[In this thread on japan-guide.com](http://www.japan-
guide.com/forum/quereadisplay.html?0+27379), we find two seemingly
contradictory statements concerning the conditional particle `ば`.

One poster states:

If A & B are the same subject, B must be non-volitional. Otherwise, B can be
volitional, e.g.:

> [日本]{にほん}へ[行]{い}けば、[富士山]{ふじさん}がみられます

Another poster states that `ば` were used in expressions which reflect the
speaker's will, judgment, permission, view, order or request, e.g.:

> [安]{やす}ければ、[買]{か}います  
>  [早]{はや}く[起]{お}きられれば、 [電話]{でんわ}をかけます/します

How do we reconcile these two statements?

Both do seem correct on their own.
CC BY-SA 4.0
2014-11-13T07:43:47.700
19489
2022-07-25T00:52:20.850
2022-07-25T00:52:20.850
9831
7334
question
grammar conditionals
Using conditional 'ば'
Gramatically there is no restriction on volatility. Practically, however, the
first presenter’s rule is partially correct.

If you say:

> × 早く起きれば、電話します。

Japanese listener thinks:

> It is you that decides whether to wake up early or not. Thus, you must know
> whether you will make a call or not.

On the other hand:

> ⚪︎ 早く起き **られれ** ば、電話します。

is acceptable, because you don't know yet whether you can wake up early or
not.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-11-13T13:44:54.283
19497
2014-11-13T13:44:54.283
6554
19489
answer