I notice that a number of verbs, especially, will have little grammar tips like “-su is most frequently used to end transitive verbs”, etc. However, these are not accumulated anywhere, they’re just stuck down in whichever vocabulary item contained it. So I’m having a heck of a time with -meru vs. -maru type things. There are also some verbs where the most simple form is passive voice such as “to be attached”. Also, for any definition that includes “something” to clarify that it is indeed transitive, it seems that entering the “something” is optional, which doesn’t help to drive the point home.
IMO it would really help to:
a) Accumulate these lessons, and summarize which vocabulary items they apply to
b) Point out which ones are regular vs. irregular.
c) Make clarification of transitive vs. intransitive more obvious or required.
Now I do also refer to other sites like Tofugu which has all sorts of these things laid out, so it’s not like I can’t learn them somewhere.
You’re talking about irregular verbs? There’s the two main ones, する and くる, and then only a handful of other verbs any level of irregularities. The other thousands of verbs are regular.
Unless you were referring to something else and I just misunderstood.
I believe they may be speaking about a pattern found in a bunch of transitive/intransitive pairs of verbs, such as 出る vs. 出す. 出る would be to go out, where as 出す would be to be taken out. There is definitely a pattern but it’s not a hard and fast rule. (I think this video by Cure Dolly is very helpful but definitely explains it in a very broad way – good for understanding the overall concept).
I know what you mean though, Digital_Larry. I’ve definitely felt like “hey, there seems to be some kind of… logic here?” while going through this and that vocab. And it turns out, a lot of times there are. I wonder if WK doesn’t want to muddle down the kanji/vocab structure they’ve created – even though it IS helpful if you know that, for instance, transitive and intransitive verb pairs can have a pattern of る・す endings to signify which is which. Again, this isn’t a hard and fast rule, but does apply to many word pairs.
And I guess that sort of begs the question, doesn’t it? Would there be a simple way to explain this grammar alongside the vocabulary? I’m not sure.
EDIT: Perhaps that would be a good third-party script idea? If someone were to write a companion guide of grammar points relevant in the vocabulary? Now just to find folks willing to do that.
