54635
I read [this
question](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/54623/meaning-
of-%EF%BD%9E%E3%81%A6%E3%82%82%E3%82%89%E3%81%86-in-this-sentence) about the
sentence:

> 野菜をたくさん買ったので、店の人に家まで届けてもらいました。

Without thinking too hard I translated this as

> a) Because I bought a lot of vegetables the shop keeper delivered them for
> me.

I then read the rest of the OPs question and the answers, where the
translation was

> b) .... **I had** the shopkeeper deliver them.

To me, this has a different nuance. Sentence b) requires me to ask for a
service with the expectation that I will receive the service. Sentence a) is
more passive. The shopkeeper may do the service as a favour. Or maybe it's by
5 veg and get free delivery. In any case sentence a) does not require me to
request a service.

Are both a) and b) equally valid translations? If so how can the Japanese be
re-phrased to make a distinction?
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-11-20T19:53:08.140
54631
2017-11-21T09:28:46.823
2017-11-20T20:09:54.597
7944
question
nuances giving-and-receiving
Does てもらう imply that a service has been requested?
> 「野菜{やさい}をたくさん買{か}ったので、店{みせ}の人{ひと}に家{いえ}まで届{とど}けてもらいました。」

Before talking about translations, I would like to discuss what we know and do
not know from this sentence without further context or explanation regarding
this particular store/market.

**We know that:**

1) the speaker bought lots of vegetables.

2) it is someone from the store that delivered the vegetables to the speaker's
place/home. It is that someone who 届けた.

3) it is the speaker who received that service. It is the speaker who 届けてもらった.

4) the subject of the entire sentence is the unmentioned speaker. It is s/he
who both 買った and 届けてもらった.

**We do not know:**

1) if the speaker expressly requested a delivery. It might be a routine
service for the regular customers at this store.

Now, let us examine the two translations you listed.

> a) Because I bought a lot of vegetables the shop keeper delivered them for
> me.
>
> b) ....I had the shopkeeper deliver them.

I actually think both are valid translations in the sense that both express
the same general idea as to what happened and who did what.

> Does 「～～てもらう」 imply that a service has been requested?

No, it does not necessarily. The action-performer may offer one of his own
will.

The subject of the original sentence is surely the unmentioned "I" while it is
"the shop keeper" for the second half in **_your_** TL (a). I call both valid
because I know it can be quite wordy/awkward to translate the "～～してもらう"
construct into English by using the receiver of the service as the subject as
in " ** _I graciously received the kind service of having my vegetables
delivered to my door by the market personnel_**.".

As long as you uderstand the sentence structure and the meaning of the
original, it should be fine because valid translations can come in very
different forms between two linguistically-unrelated languages like Japanese
and English.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-11-20T22:45:49.097
54635
2017-11-20T23:34:22.423
2017-11-20T23:34:22.423
54631
answer
In a 〜てもらう construction, the person who does the receiving _must_ be the
subject.

If you want the _giver_ to be the subject (and the giver is not you or someone
in your group), you have to say 〜てくれる (or an equivalent).

(If the giver _is_ you or someone in your group, you would use 〜て上げる or an
equivalent.)

* * *

So _technically_ your translation isn't accurate, because you made the
shopkeeper the subject, whereas in the Japanese he couldn't have been.

But like l'électeur said, as long as you know the difference you can translate
it in a way that sounds natural.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-11-21T09:28:46.823
54648
2017-11-21T09:28:46.823
26436
54631
answer