What's new
Learn Japanese with JapanesePod101.com

Confused with who is させる whom

4 Apr 2014
I remember having hard time getting hang of correct particle usage with causative. And now it comes again.

お母さんが子供たち朝ご飯を食べさせました。 - Mother made her children eat breakfast.
社長プロジェクトを受けさせました。- The CEO let me take the project
Why is に used in both cases, despite of opposite roles of 子供たち and 社長 in the sentences?
Where did you get the English for the second one?

If that's correct, then I'm confused by the Japanese version as well.
Last edited:
Yeah, the second sentence means "I/We made the CEO take the project." Thus, it's simply the example sentence in the book is wrong.
Google search results suggest you are using An Introduction to Japanese Syntax, Grammar and Language by Michiel Kamermans, right? Another example right before your quote 妹に起こさせました。"(I) had (my younger) sister wake me up." is also not good. 妹に起こしてもらいました is far more common for that case. 妹に起こさせました。 is more likely used for "(I) made (my younger) sister wake up someone else." I also found ラジオを壊てしまった。 in the book, so it would be better not to believe the examples in the book too much.
I am so glad to hear the example was in error!

From the preface:

"Japanese grammar book that I started writing while I was still taking classes in Japanese..."

The poster child for the phenomenon of the internet dragging the quality of Japanese learning down due to the blind not being able to suppress their urge to lead the blind.
Last edited:
I guess it's 自業自得 for me then. Should have deemed that reference book unreliable in the first place.

It's just i'm at a loss right now. Proper textbooks that i've finished so far cover the grammar up to N3, maybe halfway to N2 (i'm being subjective here, since i haven't looked into what to expect from N2 yet).
日本語総まとめN3 was quite helpful in consolidating already acquired knowledge. But studying new pieces of grammar from 日本語総まとめN2 seems like a bad idea.

Now i have that "Classical Japanese. Grammar" by Haruo Shirane". And while the ability to understand 古文 sounds alluring, i don't think that's the right thing to prioritize right now.
Anyway i'm getting my hands on みんなの日本語中級 tomorrow. Hope it'll help me stop my whining.
Do you already have the A Dictionary of [Basic/Intermediate/Advanced] Grammar series?

If you're around or approaching N2 and have a good grasp of the fundamentals, then the main thing you need is just tons and tons of additional exposure...and maybe a little help from a reference book here and there.

Read, read, read then read some more.
Do you already have the A Dictionary of [Basic/Intermediate/Advanced] Grammar series?
I am looking at them right now. They do look all-encompassing. Will definitely procure the whole series.
And thanks for advice Mike, appreciate that.
There's also the Kanzen Master series of textbooks. It's specifically aimed at people taking the JLPT but can no doubt also be useful for others. It covers grammar, vocabulary and kanji as well as reading and listening comprehension.

I went through the N1 books myself and especially liked the grammar book. Explanations are clear and concise and come with examples for the various usages of each pattern. The only thing I didn't grasp was the section about when to use は vs が :)
There's also the Kanzen Master series of textbooks.
I reckon Kanzen Master is a set of 聴解・文法・漢字・読解 and 語彙 just like Sou Matome. Unless there's some overwhelming advantage to Kanzen Master i will stick to Sou Matome series, simply because the structure is familiar to me, and i was satisfied with Sou Matome N3.
But thanks for sharing, lanthas. Maybe i'll consider KMN2 if i feel like SMN2 isn't enough.
I am familiar with the Kamermans book, and I quite like it. I especially like how it explains the origins of many expressions. For me, it is helpful to have that understanding when learning.

I know that the author solicits feedback, including from native speakers, and is constantly updating his work, so I suspected that the erroneous example sentences mentioned in the earlier posts in this thread were from an earlier version of the work. I checked the latest version on line, and in fact all of the sentences in question have been revised and updated.

It is unfortunate that the author chose to put content online that contained errors, as the nature of the Internet is such that old content somehow manages to find a way to stick around.

Contrary to the impression given by others posting here, I feel that this is quite a valuable work, so I feel the need to defend it. I apologize if this defense interferes with the narrative that has been constructed here, or in any way detracts at all from the sense of self-satisfaction felt by those who disparage and deride it.
You may use my name when speaking of me.

"Unfortunate" is a generously mild term; "irresponsible" seems more apt.
I don't know if this is the latest version, but the errors are not perfectly fixed yet in the edition of June 4, 2013.

"(I) broke the radio... (and that's something I wish I hadn't)."

In this line, it should be obvious why the fact that 壊せる, "break", having been completed is a bad thing.

The example sentence is changed to 壊してしまった correctly, but the dictionary form in the explanation is still 壊せる, not the correct one 壊.

"My (younger) sister woke me up."

に is changed to が here, but the problem I pointed out previously is not solved yet. As I wrote, 妹が起こしてくれました (or the passive of adversity 妹に起こされました for when the speaker didn't want to be done) is far more commonly used for this case, and 妹が起こさせました。 means more likely "My (younger) sister made me(or someone) wake someone (or me) up".

"(The) CEO let me take on (the) project."

This sentence could technically also mean "The CEO caused me to take on the project" or "The CEO made me take on the project", so context is all-important. However, in most cases where it could either be a forced action or a permission, it's usually a permission.

I don't agree with this explanation. Other expressions such like 任せてくれました or やらせてくれました are far more common for a permission, and 受けさせました is more likely mostly used for a forced action.

I haven't read the whole book, so I can't judge the quality of it, but at least these examples and explanations are not decent.
Top Bottom