27531
My textbook has this example:

> 四方を海に囲まれる。

Is it the _indirect passive_ that allows for the **を** direct object marker to
be used in that passive voice example?

This sentence matches my understanding of passive voice grammar:

> 四方が海に囲まれる。

Is it also correct?
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-08-19T19:20:37.890
27504
2016-04-17T01:18:00.923
2016-04-17T01:18:00.923
10938
question
particle-に particle-が particle-を passive-voice によって-passives
Does indirect passive allow for the を in "四方を海に囲まれる"
Yes, the indirect passive (aka "suffering passive") allows for を to mark the
object of a transitive verb.

There are, in general, three basic structures to create a passive in Japanese:

  1. [subject] が [agent] に [transitive verb]

  2. [subject] が [agent] に [object] を [transitive verb]

  3. [subject] が [agent] に [intransitive verb]

Number 1 is the regular passive that also corresponds to English passive.
Numbers 2 and 3 are the indirect passive forms that you are referring to,
indicating that misfortune occurred to the subject because the agent did the
said verb.

The example your textbook gave has structure 2. Because of the を, we know it
is indirect passive. The subject has been removed, but I will assume it is the
speaker. The sentence can be translated as:

> 四方を海に囲まれる。  
>  Every direction is surrounded by the sea (and that is unfortunate [for
> me]).

The speaker may be stuck on an island.

Now, replacing the を with が moves it to the first structure. Now the whole
"misfortune" part is no longer implied.

> 四方が海に囲まれる。  
>  Every direction is surrounded by the sea.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-08-19T20:25:42.470
27506
2015-08-19T20:25:42.470
9749
27504
answer
> My textbook has this example:  
>  四方を海に囲まれる。  
>  Is it the indirect passive that allows for the を direct object marker to be
> used in that passive voice example?

The answer is no. It is the **direct passive voice**. The reason will be
explained below.

In Japanese, the passive voice takes human beings (or something **which can
feel emotions** as the de-facto subject (before に)), as explained
**[here](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8F%97%E5%8B%95%E6%85%8B)** ,

> また直接受身では、「誰々に」を「誰々によって」と言い換えることができるが、迷惑の受身では一般にこの言い換えはできない。

which translates to:

> Moreover, in the case of the _direct passive_ , 「誰々に」 can be reworded as
> 「誰々によって」, but, in the case of the _suffering passive_ , **such a rewording
> is not possible**.

Your sentence

> 四方を海に囲まれる。

can be rephrased as

> 四方を海によって（より）囲まれる (I personally think より is more common.)

Now, let's take a look at
**[here](http://www.tomojuku.com/blog/passive/passive-4/)** for a full
definition of the Japanese direct passive voice.

The **definition of Japanese direct passive voice** is

> ①対応する能動態がある  
>  ②迷惑の意味はない  
>  （受身文に迷惑の意味があるかどうかは、動詞自体の意味による）  
>  ③英語にある

which translates to:

>   1. There is an equivalent phrase that use active voice.
>   2. The sentence does not hint that you may experience an unpleasant
> moment.  
>  (You have to rely on the verb to tell whether the passive voice implies
> "suffering".)
>   3. It can be translated in English.
>

You can see that your sentence matches these 3 conditions:

>   1. 四方を海に囲まれる。--> 海が四方を囲む
>   2. No suffering at all is implied. How 四方 would suffer???
>   3. An English translation could be: "The sea encircles all directions".
>

While Japanese passive voice takes the de-facto subject (why I say de-facto is
because when it is converted to active voice, it stands as the subject, in
your case: 海), **generally human beings or something which has emotions** ,
your sentence is a case of
**[非情の受身](http://www.tomojuku.com/blog/passive/passive-7/)** (passive voice
whose subject is emotionless).

Regarding the explanation of 非情の受身 provided by the link,

> 主語になる物・事には、感情がないので、 非情の受身は、多くは客観的な意味を表します。 そこで、ニュース、新聞、本で多用されます。
>
> The thing or phenomenon which stands as the subject does not have any kind
> of emotion, thus, this passive voice is mainly used when one wants to be
> objective. It is used a lot in news, newspapers or books.

Your sentence seems to describe from an objective point of view.

Thank you. Have a nice day.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-08-20T20:45:56.017
27531
2016-03-20T04:35:26.150
2016-03-20T04:35:26.150
9831
27504
answer
Your question actually contains multiple topics.

  1. Is 四方を海に囲まれる an indirect passive sentence?
  2. Does this type of passive allow for the を?
  3. Is 四方が海に囲まれる correct as well?

**Spoiler** : 1.--Maybe, 2.--Yes, 3.--Yes

* * *

**Is 四方を海に囲まれる an indirect passive sentence?**

Well, it depends. Japanese passive usages can be categorized into three types.

  1. **Direct passive** : _you_ * are affected by _something_ doing _something_ to _you_ (= English passive)
  2. **"Possessor" passive** : _you_ are affected by _something_ doing _something_ to _something you own_
  3. **"Third party" passive** : _you_ are affected by _something_ doing _something_ (towards _elsewhere_ )

* _you_ means the subject of the sentence here

四方を海に囲まれる "it is surrounded by sea in all directions" falls under #2. It's
clear because the word 四方 "all directions" indicates relative position from
the reference point, so it has to be "all directions _of somewhere_ ". Thus,
the sentence requires an unpronounced subject as the "owner" of 四方.

What makes your question difficult is, some people call #3 "indirect passive"
while others call #2 and #3 "indirect passive". So if you ask people whether
it is an "indirect passive", you might get different opinions. But it couldn't
be #1 or #3.

**Does this type of passive allow for the を?**

Yes, in fact, it has to. By definition (see above), #2 passives requires an
object other than _you_ (i.e. the subject of the sentence) and the object
remains in を-case. Meanwhile, the type #3 doesn't have to, because the action
doesn't have to be transitive. A typical example of that is `雨に降られた` (lit. "I
was rained") "I got caught in the rain", which describes that it was just
raining irrespective of me, and the unfortunate me happened to be there too.

**Is 四方が海に囲まれる correct as well?**

Yes, grammatically it's an ordinary #1 passive. And in this case, Japanese
grammar is so evil that this sentence has the same meaning as 四方 **を** 海に囲まれる.
But it's only because 四方 request for an "owner" (as said above) and Japanese
can utilize the [double nominative
construction](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/q/9788/7810) to fulfill it.
Of course, you can't expect to paraphrase all these kind of passives using
direct passive, especially when the subject is human: if you'd say `兄が彼に殺された`
I'd assume you were talking about your brother, but `兄を彼に殺された` I'd assume the
subject would be you, who had the experience that whose brother was killed by
him.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-08-22T13:38:55.517
27566
2015-08-22T16:23:05.390
2017-04-13T12:43:48.447
-1
7810
27504
answer
(Here I'm trying to show why 四方 **を** 海に囲まれる is not direct passive. Please see
this as an appendix to broccoliforest's answer and reply to [KentaroTomono's
comment](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/27504/does-indirect-
passive-allow-for-
the-%E3%82%92-in-%E5%9B%9B%E6%96%B9%E3%82%92%E6%B5%B7%E3%81%AB%E5%9B%B2%E3%81%BE%E3%82%8C%E3%82%8B#comment58182_27566).)

* * *

First, OP's second sentence 四方 **が** 海に囲まれる is direct passive.

Wikipedia
defines「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。」([source](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8F%97%E5%8B%95%E6%85%8B#.E7.9B.B4.E6.8E.A5.E5.8F.97.E8.BA.AB)).
Following this definition, a direct passive sentence is formed this way:

The active sentence 海が四方を囲む has a direct object, "四方を".  
Use the 四方 as the subject in the direct passive sentence.  
You get 四方 **が** 海に囲まれる。

Therefore, 四方 **が** 海に囲まれる is direct passive.

* * *

Now, [this page](http://www.tomojuku.com/blog/passive/passive-4/) says the
possessor passive is something like this:

> (1)私は 田中さんに パソコン **を** こわされた。← possessor passive  
>  cf: (2)私のパソコンが 田中さんに こわされた。← direct passive  
>  ＃2 has a corresponding active voice phrase: 田中さんが 私のパソコンを こわした。  
>  ＃1 doesn't have a corresponding active voice phrase.

The phrases in question can be analysed in the same way:

> (1)島は 海に 四方 **を** 囲まれる。 ← possessor passive  
>  cf: (2)島の四方が 海に 囲まれる。 ← direct passive  
>  ＃2 has a corresponding active phrase: 海が島の四方を囲む。  
>  ＃1 doesn't have a corresponding active phrase.

This shows that 四方 **を** 海に囲まれる is possessor passive, not direct passive.

* * *

As for the quote from Wikipedia:

> また直接受身では、「誰々に」を「誰々によって」と言い換えることができるが、 **迷惑の受身**
> では一般にこの言い換えはできない。([source](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8F%97%E5%8B%95%E6%85%8B#.E8.BF.B7.E6.83.91.E3.81.AE.E5.8F.97.E8.BA.AB))

It says **迷惑の受身** ではこの言い換えはできない(the **suffering passive** can't take によって),
not **持主の受身** ではこの言い換えはできない(the **possessor passive** can't take によって). For
example, 私は家族を日本兵 **に** 殺された, which is possessor passive not direct passive,
can be rephrased as 私は家族を日本兵 **によって** 殺された. So you can't conclude that 四方
**を** 海に囲まれる is direct passive just because you can rephrase it as 四方を海
**によって** 囲まれる.

* * *

The conditions of the Japanese direct passive voice are:

> ①対応する能動態がある  
>  ②迷惑の意味はない  
>  ③英語にある  
>  ([source](http://www.tomojuku.com/blog/passive/passive-4/))

First, does 四方 **が** 海に囲まれる meet these conditions?

> ①It has a corresponding active phrase.  
>  →Yes. 海が四方を囲む.  
>  海が **四方を** (object)囲む。→ **四方が** (subject)海に囲まれる。  
>  ②It doesn't have a meaning of suffering.  
>  →No. The subject 四方 doesn't suffer from being surrounded by the sea.  
>  ③There is an equivalent passive phrase in English.  
>  →Yes. "The four sides are surrounded by the sea."  
>  (Not "The sea encircles all directions", which is active voice.)

It meets all these conditions. Therefore, 四方 **が** 海に囲まれる is direct passive.

Now, does 四方 **を** 海に囲まれる meet these conditions, too?

> ①It has a corresponding active voice phrase.  
>  →No, it has no corresponding active voice phrase.  
>  ②It doesn't have a meaning of suffering.  
>  →No. In 島は四方 **を** 海に囲まれている, for example, the island doesn't necessarily
> suffer from being surrounded by the sea.  
>  ③There is an equivalent passive phrase in English.  
>  →No, there is no equivalent passive phrase in English.

It doesn't meet ① and ③. Therefore, 四方 **を** 海に囲まれる is not direct passive.

Is 四方 **を** 海に囲まれる possessor passive, then? Here's the conditions of the
possessor passive:

> ①対応する能動文がない。  
>  ②動詞によっては必ずしも迷惑を表さない。  
>  ([source](http://www.tomojuku.com/blog/passive/passive-4/))

Does 四方 **を** 海に囲まれる meet these conditions?

> ①It doesn't have a corresponding active voice phrase.  
>  → No, it has no corresponding active phrase.  
>  ②It doesn't necessarily indicate suffering, depending on the verb used.  
>  → No. In 島は四方 **を** 海に囲まれる, for example, the island doesn't necessarily
> suffer from being surrounded by the sea.

It meets both of these conditions, so 四方 **を** 海に囲まれる is possessor passive,
and not direct passive.

Hope this helps.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-08-23T03:57:09.543
27578
2015-08-30T07:52:15.843
2017-04-13T12:43:44.157
-1
9831
27504
answer