This is a follow up to this
[question](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/3122/when-
is-v%E3%81%A6%E3%81%84%E3%82%8B-the-continuation-of-action-and-when-is-it-the-
continuation-of-state?noredirect=1&lq=1) regarding the difference between てある
and ている.

So far I have come across two possible reasons to use てある:

てある and ている can both be used to show states, however with ている there is some
ambiguity with action verbs as to whether it's the state or the action that is
meant.

> Would one of the uses of てある be to make clear that it's the state and not
> the action that is meant ? Does this discard the implication of an actor ?

Another reason for using てある would be it draws attention to the fact that
there is someone who was responsible for the resulting state whereas ている is
simply stating the state.

> Why and when would someone want to draw attention to the actor of an action
> in such ?

Why is てある used in this case (top left panel):

![Hatsume Hirameki Chapter 3](https://i.stack.imgur.com/2OmT1.jpg)
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-07-24T21:04:27.760
51719
2020-08-10T12:04:15.437
21729
question
grammar word-choice て-form
Further clarification on ~てある
> てある and ている can both be used to show states,
>
> with ている there is some ambiguity with action verbs as to whether it's the
> state or the action that is meant.

Right.

> Would one of the uses of てある be to make clear that it's the state and not
> the action that is meant ?

I find you must be right that it seems only action verbs can make the てある
form; we don't normally say （×）思ってある, nor （×）違ってある.

> Does this（てある） discard the implication of an actor ?

Yes, grammatically, but I feel it's not quite that way psychologically.

> Another reason for using てある would be it draws attention to the fact that
> there is someone who was responsible for the resulting state whereas ている is
> simply stating the state.

I can't think of every possibility.  
花を[が]生けてある sounds just so right.  
花を生けている sounds more like an action in progress to me.

> Why and when would someone want to draw attention to the actor of an action
> in such ?

It's subjective, and I think when both てある and ている are possible, both most
likely have the same degree of ability for drawing attention.

> Why is てある used in this case (top left panel):
>

>> そういや昨日の夜 この位置に はこが置い **てあった** な…

My native sense tells me that to say ていた in place of the てあった, you have to
rewrite it to はこ **を** 置い **ていた** な.

The _grammar doesn't allow_ はこ **が** 置い **てあった** な _to have the action maker_.
It doesn't mean that we can think of someone who did that. In fact, I feel
very much an existence of someone who put that.

But はこ **を** 置い **ていた** な sounds more like the subject, or the action maker,
is being omitted; this is very much expected to state 'who' put the box.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-07-25T01:01:02.900
51725
2017-07-25T11:57:54.310
2020-06-17T08:18:27.500
-1
22422
51719
answer