が/を作る

[healer]

Easier Japanese Practice
毛は、皮膚の小さな穴にある細胞が作ります。

I understand 作るis a transitive verb so it would go with を. I haven't come across 作るthat goes with が.

Is が作りますin the sentence above a mistake or some grammar points I haven't learnt?

 

[bentenmusume]

作る is a transitive verb, so the direct object of 作る takes を.

The subject of a transitive verb (including 作る) of course, can (and does) take が, as I'm sure you know.

Maybe think about the sentence again and ask yourself what the role of 細胞 and 毛 are here with relation to the verb 作る.

 

[mdchachi]

And for advanced practice, consider where you would put を if you want to use it.

 

[healer]

The subject of a transitive verb (including 作る) of course, can (and does) take が

I had supposed whether が or をis used depended on the verb, not on the subject. If the subject takes が then it would use an intransitive verb as I had supposed such as 生える in this case. There must be something I have missed.
毛は、皮膚の小さな穴にある細胞が生えます。

I came across also the following example in a dictionary.
そのグループはディックが作った。
The group was made up by Dick.

I understand transitive verb can go with がif the sentence is in passive voice. However in both the quoted example sentences, verb of passive form is not used though the meaning or the interpretation may have the import of passivity.

what the role of 細胞 and 毛 are here with relation to the verb 作る.

I can see the fur or hair grow from cells in the pores of skin according to the sentence, nothing else.

consider where you would put を if you want to use it.

I have expected を goes with 作る anyway.
毛は、皮膚の小さな穴にある細胞を作ります。

 

[bentenmusume]

I had supposed whether が or をis used depended on the verb, not on the subject.

Well, then this is a very fundamental misunderstanding, so let's try to help you understand and overcome it.
(Actually, I have a feeling you understand this better than you're making it sound here.)

が can mark the grammatical subject of <i>any</i> verb, transitive or intransitive.

Of course, you would understand how が could serve as the subject in transitive verb sentences like:

田中さんが小説を書きました。
犬が肉を食べました。
お母さんが晩ご飯を作ってくれました。

I came across also the following example in a dictionary.
そのグループはディックが作った。
The group was made up by Dick.

Yes, this is exactly the same pattern as the sentence in question.
Note that there is no passive verb in the Japanese sentence, the passive voice is simply being introduced in the (non-literal) English translation.

The other thing you seem to be missing here is that this (like the example with Dick and the group) is simply an example of an inverted sentence. You're confused because you seem to be assuming that what's coming directly before the transitive verb is the direct object, but that's not necessarily the case (and isn't the case in these examples).

The direct objects of 作る in both of these sentences:
そのグループはディックが作った。
毛は、皮膚の小さな穴にある細胞が作ります。

...are located somewhere else, and they're not marked with を for a certain reason.
Why do you suppose that might be?

As a hint, remember: the topic particle は does not dictate the role (subject/object) of the noun it marks.

I have expected を goes with 作る anyway.
毛は、皮膚の小さな穴にある細胞を作ります。

Reconsider your understanding here in light of the above. What you have done here is change the meaning of the sentence. The original example is not trying to say that hair makes cells.

 

[bentenmusume]

And yes, I realize that this is a lot of words to answer a question that could have been summarized for concisely, but I'm trying to help you (healerさん) work through the thought process here, rather than just give you the answer directly.

(Hope it helps!)

 

[healer]

let's try to help you understand and overcome it.

Thanks for your kindness!

が can mark the grammatical subject of <i>any</i> verb, transitive or intransitive.

Yes, I'm aware.

you would understand how が could serve as the subject in transitive verb sentences

I believe I understand the grammatical structure of the three example sentences.

there is no passive verb in the Japanese sentence, the passive voice is simply being introduced in the (non-literal) English translation.

I realised that.

this (like the example with Dick and the group) is simply an example of an inverted sentence.

I understand that words in Japanese sentences can be in any order so long as the main verb is at the end of the sentence.

you seem to be assuming that what's coming directly before the transitive verb is the direct object

I didn't assume that. However I did assume at the time the direct object should precede を. So I looked for をin both sentences but I couldn't find it. That was where I got stuck.

 

[healer]

The direct objects of 作る in both of these sentences:

From the meaning of the sentences I think I can guess what the objects are. They're グループand 毛respectively.
そのグループはディックが作った。
毛は、皮膚の小さな穴にある細胞が作ります。

they're not marked with を for a certain reason.
Why do you suppose that might be?

I remembered all of a sudden that は can replace をor が for contrast or emphasis. I'm not sure if this is the case with the examples in question though.

the topic particle は does not dictate the role (subject/object) of the noun it marks.

I understand は is to mark the predicate while が the subject.

What you have done here is change the meaning of the sentence.

I wasn't thinking straight. My bad.
What about the following version?
そのグループをディックが作った。
毛を、皮膚の小さな穴にある細胞が作ります。

Last of all, I thank you for your attention. Please correct every detail how trivial it is. Thanks again!

 

[Toritoribe]

Yes, I'm aware.

It didn't seem so because of your words "I had supposed whether が or をis used depended on the verb, not on the subject. If the subject takes が then it would use an intransitive verb as I had supposed such as 生える in this case." in your previous post. I, too, thought you were misunderstanding the role of が, as bentenmusume-san interpreted.

I understand は is to mark the predicate while が the subject.

What do you mean by "predicate"? Probably you are misunderstanding something.

What about the following version?
そのグループをディックが作った。
毛を、皮膚の小さな穴にある細胞が作ります。

That's the answer. That's exactly bentenmusume-san and mdchachi-san wanted to convey. The objects are topicalized in those sentences. That's why は is used instead of を.

 

[healer]

What do you mean by "predicate"?

The part of a sentence or clause containing a verb and stating something about the subject.

 

[Toritoribe]

Yes, that's right. Briefly, it's verbs, adjectives, etc.. It has completely nothing to do with は.

 

[bentenmusume]

First of all, congratulations on figuring the passage out! I'm glad that our explanations were helpful, and especially happy to see that you were able to work through the thought process for yourself and understand what you had been misunderstanding before. (This is exactly why I responded in the way I did, rather than just giving you the answer in a straightforward manner, as I believe this process of thinking through everything is important and will be more helpful to you in the end.)

Anyhow, as Toritoribe-san also says, you seem to be understanding almost everything now, as your explanations and examples are correct.

The only thing I would question/take issue with is this:

bentenmusume said:
the topic particle は does not dictate the role (subject/object) of the noun it marks.

I understand は is to mark the predicate while が the subject.

Could you explain what you mean by this? Are you still referring to the example sentences, or are you saying that は is always used to mark the predicate of a sentence?

I remembered all of a sudden that は can replace をor が for contrast or emphasis. I'm not sure if this is the case with the examples in question though.

Yes, as Toritoribe-san says, this can be more generally referred to as "topicalizing" that which is marked with は. We can't really say whether or not it's for contrast in these examples (since they're just examples with no greater context), but it could be. "Emphasis" is a word that gets tossed around a lot that I like to avoid when possible, as it can be misleading and can obscure important distinctions/differences at times (i.e. in a certain sense of the word "emphasis", one could argue that を and が can also add a sort of "emphasis" when they are used in certain ways.)

Basically, what's happening is that the sentences are being re-ordered/re-framed so that the main topic of the utterance (the "main idea" being discusssed) is the thing that's being marked with は (that group, hair, etc.) and whatever's making it (Dick, cells located within tiny holes/pores in the skin) is being introduced as supplemental information to that. It's a rhetorical device.

 

[healer]

It didn't seem so

が can mark the grammatical subject of <i>any</i> verb, transitive or intransitive.

As far as Bentenmusume-san's statement is concerned, it is very clear to me because it defines only what がdoes.

I had supposed whether が or をis used depended on the verb, not on the subject.

On second thought it is between the object and the verb whether がor をis used,nothing to do with the subject. Please help if it is not correct.

It has completely nothing to do with は.

Could you explain what you mean by this?

I was saying things in general.

I have the impression that the difference between が and は is が refers to what is stated before it which is usually the subject and は to what is after it which is everything after the topic. Could Toritoribe-san or Bentenmusume-san please correct and help me on this matter? Thanks!

 

[bentenmusume]

I have the impression that the difference between が and は is が refers to what is stated before it which is usually the subject and は to what is after it which is everything after the topic.

This statement itself is not exactly incorrect, but I want to clarify something here.

I understand は is to mark the predicate while が the subject.

Generally, when we talk about a certain particle "marking" something, we mean the noun (or noun phrase) that precedes that particle, i.e. whose role in the sentence is governed by or dictated by that particle. In this sense, は does not "mark" the predicate, because in the sentence そのグループはディックが作りました, for example, そのグループ is not the predicate.

To clarify again what my main point was, it was that the topic particle は does not dictate the grammatical role (i.e. subject, direct object, etc.) of the noun that it marks. We can see that with a simple sentence like:

田中さんがバナナを食べました。

In this sentence, 田中さん is the subject (marked with が), バナナ is the direct object (marked with を) and 食べました is the predicate.

If we choose to for rhetorical purposes, we can "topicalize" either 田中さん or バナナ by turning the sentence into:

(1) 田中さんはバナナを食べました。
or
(2) バナナは田中さんが食べました。

Both of these are valid, even though the "topic" being marked by は is the subject in (1) and the direct object in (2).
This is because は does not strictly dictate the grammatical role in the sentence being served by the noun it marks, only the role in the "discourse" (i.e. it is the "topic", the main idea that the sentence is being framed around), while the grammatical role is dictated by the contextual meaning of the rest of the sentence. (も also functions like は in this regard.)

 

[Toritoribe]

On second thought it is between the object and the verb whether がor をis used,nothing to do with the subject.

I edited your post#13 because your way of quoting looks as if "I had supposed whether が or をis used depended on the verb, not on the subject." is my original words.

You were talking about a certain type of transitive verbs that takes が as the object marker, such like 要る, できる or potential verbs, i.e., you meant "I had supposed whether が or を is used for the object depended on the transitive verb"? Even if so, "If the subject takes が then it would use an intransitive verb as I had supposed such as 生える in this case." shows that you were misunderstanding that が couldn't be used to indicate the subject for transitive verbs.

Anyway, indeed が can be used as the object marker for specific verbs, but those verbs are special, and it's not the case for your example sentence.

As for が vs. は in general, the following threads might be somewhat helpful.

を vs. は

Hi there, could someone explain me the difference between を and は in the following examples: 私は スポーツを します。 なにか スポーツは しますか。 I understand that "sport" is a direct object here, so it should always be accompanied by を...

jref.com

Exercises in Genki

EDIT Toritoribe. Aplogies. I looked for the edit before but could not find it. ５）あなたのかばんは新しいですか。 ６）あなたの部屋は小さいですか。／あなたの部屋はきれいですか。 ７）あなたのせんせいはやさしいですか。 Re EDIT2. Helped me to understand. に is similar to は. It introduces (but without creating a topic) and indeed as Genki! says 'has many uses'.

jref.com

 

[healer]

Thanks to bentenmusume-san and Toritoribe-san for your help.

は does not "mark" the predicate, because in the sentence そのグループはディックが作りました, for example, そのグループ is not the predicate.

It is difficult to point out where the predicate of a sentence is when the word order is unusual especially when はis used instead of がor をand some Japanese sentences might not even have the predicate at all.

In this sentence, 田中さん is the subject (marked with が), バナナ is the direct object (marked with を) and 食べました is the predicate.

I had supposed predicate is everything other than the subject including the object. So I was wrong upon your correction. I presume the same definition applies to Japanese language too.

Both of these are valid, even though the "topic" being marked by は is the subject in (1) and the direct object in (2).

Thanks for giving me the examples of topicalising the subject and the direct object.

Is it correct that any part of the sentence including verb or adverb and so on can be topicalised?

How to topicalise the verb in this case? For 田中さんがバナナを食べましたI have tried but it doesn't look right.
食べたのはバナナ。
When I include the subject, it looks odd.
食べたのは田中さんはバナナ。???

a certain type of transitive verbs that takes が as the object marker, such like 要る, できる or potential verbs

I have looked up the dictionary again and both 要るand できるare intransitive verbs. Do I understand you correctly? Are they like what you said before that the dictionaries are not correct in this regard?

you were misunderstanding that が couldn't be used to indicate the subject for transitive verbs.

I was wrong in that がmarks the subject or the object and has nothing to do with the verb.

indeed が can be used as the object marker for specific verbs, but those verbs are special

If you're not referring to 要るand できるyou mentioned above, could you please give some examples?

 

[Toritoribe]

some Japanese sentences might not even have the predicate at all.

Can you give us examples?

Is it correct that any part of the sentence including verb or adverb and so on can be topicalised?

No. The predicate, verb, adjective or even "noun + copula", can't be topicalized.

（田中さんが）食べたのはバナナ（です） is a different sentence from 田中さんがバナナを食べました, just like "What Tanaka ate was a banana" vs. "Tanaka ate a banana" in English.

I have looked up the dictionary again and both 要るand できるare intransitive verbs. Do I understand you correctly? Are they like what you said before that the dictionaries are not correct in this regard?

"が indicates the object for those verbs" is the most common interpretation in Japanese grammar, so those verbs are transitive in this sense. It might be similar to 歩く, 飛ぶ, 渡る, etc. These verbs are intransitive even though を is used with them.

If you're not referring to 要るand できるyou mentioned above, could you please give some examples?

I'm referring to those verbs (including potential form of verbs).