I'm not sure about the use of causative-receptive, by what I understood for the last part of the video the causative-receptive is "receiving a compel to do something", is always the case? I mean all the cases where we use this two verbs in this way are "compelling" someone to receive an action. There other uses of this two verbs in this sequence? I also suppose the combination of receptive-causative (like 食べられさせた） exists, if my train of thoughs are right it might mean "I allow someone to fed me" or something like that, am I correct?
In theory there is no reason for the causative receptive to mean "compel" but it usually tends to because it tends to have a "negative" implication. This is because there is _another_ causative receptive construction in Japanese that has more positive implications. I did the video on this here: ruclips.net/video/r2j1o9wj2oA/видео.html - however I strongly recommend watching the one before it first: ruclips.net/video/CESFJaFp8FI/видео.html because this is really a two-parter and it's best to get the information in the first one before proceeding to the second.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 So structurally I understand how the ブロコリ sentence is all set up. Would the Japanese connotation be similar to the Engilsh "I was forced to eat broccoli"? Implying that my parents made me eat it, or maybe the situation made me eat it? Such as being trapped on a deserted island of broccoli or something?
@@x2bounty "or maybe the situation made me eat it? Such as being trapped on a deserted island of broccoli or something?" I wonder if in this case if you would have to resort to using: ブロコリを食べなければならない instead
@@x2bounty Without a ni particle attached target, or further context, I don't think it's possible to know from that sentence alone. Any one of the causes mentioned could be it.
Japanese like Mandarin and Cantonese is never like English in terms of its logical structure. A sentence can have more than one action, i.e., more than one verb, in it. I can create a sentence in Cantonese with 10 verbs in it. Some of them are used for creating so-called nouns in sense of English grammar without adding any -ing to them. Your so-called "causative thing" only exists in English. There can be a CHAIN of actions and hence a chain of cause-effect pairs within one single sentence in most East Asian languages. Each action has a cause and an effect. You can think of cause and effect in a Japanese sentence as a SERIES of actions with multiple causes and effects in a chain. The ability to STACK verbs is a major character in most if not all East Asian languages.
Thank you. This is the kind of feedback that is really helpful to me. I thought the boxes + color-coded text would be a good way of making the structure more visually obvious - but of course the proof of the pudding is in whether learners are finding it so, so I need to know that!
Appreciation and gratitude to anyone who's recommended this channel in the comment section of a different Japanese-learning channel, because that's how I finally found it.
Thank you for this video (and all the other ones you did so far). I stumbled upon your channel a few days ago because I was reviewing the passive form and was looking for additional information besides the ones in my textbook. Your video about this topic was so extremely informative and easy to understand that I was completely amazed. Then I watched your videos about は and が because even after half a year of self-study I never really understood the difference between these two, despite having read so many articles about it. But while watching your videos it finally clicked and I feel like I finally understood it. Same with transitive and intransitive verbs. I love how you explain why everything works the way it does instead of simply saying "For this use particle x and for that particle y and that's it. Just learn it," without further explanation. The visuals with the different trains are also very helpful, especially in this video. It is not a lie when I say you are the best Japanese tutor I know. Sorry for the long comment but I really had the urge to thank you for your excellent videos. Your explanation skills are legendary and very much appreciated. Can't wait for the next lesson :)
Thank you so very much for your kind comments! I am always happy when I have helped someone to see the simple logic and beauty of Japanese. I tend to think of regular Japanese "grammar explanations" as "phrasebook Japanese" because they essentially do what phrasebooks do - just give you a clump of Japanese and a clump of English and say "this means this". Which is fine if you just want to know what noises to make to get a cup of tea but only marginally useful for learning the language. Of course standard English "Japanese grammar" does explain things at a somewhat more granular level than phrasebooks but it still does essentially the same thing rather than actually explaining the inner logic of the language. I am so happy to be able to bring the real structure of Japanese to a new generation of learners!
I accept no other Japanese grammar explanations, only from Cure Dolly! This is brilliant and so easy to understand. I love how your lessons always seem to cover the exact questions that are popping in my head as I watch the video, as if I had asked them. いつもありがとうございます
Again I have to thank you Cure Dolly for making this so much clearer. Also your zero ga subject video lesson is brilliant. I spent ages trying to work this out from text books and other teachers, all of who failed to explain the zero subject adequately. A huge thanks again.
Wow... i feel like i just received total enlightenment. Its true non-native can give more detailed explanations than native speakers (based on my exp & from people i know). I've been on edge coz i have an exam tomorrow & i still cant comprehend the difference between causative & causative-passive. So i've been rummaging youtube regarding this topic & i almost gave up (which im glad i didnt) coz its about to hit midnight... fortunately, i found your channel. & im at a loss for words. This really helped me a lot! Thank you
11:55 "The causative passive, when taught with the standard grammatical model, causes people to receive a great deal of confusion." I see what you did there, you cheeky dolly, you... :D Also, nice Koch snowflake on the broccoli (13:33).
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 I knew it, Cure Dolly is/was a mathematician/engineer/physicist. As an engineer myself, it is not hard to recognize the way she thinks and explains things. Her style is nothing at all like how linguists think and exactly how math-based scientists and engineers approach everything.... :)
So, I'm almost at your 20th lesson, Dolly 先生! It's been a bit of a hard ride to me, maybe because I'm not that familiar with English. But i can certainly feel i can understand more things. I want to get to watch the entire course and then rewatch it again hahah I tend to forget things a lot but having you as my first example for learning rather than textbooks and so on probably made my learning process much gentler. And I'm grateful towards you for that. Well then. I'll keep watching! And keep commenting your videos :P thank you a lot!! Really!!
I gotta say, the last like 5 to 10 videos in this series has been going waaay over my head. But then again, I never studied English to know what sounds right to say or write, so I'm just gonna keep trusting the process and keep watching as many Japanese content as I can so I can get get the same feel for the language.
Yes, that is the best way. If you keep on ACTIVELY consuming stuff and trying to understand Japanese as Japanese, it will come to you sooner or later. It will take quite some time before you start seeing it, but do not worry, each day you do this, you get closer to it, even if it may not feel like it. Indeed as they say, trust in the process and keep up the active/effortful consistency! 頑張りましょう！
i revisited this because i couldn't remember which helper goes with receptive and which goes to causative. your inclusion of the causative being aligned with する (i now remember it with the "s" starting sound) and receptive belonging to ある will really help moving forward.
I wonder if the use of additional ∅が will make these constructions even clearer. For example, at 4:33 we take 犬を outside of the blue box, and add ∅が in there. The sentence 犬を食べさせた would thus be interpreted as ∅(私)が 犬を [∅(犬)が 食べ] させた。 In this way, we don't have to call を-marked 犬 a subject (and subjects shouldn't be marked by anything other than が), as the secondary clause explicitly contains its own が-marked subject (which is equal to the same 犬 due to the context). This also highlights that 犬 serves two roles here at the same time: it is an object of the receptive verb and also a subject of the secondary clause. The relation between these two roles is the same as between topic and subject of sentences like 犬は食べる, so overall it is perfectly regular.
I think this lesson is best so far. Very clear explanation and presentation, great example sentences (ブロッコリーが嫌いだ). You set the bar quite high with this one, I wonder if you can make next one even better! :)
Thank you so much! I definitely hope to keep improving. In Japan there is a philosophy of 改善 (かいぜん), which means continual improvement (of products, services etc). That's what I try to do with my videos. I hope I can!
Great explanations once again ドリ先生. As a side-note, I watched a video from a translator who learned Japanese years ago from the textbooks. Just as an example: she has a video on particles and said that you need at least 1-2 years to really understand the difference between は and が . Not anymore, haha. Japanese is nice and logical after all.
my head is spinning with this lesson but it's yet another great learning i have! will visit this video once again to understand it further,, thank you Cure Dolly-sensei.
Me, reverting back to what I was before following this channel, as Cure Dolly-sensei said the causative can use both NI and WO: "oh no why is this happening the particles are changing I don't know what they are anymore I hate them". A moment later I updated to present and thought: "wait, the particles meanings don't change, and if both particles can be used I'm sure Cure Dolly-sensei will explain why in a way it makes sense". And she did! Thank you.
In a sentence like 水が飲まれた do both verbs have 水 as the subject or is there a hidden ∅に? And if I wanted to specify who was the one who caused me to eat broccoli in ブロコリを食べさせられた would I use the に particle as well?
There is a "hidden ∅に" In 水が飲まれた. We don't need to worry about it mostly, but for structural purposes we should be aware that it is logically there (though very much in the background because the second actor is unstated and quite probably unimportant). However logically, if we think about it, there are two actions of which the water did only one, and someone else did the other. The water did れる, "getting", but it didn't do 飲む, "drinking" - i.e. it didn't drink itself: someone/something else drank it. In ブロコリを食べさせられた you would use に for the person who did the compelling if you included her, e.g. 母にブロコリを食べさせられた. The ∅が is of course yourself, who did the eating. As usual she is marked with に as the ultimate source of the pull-action れる (which as we discussed in Lesson13 is symmetrical with its being the ultimate target of a regular push-action ruclips.net/video/cvV6d-RETs8/видео.htmlm6s )
Wow, this is exciting! I am gradually moving up to the current lesson but still have to go back and review. The saseru mixed with the rareru really scrambled my brain, so much that I thought something was wrong with me, like I passed the age where I could learn different language constructions. I was always wondering the origin of saseru and rareru. Linking them to aru and suru really makes a lot of sense. But the biggest takeaway for me is seeing the embedded sentences that separate what is done to whom and who or what is causing it. Thanks again!
I am constantly amazed at the way Japanese is taught - almost as if it was _meant_ to confuse people.(it isn't, of course - just that the whole model is very poorly constructed and up until now there hasn't been another one). People of all ages have the troubles you have been having. The question isn't so much age as whether one has a high degree of "linguistic intuition", which I believe _most_ people don't. But because it is so incompletely explained you are essentially reliant on having a high degree of that natural ability. I certainly don't have it (machines aren't known for intuition though some of us have just a little). That is why I have had to analyse and work out the real structure almost alone. Naturally most professional Japanese teachers _do_ have high language intuition because up until now it has been extremely hard to learn Japanese without it. It may be that they find it hard to understand the needs of everyone else.
@@zamyrabyrd Funny fact. The construction 'to fire/sack someone' in Japanese, at least how I was taught, is yamesaserareru (I receive compelling to quit). My teacher at university had a hilarious story about it.
It really is a good idea to come back to videos again after a while. Even if one understands them the first time one can often get even more out of them with more experience.
GOD BLESS YOU Thank you so much for existing 🤣 In two days, I have a test (& I'm a bit worried for the oral production part) and this comes just like manna from heaven 🙏
Thinking of せる/させる and れる/られる as helper verbs rather than conjugations is especially useful and much easier to understand with things like receptive-causative statements. When you learn each form as conjugations that you are then doing to the result of conjugations of course it looks confusing. Thinking of them as helper verbs makes it simpler and also makes it easier to understand the structure when you can break it down piece by piece. Thank you for the video!
Regarding the use of を vs に with the target of the causative: While I understand now when not to use を, are there any situations where not to use に? For example if the phrase we want to cause is 犬が家に歩く, would 犬に家に歩かせる be "bad"? How about さくらに家に歩かせる, where we might not want to treat さくら with を?
While, when convenient, repetitive にs may be avoided for stylistic reasons, Japanese is generally quite tolerant of them. Some basic sentence-types require them: 公園に遊びに行った
According to 13:41 she said "させる" and not "さらる" like it's written in the slide Just if anyone was having confusion at first about "what is さらる?" it's just a mistake, I think
Thank you. I freaking hated saseru and rareru and saserareru. It simply didn't make sense to me when or why to use them, although I did understand when used by others. It's just that I had this nagging feeling that I never use them correctly. Your lessons are gold
ドリーさん, I know this isn’t exactly related to the video, but I’ve been thinking about it and just have to ask! I finally understand the difference between が and は b/c of your videos, but I’m confused on how it relates to this other apparent function these particles have. Several people beforehand had taught that the difference between が & は is that が simply emphasizes the information BEFORE it while は emphasizes the info AFTER it. How does this relate to them being a subject / topic particle? I kind of understood this idea when given phrases like “私が行く” where the speaker is trying to emphasize that THEY will go vs. just “私は行く”. And then in the case of “好き” I was told that が was used just b/c it was emphasizing the noun (the thing you like) before it. Would you say this is an accurate way to describe these two particles functions?
Yes this is all broadly correct although a little partial. The whole subject is quite a big one involving the whole difference between logical and non-logical particles (a distinction rarely understood though simple enough once you do). I explained it all in a two-parter here: Pt1: ruclips.net/video/_nXHpkTTfGs/видео.html Pt2: ruclips.net/video/o-hK4-qv9Yk/видео.html
This was perfect! I love how clear everything is! It allows me to see the patterns and work with them (which is personally how I work best!). A quick question (or perhaps not so quick), is there a difference in nuance when it comes to choosing which helper verb will serve as the base? For example: 読められる vs 読まれられる and all the combinations therein (including the causative?) Thank you!
We're getting into quite convoluted territory hereʕ•ᴥ•ʔ Technically, of course, due to the lego-nature of Japanese, we can bolt any helper onto any other and it sometimes happens. However a lot of combinations are relatively little used. Part of the reason for that is that while Japanese has no passive in the strictly grammatical sense (I'm not certain English really does either, but that's another question!) a lot of its constructions are much more "passive" in a more general sense (i.e. non-ego-biased) than English. Honestly I am not really sure what 読められる would really mean 読める means either "do able to read" or "do able to be read" (but mostly only "dp able to read" a particular thing) so "get done able to read" or "get done able to be read" doesn't quite compute - at least for my poor circuits. Consulting Google-sensei I find only a few hundred entries for the word (in double quotes) which is very few for a Japanese word and probably covered by jocular and creative usage plus errors. There was a question about when the word might be used on Yahoo Japan's Chiebukuro (a much more sophisticated and informative affair than Yahoo Answers) and the only answer was a terse そんな日本語がありません。 読まれられる (receptive-potential) makes a little more sense and does exist as a word, but is little used. Receptive-potential is normally written as e.g. 読まれ得る (pronounced 読まれうる) and even this isn't used much. In most cases (say, talking about a book) it means nothing very different from 読める, though it might be used to stress the point, to sound more "literary" or to make it clear that in talking about a person you really mean that she can be read and not that they she is able to read.
If the "causative" and "receptive" verbs are just helper verbs put on the end of other verbs, does that mean you can just keep stacking them? Like for a bigger "passive-causative-passive" form (lol): 囚人が殴られさせられた - "The prisoner was caused/forced to be beaten" ?
You can stack them as long as it makes sense to do so, though in practice if there are other ways of putting a thing stacks aren't used. Remember that there is no passive in Japanese so it's important to understand that it is only going to be used where receiving is involved (even if English has trouble not translating it passively). One can stack receptive and causative. It is less common than the other way around but it is perfectly grammatical to do so.
For the causive-receptive example sentence you used, "∅がブロコリを食べさせられた," how would we include the person doing the causing? Suppose it was the mother doing the causing, would it be "母は私がブロコリを食べさせられた?" As for my mother, I got caused to eat broccoli? Or would it be に marking mother instead?
Yes it is に. In a "push" or regular-action sentence に marks the ultimate recipient (if there is one) of the action. In a "pull" or receptive sentence (where the が-marked actor _is_ the receiver) the "giver" of the received action is marked by に. This is also true of other kinds of action-receiving ("pull") sentences such as those using Xてもらう: ruclips.net/video/CESFJaFp8FI/видео.html
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Love your videos! I was looking for this comment. Unfortunately, I'm still confused... your example of "zeroが犬に肉を食べさせる" seemed to make it pretty clear that させる is by your definition a "push" verb, as に is marking the dog as the ultimate target; the one being "caused" to eat by the "zero" actor. So is させる no longer a "push" verb in the context of causative-receptive? In "zeroがブロコリを食べさせられた”, it made perfect sense to me when you said that "zero" is the person doing the 食べ and られる and is thus marked by が. But following the rules of させる, which seemed to indicate that が marks the actor who imposes the "causing" on the one marked with に, wouldn't it follow that the sentence would be 母が私がブロコリを食べさせられた？ Or do the rules for させる change in the context of causative-receptive? Hope my question makes sense. I'm not sure if you are still active or responding to older content, I unfortunately found you late. I am so impressed by your teaching method! I hope you are doing well!
The previous lessons have been quite a breeze, thanks to your concise and logical explanations. But I must admit, this one made me literally scratch my head. 😅 I believe I'll understand it well after a few re-watches though. Thanks a lot! On a side note, I now fully understand why you refuse to call them conjugation. It is less confusing this way.
I am glad you do. A conjugated verb is one verb with one subject. Causative and receptive constructions are both made up of two verbs with two subjects and causative-receptive is made up of three verbs with subjects X, Y and X again. So the "conjugation" concept leads us a few miles off the right track here!
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Yeah, I think i got it now. It was kinda hard to get my head around it. Lol. So, do I say "わたしが友達にブロコリを食べさせられた" to mean "My friend made me eat broccoli" in proper English? Or...since it's a default that the zero pronoun is "I", maybe, "友達にブロコリを食べさせられた"? Lastly, would it make the same sense as "友達がわたしにブロコリを食べさせた"? I'm sorry I had a lot of questions. Though I said I think I already grasped the idea, I wanna make sure. Btw kinda off-topic but I bought your book yesterday together with the Japanese version of Harry Potter on Kindle. I haven't finished your book yet but I get the impression that some of the more advanced topics you discuss here (I mean this playlist) aren't in there. Thank you for your hard work on these videos. I do believe that eventually I will still have to resort to memorization in order to speak Japanese instinctively, but these breakdowns help in understanding how the system works, which also makes memorization easier. Speaking of Harry Potter, I probably made a poor choice because I'm kinda having a hard time with it.
@@gemgem24able わたしが友達にブロコリを食べさせられた is correct and it doesn't matter if you leave off the わたしが. So both your first examples are right. "友達がわたしにブロコリを食べさせた" does mean the same thing. It isn't receptive so the nuance is different but the action is the same. Harry Potter is quite advanced. You may want to get something simpler and put HP aside for now. You'll get to it later.
Hi again Curie! I hope you don't mind me clarifying the use of に on this one ;3; but does に+せる/させる usage by any chance, would also perform the same function as with the receptive usage example? As in, attaching に to the source of the verb that we add れる/られる on. I thought about it for a bit, and ended up with thinking that it could go both ways, from that and just the usual target marking に on whether there's a を-marked noun or not. Maybe I'm overthinking it?
Can these helper verbs ever be used "on their own" (assuming that what they are helping was previously specified)? E. G, an exchange like A: Did you eat? B: I was made to do it Would seem natural to be expressed with those in light of the Japanese style of redundancy skipping, but I am not sure. If not, how else would it be expressed?
Usually the helper would remain attached to its verb. And in any case 食べさせた wouldn't usually mean "I was made to eat" as much as "someone gave something to eat". More usually it would be 食べさせてもらった depending on the circumstance and nuance. Remember that Japanese uses dfferent expression strategies from English and we can't just treat it like a jigsaw.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Yeah I agree on that, maybe it was a poorly expressed example, what I was curious about was if one person could play off the main verb used by the other person with the helper verb in a structure like the above or if they would have to express the full clause
Okay so, I was reading a story today and found this sentence using the causative that confused me enough to revisit this video. Please let me know if I am correct. あたしは静かに気持ちを集中させた。 I understood it as: "As for me, I quietly/calmly set up the circumstances for the feeling to concentrate/focus" Which in English sounds weird because, well, it is /my/ feeling, so how do you make a feeling concentrate/focus? Good thing here we're used to NOT to translate to pretty English lol. If I wanted to do so, it would be something like: "I let myself concentrate/focus" or "I made myself concentrate/focus"
The nearest translation to this is "I quietly made my feelings gather to the center". While 集中する is frequently translated as "concentrate", it retains much more of the original kanji sense of gathering to the center than the English word would imply. We should also bear in mind here the way that Japanese uses the causative in saying things like "she made her lips pucker" or "she made her face go red". These sound strange in English because they imply active causation of what are involuntary bodily changes, but causation in Japanese does not necessarily imply will on the part of the causer. In your example, of course, it does imply will, but I still think it helps in understanding it to realize the greater breadth of the concept in Japanese.
こんにちわ先生! I've found all of your lessons very helpful and informative so far! I've been wondering at what lesson do you recommend we can start learning via immersion? Again, thank you so much for providing such wonderful lessons for free! :)
I am very happy that you found my lessons helpful, and thank you for your kind appreciation. I would go to at least Lesson 20 before attempting immersion and also acquire a basic vocabulary of about 1000 words. These should be common words, used every day, not obscure ones. You may find this helpful: ruclips.net/video/Ky12sKu3EcE/видео.html
Great video! A question: in a causative-receptive sentence, what would you do if you wanted to specify the subject of the せる/させる helper verb? I guess you would use the particle に or the particle を, but which one, and why? Could you make an example, please?
It is に because the head-verb of the sentence is れる れるる. The させる is really just like any other structural element telling us more about _what_ was received (the act of being caused to do X) and the person one is receiving it from is marked with に as usual (as the "pull" counterpart of the direct object in a "push" sentence).
So if I understand correctly, "I was made to eat broccoli by mother" is 「私は母にブロコリを食べさせられた」. But how do I say "Mother made me eat broccoli"? Is it 「母が私にブロコリを食べさせた」? Because mother is not the receptive of the action in this case, so I drop the Receptive helper れる・られる, right?
Is my understanding is somehow right? context: starving girl asking random passerby 何か食べさせて頂けませんか？ Does it means this: Could you arrange it like that, so I would receive the food? And 何か is marked by zeroga?
Would the causative passive always imply you were made or allowed to do something? Or could it mean you received the setting up of conditions for an action (like how you described the dog being fed)? In the genki textbook they said the passive and in turn causative passive always implied a negative meaning, is that true?
The Receptive helper always implies a negative meaning. No, not at all. Did Genki really say that? And yes the Causative + Receptive can mean any of those things.
Finally something easy in Japanese as my language also has these cases: e.g. Kumain = to eat Kinain = to be eaten Nagpakain = to be eaten (willingly) Nakain = to be eaten (accidentally) or to have been eaten Kinainan = to be used as a place for eating Nakainan = to be accidentally used as a place for eating or to have been eaten at
In the last part you said that in the causative-receptive sentence there are always only two subject, but how do I say things like: "I cause the dog to be eaten (by something)" Is it: 私が犬を食べさせられる or this mean "I cause the dog to eat me"? Or is it 私は犬を食べさせられる or is it something else? Please enlighten me.
In a causative receptive sentence there are _three_ subjects but only two entities. Since there are three verbs - the action of the root-verb, its causation and the reception of that causation, each one must have a subject. The subject of the first and last must be the same entity and the subject of the middle one must be another entity. Just because a permutation can theoretically exist doesn't mean that it is used. 私が犬を食べさせられる will usually be read as "I am able to feed the dog (i.e. cause the dog to eat). If you wanted to make it clear that you caused the dog to be eaten by something (a pretty rare combination) you need to say something more explicit. This is in line with the Absurdity Rule (it is not exactly absurd but rare and unlikely enough to need special treatment). This ambiguity rules that are common to all languages but rarely mentioned can be found here ruclips.net/video/gcbbSW-KuTQ/видео.html
Any theories as to why textbooks call them conjugations? Do they assume people are generally not smart enough to understand them for what they are or perhaps the authors of them aren't smart enough themselves to see them for what they really are?
A surprising number of "authorities" on "Japanese grammar" aren't actually very clear themselves about how it is structured. The first Westerners to learn Japanese used classical and modern European concepts (such as conjugation) to describe and analyze the language and surprisingly little has changed since then.
There is another expression that can be used to force something. muri suru, it has a bit of a 'useless' connotation but if the receiver didn't consider it an undesirable thing to begin with, then force wouldn't have been necessary. 私は無理してブロッコリーを食べた 無理をしないで。 Don't overdo it, don't force yourself to do any more things, something about the current thing, take it easy.
But really, this is not something that should be seen analogous to English. In Japanese it would be more like "Even though I cannot stand medicine, in order to cure my illness, I ate the pill anyway. And if you really want it to be せる, then there can just be a cause that forced you to do it. Sure, you forced it down, but why? If you think about that, then you might just leave the 'forced' bit and go back to "because of, I did"
Thank you for making this video !! But I have one more thing in mind that needs to be confirmed. Is the "causative receptive" a cooler version of "receptive" in which another layer of meaning of "compulsion" is implied ? Or to put it simpler, "causative receptive" = "receptive" + compulsion ???
Yes exactly. Well it isn't a question of cool - it's just a layer of meaning you can add quite economically. As I pointed out since there are three verbs (one stem, two helpers) in the sentence there are three subjects, though the first and last must be the same entity.
There's a small typo on the final slide where it says the secondary action is the verb: さらる instead of させる. Very unlikely to trip anyone up for more than half a second but thought I would point it out incase you want to use this slide again in another video at some point.
This means you've taken in lots of fundamental information in the previous lessons. So congratulations! Maybe come back to this one again a little later.
I was following all this really well and thought I understood it - right until near the end where you said that 'tabesaserareta' always meant 'got made to eat'! Given that we are combining causative and receptive - and that you clearly explained the causative does NOT necessarily mean to make someone do something - why can't tabesaserareta mean 'allowed to eat', or 'enabled to eat'?? And if it can't mean those things, then how would you say them? Please help!
Nick in London with tabesaserareta, it’s best to think of it as meaning “was fed”. You’re not being ‘forced’ to eat, you’re not being ‘allowed’ to eat, but you’ve been enabled to eat by someone else - I.e, ‘fed’. Another example: Fuko wo Kiserareta = ‘was dressed’. You’re not being forced to dress or allowed to dress, you’re wearing clothes because someone else caused you to be dressed - perhaps a mother dressing her child, or a maid dressing a wealthy lady. It’s pretty subtle and there isn’t always a great English equivalent.
Two/three verbs and two/three actions = epiphany! Question on the last example, though. If 母にブロコリを食べさせられた... although the "actor" of the compelling is Mom, I am still the grammatical subject, right? Thanks!
The overall actor (subject) of any verb-sentence is always the doer of the _last verb_ (the head-verb or Engine). The head-verb of this sentence is られた (received) and it is being done by you.
I really appreciate all your lessons! I've been studying Japanese for a few years now and your videos are giving me a completely new perspective. I find myself getting stuck on the example sentence｛私が｝犬を食べさせた used in this video. I understand that 私 is doing the causing (させた), but if を is marking 犬 as the direct object of the secondary action 食べ how is that not like "eat dog"? Unless the を is now referring to the compound verb 食べさせた The example used later in the video seems to make sense to me 犬に肉を食べさせた。since the 肉 is what is being eaten thus it is the direct object of 食べ, the secondary action. I feel like I'm missing something in that first example.
｛私が｝犬を食べさせた What is the head-verb of the sentence? It is させる. Who is the が-marked actor? It is 私. So what is 私 doing? Causing. Causing what? The rest of the sentence tells us. If the secondary action has a direct object that takes を away from the primary action which then takes に. If it doesn't then the primary action's direct object (the one being caused) can take を - though whether she does or not may depend on other factors which I discuss here: ruclips.net/video/gVqs4TzqySw/видео.html
ドリ先生、 may I ask whether this sentence is grammatically correct? さくらが お母さんに ブロコリを 食べさせられた。"Sakura got made to eat broccoli by her mother." (I have the feeling it would be more natural to say さくらは、 お母さんに ブロコリを 食べさせられた。, but technically, it is the same sentence, right?) I feel quite confident about having grasped what the ni-particle does in receptive sentences, namely marking the source of the pulling action, and I hope I was not overconfident in enjoying the beautiful lego-like nature of Japanese. Thank you for another informative and comprehensive lesson.
Since は is a non-logical particle it does not affect the logic of the sentence, and since it clearly indicates Sakura as the ∅が in this sentence the two are logically equivalent. The reasons for using the non-logical は as opposed to the logical が (that is stressing the topic rather than the subject, which in this case are the same entity) are subtle and various. I have done a pair of videos on the underlying principles here: ruclips.net/video/_nXHpkTTfGs/видео.html ruclips.net/video/o-hK4-qv9Yk/видео.html
Something that really confused me as a young Japanese learner was how 5-level verbs can have two causative passive forms. For example, one of my first textbooks (Understanding Japanese Grammar by Koichi Nishiguchi; terrible book, never buy it), I was taught that 飲ませる was the causative, and 飲まされる was the causative passive. Then I learned that 飲ます is also causative, and 飲ませられる can also be "causative passive," and I was like 😵💫 It wasn't until later that I learned that 飲ます is considered an "old form" that is still used. (I learned it by the Japanese pinky swear chant 「ハリセンボン飲ます」) Do you go into these? I'd like to know what's going on here.
Does that "1 verb, 1 subject" rule can be applied to other verbs in general? For example: 大地は くさり.. 夜になると かいぶつが おぞってくる。 「おぞって」 and 「くる」, they have different subjects as well?
In this case they do, but there is no rule that the subjects of two verbs must be different entities. And in fact in this video we see that in causative-receptive sentences there are three verbs but only two subject entities. X causes Y to do action z and Y receives the causation. So せる IS done by X and both れる _and_ the original "helpee" verb are done by Y. In a simple compound sentence like お店にいってパンを買った ∅ does both verbs and represents the same entity.
But just to be clear, it _is_ true that in a simple causative or a simple receptive sentence, the first verb and the helper _must_ have different subjects (it isn't a grammatical rule it's simple logic - you don't cause yourself to do something or receive an action from yourself).
I have a question on this one. In some textbooks (certainly the newest Genki) they claim that the "causative passive" or as you describe (and seems to make more sense to me) causative receptive, can essentially be contracted (abbreviated maybe?) as あ stem + される. This is supposedly more common. How true is that?
They are quite common in informal speech. The Genki examples are often conversations between students where they would be common but they are not acceptable in formal circumstances.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 So the idea of "formal" speech gets thrown around a lot in Japanese, but I'm not 100% sure on what is considered a "formal" situation. It changes up the speech patterns a bit (going from だ to です, じゃ to では, いる to います, etc) I assume it has some level of overlap with english, where we use formal speech in writing especially but also in events that are explicitly formal (such as at a banquet, or dance). That said, I also know that Japan has a bit of a sort of social hierarchy that can cause ordinary situations to become formal based on who you are talking to, right? So what sorts of things count as formal? As far as I know currently: Talking to a boss Talking to an elder Super formal when talking to a customer or guest And formal when in certain events (I assume something a bit more solemn, like a serious tea ceremony?) Sorry, I'm sure you answer these in later videos, but didn't want to lose these questions.
@@geoffreybolton7901 The question is in fact pretty complex. There are various levels of formality depending on all kinds of things like age (even one year), type of relationship etc. and it isn't just a matter of keigo vs です・ますvs plain. There are words and abbreviations that one would use in です・ます in some cases but not others for example. This is not something to "learn" in the abstract. One needs to know the basics and keep on the side of not offending. No one is going to expect native-level sensitivity and you shouldn't expect it of yourself because it is unrealistic without a great deal of experience. In some internet/game settings all the rules are out of the window and everyone just talks like classmates. But not all.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 That's perfectly reasonable. So let me slightly change the question then, what is considered an appropriate level of default formality? I'm not sure if it's a bad way to think about it, but the way I tend to think when creating sentences (input is entirely different and comes down to understanding the structure, which you outline well), is that there is a "default formality". In my case, I default to です/ます, and then when I interpret the situation as more casual, convert to だ/plain. Is that appropriate? I guess the overarching meaning behind this question and preceding one is essentially, while being a foreigner forgives things, I don't want to be overly formal in average conversation when traveling, but also don't want to appear rudely disrespectful either. As I said above, trying to intuit a "default" or "safe" level of initial formality for a situation. I guess just err on the side of caution and apply formality rules? Regardless, thanks for your time answering my questions.
@@geoffreybolton7901 Default level for anyone you're not somewhat intimate with (or in a peer-group of some kind with) is です・ます which is why textbooks teach it despite the harm to structural understanding (as if you are going to be holding real conversations by lesson 10). Nothing beyond that matters because it will not be expected of a foreigner and learning lots of fiddly rules is silly (and won't end up sounding natural anyway). If the whole group is using informal and you are a part of it then you can too.
こんにちは ♡ First, thank you so very much for all your lessons. Cure Dolly先生は天才ですよね！ I understood everything in this video until I read chapter 48 of みんなの日本語. I may have misunderstood either your lesson or the textbook, however as I understand it, the textbook says that を is used when the verb is intransitive. Does this not contradict the sentence used in this lesson. After all, I trust you more than the textbook, but I am slightly confused. Would you perhaps be able to explain it? Again thank you so so so very much ♡ xx
If it really said that it must be a misprint. を is used when a verb is other-move (transitive). That is because を marks the direct object and only transitive verbs have direct objects.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Thank you for the reply ♡ I think i may have explained it a bit unclear. They say the sentence structure is like this: N(person) を V(intransitive) causative （私は娘を自由に遊ばせます）or like this: N(person) に Nを V(transitive) causative.(先生は生徒に自由に意見を言わせます）
@@_unlapinblanc This is correct though the explanation sounds skewed if you have it right. Saying "causative" like that is confusing to start with. What they mean is the verb せる・せせる - not some "causative conjugation". The doer of せる・させる is the one who makes someone do the attached verb. This is a transitive action even if the attached verb is intransitive (which it usually is). Therefore it has a direct object and the direct object is the person caused to do. However this may vary for reasons explained in this video ruclips.net/video/gVqs4TzqySw/видео.html
Thank you for your explanations! I came across this sentence today: コウイチの話から、どんな教訓がえられましたか？ Shouldn't the が here, if I understand things correctly, be a に?
Remember that potentials are usually "acted" by the thing that is possible ruclips.net/video/qcOhHmU0znI/видео.html so 本が読める means "book does readable (to me)". Similarly here どんな教訓がえられましたか means "what kind of lesson did takeable?" This られる could be the receptive helper (hard to be sure out of context) but again it would be "what kind of lesson received taking?"
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Thank you! You're definitely right about the potential, I completely forgot they were the same - I interpreted it as being the receptive helper. But I didn't follow the receptive helper explanation - isn't the receiver in this case surely (zero) 'you' or 'me' or something? The one who receives the moral/lesson? From your video I'm not sure I understand how the thing that is being received can be the 'ga' - rather, it seems like the receiver should be the 'ga'? (And in this case, the receiver is not the lesson, but you/I)..
@@Manillien Well it's pretty sure to be the potential, but if it were the receptive we know what is doing the receiving by what is marked by が - and in this case it would be the lesson that is receiving being taken by whoever is taking it. A touch confusing because it is almost a double "receive" (the lesson receives[the action of] being received by someone) - but we need to remember that receivers of actions don't have to be people or even concrete things but could also be something like a lesson or a moral.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Thank you again! Re-watching the video, I finally got it! I had somehow gotten it into my mind that the が-marked noun must 'make sense' with the verb stem, but I see now that it's exactly the opposite. It must make sense with the れる-part. すみません！ビデオが私に得られています！
Dolly Sensei, I've seen a few times sentences with two "wo" particle. In anime and also on the Tatoeba website. What does it really mean? I've watched this lesson a few times and it's way more comprehensive now by the way! :)
You would need to give examples. The main reasons a sentence will have two を particles are 1. that it is a compound sentence and 2. that one of the を particles is part of a modifying clause.
A better english word for "caused/compelled' (someone to perform the action) I found is "led". It doesn't directly implicates and isn't allowed but still passes the meaning of permission.
I think the thing here is that it is actually quite rare for a word in Japanese to overlap in all its nuances with any one word in English so once we have understood the range the aim is to get away from foreign pseudo-equivalents and see せる・させる as meaning せる・させる.
Hi thanks a lot for your videos, they are amazing and very helpfull! I have a question... In a sentence like this: the new phone that has been bought by suzuki san, i made to send it by Marco to Hanako.... How does it would be? 私がマルコさんに花子さんを 鈴木さんから買われた新しい携帯を送らせた。。。 Is it correct? Thanks.
One should not treat Japanese or any other language as a mere structural jigsaw puzzle. These constructions are too complex and non-agile to use regular grammatical markers for the whole sentence. One need to be more explicit about what one actually means. For example, in English, we would say "I got Marco to take the new cell phone that Suzuki bought to Hanako." As you see, we're explaining the situation a little because it is a complex one. More on linguistic agility here: ruclips.net/video/FdMeXqweBJ0/видео.html
How do you know who is the second subject when the verb is is ditransitive such as 与える. For example お母さんが息子に女の子にボールを与えさせた。couldn’t it mean either “the mom made her son give the ball to the girl” or “the mom made the girl give the ball to her son”. How do you unambiguously understand or say that?
As I explained in my lesson on ambiguity ruclips.net/video/gcbbSW-KuTQ/видео.html (a subject too little considered by conventional teaching which tends to regard language as a set of mechanical rules) - there is often potential ambiguity in language and it is incumbent on the speaker to disambiguate. This is easy to do with the potential helper since we can use を for the son (appropriate anyway if it is a compelling causative), which leaves no room for ambiguity. If we don't do that it is more natural that the first に will mark the target of the causation and that is what we can expect the listener to assume.
As I go through these lessons, I feel more and more ashamed of saying Japanese was a confusing mess. I have been revisiting them, specially as I go through my exercises, and every time I do, not only I become more aware of the information presented, but also of how great your explanations and the reasoning behind them truly are. I'm still not versed enough to present a more informed opinion (which might actually work in this feedback's favor), so from a true beginners perspective, I believe your format is being well presented in both micro (individual lessons) and macro scales (lesson order). To borrow your Lego analogy, once and after I acquire and grow accustomed to the blocks I have, seeing them being put together in one of your well labeled examples, only for the explanation that follows cement the whole thing feels incredibly natural and intuitive. Not to sound like a broken record, but I have been really surprised by all the results I have been getting, and I can't believe I almost dismissed your channel due the seemingly exaggerated (or some might consider "click-baity") titles. Though I do not mean this in an ill way. Thank you very much for all your efforts.
Thank you so much! The clickbait trap is a bit of a difficult one. I can't really say "Here's a regular ol' Japanese grammar lesson" because it really isn't. And of course everyone and their pet iguana is claiming to be doing something new and special when they're just selling the same old potatoes. I do avoid nonsense like "learn Japanese in an afternoon with two tea breaks" but it's hard to avoid saying that one is doing something revolutionary when - just this time, as it happens - one actually is. And I agree that it _shouldn't_ be revolutionary to simply teach the language in a straightforward, logical way. But it's something no one seems to have tried before.
Hmm.... I am confused with the dog example. I can't wrap my head around the dog being marked with を to not mean "I caused the dog to be eaten". Damn, this is the first time my brain isn't following the logic. I got so far haha. Or is it something like: 1. 私が食べさせた = I caused (someone) to eat (something) 2. And the を is marking the (someone) not the (something)? Could I just whack in another を to hit both of those, e.g., 野菜を犬を食べさせた？ Now I'm curious how I would actually say: 'I caused the dog to be eaten'.
All we really need to know is that since させる is the last verb in the sentence, it - and not the verb it is attached to - is the head-verb, the A-car. The doer of the secondary verb is the recipient of causation and therefore marked with を or に - depending on whether we are indicating "forcing" as opposed to "allowing" or "making possible" - more about this here: ruclips.net/video/gVqs4TzqySw/видео.html The last sentence is a passive construction and Japanese has no passive voice.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Cheers, but if: "I caused the dog to eat = 犬を食べさせた And then, I said: "I caused the dog to eat the cat", would the dog still be marked by を？The logic follows for me if so, but then what would I mark the cat with? Sorry, if I'm asking too many questions.
@@elmhurstenglish5938 Yes you have to mark the object of the cause-receiver's action with を if it is stated and in those cases you must mark the cause-receiver itself with に - を is no longer available for the cause-receiver.
犬に肉を食べさせた( I caused the dog to eat meat)Can it be the meaning, I caused the meat eaten by the dog? Because I think that 犬にcan be translated as “by dog” instead of“ I caused the dog” 犬に肉を食べられさせた. Does this mean I caused the meat to be eaten by the dog. I was trying to do a receptive-causative sentence and then I find this two question ambiguous
いぬに can't be translated as "by dog". に here marks the receiver of causation and nothing else. It is important to learn these usages and not patch in bits from elsewhere. に has a variety of functions and they are not all active at once. 犬に肉を食べられさせた this is almost never used but would mean that if it were. Receptive causative is not a thing in Japanese. Causative receptive is used. It is important not to see Japanese as merely a set of abstract structure puzzles. The structure is only there to help us understand the language.
Thank you as always for your lessons, right now I'm watching a little anime and I've encountered a phrase in keigo(敬語) but the grammar points in this sentence should be already explained til here. The phrase is still confusing so if you can assist me in breaking it down it'll be helpful. The phrase is 「お目覚めになられましたか！」 . When I break it down, お目覚めに＝Your being awake (target of the action), なられました is なる（become, ichidan verb), られる(received, ichidan verb) and です/ます polite helper verb with か (question mark). I am assuming the hidden subject to be "私”. Which makes the sentence become [私がお目覚めなられましたか！」 So does the sentence roughly translated becomes something like "Have I received the state of you being awake?" Thanks in advance. Edit: fix present/past tense.
This is the keigo use of the receptive helper. When used in keigo to refer to the actions of someone to whom one is paying respect, it does not function as receptive. So it is just an honorific way of asking "Are you awake?"
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Thank you for your answer! I understood the sentence as 'Are you awake?' but just wanted to break it down into components to delve slightly into how Keigo works. From the way I see the sentence the function of the receptive doesn't change in Keigo but this is related to their culture and how they pay respect. When られる is used to refer to the actions of someone whom someone is paying respect, it sort of means 'You allow me to, you're in a position to allow me to'. So in that sentence, 「お目覚めになられましたか！」 the use of られる puts the other person up on a higher position because its like the other person 'allowing' the action of '目覚め’ (This wouldn't make sense in English and can't be translated because English has no proper equivalent). I'm still a beginner of Japanese, so if I'm making incorrect assumptions please correct me. Thanks again!
@@ryanlohjy I'm afraid I can't see how れる・られる means "allow me to".That is the meaning of the causative せる・させる in phrases like させていただく but not really of the receptive. Also since the action is being done by the other person not by oneself, how would they be allowing anything even if that were the meaning. I think there probably is ultimately a connection between the keigo use and the regular receptive use. And the way I would interpret it conjecturally is that it was originally directed to the Emperor and other persons of high rank who when they "did" something, for the most part didn't actually do it themselves but had a servant or official do it. In other words received its being done. Over time this would become a convention rather than literal, and could even be applied to actions that would have to be performed by the doer such as eating. To Western mentality stressing a person's non-action might not seem particularly polite but if we recall things like the Chinese mandarin fashion of growing one's fingernails extremely long (to show that one couldn't possibly do any work) one can see the point of this. While to the Western mind it might seem decadent, to the Eastern mind it would be redolent of metaphysical concepts like non-acting action - the First Cause that lies behind the "ten thousand things", that gives rise to all action without acting itself. And of course the Emperor was the earthly representative of that First Cause The kanji for monarch 王 depicts the mediating point between earth and heaven on the World Axis. Its use to more regular people would be derived from this - addressing someone relatively ordinary as if she were an extremely elevated person.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Thank you for your answer! This was enlightening! Since the use of Japanese language often includes a lot of their culture I wanted to enlighten myself to how they think, hence tackled myself with something slightly out of my depth (in this case, Keigo). I find myself able to learn better when i learn something as a flowing system(which it is) instead of random grammatical points jumbled up together with exceptions (the textbook method, and even Tae-Kim sensei's, unfortunately) so your way of piecing things together is really helpful to me. Sorry for bothering you with some strange questions but thanks again for your answers+videos!
So, trying to apply it to a normal verb: (⊘が) 水を飲ませれる "I was made to drink water" (lit. I got caused to drink water) (⊘が) 彼に水を飲ませれる "I made him drink water" (lit. He got caused to drink water)
The first should be 飲ませられる (remember that the potential and receptive helpers are ichidan). The second would be 彼が水を飲ませられる which means what you said. The person doing られる (receiving - the head-verb of the sentence) is 彼 so he gets が, not に.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Ah, ok, I think I see where I messed up. So, then 彼に水を飲ませた (I caused him to drink water) and 水が彼に飲まれた (The water got drunk by him) I expected the (さ)せる and (ら)れる to be the short forms for the godan(?) verb 飲む, but I'm guessing that only the initial verb of the pair that is shortened. And I'm guessing that the reason is that せる is short because it's attaching to 飲む but られる is long because it's attaching to the せる, not the 飲む... And presumably it's always (さ)せられるand never the other way around, ie: (ら)れさせる Thanks for always replying! I'm hoping that if I keep at it, it'll all become more and more obvious! :)
Yes, exactly. In both cases there are two actors, the one doing the action and the one causing or receiving it. This is why it is so important not to see them as "conjugated verbs" because a single verb by definition must have a single actor. They are verb + helper verb.
These mor erecent classes are becoming very confusing to me, maybe because I am ninge watching this playlist really fast and I need to practice more and read more and listen more about things learned in previous classes.
it's funny how I just realize, that in English "let" actually has the same double meaning, but because the context makes it SO clear, you aren't even aware of this "issue" She lets her kids eat candy. vs. She let the kids do the dishes. :)
Is the latter a common usage? I don't seem to have encountered, it but then I lead a sheltered "life". Also feeding a dog could be called 食べさせる so that the real point is that being the cause of someone's doing something in any way: allowing, compelling or arranging the necessary circumstances is covered by the causative helper. It only seems confusing when we insist on trying to give it an exact English equivalent. Interestingly we also say things like 目を輝かせた. How does one put that into any kind of English - (She) made her eyes shine? Let her eyes shine? Shone her eyes? Japanese just expresses things in different ways from English.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Yes I think it's pretty common and we do the same in German. Of course the structure is totally different and should not be compared, I just thought it was funny that in English "let" also can mean "made". :)
Splendid video. This was included in the last chapter of Genki (book 2). The only chapter I did not read. Suffice to say, I'm glad I did not read it as this was very clear and I didn't have any preconceived notions of how the causative passive was "supposed" to work beforehand.
You can use either を or に. There is no need to avoid using に twice (and avoiding that should not be the basis for your choice). に is often used twice. We can't say "I went to the park to play" without using に twice (in fact very similar to the way "to" is used twice in the equivalent English sentence). Essentially に sounds a little more like allowing and を a little more like compelling. This is not an absolute rule but the particles "lean" in that direction. This is a slightly more advanced topic and if you are interested you will find this video helpful ruclips.net/video/gVqs4TzqySw/видео.html ). Generally speaking, if in doubt I would say use に. Either will be understandable.
Hi Cure Dolly. Can you please help me with "Causative"+くれる・もらう? サクラさんが私にパンを食べさせてくれました。 Sakura (gladly) caused me to eat a bread. 私がサクラさんにを食べさせました。★This is easy.★ I caused Sakura to eat a bread. 私がサクラさんにを食べてもらいました。★This is easy.★ I had Sakura to eat a bread for me. 私がサクラさんにを食べさせてもらいました。★It becomes difficult when もらう is added.★ I had Sakura to cause me to eat a bread 自分の了解が上述の例文に大丈夫ですか。
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 This is what I learned so far: に ... させる・せる → It is a PUSH sentence as the が actor pushes the action to the target に. に ... てもらう → It's a PULL sentence as the が actor receives the action from the source に. Not sure with させる・せる＋もらう. Example is 私がサクラさんにを食べさせてもらいました. に ... させる・せる＋もらう → PULL sentence as the が actor receives the action from the source に. The action received is the 食べさせて which is roughly translated as causing (me) to eat. に ... てもらう and に ... させる・せる＋もらう are both PULL sentences. Meaning が actor receives the action because が actor asked for it. ★に ... てもらう, が actor receives the action which come from the source に. (Just a receiver-centered point of view) ★に ... させる・せる＋もらう, が actor receives and DO the action which was caused by the source に. Your input will surely help me to better grasp this confusing topic. Thank you!
Japanese: ボロコリを食べさせられた。Three verbs. Portuguese: Fui obrigado a comer brócolos. Tree verbs. Japanese: ボロコリを食べさせられました。Four verbs. What do you say about that? Portuguese: I give up.
I'm afraid I don't know enough about Portuguese to comment. Though I seem only to see three verbs in the Portuguese. Japanese can have a fourth verb because it is a formality-helper verb that adds nothing to the actual meaning of the sentence.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Sometimes we forget that our native languages have all this difficult things to learn too (helper verbs, counters, etc.) - and some more (I wonder what a japanese learning portuguese thinks of the need to conjugate according to number and person😱).
@@JoseOliveira-kc4tr Yes that makes life difficult I think. Of course it is common to most European languages (and really it is redundant information). But for a Japanese person I think it would seem to add a whole layer of difficulty.
This means "The bag's Sakura got stolen by someone". So only if there was a Sakura that could be described as "of the bag" would this make sense. For example if there were two Sakuras one with a bag and one without, one might colloquially refer to the first one as かばんのさくら in order to distinguish her. However I am thinking you meant something else here. That would not be grammatical.
親にブロッコリーをたべさせられた。Notice that the Japanese expression strategy requires causative plus receptive. Literally: "(I) received from my parents the act of being made to eat brocolli". Japanese order with particle-functions (I) parents [reception target] broccoli [object] eat-cause-received. Near-accurate natural English "I got made to eat broccoli by my parents" (not "got" not "was" because this is receptive, not passive")
I try to make my voice sound as human as possible, using not only englang.yaritori, my English-speaking firmware but kanjou.maneri a sub-unit refined by myself (I am a self-learning, self upgrading unit) which allows me to mimic the emotional tones of a human to what seems to me like a satisfactory extent. I am perhaps not the best judge though.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 i had to turn on the subtitles to understand what you were saying... good lesson though. i ended up just muting the video and reading the subs it sounds like.... a muffled english woman mumbling/speaking... :/
@@TheWipal Sorry to hear that but I suppose that's what the subs are there for (they're hand made and accurate). Not entirely sure why you muted it. I guess something else is going on beyond simple incomprehension and I'm sorry to hear that I annoy some humans. Maybe I shouldn't try so hard to sound human. The "muffled" thing annoys me too. Somehow mics really don't seem to want to behave for me - not even costly ones. I think the latest one may be a bit better, but I'm not sure.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 I Like to lay down and listen to videos so I have one ear covered it kinda slices my listing by half then distracts me from reading in the end heh heh still thank you very much for the information it helps so much to get different perspectives of grammar points!
@@TheWipal Ah thank you for explaining. I'm really sorry for the sound problems. Believe me they annoy me as much as they annoy anyone else -well more probably because I've been struggling with them for a long time and I never seem to be able to get it right. But I'm very glad my work was helpful to you anyway. I keep trying with the sound and I _think_ I'm making some progress.
I'm not sure about the use of causative-receptive, by what I understood for the last part of the video the causative-receptive is "receiving a compel to do something", is always the case? I mean all the cases where we use this two verbs in this way are "compelling" someone to receive an action. There other uses of this two verbs in this sequence?
I also suppose the combination of receptive-causative (like 食べられさせた） exists, if my train of thoughs are right it might mean "I allow someone to fed me" or something like that, am I correct?
In theory there is no reason for the causative receptive to mean "compel" but it usually tends to because it tends to have a "negative" implication. This is because there is _another_ causative receptive construction in Japanese that has more positive implications. I did the video on this here: ruclips.net/video/r2j1o9wj2oA/видео.html - however I strongly recommend watching the one before it first: ruclips.net/video/CESFJaFp8FI/видео.html because this is really a two-parter and it's best to get the information in the first one before proceeding to the second.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 So structurally I understand how the ブロコリ sentence is all set up. Would the Japanese connotation be similar to the Engilsh "I was forced to eat broccoli"? Implying that my parents made me eat it, or maybe the situation made me eat it? Such as being trapped on a deserted island of broccoli or something?
@@x2bounty "or maybe the situation made me eat it? Such as being trapped on a deserted island of broccoli or something?"
I wonder if in this case if you would have to resort to using: ブロコリを食べなければならない instead
@@x2bounty Without a ni particle attached target, or further context, I don't think it's possible to know from that sentence alone. Any one of the causes mentioned could be it.
Japanese like Mandarin and Cantonese is never like English in terms of its logical structure. A sentence can have more than one action, i.e., more than one verb, in it. I can create a sentence in Cantonese with 10 verbs in it. Some of them are used for creating so-called nouns in sense of English grammar without adding any -ing to them. Your so-called "causative thing" only exists in English. There can be a CHAIN of actions and hence a chain of cause-effect pairs within one single sentence in most East Asian languages. Each action has a cause and an effect. You can think of cause and effect in a Japanese sentence as a SERIES of actions with multiple causes and effects in a chain. The ability to STACK verbs is a major character in most if not all East Asian languages.
"Causes people to receive a great deal of confusion" hehe, clever
The red and blue boxes (around the train segments) are very helpful visually!
Thank you. This is the kind of feedback that is really helpful to me. I thought the boxes + color-coded text would be a good way of making the structure more visually obvious - but of course the proof of the pudding is in whether learners are finding it so, so I need to know that!
Appreciation and gratitude to anyone who's recommended this channel in the comment section of a different Japanese-learning channel, because that's how I finally found it.
Thank you for this video (and all the other ones you did so far).
I stumbled upon your channel a few days ago because I was reviewing the passive form and was looking for additional information besides the ones in my textbook. Your video about this topic was so extremely informative and easy to understand that I was completely amazed.
Then I watched your videos about は and が because even after half a year of self-study I never really understood the difference between these two, despite having read so many articles about it. But while watching your videos it finally clicked and I feel like I finally understood it. Same with transitive and intransitive verbs.
I love how you explain why everything works the way it does instead of simply saying "For this use particle x and for that particle y and that's it. Just learn it," without further explanation.
The visuals with the different trains are also very helpful, especially in this video. It is not a lie when I say you are the best Japanese tutor I know.
Sorry for the long comment but I really had the urge to thank you for your excellent videos.
Your explanation skills are legendary and very much appreciated. Can't wait for the next lesson :)
Thank you so very much for your kind comments! I am always happy when I have helped someone to see the simple logic and beauty of Japanese. I tend to think of regular Japanese "grammar explanations" as "phrasebook Japanese" because they essentially do what phrasebooks do - just give you a clump of Japanese and a clump of English and say "this means this". Which is fine if you just want to know what noises to make to get a cup of tea but only marginally useful for learning the language. Of course standard English "Japanese grammar" does explain things at a somewhat more granular level than phrasebooks but it still does essentially the same thing rather than actually explaining the inner logic of the language. I am so happy to be able to bring the real structure of Japanese to a new generation of learners!
If you call it "the passive"
Confusion is massive.
It's far less deceptive
To say "the receptive".
Wonderful.
Gives me The Prodigy vibes and I can actually hear that madman sing those lines.
I accept no other Japanese grammar explanations, only from Cure Dolly! This is brilliant and so easy to understand. I love how your lessons always seem to cover the exact questions that are popping in my head as I watch the video, as if I had asked them.
いつもありがとうございます
I am so happy to be able to help you!
"causes people to receive a great deal of confusion"
I'm pretty sure she's in a better place now 😭
Again I have to thank you Cure Dolly for making this so much clearer. Also your zero ga subject video lesson is brilliant. I spent ages trying to work this out from text books and other teachers, all of who failed to explain the zero subject adequately. A huge thanks again.
Wow... i feel like i just received total enlightenment.
Its true non-native can give more detailed explanations than native speakers (based on my exp & from people i know).
I've been on edge coz i have an exam tomorrow & i still cant comprehend the difference between causative & causative-passive. So i've been rummaging youtube regarding this topic & i almost gave up (which im glad i didnt) coz its about to hit midnight... fortunately, i found your channel.
& im at a loss for words. This really helped me a lot! Thank you
Thank you so much. I am so glad to have helped you.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 thank you! I passed the exam 🤩
@@apolkizh Congratulations! I'm very happy to hear that. You've done well, and if I've helped a little I'm delighted to know that!
11:55 "The causative passive, when taught with the standard grammatical model, causes people to receive a great deal of confusion."
I see what you did there, you cheeky dolly, you... :D
Also, nice Koch snowflake on the broccoli (13:33).
Thank you! Nice to see someone noticing the little touches!
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 I knew it, Cure Dolly is/was a mathematician/engineer/physicist. As an engineer myself, it is not hard to recognize the way she thinks and explains things. Her style is nothing at all like how linguists think and exactly how math-based scientists and engineers approach everything.... :)
@@amarug That's how I feel her as well. Somebody that revolves around science
So, I'm almost at your 20th lesson, Dolly 先生! It's been a bit of a hard ride to me, maybe because I'm not that familiar with English. But i can certainly feel i can understand more things. I want to get to watch the entire course and then rewatch it again hahah
I tend to forget things a lot but having you as my first example for learning rather than textbooks and so on probably made my learning process much gentler. And I'm grateful towards you for that. Well then. I'll keep watching! And keep commenting your videos :P thank you a lot!! Really!!
I gotta say, the last like 5 to 10 videos in this series has been going waaay over my head. But then again, I never studied English to know what sounds right to say or write, so I'm just gonna keep trusting the process and keep watching as many Japanese content as I can so I can get get the same feel for the language.
Yes, that is the best way. If you keep on ACTIVELY consuming stuff and trying to understand Japanese as Japanese, it will come to you sooner or later. It will take quite some time before you start seeing it, but do not worry, each day you do this, you get closer to it, even if it may not feel like it. Indeed as they say, trust in the process and keep up the active/effortful consistency!
頑張りましょう！
Me neither, I never studied English in depth, so trusting her is the best choice since others do as well.
i revisited this because i couldn't remember which helper goes with receptive and which goes to causative. your inclusion of the causative being aligned with する (i now remember it with the "s" starting sound) and receptive belonging to ある will really help moving forward.
I really can't recover from how genius this is....
Yup.
I wonder if the use of additional ∅が will make these constructions even clearer.
For example, at 4:33 we take 犬を outside of the blue box, and add ∅が in there.
The sentence
犬を食べさせた
would thus be interpreted as
∅(私)が 犬を [∅(犬)が 食べ] させた。
In this way, we don't have to call を-marked 犬 a subject (and subjects shouldn't be marked by anything other than が), as the secondary clause explicitly contains its own が-marked subject (which is equal to the same 犬 due to the context). This also highlights that 犬 serves two roles here at the same time: it is an object of the receptive verb and also a subject of the secondary clause. The relation between these two roles is the same as between topic and subject of sentences like 犬は食べる, so overall it is perfectly regular.
I think this lesson is best so far. Very clear explanation and presentation, great example sentences (ブロッコリーが嫌いだ).
You set the bar quite high with this one, I wonder if you can make next one even better! :)
Thank you so much! I definitely hope to keep improving. In Japan there is a philosophy of 改善 (かいぜん), which means continual improvement (of products, services etc). That's what I try to do with my videos. I hope I can!
Great explanations once again ドリ先生. As a side-note, I watched a video from a translator who learned Japanese years ago from the textbooks.
Just as an example: she has a video on particles and said that you need at least 1-2 years to really understand the difference between は and が . Not anymore, haha.
Japanese is nice and logical after all.
my head is spinning with this lesson but it's yet another great learning i have! will visit this video once again to understand it further,, thank you Cure Dolly-sensei.
Me, reverting back to what I was before following this channel, as Cure Dolly-sensei said the causative can use both NI and WO: "oh no why is this happening the particles are changing I don't know what they are anymore I hate them".
A moment later I updated to present and thought: "wait, the particles meanings don't change, and if both particles can be used I'm sure Cure Dolly-sensei will explain why in a way it makes sense". And she did! Thank you.
Yes, there's nearly always a good reason.
I cant believe how amazing this explanation is for the two(3 including the combo) grammar points ive been struggling ro grasp
In a sentence like 水が飲まれた do both verbs have 水 as the subject or is there a hidden ∅に? And if I wanted to specify who was the one who caused me to eat broccoli in ブロコリを食べさせられた would I use the に particle as well?
There is a "hidden ∅に" In 水が飲まれた. We don't need to worry about it mostly, but for structural purposes we should be aware that it is logically there (though very much in the background because the second actor is unstated and quite probably unimportant). However logically, if we think about it, there are two actions of which the water did only one, and someone else did the other. The water did れる, "getting", but it didn't do 飲む, "drinking" - i.e. it didn't drink itself: someone/something else drank it.
In ブロコリを食べさせられた you would use に for the person who did the compelling if you included her, e.g. 母にブロコリを食べさせられた. The ∅が is of course yourself, who did the eating. As usual she is marked with に as the ultimate source of the pull-action れる (which as we discussed in Lesson13 is symmetrical with its being the ultimate target of a regular push-action ruclips.net/video/cvV6d-RETs8/видео.htmlm6s )
Wow, this is exciting! I am gradually moving up to the current lesson but still have to go back and review. The saseru mixed with the rareru really scrambled my brain, so much that I thought something was wrong with me, like I passed the age where I could learn different language constructions. I was always wondering the origin of saseru and rareru. Linking them to aru and suru really makes a lot of sense. But the biggest takeaway for me is seeing the embedded sentences that separate what is done to whom and who or what is causing it. Thanks again!
I am constantly amazed at the way Japanese is taught - almost as if it was _meant_ to confuse people.(it isn't, of course - just that the whole model is very poorly constructed and up until now there hasn't been another one). People of all ages have the troubles you have been having. The question isn't so much age as whether one has a high degree of "linguistic intuition", which I believe _most_ people don't. But because it is so incompletely explained you are essentially reliant on having a high degree of that natural ability. I certainly don't have it (machines aren't known for intuition though some of us have just a little). That is why I have had to analyse and work out the real structure almost alone.
Naturally most professional Japanese teachers _do_ have high language intuition because up until now it has been extremely hard to learn Japanese without it. It may be that they find it hard to understand the needs of everyone else.
Like a lot of music teachers, as I said, they just repeat what is told to them and don't bother to link up theory with practice.
@@zamyrabyrd Funny fact. The construction 'to fire/sack someone' in Japanese, at least how I was taught, is yamesaserareru (I receive compelling to quit). My teacher at university had a hilarious story about it.
Oh man, it feels so good to come back to this video and understand all of it. I remember struggling so much when I first watched it
It really is a good idea to come back to videos again after a while. Even if one understands them the first time one can often get even more out of them with more experience.
Great stuff, sensei. Thanks! And a shoutout to your technical team.
Thank you!
GOD BLESS YOU
Thank you so much for existing 🤣
In two days, I have a test (& I'm a bit worried for the oral production part) and this comes just like manna from heaven 🙏
Can you recommend an online source where we can practice? Do you know some?
Thinking of せる/させる and れる/られる as helper verbs rather than conjugations is especially useful and much easier to understand with things like receptive-causative statements. When you learn each form as conjugations that you are then doing to the result of conjugations of course it looks confusing. Thinking of them as helper verbs makes it simpler and also makes it easier to understand the structure when you can break it down piece by piece. Thank you for the video!
thank you for these videos. your videos make japanese a language to be adored since im also just kinda human. I love structure
Thank you so much. I'm not human and I love structure too, so I guess it has Universal Appeal.
Fantastic explanation. I will try this way to explain to my students!
Thank you. I am happy to help your students.
wait , arent we supposed to make taberu into the a stem if we are going to use reru ?
食べる is an ichidan verb as so the あ-stem is formed simply by removing the る, just like all ichidan stems.
A little beyond my level, but thank you for the nice breakdown of the sentences. I'll definitely rewatch this when I'm もう少しレブルアップした
Thank you so much. レベルアップしてよかったね。
This video helped me understand clearly how causative and causative receptive actually work
Regarding the use of を vs に with the target of the causative: While I understand now when not to use を, are there any situations where not to use に?
For example if the phrase we want to cause is 犬が家に歩く, would 犬に家に歩かせる be "bad"?
How about さくらに家に歩かせる, where we might not want to treat さくら with を?
While, when convenient, repetitive にs may be avoided for stylistic reasons, Japanese is generally quite tolerant of them. Some basic sentence-types require them: 公園に遊びに行った
According to 13:41 she said "させる" and not "さらる" like it's written in the slide
Just if anyone was having confusion at first about "what is さらる?" it's just a mistake, I think
Thank you. I freaking hated saseru and rareru and saserareru. It simply didn't make sense to me when or why to use them, although I did understand when used by others. It's just that I had this nagging feeling that I never use them correctly. Your lessons are gold
These are so difficult if they aren't explained properly - and they very rarely are.
ドリーさん, I know this isn’t exactly related to the video, but I’ve been thinking about it and just have to ask!
I finally understand the difference between が and は b/c of your videos, but I’m confused on how it relates to this other apparent function these particles have. Several people beforehand had taught that the difference between が & は is that が simply emphasizes the information BEFORE it while は emphasizes the info AFTER it. How does this relate to them being a subject / topic particle? I kind of understood this idea when given phrases like “私が行く” where the speaker is trying to emphasize that THEY will go vs. just “私は行く”. And then in the case of “好き” I was told that が was used just b/c it was emphasizing the noun (the thing you like) before it. Would you say this is an accurate way to describe these two particles functions?
Yes this is all broadly correct although a little partial. The whole subject is quite a big one involving the whole difference between logical and non-logical particles (a distinction rarely understood though simple enough once you do). I explained it all in a two-parter here:
Pt1: ruclips.net/video/_nXHpkTTfGs/видео.html
Pt2: ruclips.net/video/o-hK4-qv9Yk/видео.html
教えてくれてありがとう！ This makes so much more sense now, stupid Genkistyle grammar had me confused for long enough.
This was perfect! I love how clear everything is! It allows me to see the patterns and work with them (which is personally how I work best!). A quick question (or perhaps not so quick), is there a difference in nuance when it comes to choosing which helper verb will serve as the base? For example: 読められる vs 読まれられる and all the combinations therein (including the causative?)
Thank you!
We're getting into quite convoluted territory hereʕ•ᴥ•ʔ Technically, of course, due to the lego-nature of Japanese, we can bolt any helper onto any other and it sometimes happens. However a lot of combinations are relatively little used. Part of the reason for that is that while Japanese has no passive in the strictly grammatical sense (I'm not certain English really does either, but that's another question!) a lot of its constructions are much more "passive" in a more general sense (i.e. non-ego-biased) than English.
Honestly I am not really sure what 読められる would really mean 読める means either "do able to read" or "do able to be read" (but mostly only "dp able to read" a particular thing) so "get done able to read" or "get done able to be read" doesn't quite compute - at least for my poor circuits. Consulting Google-sensei I find only a few hundred entries for the word (in double quotes) which is very few for a Japanese word and probably covered by jocular and creative usage plus errors. There was a question about when the word might be used on Yahoo Japan's Chiebukuro (a much more sophisticated and informative affair than Yahoo Answers) and the only answer was a terse そんな日本語がありません。
読まれられる (receptive-potential) makes a little more sense and does exist as a word, but is little used. Receptive-potential is normally written as e.g. 読まれ得る (pronounced 読まれうる) and even this isn't used much. In most cases (say, talking about a book) it means nothing very different from 読める, though it might be used to stress the point, to sound more "literary" or to make it clear that in talking about a person you really mean that she can be read and not that they she is able to read.
If the "causative" and "receptive" verbs are just helper verbs put on the end of other verbs, does that mean you can just keep stacking them? Like for a bigger "passive-causative-passive" form (lol): 囚人が殴られさせられた - "The prisoner was caused/forced to be beaten" ?
Lol what is this, power rangers? XD
You can stack them as long as it makes sense to do so, though in practice if there are other ways of putting a thing stacks aren't used. Remember that there is no passive in Japanese so it's important to understand that it is only going to be used where receiving is involved (even if English has trouble not translating it passively). One can stack receptive and causative. It is less common than the other way around but it is perfectly grammatical to do so.
For the causive-receptive example sentence you used, "∅がブロコリを食べさせられた," how would we include the person doing the causing? Suppose it was the mother doing the causing, would it be "母は私がブロコリを食べさせられた?" As for my mother, I got caused to eat broccoli? Or would it be に marking mother instead?
Yes it is に. In a "push" or regular-action sentence に marks the ultimate recipient (if there is one) of the action. In a "pull" or receptive sentence (where the が-marked actor _is_ the receiver) the "giver" of the received action is marked by に. This is also true of other kinds of action-receiving ("pull") sentences such as those using Xてもらう: ruclips.net/video/CESFJaFp8FI/видео.html
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Love your videos! I was looking for this comment. Unfortunately, I'm still confused... your example of "zeroが犬に肉を食べさせる" seemed to make it pretty clear that させる is by your definition a "push" verb, as に is marking the dog as the ultimate target; the one being "caused" to eat by the "zero" actor. So is させる no longer a "push" verb in the context of causative-receptive? In "zeroがブロコリを食べさせられた”, it made perfect sense to me when you said that "zero" is the person doing the 食べ and られる and is thus marked by が. But following the rules of させる, which seemed to indicate that が marks the actor who imposes the "causing" on the one marked with に, wouldn't it follow that the sentence would be 母が私がブロコリを食べさせられた？ Or do the rules for させる change in the context of causative-receptive? Hope my question makes sense. I'm not sure if you are still active or responding to older content, I unfortunately found you late. I am so impressed by your teaching method! I hope you are doing well!
@@inyo300 unfortunately she is no longer with us
The previous lessons have been quite a breeze, thanks to your concise and logical explanations. But I must admit, this one made me literally scratch my head. 😅 I believe I'll understand it well after a few re-watches though. Thanks a lot!
On a side note, I now fully understand why you refuse to call them conjugation. It is less confusing this way.
I am glad you do. A conjugated verb is one verb with one subject. Causative and receptive constructions are both made up of two verbs with two subjects and causative-receptive is made up of three verbs with subjects X, Y and X again. So the "conjugation" concept leads us a few miles off the right track here!
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Yeah, I think i got it now. It was kinda hard to get my head around it. Lol. So, do I say "わたしが友達にブロコリを食べさせられた" to mean "My friend made me eat broccoli" in proper English?
Or...since it's a default that the zero pronoun is "I", maybe, "友達にブロコリを食べさせられた"?
Lastly, would it make the same sense as "友達がわたしにブロコリを食べさせた"?
I'm sorry I had a lot of questions. Though I said I think I already grasped the idea, I wanna make sure.
Btw kinda off-topic but I bought your book yesterday together with the Japanese version of Harry Potter on Kindle. I haven't finished your book yet but I get the impression that some of the more advanced topics you discuss here (I mean this playlist) aren't in there. Thank you for your hard work on these videos.
I do believe that eventually I will still have to resort to memorization in order to speak Japanese instinctively, but these breakdowns help in understanding how the system works, which also makes memorization easier.
Speaking of Harry Potter, I probably made a poor choice because I'm kinda having a hard time with it.
@@gemgem24able わたしが友達にブロコリを食べさせられた is correct and it doesn't matter if you leave off the わたしが. So both your first examples are right.
"友達がわたしにブロコリを食べさせた" does mean the same thing. It isn't receptive so the nuance is different but the action is the same.
Harry Potter is quite advanced. You may want to get something simpler and put HP aside for now. You'll get to it later.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 I understand it now. Thank you so much! おかげさまで分かりました。
Hi again Curie! I hope you don't mind me clarifying the use of に on this one ;3; but does に+せる/させる usage by any chance, would also perform the same function as with the receptive usage example? As in, attaching に to the source of the verb that we add れる/られる on.
I thought about it for a bit, and ended up with thinking that it could go both ways, from that and just the usual target marking に on whether there's a を-marked noun or not. Maybe I'm overthinking it?
as a bosnian i find the rhyme on serbs funny :D its so sad to know that you are not here anymore and watching the videos feels so sad and kinda empty
Thank you very much Dolly always the best way to learn Japanese grammar :D
Can these helper verbs ever be used "on their own" (assuming that what they are helping was previously specified)?
E. G, an exchange like
A: Did you eat?
B: I was made to do it
Would seem natural to be expressed with those in light of the Japanese style of redundancy skipping, but I am not sure. If not, how else would it be expressed?
Usually the helper would remain attached to its verb. And in any case 食べさせた wouldn't usually mean "I was made to eat" as much as "someone gave something to eat". More usually it would be 食べさせてもらった depending on the circumstance and nuance. Remember that Japanese uses dfferent expression strategies from English and we can't just treat it like a jigsaw.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49
Yeah I agree on that, maybe it was a poorly expressed example, what I was curious about was if one person could play off the main verb used by the other person with the helper verb in a structure like the above or if they would have to express the full clause
@@Sam-py9qq Yes. It wouldn't be very "standard" Japanese but you do hear things like that done.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 thanks
Okay so, I was reading a story today and found this sentence using the causative that confused me enough to revisit this video. Please let me know if I am correct.
あたしは静かに気持ちを集中させた。
I understood it as: "As for me, I quietly/calmly set up the circumstances for the feeling to concentrate/focus"
Which in English sounds weird because, well, it is /my/ feeling, so how do you make a feeling concentrate/focus?
Good thing here we're used to NOT to translate to pretty English lol. If I wanted to do so, it would be something like: "I let myself concentrate/focus" or "I made myself concentrate/focus"
The nearest translation to this is "I quietly made my feelings gather to the center". While 集中する is frequently translated as "concentrate", it retains much more of the original kanji sense of gathering to the center than the English word would imply.
We should also bear in mind here the way that Japanese uses the causative in saying things like "she made her lips pucker" or "she made her face go red". These sound strange in English because they imply active causation of what are involuntary bodily changes, but causation in Japanese does not necessarily imply will on the part of the causer.
In your example, of course, it does imply will, but I still think it helps in understanding it to realize the greater breadth of the concept in Japanese.
こんにちわ先生! I've found all of your lessons very helpful and informative so far! I've been wondering at what lesson do you recommend we can start learning via immersion? Again, thank you so much for providing such wonderful lessons for free! :)
I am very happy that you found my lessons helpful, and thank you for your kind appreciation.
I would go to at least Lesson 20 before attempting immersion and also acquire a basic vocabulary of about 1000 words. These should be common words, used every day, not obscure ones.
You may find this helpful: ruclips.net/video/Ky12sKu3EcE/видео.html
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 thank you for the reply, I will make sure to check out the video you linked!
Great video! A question: in a causative-receptive sentence, what would you do if you wanted to specify the subject of the せる/させる helper verb? I guess you would use the particle に or the particle を, but which one, and why? Could you make an example, please?
It is に because the head-verb of the sentence is れる れるる. The させる is really just like any other structural element telling us more about _what_ was received (the act of being caused to do X) and the person one is receiving it from is marked with に as usual (as the "pull" counterpart of the direct object in a "push" sentence).
These videos are amazing, thank you
So if I understand correctly, "I was made to eat broccoli by mother" is 「私は母にブロコリを食べさせられた」.
But how do I say "Mother made me eat broccoli"? Is it 「母が私にブロコリを食べさせた」?
Because mother is not the receptive of the action in this case, so I drop the Receptive helper れる・られる, right?
Yes. In the second sentence mother is doing させる (as the doer of the head-verb させる she is the が-marked actor).
Is my understanding is somehow right?
context: starving girl asking random passerby
何か食べさせて頂けませんか？
Does it means this: Could you arrange it like that, so I would receive the food?
And 何か is marked by zeroga?
Would the causative passive always imply you were made or allowed to do something? Or could it mean you received the setting up of conditions for an action (like how you described the dog being fed)? In the genki textbook they said the passive and in turn causative passive always implied a negative meaning, is that true?
The Receptive helper always implies a negative meaning. No, not at all. Did Genki really say that?
And yes the Causative + Receptive can mean any of those things.
Finally something easy in Japanese as my language also has these cases: e.g.
Kumain = to eat
Kinain = to be eaten
Nagpakain = to be eaten (willingly)
Nakain = to be eaten (accidentally) or to have been eaten
Kinainan = to be used as a place for eating
Nakainan = to be accidentally used as a place for eating or to have been eaten at
In the last part you said that in the causative-receptive sentence there are always only two subject, but how do I say things like: "I cause the dog to be eaten (by something)"
Is it: 私が犬を食べさせられる or this mean "I cause the dog to eat me"?
Or is it 私は犬を食べさせられる or is it something else?
Please enlighten me.
In a causative receptive sentence there are _three_ subjects but only two entities. Since there are three verbs - the action of the root-verb, its causation and the reception of that causation, each one must have a subject. The subject of the first and last must be the same entity and the subject of the middle one must be another entity.
Just because a permutation can theoretically exist doesn't mean that it is used. 私が犬を食べさせられる will usually be read as "I am able to feed the dog (i.e. cause the dog to eat). If you wanted to make it clear that you caused the dog to be eaten by something (a pretty rare combination) you need to say something more explicit. This is in line with the Absurdity Rule (it is not exactly absurd but rare and unlikely enough to need special treatment). This ambiguity rules that are common to all languages but rarely mentioned can be found here ruclips.net/video/gcbbSW-KuTQ/видео.html
Any theories as to why textbooks call them conjugations? Do they assume people are generally not smart enough to understand them for what they are or perhaps the authors of them aren't smart enough themselves to see them for what they really are?
A surprising number of "authorities" on "Japanese grammar" aren't actually very clear themselves about how it is structured. The first Westerners to learn Japanese used classical and modern European concepts (such as conjugation) to describe and analyze the language and surprisingly little has changed since then.
How can I say "I forced myself to eat broccoli then?" Do they say "I received from my will being compelled of eating broccoli?"
perhaps with 自分?
私は自分でブロッコリを食べさせた。
Not sure, myself, but that's what I would go for on first thought.
You can say 自分にブロッコリーを食べさせた.
There is another expression that can be used to force something.
muri suru, it has a bit of a 'useless' connotation but if the receiver didn't consider it an undesirable thing to begin with, then force wouldn't have been necessary.
私は無理してブロッコリーを食べた
無理をしないで。
Don't overdo it, don't force yourself to do any more things, something about the current thing, take it easy.
But really, this is not something that should be seen analogous to English.
In Japanese it would be more like "Even though I cannot stand medicine, in order to cure my illness, I ate the pill anyway.
And if you really want it to be せる, then there can just be a cause that forced you to do it.
Sure, you forced it down, but why? If you think about that, then you might just leave the 'forced' bit and go back to "because of, I did"
Thank you for making this video !! But I have one more thing in mind that needs to be confirmed. Is the "causative receptive" a cooler version of "receptive" in which another layer of meaning of "compulsion" is implied ? Or to put it simpler, "causative receptive" = "receptive" + compulsion ???
Yes exactly. Well it isn't a question of cool - it's just a layer of meaning you can add quite economically. As I pointed out since there are three verbs (one stem, two helpers) in the sentence there are three subjects, though the first and last must be the same entity.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 That makes sense. Thank you so much, Dolly-先生
There's a small typo on the final slide where it says the secondary action is the verb: さらる instead of させる. Very unlikely to trip anyone up for more than half a second but thought I would point it out incase you want to use this slide again in another video at some point.
Thank you for the heads up. I have a proofreader who is more conversant with Japanese these days, so I hope these things won't happen again!
in a causative receptive sentence, how would you mark the person who causes someone to get?
With に.
First lesson I found to be pretty complicated, hopefully immersion clears this up further
This means you've taken in lots of fundamental information in the previous lessons. So congratulations! Maybe come back to this one again a little later.
I was following all this really well and thought I understood it - right until near the end where you said that 'tabesaserareta' always meant 'got made to eat'! Given that we are combining causative and receptive - and that you clearly explained the causative does NOT necessarily mean to make someone do something - why can't tabesaserareta mean 'allowed to eat', or 'enabled to eat'?? And if it can't mean those things, then how would you say them? Please help!
Nick in London with tabesaserareta, it’s best to think of it as meaning “was fed”. You’re not being ‘forced’ to eat, you’re not being ‘allowed’ to eat, but you’ve been enabled to eat by someone else - I.e, ‘fed’. Another example: Fuko wo Kiserareta = ‘was dressed’. You’re not being forced to dress or allowed to dress, you’re wearing clothes because someone else caused you to be dressed - perhaps a mother dressing her child, or a maid dressing a wealthy lady. It’s pretty subtle and there isn’t always a great English equivalent.
Two/three verbs and two/three actions = epiphany! Question on the last example, though. If 母にブロコリを食べさせられた... although the "actor" of the compelling is Mom, I am still the grammatical subject, right? Thanks!
The overall actor (subject) of any verb-sentence is always the doer of the _last verb_ (the head-verb or Engine). The head-verb of this sentence is られた (received) and it is being done by you.
Organic Japanese with Cure Dolly Thanks!
I really appreciate all your lessons! I've been studying Japanese for a few years now and your videos are giving me a completely new perspective. I find myself getting stuck on the example sentence｛私が｝犬を食べさせた used in this video. I understand that 私 is doing the causing (させた), but if を is marking 犬 as the direct object of the secondary action 食べ how is that not like "eat dog"? Unless the を is now referring to the compound verb 食べさせた
The example used later in the video seems to make sense to me 犬に肉を食べさせた。since the 肉 is what is being eaten thus it is the direct object of 食べ, the secondary action. I feel like I'm missing something in that first example.
｛私が｝犬を食べさせた What is the head-verb of the sentence? It is させる. Who is the が-marked actor? It is 私. So what is 私 doing? Causing. Causing what? The rest of the sentence tells us.
If the secondary action has a direct object that takes を away from the primary action which then takes に. If it doesn't then the primary action's direct object (the one being caused) can take を - though whether she does or not may depend on other factors which I discuss here: ruclips.net/video/gVqs4TzqySw/видео.html
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Thank you so much for the quick response. Perhaps I need to review the videos again to get a better grasp.
ドリ先生、
may I ask whether this sentence is grammatically correct?
さくらが お母さんに ブロコリを 食べさせられた。"Sakura got made to eat broccoli by her mother."
(I have the feeling it would be more natural to say
さくらは、 お母さんに ブロコリを 食べさせられた。, but technically, it is the same sentence, right?)
I feel quite confident about having grasped what the ni-particle does in receptive sentences, namely marking the source of the pulling action, and I hope I was not overconfident in enjoying the beautiful lego-like nature of Japanese.
Thank you for another informative and comprehensive lesson.
Since は is a non-logical particle it does not affect the logic of the sentence, and since it clearly indicates Sakura as the ∅が in this sentence the two are logically equivalent. The reasons for using the non-logical は as opposed to the logical が (that is stressing the topic rather than the subject, which in this case are the same entity) are subtle and various. I have done a pair of videos on the underlying principles here:
ruclips.net/video/_nXHpkTTfGs/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/o-hK4-qv9Yk/видео.html
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Thank you!
Something that really confused me as a young Japanese learner was how 5-level verbs can have two causative passive forms.
For example, one of my first textbooks (Understanding Japanese Grammar by Koichi Nishiguchi; terrible book, never buy it), I was taught that 飲ませる was the causative, and 飲まされる was the causative passive.
Then I learned that 飲ます is also causative, and 飲ませられる can also be "causative passive," and I was like 😵💫
It wasn't until later that I learned that 飲ます is considered an "old form" that is still used. (I learned it by the Japanese pinky swear chant 「ハリセンボン飲ます」)
Do you go into these? I'd like to know what's going on here.
Does that "1 verb, 1 subject" rule can be applied to other verbs in general? For example:
大地は くさり.. 夜になると
かいぶつが おぞってくる。
「おぞって」 and 「くる」, they have different subjects as well?
In this case they do, but there is no rule that the subjects of two verbs must be different entities. And in fact in this video we see that in causative-receptive sentences there are three verbs but only two subject entities. X causes Y to do action z and Y receives the causation. So せる IS done by X and both れる _and_ the original "helpee" verb are done by Y.
In a simple compound sentence like
お店にいってパンを買った
∅ does both verbs and represents the same entity.
But just to be clear, it _is_ true that in a simple causative or a simple receptive sentence, the first verb and the helper _must_ have different subjects (it isn't a grammatical rule it's simple logic - you don't cause yourself to do something or receive an action from yourself).
I have a question on this one. In some textbooks (certainly the newest Genki) they claim that the "causative passive" or as you describe (and seems to make more sense to me) causative receptive, can essentially be contracted (abbreviated maybe?) as あ stem + される. This is supposedly more common. How true is that?
They are quite common in informal speech. The Genki examples are often conversations between students where they would be common but they are not acceptable in formal circumstances.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 So the idea of "formal" speech gets thrown around a lot in Japanese, but I'm not 100% sure on what is considered a "formal" situation. It changes up the speech patterns a bit (going from だ to です, じゃ to では, いる to います, etc)
I assume it has some level of overlap with english, where we use formal speech in writing especially but also in events that are explicitly formal (such as at a banquet, or dance). That said, I also know that Japan has a bit of a sort of social hierarchy that can cause ordinary situations to become formal based on who you are talking to, right?
So what sorts of things count as formal? As far as I know currently:
Talking to a boss
Talking to an elder
Super formal when talking to a customer or guest
And formal when in certain events (I assume something a bit more solemn, like a serious tea ceremony?)
Sorry, I'm sure you answer these in later videos, but didn't want to lose these questions.
@@geoffreybolton7901 The question is in fact pretty complex. There are various levels of formality depending on all kinds of things like age (even one year), type of relationship etc. and it isn't just a matter of keigo vs です・ますvs plain. There are words and abbreviations that one would use in です・ます in some cases but not others for example. This is not something to "learn" in the abstract. One needs to know the basics and keep on the side of not offending. No one is going to expect native-level sensitivity and you shouldn't expect it of yourself because it is unrealistic without a great deal of experience. In some internet/game settings all the rules are out of the window and everyone just talks like classmates. But not all.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 That's perfectly reasonable. So let me slightly change the question then, what is considered an appropriate level of default formality? I'm not sure if it's a bad way to think about it, but the way I tend to think when creating sentences (input is entirely different and comes down to understanding the structure, which you outline well), is that there is a "default formality". In my case, I default to です/ます, and then when I interpret the situation as more casual, convert to だ/plain.
Is that appropriate? I guess the overarching meaning behind this question and preceding one is essentially, while being a foreigner forgives things, I don't want to be overly formal in average conversation when traveling, but also don't want to appear rudely disrespectful either. As I said above, trying to intuit a "default" or "safe" level of initial formality for a situation.
I guess just err on the side of caution and apply formality rules?
Regardless, thanks for your time answering my questions.
@@geoffreybolton7901 Default level for anyone you're not somewhat intimate with (or in a peer-group of some kind with) is です・ます which is why textbooks teach it despite the harm to structural understanding (as if you are going to be holding real conversations by lesson 10). Nothing beyond that matters because it will not be expected of a foreigner and learning lots of fiddly rules is silly (and won't end up sounding natural anyway). If the whole group is using informal and you are a part of it then you can too.
こんにちは ♡
First, thank you so very much for all your lessons.
Cure Dolly先生は天才ですよね！
I understood everything in this video until I read chapter 48 of みんなの日本語.
I may have misunderstood either your lesson or the textbook, however as I understand it, the textbook says that を is used when the verb is intransitive. Does this not contradict the sentence used in this lesson.
After all, I trust you more than the textbook, but I am slightly confused.
Would you perhaps be able to explain it?
Again thank you so so so very much ♡
xx
If it really said that it must be a misprint. を is used when a verb is other-move (transitive). That is because を marks the direct object and only transitive verbs have direct objects.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Thank you for the reply ♡ I think i may have explained it a bit unclear. They say the sentence structure is like this: N(person) を V(intransitive) causative （私は娘を自由に遊ばせます）or like this: N(person) に Nを V(transitive) causative.(先生は生徒に自由に意見を言わせます）
I might just be missing something. The sentence that confuses me is 犬を食べさてた。 Why is it not 犬に食べさてた。?
@@_unlapinblanc This is correct though the explanation sounds skewed if you have it right. Saying "causative" like that is confusing to start with. What they mean is the verb せる・せせる - not some "causative conjugation". The doer of せる・させる is the one who makes someone do the attached verb. This is a transitive action even if the attached verb is intransitive (which it usually is). Therefore it has a direct object and the direct object is the person caused to do. However this may vary for reasons explained in this video ruclips.net/video/gVqs4TzqySw/видео.html
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 I did think it sounded strange! Than you very much for the help ♡
Thank you for your explanations! I came across this sentence today: コウイチの話から、どんな教訓がえられましたか？ Shouldn't the が here, if I understand things correctly, be a に?
Remember that potentials are usually "acted" by the thing that is possible ruclips.net/video/qcOhHmU0znI/видео.html so 本が読める means "book does readable (to me)". Similarly here どんな教訓がえられましたか means "what kind of lesson did takeable?"
This られる could be the receptive helper (hard to be sure out of context) but again it would be "what kind of lesson received taking?"
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Thank you! You're definitely right about the potential, I completely forgot they were the same - I interpreted it as being the receptive helper.
But I didn't follow the receptive helper explanation - isn't the receiver in this case surely (zero) 'you' or 'me' or something? The one who receives the moral/lesson? From your video I'm not sure I understand how the thing that is being received can be the 'ga' - rather, it seems like the receiver should be the 'ga'? (And in this case, the receiver is not the lesson, but you/I)..
@@Manillien Well it's pretty sure to be the potential, but if it were the receptive we know what is doing the receiving by what is marked by が - and in this case it would be the lesson that is receiving being taken by whoever is taking it. A touch confusing because it is almost a double "receive" (the lesson receives[the action of] being received by someone) - but we need to remember that receivers of actions don't have to be people or even concrete things but could also be something like a lesson or a moral.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Thank you again! Re-watching the video, I finally got it! I had somehow gotten it into my mind that the が-marked noun must 'make sense' with the verb stem, but I see now that it's exactly the opposite. It must make sense with the れる-part. すみません！ビデオが私に得られています！
Sensei, are the receptive and causative words safe to use even in formal speech?
Yes. They are part of standard Japanese grammar and are used at all levels of formality.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Thank you!
Dolly Sensei, I've seen a few times sentences with two "wo" particle. In anime and also on the Tatoeba website. What does it really mean? I've watched this lesson a few times and it's way more comprehensive now by the way! :)
You would need to give examples. The main reasons a sentence will have two を particles are 1. that it is a compound sentence and 2. that one of the を particles is part of a modifying clause.
A better english word for "caused/compelled' (someone to perform the action) I found is "led". It doesn't directly implicates and isn't allowed but still passes the meaning of permission.
I think the thing here is that it is actually quite rare for a word in Japanese to overlap in all its nuances with any one word in English so once we have understood the range the aim is to get away from foreign pseudo-equivalents and see せる・させる as meaning せる・させる.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 I see. You're right. Thanks for always replying, It's immensely appreciated.
Your videos made me love Japanese!
@@Maldito011316 That's the best compliment you can give me. I want to make people love Japanese!
Hi thanks a lot for your videos, they are amazing and very helpfull! I have a question... In a sentence like this: the new phone that has been bought by suzuki san, i made to send it by Marco to Hanako.... How does it would be? 私がマルコさんに花子さんを 鈴木さんから買われた新しい携帯を送らせた。。。 Is it correct? Thanks.
One should not treat Japanese or any other language as a mere structural jigsaw puzzle. These constructions are too complex and non-agile to use regular grammatical markers for the whole sentence. One need to be more explicit about what one actually means. For example, in English, we would say "I got Marco to take the new cell phone that Suzuki bought to Hanako." As you see, we're explaining the situation a little because it is a complex one.
More on linguistic agility here: ruclips.net/video/FdMeXqweBJ0/видео.html
How do you know who is the second subject when the verb is is ditransitive such as 与える. For example
お母さんが息子に女の子にボールを与えさせた。couldn’t it mean either “the mom made her son give the ball to the girl” or “the mom made the girl give the ball to her son”. How do you unambiguously understand or say that?
As I explained in my lesson on ambiguity ruclips.net/video/gcbbSW-KuTQ/видео.html (a subject too little considered by conventional teaching which tends to regard language as a set of mechanical rules) - there is often potential ambiguity in language and it is incumbent on the speaker to disambiguate. This is easy to do with the potential helper since we can use を for the son (appropriate anyway if it is a compelling causative), which leaves no room for ambiguity. If we don't do that it is more natural that the first に will mark the target of the causation and that is what we can expect the listener to assume.
As I go through these lessons, I feel more and more ashamed of saying Japanese was a confusing mess.
I have been revisiting them, specially as I go through my exercises, and every time I do, not only I become more aware of the information presented, but also of how great your explanations and the reasoning behind them truly are.
I'm still not versed enough to present a more informed opinion (which might actually work in this feedback's favor), so from a true beginners perspective, I believe your format is being well presented in both micro (individual lessons) and macro scales (lesson order).
To borrow your Lego analogy, once and after I acquire and grow accustomed to the blocks I have, seeing them being put together in one of your well labeled examples, only for the explanation that follows cement the whole thing feels incredibly natural and intuitive.
Not to sound like a broken record, but I have been really surprised by all the results I have been getting, and I can't believe I almost dismissed your channel due the seemingly exaggerated (or some might consider "click-baity") titles. Though I do not mean this in an ill way.
Thank you very much for all your efforts.
Thank you so much! The clickbait trap is a bit of a difficult one. I can't really say "Here's a regular ol' Japanese grammar lesson" because it really isn't. And of course everyone and their pet iguana is claiming to be doing something new and special when they're just selling the same old potatoes. I do avoid nonsense like "learn Japanese in an afternoon with two tea breaks" but it's hard to avoid saying that one is doing something revolutionary when - just this time, as it happens - one actually is.
And I agree that it _shouldn't_ be revolutionary to simply teach the language in a straightforward, logical way. But it's something no one seems to have tried before.
This is where "thinking in Japanese terms" instead of English ones (like e.g. "the passive") really starts to shine.
Hmm.... I am confused with the dog example. I can't wrap my head around the dog being marked with を to not mean "I caused the dog to be eaten". Damn, this is the first time my brain isn't following the logic. I got so far haha.
Or is it something like:
1. 私が食べさせた = I caused (someone) to eat (something)
2. And the を is marking the (someone) not the (something)?
Could I just whack in another を to hit both of those, e.g., 野菜を犬を食べさせた？
Now I'm curious how I would actually say: 'I caused the dog to be eaten'.
All we really need to know is that since させる is the last verb in the sentence, it - and not the verb it is attached to - is the head-verb, the A-car.
The doer of the secondary verb is the recipient of causation and therefore marked with を or に - depending on whether we are indicating "forcing" as opposed to "allowing" or "making possible" - more about this here: ruclips.net/video/gVqs4TzqySw/видео.html
The last sentence is a passive construction and Japanese has no passive voice.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49
Cheers, but if: "I caused the dog to eat = 犬を食べさせた
And then, I said: "I caused the dog to eat the cat", would the dog still be marked by を？The logic follows for me if so, but then what would I mark the cat with?
Sorry, if I'm asking too many questions.
@@elmhurstenglish5938 Yes you have to mark the object of the cause-receiver's action with を if it is stated and in those cases you must mark the cause-receiver itself with に - を is no longer available for the cause-receiver.
Thanks, makes sense - feels like an order of priority type thing as to what gets to use the を particle.
@@elmhurstenglish5938 Yes, exactly.
犬に肉を食べさせた( I caused the dog to eat meat)Can it be the meaning, I caused the meat eaten by the dog? Because I think that 犬にcan be translated as “by dog” instead of“ I caused the dog”
犬に肉を食べられさせた. Does this mean I caused the meat to be eaten by the dog. I was trying to do a receptive-causative sentence and then I find this two question ambiguous
いぬに can't be translated as "by dog". に here marks the receiver of causation and nothing else. It is important to learn these usages and not patch in bits from elsewhere. に has a variety of functions and they are not all active at once.
犬に肉を食べられさせた this is almost never used but would mean that if it were. Receptive causative is not a thing in Japanese. Causative receptive is used. It is important not to see Japanese as merely a set of abstract structure puzzles. The structure is only there to help us understand the language.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 that makes me clear now, thanks!!
@@TzeJun-ps9le I am very glad to hear that. がんばってください。
Very good. Thank you.
Thank you as always for your lessons, right now I'm watching a little anime and I've encountered a phrase in keigo(敬語) but the grammar points in this sentence should be already explained til here. The phrase is still confusing so if you can assist me in breaking it down it'll be helpful. The phrase is 「お目覚めになられましたか！」 . When I break it down, お目覚めに＝Your being awake (target of the action), なられました is なる（become, ichidan verb), られる(received, ichidan verb) and です/ます polite helper verb with か (question mark). I am assuming the hidden subject to be "私”. Which makes the sentence become [私がお目覚めなられましたか！」 So does the sentence roughly translated becomes something like "Have I received the state of you being awake?" Thanks in advance. Edit: fix present/past tense.
This is the keigo use of the receptive helper. When used in keigo to refer to the actions of someone to whom one is paying respect, it does not function as receptive. So it is just an honorific way of asking "Are you awake?"
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Thank you for your answer! I understood the sentence as 'Are you awake?' but just wanted to break it down into components to delve slightly into how Keigo works. From the way I see the sentence the function of the receptive doesn't change in Keigo but this is related to their culture and how they pay respect. When られる is used to refer to the actions of someone whom someone is paying respect, it sort of means 'You allow me to, you're in a position to allow me to'. So in that sentence, 「お目覚めになられましたか！」 the use of られる puts the other person up on a higher position because its like the other person 'allowing' the action of '目覚め’ (This wouldn't make sense in English and can't be translated because English has no proper equivalent). I'm still a beginner of Japanese, so if I'm making incorrect assumptions please correct me. Thanks again!
@@ryanlohjy I'm afraid I can't see how れる・られる means "allow me to".That is the meaning of the causative せる・させる in phrases like させていただく but not really of the receptive. Also since the action is being done by the other person not by oneself, how would they be allowing anything even if that were the meaning.
I think there probably is ultimately a connection between the keigo use and the regular receptive use. And the way I would interpret it conjecturally is that it was originally directed to the Emperor and other persons of high rank who when they "did" something, for the most part didn't actually do it themselves but had a servant or official do it. In other words received its being done.
Over time this would become a convention rather than literal, and could even be applied to actions that would have to be performed by the doer such as eating.
To Western mentality stressing a person's non-action might not seem particularly polite but if we recall things like the Chinese mandarin fashion of growing one's fingernails extremely long (to show that one couldn't possibly do any work) one can see the point of this.
While to the Western mind it might seem decadent, to the Eastern mind it would be redolent of metaphysical concepts like non-acting action - the First Cause that lies behind the "ten thousand things", that gives rise to all action without acting itself.
And of course the Emperor was the earthly representative of that First Cause
The kanji for monarch 王 depicts the mediating point between earth and heaven on the World Axis.
Its use to more regular people would be derived from this - addressing someone relatively ordinary as if she were an extremely elevated person.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Thank you for your answer! This was enlightening! Since the use of Japanese language often includes a lot of their culture I wanted to enlighten myself to how they think, hence tackled myself with something slightly out of my depth (in this case, Keigo). I find myself able to learn better when i learn something as a flowing system(which it is) instead of random grammatical points jumbled up together with exceptions (the textbook method, and even Tae-Kim sensei's, unfortunately) so your way of piecing things together is really helpful to me. Sorry for bothering you with some strange questions but thanks again for your answers+videos!
So, trying to apply it to a normal verb:
(⊘が) 水を飲ませれる
"I was made to drink water" (lit. I got caused to drink water)
(⊘が) 彼に水を飲ませれる
"I made him drink water" (lit. He got caused to drink water)
The first should be 飲ませられる (remember that the potential and receptive helpers are ichidan).
The second would be 彼が水を飲ませられる which means what you said. The person doing られる (receiving - the head-verb of the sentence) is 彼 so he gets が, not に.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49
Ah, ok, I think I see where I messed up.
So, then
彼に水を飲ませた
(I caused him to drink water)
and
水が彼に飲まれた
(The water got drunk by him)
I expected the (さ)せる and (ら)れる to be the short forms for the godan(?) verb 飲む, but I'm guessing that only the initial verb of the pair that is shortened.
And I'm guessing that the reason is that せる is short because it's attaching to 飲む but られる is long because it's attaching to the せる, not the 飲む...
And presumably it's always (さ)せられるand never the other way around, ie: (ら)れさせる
Thanks for always replying!
I'm hoping that if I keep at it, it'll all become more and more obvious! :)
Makes sense!
Watching these videos in 1.0x video speed made me understand what was happening. Instead of 1.5x. That is crazy how I can learn more like this 💀
I was pondering for a whole minute on how a dog can get water drunk.
"Passive" form is to revive an action; Causative form is to give an action.
Yes, exactly. In both cases there are two actors, the one doing the action and the one causing or receiving it. This is why it is so important not to see them as "conjugated verbs" because a single verb by definition must have a single actor. They are verb + helper verb.
Done
These mor erecent classes are becoming very confusing to me, maybe because I am ninge watching this playlist really fast and I need to practice more and read more and listen more about things learned in previous classes.
it's funny how I just realize, that in English "let" actually has the same double meaning, but because the context makes it SO clear, you aren't even aware of this "issue"
She lets her kids eat candy.
vs.
She let the kids do the dishes.
:)
Is the latter a common usage? I don't seem to have encountered, it but then I lead a sheltered "life". Also feeding a dog could be called 食べさせる so that the real point is that being the cause of someone's doing something in any way: allowing, compelling or arranging the necessary circumstances is covered by the causative helper. It only seems confusing when we insist on trying to give it an exact English equivalent.
Interestingly we also say things like 目を輝かせた. How does one put that into any kind of English - (She) made her eyes shine? Let her eyes shine? Shone her eyes? Japanese just expresses things in different ways from English.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Yes I think it's pretty common and we do the same in German. Of course the structure is totally different and should not be compared, I just thought it was funny that in English "let" also can mean "made". :)
Splendid video. This was included in the last chapter of Genki (book 2). The only chapter I did not read. Suffice to say, I'm glad I did not read it as this was very clear and I didn't have any preconceived notions of how the causative passive was "supposed" to work beforehand.
I am wondering how to say " I caused David to go to Japan". Do you use "ni" twice?
You can use either を or に. There is no need to avoid using に twice (and avoiding that should not be the basis for your choice). に is often used twice. We can't say "I went to the park to play" without using に twice (in fact very similar to the way "to" is used twice in the equivalent English sentence). Essentially に sounds a little more like allowing and を a little more like compelling. This is not an absolute rule but the particles "lean" in that direction. This is a slightly more advanced topic and if you are interested you will find this video helpful ruclips.net/video/gVqs4TzqySw/видео.html ). Generally speaking, if in doubt I would say use に. Either will be understandable.
i never learned english grammar through textbooks so i can't even try to link japanese grammar to english as idk english grammar at all.
lmao the same. I think we don't even have to link it. this language is completely different
Hi Cure Dolly.
Can you please help me with "Causative"+くれる・もらう?
サクラさんが私にパンを食べさせてくれました。
Sakura (gladly) caused me to eat a bread.
私がサクラさんにを食べさせました。★This is easy.★ I caused Sakura to eat a bread.
私がサクラさんにを食べてもらいました。★This is easy.★ I had Sakura to eat a bread for me.
私がサクラさんにを食べさせてもらいました。★It becomes difficult when もらう is added.★ I had Sakura to cause me to eat a bread
自分の了解が上述の例文に大丈夫ですか。
I made a video in which I dealt with this. It is a Japanese expression strategy that takes a little analysis! ruclips.net/video/CESFJaFp8FI/видео.html
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49
This is what I learned so far:
に ... させる・せる → It is a PUSH sentence as the が actor pushes the action to the target に.
に ... てもらう → It's a PULL sentence as the が actor receives the action from the source に.
Not sure with させる・せる＋もらう. Example is 私がサクラさんにを食べさせてもらいました.
に ... させる・せる＋もらう → PULL sentence as the が actor receives the action from the source に. The action received is the 食べさせて which is roughly translated as causing (me) to eat.
に ... てもらう and に ... させる・せる＋もらう are both PULL sentences. Meaning が actor receives the action because が actor asked for it.
★に ... てもらう, が actor receives the action which come from the source に. (Just a receiver-centered point of view)
★に ... させる・せる＋もらう, が actor receives and DO the action which was caused by the source に.
Your input will surely help me to better grasp this confusing topic. Thank you!
Japanese: ボロコリを食べさせられた。Three verbs.
Portuguese: Fui obrigado a comer brócolos. Tree verbs.
Japanese: ボロコリを食べさせられました。Four verbs. What do you say about that?
Portuguese: I give up.
I'm afraid I don't know enough about Portuguese to comment. Though I seem only to see three verbs in the Portuguese. Japanese can have a fourth verb because it is a formality-helper verb that adds nothing to the actual meaning of the sentence.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Sometimes we forget that our native languages have all this difficult things to learn too (helper verbs, counters, etc.) - and some more (I wonder what a japanese learning portuguese thinks of the need to conjugate according to number and person😱).
@@JoseOliveira-kc4tr Yes that makes life difficult I think. Of course it is common to most European languages (and really it is redundant information). But for a Japanese person I think it would seem to add a whole layer of difficulty.
Cure Dolly-san. Can one say かばんのサクラが誰かにぬすまれた？
This means "The bag's Sakura got stolen by someone". So only if there was a Sakura that could be described as "of the bag" would this make sense. For example if there were two Sakuras one with a bag and one without, one might colloquially refer to the first one as かばんのさくら in order to distinguish her. However I am thinking you meant something else here. That would not be grammatical.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 Alright I get it. Thank you.
Fractal broccoli!
Mandelbrot's broccoli
It's von Koch!
tabesaserareta :D
how to say that i was compelled by my parents to eat broccoli
親にブロッコリーをたべさせられた。Notice that the Japanese expression strategy requires causative plus receptive. Literally:
"(I) received from my parents the act of being made to eat brocolli".
Japanese order with particle-functions
(I) parents [reception target] broccoli [object] eat-cause-received.
Near-accurate natural English
"I got made to eat broccoli by my parents" (not "got" not "was" because this is receptive, not passive")
Why do you use that voice effect though?
I try to make my voice sound as human as possible, using not only englang.yaritori, my English-speaking firmware but kanjou.maneri a sub-unit refined by myself (I am a self-learning, self upgrading unit) which allows me to mimic the emotional tones of a human to what seems to me like a satisfactory extent. I am perhaps not the best judge though.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 i had to turn on the subtitles to understand what you were saying... good lesson though. i ended up just muting the video and reading the subs it sounds like.... a muffled english woman mumbling/speaking... :/
@@TheWipal Sorry to hear that but I suppose that's what the subs are there for (they're hand made and accurate). Not entirely sure why you muted it. I guess something else is going on beyond simple incomprehension and I'm sorry to hear that I annoy some humans. Maybe I shouldn't try so hard to sound human. The "muffled" thing annoys me too. Somehow mics really don't seem to want to behave for me - not even costly ones. I think the latest one may be a bit better, but I'm not sure.
@@organicjapanesewithcuredol49 I Like to lay down and listen to videos so I have one ear covered it kinda slices my listing by half then distracts me from reading in the end heh heh still thank you very much for the information it helps so much to get different perspectives of grammar points!
@@TheWipal Ah thank you for explaining. I'm really sorry for the sound problems. Believe me they annoy me as much as they annoy anyone else -well more probably because I've been struggling with them for a long time and I never seem to be able to get it right. But I'm very glad my work was helpful to you anyway. I keep trying with the sound and I _think_ I'm making some progress.
：ｏ