Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
As in the dictionary Nagashima-san linked, 寝かす is the classical version of 寝かせる, which is the counterpart of 寝る in the transitive-intransitive pair. Probably it's a kind of irregular verb pair, similar to 絶つ vs. 絶える.How does 寝かす come about?
It was quoted where the ~さす short causative short form was discussed. I try to work backwards. I can only find 寝る, but no 寝く though 寝かす does exist in the dictionary.
I came across 寝かす on 〜させる (Causative)
Thanks for sharing even though your explanation wasn't quite right. I always thought saying something is better not saying anything as far as a learner is concerned. Luckily we have Toritoribe-san correct us.I want to share a couple of examples of causative
Toritoribe-san, how widely that the short causative form is used, such as 歩かす instead of 歩かせる and so on? Thanks!By the way, some regard the short causative form to be rough slang but some regard it 関西弁. What is the truth? I wonder. Could you guys please shed some light?
How to categorize this type of verbs? Do we go by finding out if the causative form of the intransitive verb in question has been treated as an separate transitive verb in a dictionary?In fact, in this type of "intransitive(-u) - transitive(-asu)" pairs, e.g. 沸く - 沸かす, 乾く - 乾かす, 減る - 減らす, 照る - 照らす, the causative form of the intransitive verbs doesn't exist.
Could you please give an example of 動かす being used as an intransitive verb? Thanks!finally it's treated as a intransitive verb now
It totally differs depending on the verb, region, generation, etc..how widely that the short causative form is used, such as 歩かす instead of 歩かせる and so on?
Not really. For example, while 滑らす is in the dictionary, 滑らせる can work as the causative form of 滑る. Those verbs are a kind of exception. They are not so many.How to categorize this type of verbs? Do we go by finding out if the causative form of the intransitive verb in question has been treated as an separate transitive verb in a dictionary?
Those verbs are more common than those exceptions I listed. It's just both the classical and modern forms are used for these verbs.What about the short causative form of verbs not in the above category? Where are they being used?
Oh, sorry, it's just a typo. I meant "finally it's treated as a transitive verb now". I revised my post.Could you please give an example of 動かす being used as an intransitive verb?
I suppose you meant ぬめらす. Incidentally I've found three different pronunciations of 滑らす. The causative form of 滑る(ぬめる) is either 滑らせる(ぬめらせる) or 滑らす(ぬめらす). And there are two separate headwords of 滑らすwhich read differently. They're ずらす and すべらす where the former is usually written using kana alone. I haven't been able to find a separate headword of 滑らす(ぬめらす).For example, while 滑らす is in the dictionary, 滑らせる can work as the causative form of 滑る.
They meant causative-potential form.What is causative-possible form?
Did you mean the contracted form instead of the long form was used in most circumstances?the causative passive ~される is a contraction. This contracted form is almost always used.
It's interesting to see that the classical form ~すis used depending on the verb, region or generation while the contracted causative-passive form ~されるderived therefrom ended up much more prevalently used.the causative ~す is the classical form
Yes.Did you mean the contracted form instead of the long form was used in most circumstances?
Indeed, the contracted causative-passive form ~される is seemingly derived from the passive form of the classical causative form ~す, but it actually is not (well, at least not always) so. That's exactly why I said "different stories", and ~される is broadly used even for verbs the causative ~す is rarely used.the contracted causative-passive form ~されるderived therefrom
causative-passive form
A few set of textbooks that I had used didn't seem to mention causative-potential form at all. Even verb conjugation tables that came with dictionaries I came across didn't refer to causative-potential but causative-passive. I wonder why. Is it actually used? I can see this form and the causative-passive form are the same in structure. Which one to be interpreted depends on the context, doesn't it? Isn't it hard to guess which it could mean?Exactly, 泳がせられる/読ませられる can be read both as the causative potential and the causative passive.
So the long form is ONLY for causative potential while the short form ONLY for causative-passive, aren't they?But, actually, 泳がされる/読まされる is far more often used as the causative passive.
In order to express causative-passive without ambiguity for those don't have short forms, those end with す and 一段動詞, we need to word it like what you did above with 話す, don't we? Does it always work with all the verbs grammatically, i.e. masu-form + をさせられる?話[はな]させられる is not incorrect, but 話[はなし]をさせられる is far more commonly used.
By the way, how is 作りたて made up grammatically and what does it mean? Thanks again Toritoribe-san.PMで作りたての短歌を見せます。
It's the same reason why you can't find any other conjugation forms of causative forms other than causative-passive form. For example, you would rarely see the terms causative-te form, causative-imperative form, causative-negative form, etc.. This doesn't mean these forms don't exist, or are never used, of course. Causative forms perform as an ichidan verb, as you must know, so they conjugate like an ichidan verb, therefore they have the -te form, imperative form, negative form. etc. other than the passive from. It's just causative-passive has special grammatical functions, and therefore it's often mentioned.A few set of textbooks that I had used didn't seem to mention causative-potential form at all. Even verb conjugation tables that came with dictionaries I came across didn't refer to causative-potential but causative-passive. I wonder why. Is it actually used?
It reminds me of your previous question about 風 vs. 風邪. As I explained previously, even if they are the same in pronunciation, the context tells which is which, and if the speaker feels that it could be confusing, they would use other expressions to avoid being misinterpreted. Again, we use a language to say or write what we want to convey. If the speaker/writer wants to use 読ませられる as the causative-potential form, but they feel it could be confusing in the context, they would choose other expressions, for example 読ませることができる, 読ませうる or like that instead.I can see this form and the causative-passive form are the same in structure. Which one to be interpreted depends on the context, doesn't it? Isn't it hard to guess which it could mean?
The former can be both potential and passive, or even honorific in some cases (e.g. ある --> あらせられる), but the latter is only for passive. It's similar to ら抜き言葉 in the potential form of ichidan verbs.So the long form is ONLY for causative potential while the short form ONLY for causative-passive, aren't they?
It depends on the context, verb, situation, etc., as I wrote.In order to express causative-passive without ambiguity for those don't have short forms, those end with す and 一段動詞, we need to word it like what you did above with 話す, don't we?
No. 話をさせられる works because 話 is a noun. On the other hand, for example 落としをさせられる doesn't make sense as the causative-passive form of 落とす because 落とし is not commonly used as a noun.Does it always work with all the verbs grammatically, i.e. masu-form + をさせられる?
たて【立て】 の解説By the way, how is 作りたて made up grammatically and what does it mean?
Thank you Toritoribe-san for your patient and detailed explanation.It's just causative-passive has special grammatical functions, and therefore it's often mentioned.
I'm not sure what conjugation this is.読ませうる
Is this form very common in spoken language only and not in written language at all?ら抜き言葉 in the potential form
I had supposed the masu-stem of all verbs can be used as nouns. Can we say 落とすことをさせられる then?for example 落としをさせられる doesn't make sense as the causative-passive form of 落とす because 落とし is not commonly used as a noun.
You can think you already know all the conjugation forms of verbs, in other words, if you come across a form of a verb you think you don't know, you can presume that it's a combination of a conjugation form of the verb and a suffix, an auxiliary verb, the second verb of a compound verb(including its conjugation form) or like that.I'm not sure what conjugation this is.
It's also used in written language if it's in colloquial forms (novels, essays, etc.). It's considered grammatically wrong, though.Is this form very common in spoken language only and not in written language at all?
落とし can work as a noun in set expressions(e.g. 落としにかかる), compound words(e.g. 厄落とし) or like that, but it doesn't always work well for every cases, unlike 話. That's the difference.I had supposed the masu-stem of all verbs can be used as nouns.
Yes.Can we say 落とすことをさせられる then?
I did dissect the word 読ませうる into various possible components, i.e. 読ま-せうる and 読ませ-うる. Unfortunately I haven't learnt any meaningful suffix like せうる or うる. Neither did I find anything in a dictionary for them.You can think you already know all the conjugation forms of verbs
In fact I had come across and learnt たて being used to indicate activity only just occurred. I just didn't recall at the time. I did have a quick glance at a dictionary but such definition somehow eluded me. Thank you for the refresher.you said you didn't know how 作りたて
By the way, what is the meaning of 落としにかかる? There are various definitions for both 落とし and かかる.e.g. 落としにかかる
Really?Neither did I find anything in a dictionary for them.
Really??I had Googled for "うる suffix" but nothing meaningful came up.
I totally agree with bentenmusume-san. I don't think that it's wrong to ask someone about words you don't understand, but I believe that there are cases you can get the meaning by yourself relatively easily. In fact, your way of parsing 読ませうる is correct. It's OK just to check dictionaries or google search results more carefully.I'm not trying to be dismissive, but I think some of these things are easier to research/look up than you seem to believe they are.
Thanks Toritoribe-san. I was looking for something like those standard conjugations I used to get.there are cases you can get the meaning by yourself relatively easily.