yudantaiteki wrote:

I don't know if you need to complicate -te aru by adding in things about intentions; it just represents a completed action that's done by someone you don't state (either because it's not important or you don't know).  More or less equivalent to one use of the passive in English.

Intentions are actually a pretty important aspect of てある. That's the way I was taught, originally, but just to check I looked through a couple of Japanese grammar explanations online written for Japanese people. This is a copy paste from one of them: Attention to the second bullet point in each section, about 人間などの意思. ている doesn't include it, while てある does.

１）「～ている」（結果の残存（状態））

　　「～が」＋無意志動詞（自動詞）＋ている

　　例：「窓が開いている」「エアコンがついている」

　　・行為そのものではなく、その結果や変化に注目する表現である。   

　　・人間などの意志(意図)が含まれていない場合、あるいは、自然力の影響などでできごとが起こった場合に用いられる。



２）「～てある」（結果の残存（状態））

「～が」＋意志動詞(他動詞)＋てある

例：「窓が開けてある」「エアコンがつけてある」

　　　・行為に注目している。

・人が意志(意図)的にそのできごとを引き起こしたととらえる。

link: http://homepage3.nifty.com/i-yasu/Lesson33.htm

@yudantaiteki Yeah, I can see what you mean. Although consider the fact that they contrast it with "人間などの意志(意図)が含まれていない場合、あるいは、自然力の影響などでできごとが起こった場合に用いられる。" ている either occurred naturally without human action OR occurred as the result of a human action that DOESN'T include intention, aim, volition, etc. That makes it seem like the combination of human action and "will" is important for てある。

@asriel I'm not sure about that. I think you're making my point for me. ている can be used without intention. てある on the other hand means something was done on purpose... ie with a purpose. That's the same thing I was saying.

My guess is that the 'purpose/intention' aspect is more important where there is a transitive/intransitive pair and so there is a choice between intransitive + teiru or transitive + tearu. Where there isn't a choice, as with 書いてある, it's less significant. Obviously all acts of writing are "on purpose" in some sense, but using 書いてある is just saying "it's written", not emphasising "it was written deliberately".

Tori-kun wrote:

1) Humble Expressions, 2) Honorific ones and 3) Teineigo

You're leaping all over the place here; it kind of feels to me like you'd do better to focus on one thing rather than bouncing off half a dozen different problems in one week.

pm215 wrote:

Tori-kun wrote:

1) Humble Expressions, 2) Honorific ones and 3) Teineigo

You're leaping all over the place here; it kind of feels to me like you'd do better to focus on one thing rather than bouncing off half a dozen different problems in one week.

Agreed. Take it easy, man. Goodnight, everybody.

Yeah, I wasn't trying to disagree with anybody so much as just throwing in my two cents...

Last edited by pm215 (2011 April 24, 2:00 pm)

I'm still having a hard time understanding what you're trying to say.  ている is used with both transitive and intransitive verbs, and てある only with transitive. 

ている can refer to a resultant state regardless of what type of verb it's used with.  That is, 書いている can either mean "I'm writing [now]" or "I have written it".  Only certain verbs can take the action in progress meaning, though.

No; the motion verbs where を marks a location rather than an object do not normally occur with ある.  (This is why JSL actually makes a distinction between "operational" (i.e. volitional) verbs and transitive verbs)

There do appear to be a few examples of 走ってある on google (although some of them are just saying it's wrong).

(good morning)

I must agree to fakewookie, that I'm also a bit irritated by what you wrote. To be deeply honest I found the answer of bobbyj, his explanation I mean, really comprehendable and I also think it's correct from what I read in my textbook now (it becomes clearer thanks to him; thanks for answering the humble/honorific language-question of mine which seemed to mess up the thread here slightly, but as the title says: general questions of mine go in here; I collect them.). So for the reference for other users who may encounter the problem let me quote him:

(In my opinion the first examples cover the difference quite well)

あの家の窓は板で塞いでいる。
That house's windows are boarded up.
(In this case, they have been and continue to be boarded up. This sentence carries no meaning about who boarded them or why. It's merely an observation.)

あの家の窓は板で塞いである。
That house's windows have been boarded up.
(In this case you ARE implying that someone has boarded them up with some purpose.)

Recall your examples from the forum "窓が開いています”
The window is open.
Again, just an observation about the state of the window. Notice that you have to use an intransitive verb because no one is acting on the window. It's just open.

"窓が明けてある”
The window has been opened.
Here, the state of the window is the same, but you have to use a transitive verb, because you're implying that someone opened the window with a purpose. Maybe you're noticing that other people must also think it's hot in this room. Maybe you're a cop observing how a criminal must have escaped. I dunno.

The whole point of てある is that it lets you add extra information: an action has been done by someone, and they had a reason for doing it. Even a sentence like "彼は窓を明けている： He is opening the window" says nothing about his reasons for opening the window. In that case, he might not even have a reason. てある implies an agent, and a motive.

For てしまう, again, you're making it too complicated. てしまう has two uses:

1: done regrettably
2: done completely

It takes context to know which meaning.

You can say "この本を読んでしまった。" to mean "I have finished reading this book in it's entirety.

For your homework example, you usage of grammar is fine, but I think your wording is a bit unnatural. I would say ”宿題をしてしまった。”　I finished all of my homework. (By the way, in English we say "do my homework," not "make.)

The regrettable aspect is all context. For a sentence like "隣のばあちゃんの裸姿を見てしまった、” it should be obvious.

For a sentence like "１人でピザを食べてしまった、" it could be regrettable, it could be completely, or it could be both.

--- (cut)
In Chapter 16 of the Genki 2 textbook ～時 gets introduced. It seems to be quite confusing to english speaking people concerning the usage of tenses and the proper translation of those, hm. I tried to figure out something before finally asking in here (again), so that's my conclusion (I hope it's correct. Again, please correct if you find mistakes, t hanks!!!).

- 4 possible time-combos possible, namely (the first phrase being the one with ～時 = [A], the other one after the "," being [b])
1) PRESENT, PRESENT
2) PRESENT, PAST
3) PAST, PRESENT
4) PAST, PAST

- Equivalents in Japanese (f.e.)
1) 学校に行くとき、りんごを食べる。
2) 学校に行くとき、りんごを食べた。
3) 日本語を学んだとき、中国語を学ぶ。
4) 日本語を学んだとき、中国語を学んだ。

- the translation of toki with "when" is sometimes a bit vague I found, so "A dict of Basic Jap. Grammar" tells us the phrases can be translated with "before..." (for [A]=present tense) or "after..." (for [b]=past tense)
1) 学校に行くとき、りんごを食べる。 - When I go to school (present tense), I eat an apple. (-> Before I go to school, I eat an apple)
2) 学校に行くとき、りんごを食べた。 - this one is troublesome for me; I can't think of a way translating it. It's incomprehensible for me.

- the following examples for past tense can be really well translated with "after..." I find:
3) 日本語を学んだとき、中国語を学ぶ。 - (right) After I learnt Japanese, I will learn Chinese.
4) 日本語を学んだとき、中国語を学んだ。 - (right) After I learnt Japanese, I learnt Chinese. (both happenings are already in the past)

Well can't do anything with the second sentence and would like somebody to explain it to me. I understood that if the time reference [A] occurs after B it will be in present tense, irrespectible if [b] is in the past/present tense (Japanese tenses).
I also understood that if an event was in the past,  [A] has to be in the past and if [A] is current or yet to happen it has to be in the present tense...

Last edited by Tori-kun (2011 April 25, 7:27 am)

Ah! Found it! Well then, the example of mine was a bit "too easy" perhaps or the verb was not well chosen. How is this variant translated else if the verb is not a motion verb?

Last edited by Tori-kun (2011 April 25, 8:21 am)

This is an instance where it's really useful to view these as aspects, rather than tenses.  Japanese has relative, not absolute tense.  That is, if you just have 食べた, all you know is that it represents a completed action of eating.  But depending on the context, that could represent future or past.

There are essentially two aspects in Japanese -- imperfect (something that is not completed), and perfect (something that is completed/realized).

When you have two different aspects in one sentence, you interpret the first one relative to the second.  So with 前 and 後:

日本に行く前に、日本語を勉強する.  (Before I go to Japan, I will study Japanese.)
日本に行く前に、日本語を勉強した。 (Before I went to Japan, I studied Japanese.)

In both these sentences, the studying takes place before the going to Japan.  In the first case you have two imperfectives, so the whole thing takes place in the future.  But in the second, your final predicate is perfective, so the whole thing takes place in the past.  The imperfective is used in the first clause because it was not complete when the action of the second clause took place.

The same thing occurs with 後:
日本に行った後、日本語を勉強した。 (After I went to Japan, I studied Japanese.)
日本に行った後、日本語を勉強する。 (After I go to Japan, I will study Japanese.)

In this case, the perfective first clause always takes place before the second one (i.e. it's completed at the time of the second).  So the final predicate determines the tense.

時 tends to be a little more confusing because it can represent either, but the relative tense is the same.  If it's [Perfective X]時 + Y, then X takes place before Y.  If it's [Imperfective X]時 + Y, then X takes place after Y.

So in the example: 学校に行くとき、りんごを食べた。  This is [Imp. X]時 + Y, so X takes place after Y.  And because the final predicate is perfective, the whole sentence will be past tense.  Thus "Before I went to school, I ate an apple."

Thinking about aspect instead of tense is confusing at first, but in the long run I think it really makes a lot of structures in Japanese clearer.  The basic idea is that only the final predicate determines the tense, and any other predicate in the sentence is merely showing the tense relative to the final one.

Also, note that the て ending of verbs and the た ending of verbs derive from the same original source (a suffix in classical Japanese that indicated completion).  So when you have ご飯を食べて、学校に行く, this is the same notion -- you have a completed action X, then an imperfective Y.  Since the final predicate is imperfective, the whole thing takes place in the future, and you come up with "I will eat, then go to school."

The issue is actually a little bit more complicated than this but I'm afraid this post is not written well enough to be understandable so I'll end there...

Last edited by yudantaiteki (2011 April 25, 9:22 am)

yudantaiteki wrote:

The same thing occurs with 後:
日本に行った後、日本語を勉強した。 (After I went to Japan, I studied Japanese.)
日本に行った後、日本語を勉強する。 (After I go to Japan, I will study Japanese.)

In this case, the perfective first clause always takes place before the second one (i.e. it's completed at the time of the second).  So the final predicate determines the tense.

This whole 時 stuff smells slightly like は and が. It does seem in fact quite irritating and more complicated than described in the textbook, but anyway. Coming to the quote: the bold part you wrote yudan, expresses the so called anteriority, right? The latter predicate of the sentence sets the whole "tense". 　
後 can be replaced by 時 then, right?

For past:
1) 日本に行った後、日本語を勉強した。 (After I went to Japan, I studied Japanese.)
2) 日本に行った後、日本語を勉強する。 (After I go to Japan, I will study Japanese.)

For present:
3) 日本に行くとき、日本語を勉強する。 (Before I go to Japan, I will study Japanese) The last verb-tense is important. Since it's present tense, the whole thing happens in the present.
4) 日本に行くとき、日本語を勉強した。 (Before going to Japan, I studied Japanese) The last verb-tense is important. The past indicates that you have done something before the present (行くとき) -> going to Japan.

I hope we don't have to go any further into deep linguistic/grammatical explanations why and how, but just keep it simple and comprehensible for me (a beginner)