26132
I'm confused about the difference between the passive form and the てある form.

> 飲み物はもう **買ってあります** 。
>
> The drinks have already been bought.
>
> 飲み物はもう **買われました** 。
>
> The drinks were already bought.

Are my translations correct? Is it that verb-てある means 'verb **has been**
done', whereas, verb-passive means 'verb **was** done'? Are there any other
subtleties? Thanks.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-08-02T16:42:35.067
26126
2019-02-06T03:31:32.703
2020-06-17T08:18:27.500
-1
7944
question
grammar passive-voice
Difference between passive form and てある
> Are my translations correct?

I could not say 'no', but as a Japanese-speaker, I do know that you basically
would never hear one of us say 「飲{の}み物{もの}はもう買{か}われました。」 to mean anything. It
certainly does not mean the same as 「飲み物はもう買って **あります** 」.

「飲み物はもう買って **あります** 」 is a 100% natural-sounding sentence so I do not have to
**_think_** about what it could mean. It could only mean one thing: "I/We
bought drinks some time ago for a specific purpose and they are still here
waiting to be consumed."

With 「飲み物はもう **買われました** 。」, however, one would have to think hard about what
it could possibly mean as it is such a strange-sounding sentence to the native
ear. It could mean something like "The drinks that I wanted to buy had already
been bought by another person.", but to say that it would be more natural to
use 「買われていました」 than to use 「買われました」.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-08-02T22:39:30.520
26132
2015-08-02T22:39:30.520
26126
answer
To the questioner, with my today ( Aug 3 )'s comment, I made a **HUGE
MISTAKE** which could not only perplex you but in resulting to tell you a
**COMPLETE LIE.**.

## Kindly endure to read the full sentence, **I am CERTAIN you can have at
least some clear image about the ( Japanese passive voice ).**

Now, I am afraid I am not so sure how you made such a conclusion like this.

> **From previous questions I've come to understand that Japanese favours a
> first person subject.**

But I can not "despise" you. Granted, let us look at [**an example at another
thread.**](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8F%97%E5%8B%95%E6%85%8B)

But **thorough the discourse with you, I think I have figured it out**

Mr. l'électeur answers,

> 「Aの質問は私に、そしてBの質問はマサコさんによって答えられました。」
>
> = "Question A was answered **by me** and Question B, **by Masako.** "

With the comment about 10 hours ago, I said in this **passive voice** ( I am
sorry not **passive -- "mode"--** but the **passive -- "voice"--**), the
eventual, the actual, the de facto **subjects** are Aの質問は or either, Bの質問は.
**But that was a HUGE MISTAKE TO LEAD YOU TO THE COMPLETE MISUNDERSTANDINGS**
with an apology.

They are, **instead** , the **direct -- "object"-- ( not the "subject" with
sorry )**. The reason will be developed hereunder so kindly take a look with
thank you in advance.

As I quoted as below, the Wiki's explanation,

>
> 日本語の受身は助動詞「れる」「られる」（文語では「る」「らる」）を用いて表現する。英語の受動文などに相当する直接受身と、英語などには見られない間接受身がある。

Translation

> The Japanese passive voice uses the auxiliary 「れる」「られる」（ in literary style
> 「る」,「らる」 ) to express the passive voice. Note there is a **direct passive
> voice, which is equivalent to the English passive** and another, an
> **indirect passive voice** which **does not exist in English.**.

I think the above example falls into the **direct voice**. The reason is
below.

From the very same source

> 間接受身は間接的に影響（ふつうは主語から見て悪影響）を被るものを主語に立てる表現であり、通常、主語は人間である。

Translation :

> The **indirect voice** , which takes the form to express an **influence** (
> **--- "generally unfavorable influence"---** ) onto the subject, and the
> subject is generally human beings.

In the above example, **anything bad ( unfavorable ) is occurring??**.

No. So I took this sentence as the direct passive voice.

Granted, **for the further development of the reason why I thought the bove
example as the direct passive voice,** let us take a look at the different (
but from the same source ) explanation.

> 直接受身は、能動文における直接目的語または間接目的語を主語にするものである。

Translation

> In the ( Japanese ) direct passive voice, it takes either the **direct
> --object--** or the **indirect --object--** as **a --subject--** in the
> **active voice**.

And I think the above example is taking the -- **indirect object** --.

Now **[let's take a look at the definition of the"indirect
object"](http://www.coelang.tufs.ac.jp/mt/ja/gmod/contents/explanation/046.html)**

The above link is describing the **object in general** in a speech.

And it says,

>
> 行為の直接的な対象を表す直接目的語（主として対格、日本語では「を」等で示される）と、その行為によって間接的に影響を受ける対象を表す間接目的語（主として与格、日本語では「に」等で示される）に分類される。

Translation

> The object can be categorized into 2 categories. The one is the **direct
> object** , which denotes substances or phenomenons influenced directly by
> the action of the subject ( mainly in linguistics the accusative case, **in
> Japanese it follows frequently the postpositional particle 「を」** ) and the
> other is the **indirect object** which denotes the indirect influence by the
> action of the subject. ( in linguistics the dative case, **in Japanese
> generally it follows the postpositional particle 「に」** )

Thus by the above reasons I concluded the above example is the **direct
passive voice** because, **----the defacto, the actual "subject" is 「私に」,
「マサコさんに」----** **I think here is very important and the reason why I thought
these 2 are the de facto subject is as the following** ( as I said below. )

From the **[below source][3]**

>
> 元の動作の主語（動作主）を表示するには「に」を用いるのが一般的だが、事物の属性を説明する場合などは「によって」が用いられる。また元の主語からの物の移動（授受）を表す場合は「から」を用いることができる。

Translation

> In the Japanese direct passive voice, **in order to express the de facto
> subject which causes the action, the postpositional particle 「に」is generally
> used. The one of the exception is, the phrase 「によって」is used particularly in
> order to express the properties, characteristics of things**. And the other
> exception, which follows the postposititional particle 「から」 which is used
> when denoting the "change" or the "movement" by the subject to the others.

From the above reason I concluded the actual subjects are 「私に」,「マサコさんに」.

## WHY IS THE JAPANESE PASSIVE VOICE SO COMPLICATED??

I think the reason is below ( mentioned in the below original. )

> 受身の起源
>
>
> 受身の助動詞「(ら)れる」の機能は、元来は人が意志的に行うのではないことを表現する自発であると考えられている。場合によっては受身か自発か明確でないこともある。上記の制限や間接受身も、この性格に由来すると思われる。

Translation

> The origin of Japanese passive voice.
>
> The Japanese auxiliary 「（ら）れる」, in its origin functioned to have denoted the
> **active** voice, _**which denotes the unintentional movement by the subject
> to the event in the speech**_. It should be mentioned sometimes it is hard
> to distinguish if the **passive mode** denotes either the **passive** or
> **active**. The above limitation of the passive mode and the characteristic
> of the **indirect passive mode** are thought to have come from this origin.

**NOW LET'S TRY TO "CONVERT" THE ABOVE EXAMPLE TO THE ACTIVE VOICE.**

> 「Aの質問は私に、そしてBの質問はマサコさんによって答えられました。」

---> converted to the active voice

> 「私が質問Aを答え,そしてマサコさんが質問Bを答えました。」

Translation

> **I answered the question A, and Masako-san answered the question B.**

Is the idea getting clearer now?? ( I hope -:) )

In the Japanese ( direct ) passive mode, taking the above example, the both
actual, "authentic" subject 「私に」, 「マサコさんに」 can be **converted to the subjects
in the active voice.**

I think I myself got the idea. ( I don't know I could convey my intention to
you. ) The Japanese direct passive voice, **which does exist in English too**
will be applied to the above sample.

## Now here is my assumption why the Japanese passive voice is so difficult.

I think the reason is perhaps, this kind of passive voice is made **in order
to evade denouncing the subject directly ( in my opinion ) or by the reason
mentioned below**

From the same below source says,

> 被動作者の意志によらないことを強調すること。日本語ではこの意義が特に重要であると考えられる。

Translation

> ( The objective or the purpose of the passive mode are these ( another
> purposes are abbreviated on purpose by me due to the reason they are
> explaining the purpose of the passive voice in another languages. ) --> 3.
> **It is made in order to emphasize the "uncontrollable" event by the
> subject. --- In Japanese this purpose is quite critical ---**

I hope you can understand. Have a nice day.

* * *

I happened to have found **[an easy source. ( Wikipedia
)](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8F%97%E5%8B%95%E6%85%8B)**

( **However the below explanation will be difficult to you with sorry.**
However, if an answerer is asked **WHY?** I have to go into the grammar
because otherwise I can not provide you with the logical explanation ( If you
would like to **run over** easily, then please express it in the question ))

>
> 日本語の受身は助動詞「れる」「られる」（文語では「る」「らる」）を用いて表現する。英語の受動文などに相当する直接受身と、英語などには見られない間接受身がある。

Translation

> The Japanese passive mode uses the auxiliary 「れる」「られる」（ in literary style
> 「る」,「らる」 ) to express the passive mode. Note there is a **direct passive
> mode, which is equivalent to the English passive** and another, an
> **indirect passive mode** which **does not exist in English.**.

Now kindly be noted, from the very same source

>
> 日本語の直接受身の用法には、英語などの受動態に比較して制限がある。受動態の主語（被動作者）として使えるのは主に人（有情物）であり、事物を主語にする「この会社は1976年に設立された」などの言い方は、主として明治以降に翻訳用に用いられるようになったものである。

Translation

> The Japanese **direct passive mode** has its own limitation for the usage
> unlike that of English. The **actual** subject is **generally human beings (
> ( or something that has an emotional heart )** , thus the above mentioned
> example
>
> 「この会社は1976年に設立された」 ( This company was founded in 1976. )
>
> which takes **things** as the de facto subject, appeared **only after Meiji
> era generally for the translation's technique sake.**

Now here, I can not decide which one ( the direct passive or the indirect
passive ) your speech will fall into.

> 受身の起源
>
>
> 受身の助動詞「(ら)れる」の機能は、元来は人が意志的に行うのではないことを表現する自発であると考えられている。場合によっては受身か自発か明確でないこともある。上記の制限や間接受身も、この性格に由来すると思われる。

Translation

> The origin of Japanese passive mode.
>
> The Japanese auxiliary 「（ら）れる」, in its origin functioned to have denoted the
> **active.** mode, _**which denotes the unintentional movement by the person
> concerned with the event in the speech**_. It should be mentioned sometimes
> it is hard to distinguish if the **passive mode** denotes either the
> **passive** or **active**. The above limitation of the passive mode and the
> characteristic of the **indirect passive mode** are thought to have come
> from this origin.

If you do not care, it is O.K. But I am a type of a guy who can not provide an
answer with the **evidence**.

Granted, I hypothetically take your speech as the **direct passive mode** ,
per the comment line's adviser's recommendation, which **exists too in
English.**

> 飲み物はもう買われました。

This speech, per the explanation above,

> The **actual** subject is **generally --- >human beings<----**, thus the
> above mentioned example

So let's try to swap the 飲み物 by 女 ( a woman ( Although this is not a good
example. ))

> 女はもう買われました。

which makes sense, meaning ( The woman was bought. ( **Please guess what it
means, I can not articulate openly here** )). **And please note by swapping it
by human beings, the woman becomes a -- subject--**

Then granted, your last speech

> 飲み物はもう買われました。

should have used the human beings instead, logically thinking, despite the
existence of exceptions.

## Now, What is the difference from てある form from the passive mode??

Kindly take a look at **[this
site.](http://www.coelang.tufs.ac.jp/mt/ja/gmod/contents/explanation/046.html)**

> これだけは覚えよう １ 「Vてあります」（普通形「Vてある」）は、意図的な働きかけの結果変化したNの状態を表わすときに使います。

Translation

> Let's learn at least this. 1 「Vてあります」 ( generally 「Vてある」) denotes result of
> the change of the N by the intentional action V ( by the subject.))

## Conclusion

Your first speech indicates **the condition as a result of your intentional
action (V)** , while regarding the passive mode, I can not say so much due to
the above reason ( about the explanation of the passive mode. ( **as
l'électeur says, it sounds unnatural to the native speakers.** ))

Have a nice day.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-08-03T04:16:24.000
26139
2015-08-05T11:07:04.023
2020-06-17T08:18:27.500
-1
26126
answer