Potential vs. Intransitive vs. Passive verbs

Potential vs. Intransitive vs. Passive verbs - Printable Version

+- kanji koohii FORUM (http://forum.koohii.com)
+-- Forum: Learning Japanese (http://forum.koohii.com/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The Japanese language (http://forum.koohii.com/forum-10.html)
+--- Thread: Potential vs. Intransitive vs. Passive verbs (/thread-6665.html)

Potential vs. Intransitive vs. Passive verbs - ems573 - 2010-11-10

Can anyone give me a comprehensive breakdown on the differences between these three types of verbs? I especially cannot figure out the difference between intransitive and passive verbs. Also, does 使う not have an intransitive verb?

Potential vs. Intransitive vs. Passive verbs - kazelee - 2010-11-10

Potential is pretty strait forward, for the most part.

http://www.guidetojapanese.org/learn/grammar/potential

Sometimes passive and intransitive are the same thing.

使う does have an passive form which turns it into an intransitive.

このペンはマイクに使われた。

Brain tired need sleep.

Potential vs. Intransitive vs. Passive verbs - nadiatims - 2010-11-10

intransitive（自動詞） means the subject (often omitted but otherwise marked by が) of the clause does the action and the action happens to the subject:
学校に行く = (I) go to school.
the subject (omitted) is the one doing the going, and it's not being done to some object.

transitive verbs (他動詞）are done by the subject to some object (the を marked word)
牛は草を食べる
Cows, (they) eat grass. The action is done by cows to the object grass.

passive verbs are something that happens to the subject but they are a passive participant. The agent (who performs the action) is marked by に.
草が牛に食べられた。 the grass was eaten by (the) cow(s)
止めてと彼に言われた　(I) was told(said) by him to stop (it).

Potential means the action is able to be performed by the subject.
漢字を書ける I can write kanji.

Some verbs (食べる for instance) don't have a unique potential form. The potential form is the same as the passive form:
好きな映画を見られた (I) could see the movie I like.
UFOが見られた a UFO was seen

kazelee Wrote:Sometimes passive and intransitive are the same thing.

使う does have an passive form which turns it into an intransitive.

このペンはマイクに使われた。

That's not intransitive, because the action is not being taken by the pen. Compare that to intransitive verbs like 行く、歩く、飛ぶ etc.

One thing to take note of is sometime intransitive verbs can take objects in Japanese.
鳥は空を飛ぶ　birds, (they) fly the sky. birds fly in the sky.

Potential vs. Intransitive vs. Passive verbs - zigmonty - 2010-11-10

nadiatims Wrote:One thing to take note of is sometime intransitive verbs can take objects in Japanese.
鳥は空を飛ぶ　birds, (they) fly the sky. birds fly in the sky.

or 公園を歩く

I've always taken this as being another use of the particle を, unrelated to its use as marking the direct object of a transitive verb (whether or not that way of thinking is strictly correct).

Rikaichan (super authoritative, i know) appears to more or less agree with that view (3rd definition):

Quote:を (prt) indicates direct object of action; indicates subject of causative expression; indicates an area traversed; indicates time (period) over which action takes place; (P)

Potential vs. Intransitive vs. Passive verbs - nadiatims - 2010-11-10

Actually it's more like words don't have to stick strictly to specific word classes (parts of speech) as long as what you're saying makes sense. For example photoshop was never a verb until people started saying things like:
That picture is so photoshopped. etc
or dog is supposed to be a countable noun until you say something like:
Do you like dog? (as in dog meat)
Basically you can use words however you like, even changing their word class as long as you understand how the meaning will be interpreted.

Potential vs. Intransitive vs. Passive verbs - yudantaiteki - 2010-11-10

nadiatims Wrote:Basically you can use words however you like, even changing their word class as long as you understand how the meaning will be interpreted.

You can't just make up any use that you want. There's a difference between "photoshopped" and that use of を, which has been around for a long time.

Potential vs. Intransitive vs. Passive verbs - wildweathel - 2010-11-10

ems573 Wrote:Can anyone give me a comprehensive breakdown on the differences between these three types of verbs?

For ages linguists have struggled with that very question and many have died leaving it unanswered.

Quote:I especially cannot figure out the difference between intransitive and passive verbs.

Well, hmm. I'll assume we're talking about verbs like 落ちる and 渡る and 現る that have corresponding transitive pairs (落とす、渡す、現す). So your question is "what is the difference between
落ちる・落とされる　
渡る・渡される　
現る・現される
帰る・帰される
と等

The one big difference is that passive verbs express an action that has an "agent" (fancy linguistic term meaning "doer") that might be omitted, but intransitive verbs express no agent at all.

It turns out that you're already familiar with this difference because it exists in English.

落ちる・落とされる =
fall / be dropped
　
渡る・渡される　
go across / be handed over

現る・現される
appear / be revealed

帰る・帰される
go home / be sent home

Quote:Also, does 使う not have an intransitive verb?

ありません。It doesn't really need it--the whole point of "using" something rather strongly implies that there's someone doing the using, doesn't it? Otherwise you'd have a verb that means "carries out its function" which is a separate enough idea that it gets its own verb:

効く・利く・きく

yudantaiteki Wrote:You can't just make up any use that you want.

なるほどね、もし「ググる」をググったら、結果が出ない理由ですね。

Potential vs. Intransitive vs. Passive verbs - yudantaiteki - 2010-11-10

wildweathel Wrote:
yudantaiteki Wrote:You can't just make up any use that you want.
なるほどね、もし「ググる」をググったら、結果が出ない理由ですね。

Once again, you can't just make up any use that you want. It's not a free for all. Your "counterexample" is irrelevant. Words can change and move word class, but you can't just decide on your own to use words however you want, especially as a non-native speaker.

Also I don't think it's right to conclude that because the use of を doesn't match the concept of direct object in English, there's just no rhyme or reason and you can do whatever you want.

Potential vs. Intransitive vs. Passive verbs - nadiatims - 2010-11-10

yudantaiteki Wrote:Once again, you can't just make up any use that you want. It's not a free for all. Your "counterexample" is irrelevant. Words can change and move word class, but you can't just decide on your own to use words however you want, especially as a non-native speaker.

Says who? There is no ruling body forcing anybody to use language in a certain way. You can do anything you like. If I arbitrarily decided to start using using が instead of を and visa versa than that's my choice. I'm not going to do this though because it conflicts with the way 99.9% of people use it and therefore would be confusing. That's why I said before "you can use words however you like, even changing their word class as long as you understand how the meaning will be interpreted."

Potential vs. Intransitive vs. Passive verbs - Asriel - 2010-11-10

nadiatims Wrote:If I arbitrarily decided to start using using が instead of を and visa versa than that's my choice. I'm not going to do this though because it conflicts with the way 99.9% of people use it and therefore would be confusing

I think this is what would come down to "you making a grammar mistake on purpose." And even if it would be interpreted the way you wanted to, it doesn't mean it would be good. Especially since you're not native. You'd probably be "let off the hook" in a conversation, but wouldn't you just want to do it right so you don't have to bother?

On a somewhat related note, anyone see the thing on the front page of Asahi a while back where it said 99.99% of Chinese people hate Japan?

Potential vs. Intransitive vs. Passive verbs - kazelee - 2010-11-11

Hah. I had a similar argument with Jarvik when I first started out here. Truthfully, you can make up whatever you want. You just have to be ready to deal with the consequences of doing so.

Potential vs. Intransitive vs. Passive verbs - Umikuma - 2010-11-11

nadiatims Wrote:transitive verbs (他動詞)are done by the subject to some object (the を marked word)
牛は草を食べる
Cows, (they) eat grass. The action is done by cows to the object grass.

passive verbs are something that happens to the subject but they are a passive participant. The agent (who performs the action) is marked by に.
草が牛に食べられた。 the grass was eaten by (the) cow(s)

Except that the examples should read 牛は草を食うand 草が牛に食われた。たべるis for people. くう is for animals (and guys being all macho). Smile

Potential vs. Intransitive vs. Passive verbs - nadiatims - 2010-11-11

A Japanese person just told me both have the same meaning, just 食う less polite. Where did you learn that 食う is for animals, and 食べる for people. I've never heard that before.

Potential vs. Intransitive vs. Passive verbs - Umikuma - 2010-11-11

That's how I learned it back in the dawn of time.

This seems to support it: http://www.wikiled.com/english-japaneseromajikanji-eat-Default.aspx but I'll check my 大辞典 when I get home and see what it has to say. I know it is used as a rougher form by males, and indeed, we used it that way as well occasionally, having heard it used that way -- mostly in a joking manner, as in "Let's go kuu." But I don't think 食べる is generally used for animals. You might ask your friend about that.

Potential vs. Intransitive vs. Passive verbs - yudantaiteki - 2010-11-11

I've never heard that distinction either. 食う is a rougher word and mostly used in male speech, but it can be people or animals. And I've heard many native speakers use 食べる with animals. You can search "餌を食べる" on google and see a lot of examples.

Potential vs. Intransitive vs. Passive verbs - harhol - 2010-11-11

There's a difference between being anti-prescriptivism (something which should be encouraged at all times) and just being plain wrong. Attempting to redefine centuries-old particle usage is a step too far, imo, particularly for a non-native.

Potential vs. Intransitive vs. Passive verbs - wildweathel - 2010-11-11

Hmm, yes, language isn't quite a free-for-all. Ultimately your skill is determined by is how well you project the meaning and style you intend. To do that effectively, you must have a deep, intuitive understanding of what your 聞き手 considers "normal"--a high standard, but no one said this language thing was trivial.

As a teacher, one can say "in my classroom you can't just make things up." The truth in the real world is a little more nuanced: "if you make things up, there's no telling how weird you'll sound or if people will understand you."

Potential vs. Intransitive vs. Passive verbs - yudantaiteki - 2010-11-11

I asked some native speakers and they had never heard of the "食う with animals, 食べる with people" rule either.