While I can understand the meaning of the word, I cannot wrap my head around
the logic behind it.

In all similar cases, the basis of the expression is the object of the action:

  * Aを食べる ⟶ A: 食べ物

  * Aを飲む ⟶ A: 飲み物

But:

  * A **を** 入れる ⟶ n/a

  * A **に** 入れる ⟶ A: 入れ物

I have asked my native Japanese teacher, but she could only explain it by
saying that the container is still _involved_ in the action of putting things
inside it, and is thus labeled by that action. But to me the object of an
action is a quite distinct thing, and the "direction" of it all seems off in
the case of 入れ物.

Could someone explain the logic behind this? Are there other A-物 expressions
that are not based on the object? Or is this just a unique exception?
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-06-06T11:05:16.170
77841
2020-06-07T09:08:16.943
2020-06-06T17:00:15.930
33435
33552
question
expressions object
Is 入れ物 different from other A-物 expressions?
You may be right that most of the examples of nouns following the V連用形＋物
pattern usually describe the direct object of the verb. But that is far from
always the case.

One noteworthy exception that springs to mind is 生き物 (living thing). This
would notionally refer to the subject of the verb (e.g. the 私 in 私が生きる),
rather than a direct object, which this verb only rarely uses (e.g. 瞬間を生きる
meaning 'to live in the moment').

Slightly separately but possibly helpful to your understanding, I think it is
worth noting here that there are also many words following this pattern that
have very specific interpretations (unlike the examples you gave). For
instance, 吸い物 doesn't refer to anything that uses the verb 吸う (e.g. a
cigarette); rather, only a dish of a clear broth with ingredients/garnish
floating in/on it.​ **EDIT: It seems that I may have had an slightly overly
narrow view of the word 吸い物 myself. Please see comments below.**

吹き出物, meaning a 'pimple' or a 'rash', is a good example of one noun which sits
in the intersection of not being a direct object, and having a specific
meaning. A pimple is not a direct object (taking を) of the verb, as the verb
吹き出る (meaning gush out, spout, break out) is intransitive. Similarly, 吹き出物
doesn't correspond to anything that is gushing out e.g. 水が吹き出る.

So, it's not worth, in my opinion, trying to find a strict rule here regarding
it being a direct object of the verb, as opposed to some other part of speech.
It's rather just that the verb plays some role in the thing involved, and the
expression may convey a broad meaning (like 食べ物 or 飲み物) or a more specific one
(like 吸い物).
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-06-06T16:36:41.143
77850
2020-06-07T01:55:43.257
2020-06-07T01:55:43.257
33435
33435
77841
answer
This is fairly interesting because I finally couldn't find any example as
"入れ物". 乗る in 乗り物 take "に" but it won't take "を" as 入れる does. Verbs inside
贈り物(gifts), 売り物(items for sale), 置き物(figurines), 届け物(deliveries) can take both
に and を naturally but those indicate objects connected after "を" not "に". They
NEVER indicate givees, importers, saucers, and mailboxes respectively.  
So in my observation 入れ物 is an exclusive exception among the rule.  
(As @henreetee mentioned, as a different rule we have many samples assembled
as attributive verbs like 生き物 living-thing, 光り物 glittering-thing, 回り物
transiting-thing as well as 書き物 written-thing, 編み物 knitted-thing, and 忘れ物
forgotten-thing)

I guess that's because we hardly need to mention something to **put** , but
frequently have to talk about something to **put in**. (In fact it's very easy
to imagine a case that we need a bag) The practicality may have won the
grammatical rule in this case.

So I could suggest the rule below.

(1) A thing used along with attributive verbs like 生き物, 光り物, 書き物  
(2) A thing to achieve the purpose of its verb like 食べ物, 飲み物, 入れ物, 乗り物  
Basically in the case(2) the most obvious object is supposed to be taken. If
it's not obvious, the object connected after を is choosed basically, except
入れ物.
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-06-07T09:08:16.943
77865
2020-06-07T09:08:16.943
38911
77841
answer