What's new

寝かす

healer

Sempai
13 May 2019
687
10
28
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.
 
There is no such word as 寝く because the verb 寝る (neru) doesn't conjugate like that.

寝かす (to put to sleep) is a different verb from 寝る, and not the causative form of 寝る, even though it seems like it should be.
Grammatically, 寝かす is an irregular "godan" verb (I think).

I'm a bit over my head here. Maybe one of our Japanese grammar experts can explain better.
 
example
1.赤ん坊を寝かす。
2.患者をベットに寝かす。
3.ロッカーを寝かして運び出す。
4.商品を倉庫に寝かしておく。
5.味噌を寝かしておく。

meaning
1. 眠りにつかせる。寝つくようにする。
2. からだを横たえさせる。
3. 縦のものを横にする。横に倒す。
4. 品物や金銭などを活用せずに手元にとどめておく。
5. 発酵・熟成させるために、一定の温度でしばらくそのままにしておく。

translation
1. I let you fall asleep. I fall asleep.
2. I let you lay a body.
3. I lay a vertical thing. I defeat it aside.
4. I leave it at the hand without utilizing an article or money.
5. I keep it intact at constant temperature for a while to let you ferment and mature.

 
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.
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.

Incidentally, there also is another transitive verb 絶やす for this verb pair. Both 絶やす and 絶える are from a classical intransitive verb 絶ゆ.
e.g.
classical 増ゆ --> intransitive 増える - transitive 増やす
classical 燃ゆ --> intransitive 燃える - transitive 燃やす


The causative form of 寝る is 寝させる, as in the wikipedia page Majestic-san linked.
 
Thanks everyone for the inputs.
I came across 寝かす on 〜させる (Causative) where the causative form only was discussed. 寝かす was mentioned in the same breath as 泳がす and 沸かす and I understand the latter two were also the causative form of 泳ぐ and 沸く respectively. Having read all your inputs, it sound like the web site was wrong in this regard.

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?
 
す is the classical causative auxiliary verb for causative, which is the etymology of the causative suffix せる. See the following explanation in a dictionary.

す の解説
[助動][せ|せ|す|する|すれ|せよ]四段・ナ変・ラ変動詞の未然形に付く。
[補説]平安時代以降、漢文訓読文の「しむ」に対し、主に和文系統の文章に用いられた。中世以降、下一段化して、現代語の「せる」となる。


It's just these classical forms still remain in some dialects.

泳がす and 沸かす are transitive verbs, as the writer of the site mentioned, but also has a nuance of the causative form of the transitive counterpart (泳ぐ and 沸く, respectively). Please refer to the following discussion. (It's partially Japanese since I talked with a Japanese member.)


As I wrote there, it's often useless to think about these grammar issues only in modern Japanese. It's necessary to analyze classical Japanese by using real classical document/texts.
 
I came across 寝かす on 〜させる (Causative)

Healer,

I want to share a couple of examples of causative (〜させる) I have found to be useful.

Makasenasai. (まかせなさい。) The meaning is, "Leave it up to me. I will take care of it (for you)."

Mou kaesasete moraitain desu keredomo. (もう かえさせて もらいたいん です けれども。) (もう帰させて貰いたいんですけれども。) This is an extremely polite way of saying, "I'm going home now. Goodbye."
 
The causative form of 帰る is 帰せる since 帰る is a godan verb even though it ends with "-eru". かえせる is the causative form of ichidan verbs かえる (変える or 換える/替える/代える).
cf.
ねる
練る(godan) --> 練らせる
寝る(ichidan) --> 寝させる

きる
切る(godan) --> 切らせる
着る(ichidan) --> 着させる


Also, 任せる(まかせる) is not the causative form, either, even though it ends with ーせる. This is just a transitive verb. The causative form まかせる does exist, but it's for 巻く "to wind up", 蒔く "to sow (seeds)", etc..
 
I want to share a couple of examples of 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.
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?
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!
 
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.
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?
What about the short causative form of verbs not in the above category? Where are they being used?
 
how widely that the short causative form is used, such as 歩かす instead of 歩かせる and so on?
It totally differs depending on the verb, region, generation, etc..

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?
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.

What about the short causative form of verbs not in the above category? Where are they being used?
Those verbs are more common than those exceptions I listed. It's just both the classical and modern forms are used for these verbs.

Could you please give an example of 動かす being used as an intransitive verb?
Oh, sorry, it's just a typo. I meant "finally it's treated as a transitive verb now". I revised my post.
 
For example, while 滑らす is in the dictionary, 滑らせる can work as the causative form of 滑る.
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).

I found out the short causative form of a verb when I first stumbled upon the short causative-passive form of a verb i.e. 歩かされる while I expected 歩かせられる. I asked around, 歩かされた ケンイチが厚板の上を歩かされた! https://www.tofugu.com/japanese-grammar/particle-wo/. One native Japanese said they never used the long form which I had learnt. I didn't quite follow when they referred to the latter as causative-possible form. I googled but couldn't find such term. What is causative-possible form? I wonder.

To cut the question short, would you say all these short forms, be they causative or causative-passive, are non-standard Japanese? The two set of textbooks I used before didn't refer to them at all. Some small dictionaries I came across didn't show the short conjugation either.

Thanks for your kind attention.
 
I meant すべらす. ぬめらす is not commonly used.

The causative ~す and the causative passive of godan verbs ~される are different stories.


As in the wikipedia page linked above, the causative passive ~される is a contraction. This contracted form is almost always used. On the other hand, the causative ~す is the classical form, and it depends on the verb, region, generation, etc. which, ~す or ~せる, is more common, as I already wrote.

What is causative-possible form?
They meant causative-potential form.
 
the causative passive ~される is a contraction. This contracted form is almost always used.
Did you mean the contracted form instead of the long form was used in most circumstances?
the causative ~す is the classical form
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.
 
Did you mean the contracted form instead of the long form was used in most circumstances?
Yes.

the contracted causative-passive form ~されるderived therefrom
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.
 
causative-passive form
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.
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?
But, actually, 泳がされる/読まされる is far more often used as the causative passive.
So the long form is ONLY for causative potential while the short form ONLY for causative-passive, aren't they?
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.
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?
PMで作りたての短歌を見せます。
By the way, how is 作りたて made up grammatically and what does it mean? Thanks again Toritoribe-san.
 
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'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.

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?
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.

So the long form is ONLY for causative potential while the short form ONLY for causative-passive, aren't they?
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.

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?
It depends on the context, verb, situation, etc., as I wrote.

Does it always work with all the verbs grammatically, i.e. masu-form + をさせられる?
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.

By the way, how is 作りたて made up grammatically and what does it mean?
たて【立て】 の解説
[接尾]
1 動詞の連用形に付いて、その動作が終わったばかりであることを表す。「炊き―の御飯」「でき―のビル」

 
It's just causative-passive has special grammatical functions, and therefore it's often mentioned.
Thank you Toritoribe-san for your patient and detailed explanation.
読ませうる
I'm not sure what conjugation this is.
ら抜き言葉 in the potential form
Is this form very common in spoken language only and not in written language at all?
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.
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?
 
I'm not sure what conjugation this is.
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.

For example, you said you didn't know how 作りたて was made up in your previous post. However, you must be able to recognize 作り in it. I believe you are familiar with this conjugation form, i.e., the pre-masu form of 作る. Then, you can look up たて, find it in your dictionary, and finally get the correct meaning of the word 作りたて.

By using this method, I think it's not so difficult for you to identify what 読ませうる is.

Is this form very common in spoken language only and not in written language at all?
It's also used in written language if it's in colloquial forms (novels, essays, etc.). It's considered grammatically wrong, though.

I had supposed the masu-stem of all verbs can be used as nouns.
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.

Can we say 落とすことをさせられる then?
Yes.
 
You can think you already know all the conjugation forms of verbs
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.

I asked around. A native told me the following.
読ませる made sb read
読ませうる possible to make sb read
However I understood to change an ichidan verb to a potential verb is to change る to られる. How does 読ませうる come about? I wonder. I had Googled for "うる suffix" but nothing meaningful came up.
you said you didn't know how 作りたて
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.
e.g. 落としにかかる
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.
 
1.
This is a different form from the standard potential form. Search for "Japanese grammar える うる". You may also be familiar with the relatively common verb あり得る.

2.

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.
 
Neither did I find anything in a dictionary for them.
Really?

得る
Verb unspecified, Suffix
1. to be able to ...; can ...after the -masu stem of a verb


うる 得る
…し得る
〈可能〉 can do; be able to do; be capable of doing; 〈許可〉 may do ⇒できる


うる【得る】 の解説
2 動詞の連用形に付いて、…することができる、可能である、の意を表す。


I had Googled for "うる suffix" but nothing meaningful came up.
Really??

The following sites are all in the first page of the search results.

得る, うる
uru
JLPT LEVEL 3
Definition suffix
(after the -masu stem of a verb) to be able to ... can


うる
Japanese
【得る】
[suffix] be able to, -able


得る
uru
JLPT N2
Meaning
able to do


得る【うる】
suffix:
to be able to ...; can ... - after the -masu stem of a verb


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.
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.
 
there are cases you can get the meaning by yourself relatively easily.
Thanks Toritoribe-san. I was looking for something like those standard conjugations I used to get.

得る never means "capable or able" but "possible only", doesn't it?

Can I take it when あり得る simply means "possible" we say ありうる? When it means "possible to have" we say ありえる like the example below?
1つのミスが、会社を倒産に導くこともあり得ることだ。気を抜かずに、頑張っていこう。
I have found suffix to verbs mostly reads える though うる pops up sometimes but the former is much more prevalent. Am I correct? I have come across なり得る read both なりえる and なりうる. 得ない reads えない only as far as I can see.

Incidentally I would like to ask the difference in usage between こと and もの. こと after plain verb nominalize the verb. What about adjectives? Do we have to use もの like the example below? Can we say ややこしいこととなり得る in the example below? Can we say ものになり得る instead of ものと...
混雑した地下鉄は、初めて乗る人々にとっては、とてもややこしいものとなり得る。

Does it make sense if I say どんなもの instead in the following sentence? Is でも stronger than も for the meaning of "even" in there?
君の話を信じるよ。だってこの世界ではどんなことでも起こり得るから。

Lastly, can both こと and もの be used to refer to both physical things and abstract things?
 
Back
Top Bottom