Some tense problems:

[BlackWhiteOrange]

Question 1.
I know the passive voice, ie the conjugation of kaku (to write) as kakareru.

So "Hon wa ore o kakareru" means "the book is written by me."

what if I want to do this in the past or negative tense, eg:

"The book was not written by me."

"The book was written by me"

"The book is not written by me"

Question 2. Suffixes with the past tense.

Please tell me if the following conjugations are correct:

"Kakanaide-sugiru" meaning "Did not write too much"
"Kakanaide-tai" meaning "Did not want to write"

Question 3.

Please tell me what the difference between "kaite aru" and "kaite shimau" is.


Thank you in advance for your help.

[nice gaijin]

If kaku is to write, how do you expect to conjugate it to mean "read?"

yomu is the verb for read. The passive form is yomareru

あの／その／この　本は私に読まれた。
(ano/sono/kono) hon ha watashi ni yomareta
this/that/that (needed to specify the subject) book was read by me

to make it negative past (from present-perfect), yomareta conjugates to yomarenakatta

[BlackWhiteOrange]

Thanks, I fixed my stupid mistake.

Thanks for the help. Do you know any place I could find some seriously in-depth verb conjugation tables with all these obscure(ish) tenses because I'm having serious trouble finding anything near comprehensive.

Thanks for the help.

[Mike Cash]

You're getting your cart out too far in front of your horse. Need to go back and learn the basic conjugations before you go on to the passive voice.

(And you need "ni" instead of "o" when indicating who performed the action in passive voice).

Question 2 examples are not correct.

Question 3, like passive, is best left for later.

Rather than looking for tables on the net, I would like to suggest you give thought to a standard textbook based approach to learning Japanese. The pedagogical structure in textbooks is more conducive to thorough learning than the scattergun effect one oftens sees from folks who pick up pieces here and there on the web.

[BlackWhiteOrange]

@Mike Cash: I understand what you mean, but I eschewed the textbook approach precisely because it is so 'scattergun." There's grammar followed by vocabulary followed by cultural tips, in a hodgepodge mess.

I want to learn the grammar first. All of it. It's the easiest way, and I know this because Japanese is the fourth language I've learnt (or rather, am learning.) If you know of a textbook that uses this approach please tell me of it.

Thanks, again, for the help.

[shikyo]

I want to learn the grammar first. All of it. It's the easiest way, and I know this because Japanese is the fourth language I've learnt (or rather, am learning.) If you know of a textbook that uses this approach please tell me of it.
If you want books about grammar I can really recommend both "A Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar" and "A Dictionary of Intermediate Japanese Grammar" both written by Seiichi Makino and Michio Tsutsui. Although, as the name applies, they're more like dictionarys than textbooks (they contain no exercises, etc) but they have good explanations, good points, good examples and what's most: alot of grammar :-).

Note the basic one contains romaji, the intermediate does not, but it contains furigana.

(Edit: The Genki serie is a really good textbook and workbook imo)

[Mike Cash]

But in properly and professionally crafted texts there is a pedagogical structure. Lesson 2 builds on Lesson 1. Lesson 3 builds on 2 and 1, etc etc etc. That is precisely the opposite of "scattergun".

What you have picked up so far, as evidenced by the initial post in this thread, is a hodge-podge mess of bits and chunks of grammatical points. Learning them in a rational, linear, pedagogically sound manner would obviate the need for your Question 2. As it is you picked up a little here, a little there, and are trying to force disparate chunks together.

One of the people currently learning Japanese would be a better source for what textbook would be good. I gave up studying Japanese years ago.

[Elizabeth]

Please tell me if the following conjugations are correct:

"Kakanaide-sugiru" meaning "Did not write too much"
"Kakanaide-tai" meaning "Did not want to write"
They are not correct.

And by the way, good luck finding your way through "all the grammar" without the vocabulary that books teach to enable you to understand these constructions.

[Buntaro]

BlackWhiteOrange,

In-depth verb conjugation tables? Here are two great books.

201 Japanese Verbs

http://www.amazon.com/Japanese-Described-Inflections-Aspects-Formality/dp/0812003918/ref=sr_1_1/002-0165030-5672021?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1186072256&sr=8-1

501 Japanese Verbs

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_b/104-6139961-3934363?initialSearch=1&url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=501+Japanese+Verbs&Go.x=12&Go.y=11 (http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_b/104-6139961-3934363?initialSearch=1&url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=501+Japanese+Verbs&Go.x=12&Go.y=11)

[BlackWhiteOrange]

I'll be sure to check out the books you recommended. Thanks for the advice.

Just a point:
And by the way, good luck finding your way through "all the grammar" without the vocabulary that books teach to enable you to understand these constructions.

That's one of the reasons I like learning grammar: Before learning grammar a small amount of vocabulary has to be learnt, but never any more than the bare minimum. For example, to learn verb conjugation only a small amount of verbs has to be learnt (one verb for each regular verb ending and the commonest irregulars, though I admit more unusual irregular verbs have to be learnt later.)

Same goes for adjective, etc.

[Elizabeth]

I'll be sure to check out the books you recommended. Thanks for the advice.
Just a point:
That's one of the reasons I like learning grammar: Before learning grammar a small amount of vocabulary has to be learnt, but never any more than the bare minimum. For example, to learn verb conjugation only a small amount of verbs has to be learnt (one verb for each regular verb ending and the commonest irregulars, though I admit more unusual irregular verbs have to be learnt later.)
Same goes for adjective, etc.
Oh, if all you're interested in are conjugations than I agree. You can memorize those from one of the books Buntaro suggested. That'll take a full few hours or days to get down. Most other grammar points are specific to particular words and forms that will need to be learned in the context to have any hope of retaining. :okashii:

[Taiko666]

If you're serious enough to learn, part are not inclined to tackle a programme of stuctured course work, I recommend this book.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Oxford-Japanese-Grammar-Verbs-Dictionary/dp/0198603827

[Charles Barkley]

I recommend this book, no need messing around with the rest of the language if you just want to learn the grammar, and this book will help you dive right in:
完全マスター日本語能力試験文法問題対策

Boy do I feel embarassed, forgot to mention its the green one, ２級。No sense wasting your time with the other books. And good on you for sticking to your own way of studying Japanese. You know what works best for you, no use listening to people who became japanese experts the hard way.

[Elizabeth]

I recommend this book, no need messing around with the rest of the language if you just want to learn the grammar, and this book will help you dive right in:
完全マスター日本語能力試験文法問題対策
Boy do I feel embarassed, forgot to mention its the green one, ２級。No sense wasting your time with the other books. And good on you for sticking to your own way of studying Japanese. You know what works best for you, no use listening to people who became japanese experts the hard way.No one who has replied so far has criticized the use of grammar books per se. I would question relying on them with no other input, but that is largely dependent on ones study goals. Obviously a language cannot be understand without a solid foundation in its grammar.

What the OP was calling hodgepodge were normal texts with dialogues, vocab and grammar explanations in a comprehensive package. ２級 grammar dictionaries are still going to presuppose a high level of vocab and reading comprehension.

Judging by the sentences we were presented, "the cart before the horse" seems a very apt metaphor in this case indeed.


(And you need "ni" instead of "o" when indicating who performed the action in passive voice).
There is a more recent usage which allows for "o" marking "impersonal objects" + passive. That's pretty much the extent of my knowledge of it being new, one example from Japanese for Busy People III :

うちの前に高いビルを建てられた。

[Mike Cash]

Thanks, Elizabeth. But please note that in the example the performer of the action isn't indicated, in contrast with the example given by the OP.

[Elizabeth]

Thanks, Elizabeth. But please note that in the example the performer of the action isn't indicated, in contrast with the example given by the OP.
Oh, sorry for the bad reading. That's very true. It substitutes as the subject for が　or は、not に。　

から　is sometimes used with passives to indicate the actor "giving" or "imposing" an action on the object but that doesn't apply here, either..:relief:

[Charles Barkley]

No one who has replied so far has criticized the use of grammar books per se. I would question relying on them with no other input, but that is largely dependent on ones study goals. Obviously a language cannot be understand without a solid foundation in its grammar.

What the OP was calling hodgepodge were normal texts with dialogues, vocab and grammar explanations in a comprehensive package. ２級 grammar dictionaries are still going to presuppose a high level of vocab and reading comprehension.

Judging by the sentences we were presented, "the cart before the horse" seems a very apt metaphor in this case indeed.


Perhaps I kept the sarcasm a little too vague. I completely agree with all the aforementioned criticisms. I have never really seen Japanese like that the OP wrote--it is utterly indecipherable. I struggle with using the passive form now and I have been studying lights out for over a year now. Its so context specific that internalizing it...well, you of course know what I am talking about.

I wish the OP did though. OP: where did you get the idea that studying only the grammar first is a good idea? What language were you learning? Were you living in a 'that language only' environment? I am genuinely curious about how you succeeded in learning a language (and which language it was) using the methods you are describing. I think if you want to learn Japanese, you are going to have to learn:

a) how to listen to those who have studied before you
b) take their criticism
c) have an extreme amount of patience and
d) engage in the language in as varied and realistic ways as possible

You seem to have none of these traits now--I mean look at yourself, you are shooting down the ideas of very experienced learners and stubbornly contending that you know what you are doing when what you have written tells us all otherwise. Learn some humility, start from the basics, and realize learning is going to be a long process no matter how you cut it. Come back, post some more stuff, and let us help you. But do that: Let us help you.

[Mike Cash]

Charles, he never said he had succeeded at learning other languages. Go back and look at exactly what he said and reflect on how people use language in subtle ways to make others think something that was never said.