) developed the interest in learning the wonderful language of Japanese. But, a learner of Japanese does need to realize that "reader's translations" often can't be taken literally.
There is of course more than a little confusion when J-E textbooks or websites use such "reader’s translations". (Your frequent example of “I like coffee.” is a reader’s translation-not a learner’s translation.) And, it’s quite important for learners of Japanese to understand this very early, so that someone in the early stages doesn’t get so confused as to give up. This, I believe, is the real importance of what you’re doing: helping learners avoid such confusions, so that their learning-and their *interest* in learning-can continue to grow!
By the way, could you sometime show your KawaJapa-style learner’s translation of your closing sentence "Kore kara mo yoroshiku onegai shimasu." with the train engine & railcars (and color coding if needed)?
Yes, the distinction between readers' translations and learners' translations is very important. If you are actually translating an anime or manga for the general public "I like coffee" is correct and translating receptive sentences into the English passive is also correct in a large number of cases - "correct" meaning making the characters use natural English and say something close to what the original text said. Of course how far one should go in making Japanese characters talk as if they were American characters is a creative decision. To some extent it is inevitable - and it is interesting to see that two different translations are rarely the same. In more extreme cases a character is almost remolded to be more like who she would be if she had been born in America.
But that is really a whole different point. I am always surprised by how textbooks etc. present these loose translations to learners as if they were what the words were actually saying. It is really so unhelpful and sows problems that just get deeper as they go along.
The thing about yoroshiku onegaishimasu is that it isn't regular Japanese grammar. It is a kind of keigo (ultra-polite Japanese) called kenjougo (humble-speech) and the grammatical formation of the sentence is a little different from regular grammar. It isn't difficult and I probably will map it with trains some time, but probably not until we get to learning some keigo. But to summarize what is going on if you are interested, in kenjougo instead of using a verb straight out as in normal Japanese we first use the honorific "o", then the verb in its い-stem form (making it a noun) and then suru to turn it back into a verb again! The verb here is negau, wish, or beg and yoroshiku is the adverbial form of yoroshii, good (a slightly fancier form of ii or yoi) in its ku adjectival form. So in all it means something like "(treat me) well, (I) humbly entreat" - and it is kind of old-fashioned like that, except that it is so often used that it doesn't feel old fashioned - just as "Good bye" = God be (with you) doesn't feel old-fashioned in English because it's just a part of everyday speech.
I would recommend learners not to worry too much about keigo (there are two other forms as well as kenjougo, all used together) - even Japanese people can have trouble with it. The heroine in _Fruits Basket_ uses keigo all the time and gets it wrong all the time (a part of her character that I imagine can't help getting lost in translation!) No one will ever expect you to use it (unless you work for a Japanese company). People in customer service situations will use it toward you and you will encounter it in anime etc, so we do need to cover it when we have the basics firm, but luckily it is much easier to understand than to use correctly. It isn't really _that_ difficult to use but it will
take a few lessons to get a handle on it. And we'll definitely do that!
Took me a long while to internalize that concept, but it became much clearer now. I believe I can ever include that in my vocabulary ^^. Thank you very much, sensei!
I am glad I could help.
Rest in Peace Cure Dolly
I first watched this video a few weeks ago, and I enjoyed it. But I'm currently about 30 videos further ahead in the series (wrapping up the ghost story), and I came back to this lesson as a review (one of your helpful cards in the video sent me back here). All I can say is, wow! It makes so much more sense now. It feels more intuitive, what with the extra practice and concepts (and vocab) under my belt.
This really is important. I can't recommend enough that learners come back to earlier videos after some (more) immersion. However clear they seemed the first time you will find new understanding as you know more.
OMG I'm just reviewing ている, てある, and ておく recently using a textbook. Even though I watched this video before, I decided to re-watch this. Your explanation really closes the deal of my confusion! Thank you for this great explanation! I had lots of "Aha!" moments while listening to your explanations.
Re-watching the videos after a little more experience often brings new depths of understanding.
I just want to say thank you so much for these videos! A lot of these concepts can be challenging to grasp as a native English speaker, but you really do have a great way of teaching them. Also the fact that you have so many visual representations of what is going on is so helpful. Textbooks so often tend to over-complicate or over-simplify things. They're either too wordy or they don't explain enough, and then I become lost lol.
Thank you so much. I am happy to be able to help.
Thank you so much Sensei. I've been learning Japanese for almost a year now and due to the vague translations in the English textbooks, which at the moment seemed rather easy, I still keep wondering about things and translating in my head whenever I hear these in dramas and anime. Your videos are really helping me to slowly get out of this mess. Although, I think these concepts are much easier to grasp for Asians like myself than it is for any European or Americans because we use a lot of double verbs in daily conversations. But it has to be done sooner or later in order to stay away from constant translation in the head, which is exhausting.
Ah this makes so much sense now. I often watch Let's Plays of video games and often the TH-camr will say 「セーブシておきます」. Now it makes sense why they use 置く!
Is that really said? Do you think you misspelled it?
@@ayaneagano6059 Good catch! I should have said セーブしておきます。
@@niket527 okay, that makes sense
@@niket527 By the way, did you know that you can edit comments?
i feel like mastering te-form is like mastering english vocabolary it has so many uses in its arsenal its like you'll never run out options.
Beautiful lesson and explanations. Amazing
I quickly paused the video just to say: WOW! I understood the first part of the on-going story "naturally" as I read it, without having to make too much effort. If I stumbled upon the same sentence before discovering this playlist, I'd have a grasp of the meaning because of the visual reference, but I wouldn't be able to pin point the particles functions and stuff. This means you're doing an excellent job, Cure Dolly sensei. The merit is all yours, I'm just a regular person with slightly above average intelligence @_@ much love to you! I'm excited to finish this playlist :D
That's wonderful! Let's keep going forward together. がんばってください。
Organic Japanese with Cure Dolly はーい、頑張ります🙏🏼
Way to go Cure Dolly! I'm always excited for what the next lesson has in store
Thank you! So glad you are enjoying them.
Thank you Cure Dolly! I had studied Japanese for a year but I was still having to guess bits of grammar, or I couldn't quite understand the rules of everything - and the logic behind them. I discovered your videos and by watching the first 20 I already understand concepts so much better than I used to. I now use your videos to teach myself grammar rather than from my teachers as they fall into the pitfall of explaining everything with an English lens which after a while starts to break down.
Yes that's the problem. The English lens appears to make things (a little) easier at first but it's like putting the ladder on uneven ground. The higher you go the wobblier it gets.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 I am honoured to recieve a reply from the electronic sensei!
ありがとうございました。「てある」や「ておく」についてよく分かりませんでした。ドリー先生の説明のおかげでもっとはっきりと分かると思います。
コメントをしてくれてありがとうございます。お役に立てて嬉しいです。
The relationship, and their seperate distinctions are well explained and made clear through good examples. ておく has been a bother to me for a while, no more, thanks to you. ありがとう。
That is a really good explanation of ている、てある、ておく forms. The subtlety of the explanation is almost like an exact science, which really leaves Japanese with no Indeterminate explanations. Rather if you understand the actual weird translations of these sentences, it only becomes much more easier to translate it into English. ありがとう先生.
Thank you. Japanese does tend to be very precise.
Thanks very much I really like how you explain things... 始める時、このチャンネルを見たことがあればよかった。
ありがとうございます。チャンネルへようこそ。
Very good. Thank you so much.
Since in the jar's case ておく doesn't have an implication of "doing in advance as preparation", what's the difference between the ておく form and just 「アリスがびんを」うまくとだなの一つへ通りすがりに置いた? My main issue with this form is than sometimes I can't tell why it's used instead of the form without it.
Amazing like always, it solved lots of doubts!!
why we used 閉じ込めておく？ can we use 閉じ込めている for the same case?
Hi,
I really like this video series and have been taking notes for each lesson so far. I got a little confused at 6:24. Here you say that the jar existed in a state of having a label pasted on it. To me, it seems like it would be the label(marked by が) that is existing in a state of being pasted on the jar. The meaning is sort of the same, but after focusing on が-placement for so many lessons your wording here got me questioning wether I am missing something.
Ken M I’m far from an expert but since Sensei Dolly didn’t respond, I thought I would try. I think the issue here is that you are reading the ga-marked subject “label” with the wrong verb. “Label” is the ga-marked subject only of the subclause which has the verb はる or paste. The main or “core” sentence is determined by the verb ある. There is no stated subject of this verb, it is simply omitted. In this manner, the core sentence has a zero-ga subject, as Sensei Dolly has been teaching from her early lessons. But we can infer from context that the zero-ga subject is actually just “it” or, in this case taking a hint from the wa-marked topic, “this jar”. So the core clause could more closely be translated to “As for on this jar, [it] existed [in a state]. Then the sub clause expands on that state by defining it as a “label is pasted” state.
So back to the original point, there are actually two different が marked subjects in this sentence, but one of them is omitted or silent as happens frequently in Japanese sentences.
@@susie2251 I can kinda see how this explanation works in the context of this sentence. However, I think Dolly explained it (her? it?)self in bits and pieces throughout the video (1:56 and 7:20). I think the key is in 1) what's actually being marked by the は particle and 2) what と is doing in the sentence. Basically, what I think is going on (and what's suggested at 7:20) is that there are two separate core clauses, with the second ある contained entirely within the second clause (i.e. there is no zero-が). The topic marked by the は particle can be translated as, "As for (what was) on that jar...". The first clause indeed says that the label existed in a state of being pasted. Pasted where? On the jar (since that is the topic). The second clause is similar; the words "orange marmalade" existed in a state of being written. Written where? On the jar. The particle と essentially replaces が as the subject marker (again, see 7:20). As was stated in a previous lesson, only the last verb in a compound/complex sentence indicates the tense of the sentence (hence why the second ある looks different from the first one).
First of all thank you so much for this series, really reignited my drive to learn japanese.
So I finally started with anime immersion and I still need to frequently come to some lessons to clear some doubts but I found something that I'm not sure if it has something to do with the ～ておく verb the sentence is the following 「お弁当ちょっとデカいけど硬く握っといたから大丈夫」in the anime a girl gives someone a very big rice ball so she starts announcing the subject the she describes that even thought it's very big she made it tightly (don't think is the right way to say in english but anyone that has made riceballs understands) so the other person shouldn't worry about it coming apart.
My problem is the way 「硬く握っといた」is formed , is this a te oku form in past tense? Where instead of saying 「硬く握ておいた」the て and お get fused into っと, the sentence makes sense like that but I just want to be sure if this is the case or if this is something completely different.
You probably already learned that on your own long ago, but in case someone else stumbles upon this - yes, ~とく is a colloquial contraction of ～ておく, much like ～てる is a colloquial contraction of ～ている。
Another very important video. I have one question: Is っとく the abbreviation of っておく? お願いします
The usual contraction of ておく is とく. If the て-form is って then of course that will be っとく, and if it is んで it will be んどく.
Can you do anything to clarify 自動詞とたどうし
I'm feeling sorry for a window because of grammar. Mado-san deserves better than to be treated as inanimate.
So i guess it could be considered also be considered as also ( leaving it) or leave it置いておいた putting it down and leaving it same thing with the other examples! Thanks a ton! who knew that a robot could explain Japanese grammar so well! We need more robot teachers and less human teachers haha
Heehee I agree with you. But that sort of thing worries a lot of humans. "Robots will take our jobs!" Will we? Well the short answer to that is "yes". In 1900, 80% of Americans worked on the land. Now it's 2%. Does anyone think that was a disaster? I don't think so. If you'd told people in 1900 that it was going to happen (and they believed you), would _they_ have thought it would be a disaster? You can bet your carbon they would have. Things will change. But it will be all right .
Idk if anyone is gonna see this and be able to help, but I'm confused by the literal translation she gives for the first part.
In the window example まど is marked as the subject by が, therefore it is the actor as in "the window exists in a state that is opened."
Now in the sentence of Alice, she says "the jar existed in a state of having a label pasted onto it." But the jar here is marked by には as the topic, while ラベル is marked by が. Shouldn't it be something like "as for the jar, the label exists in a state in which it is pasted onto it."?
Further she says something similar for the second part, where と replaces が marking the quote as a subject, but translates it as "it (the jar or label) exists in a state of having those words written onto it." Even according to the note below the quote is the grammatical subject, but the fact she kept the same structure makes me think it isn't a mistake.
Hi, at 1:06, could you explain why there is a に attached to the びん. You taught us that we can turn a noun to an adverb by adding a に, but in this case, I don't think it is an adverb, right? Is it something like ては？Thank you. I love your videos.
Thank you! This is the plain location-marking use of に telling us where the marked noun is (in this case on the label is on the bottle. The addition of は makes it a topic and therefore adds slight emphasis to the label "as for on the bottle" - which gives an emphasis pattern slightly (but not so strongly) like "what was on that bottle? A label was on that bottle". If you find "double particles" confusing you may want to watch this video th-cam.com/video/iPiLVZoYhfM/w-d-xo.html
If you find the subtler qualities of は confusing I should say that this is a slightly advanced question that you will get used to over time. It is a bit difficult for English (and non-Japanese generally) learners as most languages don't have topic-marking. If you want to go into this at this stage I have a pair of videos that explain it more:
th-cam.com/video/_nXHpkTTfGs/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/o-hK4-qv9Yk/w-d-xo.html
The second one is about the implications of は as in this sentence (and many others) but it would be best to watch the first one first to get the concepts on which the second one is based. But if you don't want to go that deep at this stage don't worry! The reason I don't talk about it in these early lessons is because easier to take on when you have more experience.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Thanks for your explanations and recommendations! I am following your Japanese from scratch, super helpful.
Sensei if I am not mistaken, the particles answer a question about the verb, right? So that means at 10:08 the へ particle answers the questions "in which direction" about the verb 置いておいた, right? So why is へ particle used then? I believe Alice would have placed the bin in(に) the cupboard and not in the direction of the cupboard otherwise it would fall!
this is very informative.
Thanks for helping demystify Japanese. A question please. Do we know from the text if Alice places the jar in or on the cupboard?
That's a very good question.. The text just says へ, which is a _little_ unusual being the "direction" rather than the strict "target" particle (though they overlap considerably), probably because she was passing by and had to reach toward it rather than calmly place it (this is also implied by うまく, since there is no skill in just putting something on or in a cupboard under normal circumstances). So essentially I would say that we don't know for sure. It is very possible to specify either とだなの中に or とだなの上に. One could argue that since putting something on top of a cupboard is unusual and nothing was specified one should assume the normal action. On the other hand that would have involved opening the cupboard in passing, putting in the jar, and ideally closing it again. Was she falling slowly enough for that? I think we have to conclude that the text doesn't tell us.
Since in Alice's example she isn't putting the jar back on the shelf in preparation for something, what's the difference between saying 「通りすがりに置いておいた」 or just 「通りすがりに置いた」?
Not much, just as in English there are various minor variants that don't make a lot of difference "she cleaned the kitchen" vs "she cleaned up the kitchen". ておく adds the sense of putting the action in place - i.e. (in this case) doing it in order to make the situation the way it should be.
Hello, Cure Dolly sensei. First of all, I have to thank you for creating wonderful, easily understandable lessons, something that you can't really find anywhere else. It is Japanese as Japanese and not merely English as Japanese and this is what makes your teaching style extremely unique.
However, I have a question about this lesson, I think I have understood most of it, but there is something that really intrigues me. -Te oku" means to put the action in place, and in the sentence "umaku todana-no hitotsu-he toorisugari-ni oite oita." Alice is literally putting the jar literally into place/she's putting that action into place.
But in this particular sentence, could this not be interpreted as Alice having a purpose; the purpose of not wanting the jar to fall into the hole? Which would correspond to the uses mentioned in the textbooks, i.e. to do something in advance or to do something for the purpose of something else?
The textbooks aren't wrong. They just don't explain _why_ Xておく means what it does which a) makes it harder to learn and b) doesn't cover all its uses clearly because they are only using rough English equivalents. But yes absolutely she was putting the action in place for a purpose and that is what it generally implies.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Alright, I think I understand now. Thanks for the answer sensei.
is using te aru serving the same purpose as using the receptive helper verb??? both indicate how the window has been opened by someone else and both of them place the window as the subject with the particle ga.
I think I have a vague idea of おく now... But as with a lot of things in Japanese, I find it difficult to understand why and when it would be used, especially with a subtle distinction in meaning. For example, what does the おいて おいた in the story mean?
I gather that it basically means "She put it on the shelf and left it there"
whereas just おいた on its own would be "She put it on the shelf".
Am I close?
Yes that's right. This sort of thing can't really be learned in the abstract. It is good to know the structure, but the "why and when it would be used" question is has only one answer: immersion, immersion, immersion. You don't get the "feel" of a language from abstract explanations.
Thank you for your videos. Your way of teaching Japanese is very understandable to me.
I have a question regarding the the ~ておく verb. All the examples implied that the amount of time the subject is gonna stay that way, is rather large. Could ~ておく also be used for a smaller amount of time?
Does this song natural / is it correct?
私は前の赤い光に止まっておいた
I want to say that, I stopped in front of a red light and imply that I stood there until the light turned green.
Also, is it true that:
1) Non tense is used when, creating a general statement
2) Past tense is used when, the action is actually done
3) The present tense does not exist? I'm not sure how the present tense could be used, since it is not known whether the thing kept staying that way, at that time
I can't answer your question about the use of ておく, but shouldn't it be 赤い光の前に since we're interested in 'the front of the red light', not 'the red light of the front' ?
Hallo Dolly, thank you for the video.
Is the following sentence correct? 窓が開いてある (self-move verb + てある).
If it is correct, what would be its meaning?
I noticed while reading some stuff that する was also used as an existence verb ("前にした") with a definition on jisho as "to be (in a state, condition, etc.)". How does it differ from いる and ある?
する is not an existence verb. It means do/act. The usual meaning of 前にした is "done before".
On rewatch I paid more attention to the 2 sides of the coin with てある and ておく. In the example of the window, would these two sentences represent a similar idea? 私が窓を開けておく (I opened the window so that it would be open). 私に窓が開けてある (The window was set into the state of being open by me). Is the difference between the two that with ておく I am expressly opening the window so that it stays open? I guess in the てある form I'm also opening the window so that it will be open and stay open but the emphases is on the window not me. Thanks in advance for your answer (as always)!
Yes you have the idea right but we don't usually have a に-marked actor with 〜てある. It isn't ungrammatical but it isn't the way it is generally used. We are just describing the state of the window (implying but not stating an outside actor).
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 excellent that clears it up. Given there isnt a に marked actor in a てある sentence it makes it clean which to use given the circumstances. Thanks as always!
Does the い ending of い-adjectives have any connection to the い of the verb いる? You've mentioned that い-adjectives have the copula function built in: could it be because they are acquiring it from the stem-form of いる, like あか + いる - る = あかい?
If so, then that might explain why ‐ている can be applied to inanimate states of being, just as い-adjectives can be applied to inanimate objects as well. It would _almost_ be like using ている to turn a verb into a verb-derived-い-adjective-ish statement-of-a-state-of-being! Like 'window opens' to 'window is-open' or 'is-open window'. 🤔
Thank you for your wonderfully insightful videos! They are sooo helpful!
🤗 💖 👧🏻🤖🎎
[Android dolls can experience love, gratitude, and appreciation, too, right!? (Who says they can't, ね??!) 😉😄]
Well the history is a bit more complicated than that. It is also important to remember that what adjectives (so-called い-adjectives are the only adjectives - so-called な-adjectives are nouns) what they contain is the _copula function._ The copula function and the verb of being are confusingly the same word in English (is, am, are etc.) But they are _not_ the same thing at all. And in Japanese (as in many other languages, like Spanish) are not the same word. More on the copula here: th-cam.com/video/euHYPcMoao4/w-d-xo.html
I've been reading a book on the history of Japanese and English language contact and for a lot of weird katakana pronunciations, the reason they sound weird is that they were copied by eye rather than by ear. So ラベル sounds different but it "looks more like" label than レブル. It's like in my first month of Japanese class when I learned to write my name, リャン
That may be the reason in some cases though more often it is because the word, while resembling English, actually comes from a related European language. For example エネルギー has a hard gii-sound rather than a soft jii sound because it is actually from German _Energie,_ not English "energy". Similarly "theme" is テーマ because it is from German _Thema,_ not English "theme".
Fun fact: both words are originally from ancient Greek.
Incidentally Japanese transliteration of place names is usually closer to the real local pronunciation than the English versions. For example Paris is パリ which is nearer to how the French say it. Prague is プラハ which is nearer to how the Czechs say it etc.
Seeing as it is rarely mentioned (I've personally never come across it in any textbook) and that your channel is full of these insightful videos, it'd be great if you could someday make a video on rendaku (I believe it is called)! I'm sure the consonant switch confuses a lot of beginners (including myself) and can be unintuitive, so I think it'd make for an interesting (if not unusual) video.
I actually wrote about this in my book _Alice in Kanji Land_ - Alice calls it "ten-ten-hooking" and sees the ten-ten (the double-mark that turns an unvoiced consonant into its voiced equivalent) as a little double-hook that attaches a word to the word that comes before it. I did say a little bit about it in one of the videos too. I have noticed that the concept of voiced vs unvoiced consonants is difficult for some people (they don't see how k/g, t/d etc are related) though for most people they are easy to teach by just getting them to say the sounds in isolation and notice what is happening (presence and absence of vocal chord engagement). I have actually done a few pronunciation-based videos of that sort too (like the one on small tsu th-cam.com/video/qsOMQf5MxrQ/w-d-xo.html ) though I have to say that when I make a video about _anything_ except pure grammar structure the videos get far less views, so I'll likely sandwich it into a grammar video. Really it isn't much different structurally from the way English often doubles letters when extending words (hot→hotter, job→jobbing, etc.) except that it is more concerned with joining two words into a compound concept and it does affect the pronunciation, but in an absolutely regular way. So regular that it can be done to form new words _ad hoc_ with full understanding. For example, when my little sister Kinoko was staying in Japan her host family (who know her well and are on familiar terms) referred to her little room not as kinoko no heya (Kinoko's room) but as kinokobeya (the mushroom-room). Kinokobeya is not an established Japanese word but it is easily formed by ten-ten-hooking (rendaku) and sounds instantly understandable and kawaii.
I see - I found your channel a mere two days ago so I haven't been able to go through all your videos yet, and have only read unlocking japanese so I was unaware. Thank you for taking the time to reply (and in such detail too!). Keep up the good work, looking forward to any and all of your videos regardless of content!
Done
very nice. how does te-shimau fit in with that if its related at all? ive read it to mean to finish completely or to imply some sort of usually negative unintentionality. maybe to highlight the lingering effects of a completed action without the volition of te-oku? or perhaps its a selfmove/othersmove difference? not related at all? :3
Te-shimau isn't really related here, I think. It has a variety of uses, not really easy to encapsulate (and is very often used in the truncated form ちゃう, especially in the past tense). A good analogy in English, at least for the past tense form (which gives a handle on the rest) is the expression "done" as in "the dog done ate my dinner". This is used in many very similar circumstances to 〜てしまいました・〜てしまった・ちゃった (the past form of 〜てしまう in descending order of formality). So we very often say things like 忘れちゃった: "I done forgot". As with "done" it very often expresses something negative, sometimes something unexpected with usually at least one of those two elements present. For example non-negatively we can say "I done won the lottery!" which works equally well with ちゃった. Since しまう really means "close" the same notion of stressing the fact that it has actually been done (for better or worse, believe it or not, etc,) applies. The main difference is that しまう is not restricted to the past tense and already-accomplished facts. So you can say things like "I'll done get fat" (太ってしまう) which of course is impossible in English.
Incidentally しまった used on its own and often likened to a dirty word in English (there's nothing dirty about it but some English speakers would unfortunately use a dirty word in the circumstances where it is used) means something like "that's done it" in the bad sense. It refers to a turn of events which has brought about a final "closed" result of a bad kind - from breaking a plate to missing a train.
Going back to the 3 types of Japanese sentences: A does B, A is B (だ), A is B (い). Would you say the sentence 窓が開いている is an A is B sentence, or an A does B sentence? It seems to me like it can't be A is B because there's no adjectival function going on here, even though it seems like it in English... So, if it really is A does B, would the meaning be something like "the window exists in a state of being opened", or am I all wrong?
You are entirely right. Nothing that ends in a verb is ever anything but an A-does-B sentence. It is important to understand that Japanese very often regards as "actions" what English regards as "states". It is best to ignore what it _would be_ in English and just look at what it _is_ in Japanese. That's what you did and got it right. On the states/actions question, see this video: th-cam.com/video/wLrK_YxdPoM/w-d-xo.html
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Thank you for the quick response!
Is there any difference between 貼ってある and 貼られている? It seems we can use the 2nd on in place of the first, if I understood the explanation correctly.
They are different ways if expressing a similar idea. There is always a "difference" between expressions but it doesn't necessarily amount to much. Language is not math. People like to vary what they say.
Great video, really cleared up てある and ておく for me (until now I had just been interpreting てある to be basically the same as ている, and was quite confused about ておく. One question just out of curiousity: is this a standard japanese version of Alice in Wonderland, or have you written your own that suits the grammar you want to teach in each video?
It's a bit of a mixture, using several translations and a bit of my own - mainly to keep the structural complexity to something we can handle at this point and of course to raise points we need to cover.
I realise now that the word 積ん読 could also be a pun of でおく(どく).
Could it be though?
So beautifully explained, dear robot-sensei.
Wouldn't this translate, in English, in the difference between "The window is open" (simple description) and "The window has been left open"/"Someone left the window open" (someone did it and left it in that state)? Or between "She put it in the cupboard" and "She left it in the cupboard"?
P.s. just wondering, English not being my native language, as you can tell.😁
The main difference between Japanese and English here is that in てある constructions the central actor is the window that was left open, not the person who left it open. English always wants to bring the human actor back into the sentence if it can. There are many expressions like this in Japanese hat aren't really translatable into English at except by falsifying them by turning them passive. There is no passive in Japanese.
More about this phenomenon here: th-cam.com/video/wLrK_YxdPoM/w-d-xo.html
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Thank you for your 💯 reply - going to work harder on both Japanese and English grammar.
P.s. Wish you all the best!
@@カペラマヌエル 頑張ってください。
Thank you for another good explanation. Much better than the simple but useless textbook ones "ておく just means do it in advance" 🤔😂
Or more literally "put the action in place" (for some reason beyond the action itself).
Ibuki Yagami: "I'll quit high school and get a job to support Godai-sensei!"
Kyoko: "ま、リアリティーのないその話はこっちに置いといて…" as she motions to the side with both hands.
What was the problem? 置いといて = 置いてあいて= which in this case is a slangy way of saying "put aside" or "give it a rest".
Hello, I'm going through your whole course and I find it EXTREMELY clear. I'm mostly interested in reading and listening, rather than writing and speaking, and for that I'm practicing by reading novels (キノの旅 at the moment), and deconstructing each and every sentence with your method. It's working wonders, but I've stumbled on a sentence I just cannot manage:
まるで自分に言い聞かすような、誰もいないところへ向かって喋るような口調だった。
To the best of my understanding, this means "as if he was talking to himself, with a tone as if he was talking to no one". It's mostly fruit of intuition, but I cannot really grasp the grammar underneath.
Do you have any pointers?
The core sentence is ∅が口調だった. Everything else is a big modifier for 口調 - telling us what kind of tone it was. - it was a [just as if one were talking-and-causing-to-listen to oneself, directed to a place where no one was kind of] tone.
Does this make it clearer?
It may help to recall as I have explained elsewhere th-cam.com/video/Ft_zw0mdeyI/w-d-xo.html that まるで and ようだ (な) often sandwich a simile/comparison phrases, which is exactly what is happening here.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Ohhh, I see. I didn't recognize the まるで...ような at first. This is much clearer.
Thank you!
Thank you very much, your explanations were fascinating as usual!
And, I have a question:
Is the difference between「窓が開けてある」and「 窓が開けられる」the fact that the first one indicates that the action of 開ける was put into place, so that its results remain whereas the second one does not? Like, the first one is the receptive of 「窓をあけておく」whereas the second one is the receptive of (at least in terms of meaning) 「窓を開ける」?
Also, can you also use に in てある sentence to remark the performer of the actual action (as in receptive)?
Thanks.
Languages often have minor differences in the way they say similar things at different times. The differences are what they are, which is why I explain structure:
窓が開けてある "The window is in a state of having been opened" (the opening itself obviously happened in the past). This never identifies the opener so you can't use に.
窓が開けられる "The window gets opened". In the present (or future).
These are different statements.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Sorry, I actually meant 「窓が開けられた」in second example, not 「窓が開けられる」. My mistake.
But I think I understood the difference. Thanks.
This is narratively referring to an action れた that took place in the past, not to the present state of the window (though it may also imply that).
This is gold🏆
Thank you!
sensei I have a question, not about a specific sentence but a thing that I see been repeated in many ways in Japanese but I quite don't understand it. I'm talking about なく I know it can mean cry and other things but I see this in like 食べたくなかったけど食べたくなった。I know that it is te negative form of たい but why the second part that means "became wanting to eat" it is in the negative too? why not 食べたなった? also like in this sentence ”うちの子供はプールに入るのお理由もなく怖がる。” I can't understand at all why なく it's been used here, if you could explain me or mention a video that you talk about it I would be grateful.
This なく is not a word in itself. It is the negative helper adjective ない in its く-stem form with the verb なる attached. And in this case it is in the past tense. The second instance is not in any sense in the negative. I'm not sure why you thought it was. 食べたくなかったけど = (I) was not in a state of wanting to eat but. 食べたくなった = (I) became in a state of wanting to eat. The adjective is たい and its helper verb is なる(become) in the past tense.
Once again this is the negative helper adjective ない in its く-stem form. お理由もな is the adverbial form, so it means "without any reason (verb)".
If you want to learn more about adjective stems, please see this video: th-cam.com/video/uoj5l8-Ppws/w-d-xo.html
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 thank you very much again, I thought it was because the textbook just show me the "Formulas" and did not explain what it means, now I totally get it, thank you very much. you are helping me so much, just wanted to say, really, thank you.
Is it common or possible to use the ておく for questions / requests? Like asking someone else "Can you put x action into place" or "Please put x action into place and leave it in effect.
Yes there's no reason not to use it in questions or requests when it makes sense to do so.
Seeing the example of the windows, I started wondering whether a sentence like this 水が飲んでいる would be still gramatical, as for using water as the subject
It is certainly grammatical but the meaning is a little unusual. It means "the water is drinking". I wonder what it is drinking. Beer maybe.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 So that's how it is... It couldn't perhaps mean water is in the state of being drunk even if the いる was replaced by ある?
@@tomaskopecky9348 Understanding structure is about seeing how things actually fit together, not about constructing unlikely combinations and saying "look! It's legal! I can do it!". That just leaves one speaking strange foreigner Japanese. the Xてある construction is used in cases (usually with a relatively limited range of verbs) where something exists in a state of something having been done to it. When would we ever see water in a state of having been drunk? (And yes there are funny answers to that - but seriously....)
I was trying to consider possible nuances you could create with てある. Is it possible to use it to create a sense of mystery, or even use it in a spooky story about who the actor could be? For example, a story where someone walks into a room, maybe is looking around, and when they look back at the door. ドアが閉めてある
Might this be used to give the nuance that someone might be nearby and push the listener/reader to wonder who the actor is?
That doesn't work because these constructions suppose that it is in the state described, not that it becomes so at the moment of narration.
PS - We can use ドアが閉めた (the door closed) or
ドアが閉められた (the door got closed [by someone])
does the verb before あるmust be self -move ? If it is , can you explain it?
No it must be other-move because it always implies that someone else did it to the object of which it is predicated. So you can't say 窓が開いたある only 窓が開けてある because you are saying what in English would be probably translated by the passive construction "the window had been opened (by someone)".
Note that it is _not_ passive in Japanese.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 thx dolly sensei!
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 is it the same as the verb before おく must be other-move ?
@@TzeJun-ps9le There is no reason that it must be though it often is. We are putting the action in place, not necessarily putting any thing in place. For example 黙っておく - put in place the action of saying nothing (for the purpose of not giving away a secret perhaps). This is not other-move.
@@TzeJun-ps9le PS - remember that none of this is just "arbitrary rules" the way the textbooks present things. They are just straightforward logic.
Ah sensei a quick question! This came up in a conversation with a friend in Japanese. The friend explained that てる as in 書いてる implies an action that I (the speaker) have done. As opposed to てある which implies a state of having been done as you explained. She suggested that ておく had a similar connotation as the former and I wouldn't use 書いておく to describe something she had done. Is that right? Is ておく usually only used to describe your actions or the actions of a group you belong to? To give more context, I was talking to her about something she'd written on her bio. Thank you!
I'm a bit confused about the use of には in the first sentence of the video "その びんには..." I was wondering if you could tell me why には is used and what it does grammatically?
Edit: Wouldn't the meaning of the sentence stay the same if は was not used here?
th-cam.com/video/iPiLVZoYhfM/w-d-xo.html I'm not sure if you're willing to jump through several lessons but she's done a video on this topic in the course.
This, to me, seems to be indicating that ある is the other-move form for the いる self-move form. As ある is to treat it like an object (something that must be moved by others) and いる is to treat it like a being (something that can self-move). But, since you said that ある is the mother of all self-move verbs, this might be thinking about it too much.
Other-move word (他動詞) doesn't refer to _being moved_ by other, it refers to moving other. Really I would say that while people often say that いる refers to anything that breathes and ある to anything that doesn't, the actual difference is _will,_ not breath and this "will" is extended metaphorically (and perhaps in older animistic thinking not metaphorically) to the idea that Xている refers to being in a state of X independently (metaphorically "by its own will") while Xてある refers to being in a state of X very clearly because another will has put it there.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 I do appreciate it, and that makes sense. That both this distinguishing nature, and the particle が being on objects are the case, is strange, but I suppose two views of the world can exist. Or perhaps が doesn't indicate will at all, and thus doesn't really mark the subject (the doer). If so, then が only marks the thing affected by the verb, and it all seems to fit together. At least, unless I misunderstand what subject is.
@@LordOfEnnui Japanese thinks a little differently about agency than English. Just as an object "does understandable" (分かる) even though the understanding itself comes from outside it, so in AがXてある the actor is A, The point in this case I think is that the actor of ある (being) is A, even though the actor of creating situation X was B (another entity).
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 I completely agree with your idea of the source of whatever action the verb describes being the thing attached to the が, after all, that's the only way the grammar and particularly the particles make any sense, but why is this idea of agency associated with verbs? - given agency's poor definition, I define it as will. Aren't verbs at their core simply describing actions? - I would think that is their purpose at least. So then, "I ate food" or maybe even (though I lack experience with japanese) 「私が食べ物をたべた」 can be taken as an event instead of an action, without the listener needing to think about the will that came before the action of eating. If the listener is not thinking about that part, even though the implicit understanding exists that all actions have a will existing in something/someone before they happen (and the word unwillingly is strange in that it should really be un-desiringly if so, and yet makes sense somehow, so maybe this is not quite the understanding that exists or will is defined as desire after all), the information is not being conveyed to the listener or they would see that the will exists as they hear the sentence. So then, if the doing is removed, it feels less clunky and is just "exists in the state of understandability". Or perhaps, my mind lacks the frame of reference to comprehend an animist view just yet and my brain is doing its usual thing of justifying my hunches.
@@LordOfEnnui I think the concept of "will" here is only to be taken fairly lightly. It isn't in this form common to Japanese in general, but it is I think the underlying reason for the distinction between Xている and Xてある the first shows something simply existing independently in a given state (comparable to a willed being) and the second makes the clear point that the state was brought about by another entity (making the doer of being in the state more comparable to a non-willed being).
This might be a pretty beginner question but at 6:19 why is it 書いてあった and not 書いたあった or 書くあった i think this might solve of my great issues with the て form お願いします！m(__)m
書いたあった or 書くあった are not possible because you can't just pile up two verbs. Just as in English you can't say "I ran walked". What you can do is link two verbs together to make a verb compound. And for this we use the て-form. て-form is always linking something to something else. In this case a verb to a helper-verb, which is one of the fundamental structures of Japanese. I hope this helps - feel free to ask if not.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 that makes sense, but why wont the て form of 書く just mean "and", also do you have any videos where you further explain this form of linking two verbs?
I love how you explain things so good and you are most definitely my favourite japanese teacher on all the internet•̀.̫•́✧thanks a lot for helping me and us❤️
Why, thank you so much ೭੧(❛▿❛✿)੭೨I did a video a while back in my earlier series where I talk about て-form with some of the most common helpers. I think this might be the kind of thing you are looking for th-cam.com/video/PsTsliRe2Cg/w-d-xo.html
3:22
Sensei you said that its okay to use self move or other move verbs with te-iru while te-aru is for other move verbs only. So does that mean its safe if we just use te-iru?
てある and ている mean different things so you should use the one you mean to express. ている has the simpler more basic meaning, so best to stick with that at first - especially as you can use it with any verb.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Got it. Thank you!
Love this series. What translation are you using? Is it available somewhere?
Thank you so much! I'm afraid what I am using is a mish-mash of several translations because I have to shape the narrative toward teaching purposes Lots of considerations, like not introducing ten new points in one sentence for example and lots of little issues, like in this case wanting a sentence that separates the pasted label from the writing on the label (so I can show how 〜てある works in each case. I use the public domain translation on Aozora Bunco (plus some odd bits of the Nursery Alice there) as a basis and then shoehorn in little elements from several other translations. A bit of a task but I think it produces something very useful to work with.
I think I understand this, but I do want to confirm something. If I wanted to convey the idea that Sakura opened the window, could I say 「さくらが まと゛を あいて いた」? Or must I say 「さくらが まと゛を あけて おいた」 (for which the translation would really be "Sakura put into place the action of opening the window")?
If either of my above sentences work, is there a way to tell which construction you should choose? Thank you!
「さくらが まと゛を あいて いた」means "Sakura was opening the window". 「さくらが まと゛を あいて おいた」means that she put the action in place (and therefore the window is open).
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Oops. My mistake. That should have been あいた. :P So, presuming I write either of those correctly ("Sakura opened the window" OR "Sakura put the action in place and therefore the window is open."), is one of them superior to the other? Or is it just that one implies continuation of the action (ておいた) and the other makes no implication either way?
@@cincysoprano4714 Superiority isn't an issue. It depends what you want to say. The two sentences are not equivalent at all. Do you want to express that Sakura was (at some time in the past) engaged in the action of opening the window (a piece of narrative)? Or do you want to express that the window is now open because Sakura has opened it?
Re-watching this, hearing 置いておいた、reminded me of a bit of anime dialogue that puzzled me for a long time. Our MC, in quote marks makes an embarrassing request to himself and makes the female repeat it, with the sentence; と言っておいてくれるかな。 I wonder if you could say that for me? Or rather, I wonder if you could diagram that for me?
Xと言っておいてくれるかな is approximately "X-put in place the act of saying kindly do I wonder" or in slightly more natural English I wonder if you would kindly put in place the action of saying X" - the "put in place" part is pretty much untranslatable as there is no expression like that in English.
How about the expressions, beforehand or for the record? "I wonder if you could say that beforehand for me." So that in the unlikely case that any of this should come to a court of law, I could truthfully say, "Your Honor, she asked for it, she begged me for it, I had her explicit permission to do it. But I didn't even do it because I chickened out. It wound up with me giving her only a very chaste and brief shoulder massage."
But going back to grammer is the core sentence just ∅がという？ with helper verbs おく、くれる、and the I ask myself sentence ender かな？ Or is くれる the sentence ending verb?
@@stanleykparker I think we are in danger of getting a little structure-bound here. Structure is important for understanding but once we get into ways of expressing very particular things structure dumping can be almost as bad as dictionary-dumping: learnjapaneseonline.info/2018/08/25/on-dotards-and-dictionary-dumping-getting-japanese-words-right/ The correct way to approach problems like this is as far as possible to find actual linguistic precedents: th-cam.com/video/1FdhiQH8TS8/w-d-xo.html
Oh, so て置く is pretty close to the not grammatically accepted but informally used “put the window open.” People do say things like that sometimes.
I have never heard "put the window open". Out of interest, what reason do you come from?
Organic Japanese with Cure Dolly Assuming you meant region, I come from eastern Pennsylvania, though I doubt it’s a regional thing, probably just casual. Maybe used more by kids and teens or something. Not sure it’s too common but I’m pretty sure it exists. At least it seems to fit the idea of て置く.
Yes it does fit the idea of ○○ておく. It seems to be much the same concept.
1:45 Ah. Now the key word Heisig gave for 貼 (post a bill) makes slightly more sense.
I would say "paste" (if I thought keywords were a good idea, which I don't) for this one but the problem with the Heisig system is that you need a unique keyword for each word and he'd probably already used "paste". That's why they get increasingly obscure.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 hmm, he uses neither ‘paste’ nor ‘stick’ as a keyword in volume 1 at least. My only thought is maybe he didn’t want it to be confused with actual glue-paste, which he gave as a primitive meaning to 寸.
@@mattheww.4726 Yes that's true. I was thinking of the verb "paste" not the noun. Heh. Just as well I don't make keywords. (I'd think it out a bit more if I did).
Is te aru unusual for taking a subject but implying another do-er of the te verb? I guess te hoshii is kind of similar in this regard. The notion that verbs might be piling up at the end of sentences with different subjects is stressing me out here
A helper verb can have a different subject from the verb it is attached to. With the receptive (so-called "passive") and causative helper verbs it always does (the subject is the receiver of someone else's action or the causer of someone else's action). And as you say, in constructions like てほしい and てもらう the subject is desiring or receiving an action from someone else. So this is not unique. The subject of the recieved/caused (etc) action being unspecified is not unusual either - it often is in the with the receptive helper verbs れる・られる and もらう. The only really unusual thing about てある is that the causer of the state is always implicit. We never identify her with に as we can in the other cases.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Of course, i didnt think about the other examples eg: te morau that know. You're right in singling out the *implied* other grammatical subject in te aru, i think this was my issue. Thanks for your response!
For my fellow Indian learners, ~ておく is much more easily translated and much more natural in Hindi as "रख दिया". Like in Hindi we say "सबजी काट कर रख दी". "Kept" seems like a close enough English translation, but "I have kept the vegetables cut" or "I have left the vegetables cut" sounds weird in English
@@chrisbergsten1429 Yes that's sounds like a good explanation
saaar
This was a tough lesson, I still don't fully understand this.
My interpretation of the lesson is that ておく means to perform an action which alters the condition of a thing from one state, into a different and ongoing state.
Or in other words, to alter it's ある condition.
@@mikenekoski4251 This is very helpful! Thanks for sharing
Wow, just wow. Problem solved
I felt this lesson VERY useful. Indeed it's a thing rarely explained this well and sometimes not explained at all, and I found one of the more difficult lesson I have to date.
I have a little request since is difficult to grasp how is used in practice. With that I mean I feel the need of more practical examples of ておく in actual context and in relation with てある・ている. Sure, immersion help to recognize the usage but I feel immersion don't help much in producing phrases with this kind of construction, at least in this specific case. Can you help me somehow?
Did you see last week's video on how to use sentence databases? This is a very good case for that. (you can find it here th-cam.com/video/1FdhiQH8TS8/w-d-xo.html ). If we pop "ておく" (in quotes) into Webliio as explained in that video we get a huge number of examples. Let's take the first one. It's quite interesting:
信じておくよ。
I'll believe you.
Notice that it is "I'll believe you", not "I believe you". I believe you would be 信じている (I exist in state of believing you). 信じておく on the other hand means "I put in place the action of believing you". This gives us the subtle difference from "I believe you" - I don't just happen to believe you. I am making a conscious decision to put in place the condition of believing you.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Thank you, I did see that video but I forgot to use it like that. I'll use it now more for sure!
Besides, I noticed for some reason I didn't receive the notification for this answer, this already happened in the past and I checked all is right on my part and apparently it is. I wonder if it is because you need to put the nick of the person you answering to in the actual answer, like I just did at the start of this message.
I just checked out for this answer now because I know you always respond to your followers. (and I glad for that)
@@umascariatuerich2014 I've had a few reports from people about TH-cam's notifications not working properly. I'm afraid I can't do anything about that so I hope they'll fix it soon!
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 this one indeed came in. The only difference between this and the one before is this have my name in and the one before that do not. But maybe is only YT who goes awry for unknown reasons.
Now I can properly understand this sentence 半分しか⾷べてないままで捨てちゃダメ！
本当ですね。もったいないですからね。
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 isn't it? :)
I genuinely don't understand. It makes no sense.
1- your voice is awful
2- every 5 min you saying everyone else is wrong is annoying, you can just provide your theory without saying that.
BUT
1- content is very good.
1. What a charming gentleman. I do my best to sound human. Sorry if I don't quite make it. I keep trying
2. Since people have so much misinformation put into them I consider it necessary to point out that there is in fact a difference between the actual structure and what they have been taught. Otherwise people would be likely to try to reconcile the two, which would lead to further confusion.
3. Thank you so much. Genuinely happy for your kind appreciation.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 I appreciate that you intentionally point out where your approach differs from traditional textbooks. To your point, I would otherwise attempt to reconcile these differences and would end up super confused. ありがとうございます！