54069
I have noticed that there are a number of verbs in Japanese which have common
alternative forms, especially potential form, but these forms have identical
meanings.

One of these is 焼く, which appears to have similar if not identical meaning to
its potential form 焼ける, although _burning down_ and _being able to burn down_
seem to be very different things from an English perspective.

Words which behave similarly include 続く/ 続ける, 入る/入れる, 受く/受ける, and I'm sure
there are many more examples I've seen that don't come to mind right now.

What is the reason for these words having unchanged meanings despite seemingly
changed forms? Are they even really etymologically related?
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-10-26T20:04:35.810
54067
2017-10-26T20:38:21.420
2017-10-26T20:16:05.877
22689
question
meaning etymology suffixes transitivity false-etymology
Verbs Which Change Form but not Meaning
These are transitive and intransitive forms of verbs. English has them too,
but often they're identical. Transitive verbs take "direct" objects,
intransitive ones don't.

I raise my hand vs My hand rises

In English, raise is transitive, and rise is intransitive. Similarly,

何かを入れる vs 何かが入る

入れる is transitive, 入る is intransitive. Case markings make it pretty easy to
find if there's an object.

Without context you can guess. Typically intransitive ends in ~consonant+ある or
~consonant+う. Transitive might end in ~える or ~す.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-10-26T20:38:21.420
54069
2017-10-26T20:38:21.420
54067
answer