Some Japanese Questions

[pacerier]

Hi all,

I was wondering is どうやったら and どうやって interchangeable in every context? or are there certain rules which may prevent them from being interchangeable?

 

[Elizabeth]

A little doubt, plz anyone T_T | Japan Forum

How do I open the window? | Japan Forum

 

[pacerier]

heys, thanks for the links, instead of replying the old threads i will post here instead.

I think どうやったら is used more when you encounter an unexpected piece of news, like 'Wow! How can I/anyone do that ?' sort of impact, but it was explained a while back so I'm not entirely sure....I just know it has to do with how to do something (mechanically)

The below sentence is one reibun found in a dictionary:
どうやったら子供たちが野菜を食べてくれるのか、私の 頭痛のたねです。

I was wondering what do you mean by "mechanically" for douyatte?

also, is this true:

I think Douyatte is more often used when you want instructions.

 

[Toritoribe]

The clause following どうやったら expresses the state after doing something, whereas the purpose to do something follows どうやって.
"What/How should I do to become the state of ~" vs "What/How should I do to do ~"

どうやったら子供たちが野菜を食べてくれるのだろう（ ＝どうすれば「子供たちが野菜を食べてくれる」状態に なるのだろう）
どうやって子供たちに野菜を食べさせるのだろう（＝「 子供たちに野菜を食べさせる」ためにはどうすればいい ですか？）

どうやったら窓が開きますか？（＝どうすれば「窓が開 く」状態になりますか？）
どうやって窓を開けますか？（＝「窓を開ける」ために はどうすればいいですか？）

どうやったら説明できますか？（＝どうすれば「説明で きる」状態になりますか？）
どうやって説明しますか？（＝「説明する」ためにはど うすればいいですか？）


I believe this can be an answer to your question.; "why is it "<わたしは>どうすると窓を開けるんですか" not allowed?"
How do I open the window? | Japan Forum

Because it should be どうすると/どうすれば窓を開けられるんですか or どうやって窓を開けるんですか.

 

[pacerier]

heys, many thanks for the reply. Let me try summarizing it to see if i really get it: if we say どうやったら[x]か it means "how to get [x]" where [x] is a situation and if we say どうやって[x]か it means "how to [x]" where [x] is an action, is that right?

is 私が速く走る considered a situation where "i am running quickly", are both of these acceptable:
どうやって速く走りますか
どうやったら私が速く走りますか

 

[Toritoribe]

heys, many thanks for the reply. Let me try summarizing it to see if i really get it: if we say どうやったら[x]か it means "how to get [x]" where [x] is a situation and if we say どうやって[x]か it means "how to [x]" where [x] is an action, is that right?
is 私が速く走る considered a situation where "i am running quickly", are both of these acceptable:
どうやって速く走りますか
どうやったら私が速く走りますか

No. どうやって and どうやったら are not interchangeable. The meaning is changed depending on the type of the verb, too. If the volitional verb is used in the clause following どうやったら, the doer is not the speaker. 速く走る is the volitional, not the state. Thus, you can't say どうやったら私が速く走りますか. It should be どうやったら（私は）速く走れますか or どうやったらこの車は速く走りますか.

As for どうやって速く走りますか, this sentence is asking the mechanism how something runs fast.

 

[pacerier]

in this sentence: どうやったらこの車は速く走りますか, if この車 is assumed, can we leave it out and say this: どうやったら速く走りますか

As for どうやって速く走りますか, this sentence is asking the mechanism how something runs fast.

is it fine if the something is a person どうやってあのた方は速く走りますか

also i was wondering how is it possible for 走る to be passive. if 叱られる means "i'm scolded by [x]", will 走れる mean "i'm runned by [x]"?

 

[Toritoribe]

in this sentence: どうやったらこの車は速く走りますか, if この車 is assumed, can we leave it out and say this: どうやったら速く走りますか

If it is obvious from the context, yes, you can say so.

この車、調子が悪くてスピードが出ないんです。どうやったら速く走りますか？

走るようになりますか would be more common for this case, though.

is it fine if the something is a person どうやってあのた方は速く走りますか

あの人はどうやって速く走りますか might be acceptable but sounds awkward to me. Some specific situation would be needed.

ぬかるんだ地面を走るとき、あの人はどうやって速く走 りますか

Although I would say あの人ならどうやって速く走ると思いますか instead.
あの人はどうやって速く走りましたか/走ったんですか is natural. This difference is not from どうやって but from the characteristics of the action verb 走る

also i was wondering how is it possible for 走る to be passive. if 叱られる means "i'm scolded by [x]", will 走れる mean "i'm runned by [x]"?

走る is a godan-verb.

走られる; passive
走れる; potential

 

[pacerier]

hey thanks for the reply. Is it true that both どうやって and どうやったら are expecting an "answer"/"reply", or can they be rhetorical?

Also, how does どうすれば come into the picture? is it interchangeable with どうやったら or does it have its own set of rules?

 

[Toritoribe]

hey thanks for the reply. Is it true that both どうやって and どうやったら are expecting an "answer"/"reply", or can they be rhetorical?

Are there any interrogatives that can't be used in rhetorical questions?

Also, how does どうすれば come into the picture? is it interchangeable with どうやったら or does it have its own set of rules?

They are basically interchangeable. どうやったら sounds more colloquial and tends to be used for particular and concrete things. This difference is from "する vs. やる" and "ば conditional vs. たら conditional."

 

[pacerier]

cool, i'll keep that in mind, anyway i've read somewhere that ば conditional focuses more on the cause and たら conditional focuses more on the reason. I was wondering if this is true, if not what may be the difference between the ば conditional and たら conditional?

 

[Toritoribe]

Need a word or phrase translated? | Page 286 | Japan Forum

 

[pacerier]

thanks for the link =P

is it safe to assume that たら is a "catch-all", meaning anything that uses the ば conditional can in fact also use たら?

ば can't be used when the verb in the main clause is imperative/intention verbs and besides the verb in the subordinate clause is also intention verbs.

i'm aware of what's an imperative verb, however what do you mean by an intention verb?

 

[Toritoribe]

is it safe to assume that たら is a "catch-all", meaning anything that uses the ば conditional can in fact also use たら?

In most cases, it can be said so. The nuance could be changed, though. Some idiomatic usages, e.g., ～ば～ほど, ～も～ば、～も, ～なければならない/いけない, are the exceptions.

手直しすればするほどひどくなる（×手直ししたらした ほど）
金もなければ仕事もない（×金もなかったら）
きちんと確認しなければならない（×しなかったらなら ない）

i'm aware of what's an imperative verb, however what do you mean by an intention verb?

Oh, sorry, I meant 意志動詞, i.e., "volitional verbs."

 

[pacerier]

きちんと確認しなければならない（×しなかったらならない）

heys i was wondering why is しなかったらならない (to mean "must") not allowed. is there a reason for it or is it that its just not allowed?

たら sound more colloquial, and is often used for particular/one-time-only things.

ば is often used for general/repeatedly-happened things.

besides this, is it true that たら emphasizes more on the "right" side of the sentence whereas ば emphasizes more on the "left" (the cause) side of the sentence?

 

[Toritoribe]

heys i was wondering why is しなかったらならない (to mean "must") not allowed. is there a reason for it or is it that its just not allowed?

It's an idiom. But you can say ちゃんと確認しなかったら、失敗する（＝ちゃんと確認 しなければ、失敗する）as a conditional clause. FYI, きちんと確認しなければならない is a simple sentence structure, not a compound.

besides this, is it true that たら emphasizes more on the "right" side of the sentence whereas ば emphasizes more on the "left" (the cause) side of the sentence?

I think it's too much simplistic. That more likely depends on the context. Where did you get from?

 

[pacerier]

I got it from an online guide, so it may not be really reliable.

anyway, regarding conditionals, I saw this sentence from Wikipedia: 雨が上がると、子ども達はもう学習を忘れて、太陽に表を向ける水溜りの誘惑に従う

My question is that why is it possible for us to use the と conditional (in 雨が上がると) when<children forgetting their lessons giving in to the temptation of sun-faced puddles> is not a "sure happen"? Will it be better if we change 雨が上がると to 雨が上がったら in the above sentence.

 

[nhk9]

My understanding of ～と is that the clauses should flow naturally.
A ~と B
When A happens, naturally B happens
春になると花が咲く
お金がないと困る
Notice that B does not have to "happen for sure". Instead, the speaker is expecting B to happen naturally due to A happening. When you think about it, in Antarctica there are probably no flowers even in the Spring (correctly me if I am wrong).
Of course, there may be other interpretations of ~と, but they are out of scope here

 

[pacerier]

can we use the と conditional this way: これを食べると絶対許さない, to imply that "if you eat that I Absolutely cannot forgive"

 

[Toritoribe]

Yes. 食べたら sounds more natural to me, though. "Absolutely" is not from と, but from 絶対.

 

[Elizabeth]

can we use the と conditional this way: これを食べると絶対許さない, to imply that "if you eat that I Absolutely cannot forgive"

The と conditional is usually used for naturally-occurring or repeated factual conditions and states, habitual occurrences, or to indicate an immediate sequencing of events (B happens as soon as A is done). So if you said "Kore wo taberu to, itsumo yurusanai" (Straight from animelyrics ?? haha or something better contexted) it may be slightly more natural.

This is と outside of a ton of set phrases and other usages. It isn't overly common.

 

[pacerier]

thanks for the replies. I've just read an online guide and i was trying to figure out why are there so many ways to say Must. the guide told me that there are 9 ways to say Must (e.g. must eat):
1. 食べなくては駄目
2. 食べなくてはいけない (食べなくてはいけません)
3. 食べなくてはならない (食べなくてはなりません)
4. 食べないと駄目
5. 食べないといけない (食べないといけません)
6. 食べないとならない (食べないとなりません)
7. 食べなければ駄目
8. 食べなければいけない (食べなければいけません)
9. 食べなければならない (食べなけれなりません)

I was wondering what may be the difference between these, and/or which is more suitable for writing and talking to boss / talking to strangers / talking to friends / talking to younger siblings / talking to pet

also, i've realised (i think) that we couldn't do this:
食べなかったら駄目
食べなかったらいけない
食べなかったらならない
but why is it that these 3 are not allowed

 

[nhk9]

There are many more expressions that can express the idea of 'must'. It's important that you choose the ones that you want to use, instead of trying to discern all the minute details.

By far the most common one that you hear is してはいけない. It means that one may not do sth due to some restriction. しなければならない is probably the first one that they teach to foreigners, but it's not used nearly as much by native speakers (and I say this after 10+ years of dealing with Japanese people)

Notice that しなければならない is sometimes thought of as "should" by native speakers and also by translation devices from Japan. This fact is not a well-known fact amongst foreigners. Most foreigners tend to associate "should" with hazu or beki(da)/besi

 

[Toritoribe]

The point to watch out for is that してはいけない means "mustn't."

食べてはいけない: You mustn't eat.
食べなくてはいけない/食べなければならない: You must eat.

It's said that なければならない tends to be used for the case that you must do something regardless of your intention, whereas なくてはいけない is for that you can choose to do another thing but you must do it. However, the difference is subtle. They are often interchangeable.

 

[pacerier]

It's said that なければならない tends to be used for the case that you must do something regardless of your intention, whereas なくてはいけない is for that you can choose to do another thing but you must do it. However, the difference is subtle. They are often interchangeable.

hm, sry let me try an example to see if i get it. let's say my sister is not eating because she's dieting and i want to say "you must eat!". so in this case she can choose to do another thing (which is to not eat), does that mean that i should use 食べなくてはいけない?