Not preachy at all! I understand what you mean, as when I first started Japanese I had the same thought about basic verb and adjective forms as I do about the passive/causative now. Looking back, it seems easy, as it does eventually become second nature.
3 Likes
I wholeheartedly ‘second’ @Galeno’s suggestion to check out Cure Dolly:
I haven’t watched all her stuff, but of all the grammar stuff I’ve sampled from (which, admittedly is not super-extensive; but also not super-sparse either), her lessons are the ones that really helped me make sense of Japanese grammar the most.
She immediately conveys the sense that there is an underlying logic to a lot of the grammar (especially if you mostly-ignore dealing with polite/honorific/humble stuff until you get fairly comfortable with the logic of the plain, everyday grammar first).
And as I’ve progressed (generally by using BunPro.jp, which from the context of your OP it appears you are probably using, too (?) ), the sense that there’s an underlying logic to it has held pretty strong, even after struggling with some of the trickier intermediate grammar points. So, that seems to lend weight to Cure Dolly’s concepts about the underlying logic of the language. (In fact, I get the feeling that Japanese is actually more logical, grammar-wise, than most languages; but I only really know English and a tiny smattering of things from other languages, so it’s hard for me to tell for sure.)
On persistence:
I’m still midway through BunPro’s JLPT level 3 points, and I’ve had to slowwww right down and just keep hammering away at these points, since the early stuff was ‘too easy’ (I had previously finished the Genki 1 book), and I started ‘learning’ too many newer grammar points too quickly. They take more practice than Kanji, though, so I soon became overwhelmed, unable to consistently remember points I had ‘learned’. So I’ve stopped adding new points to my review stack until I can finally get things under control again.
I just keep plugging away at it, even if it’s just a few reviews per day. In the past couple of weeks, things have started to improve again, and I’m finally starting to make a bit of a dent in my backlog of reviews. So, persistence seems to be working.
On language use/immersion:
Another thing I could probably do would be to go back to my attempt to follow along with one of WaniKani Community’s reading groups (I joined one a while back, but couldn’t keep up with my weak vocab and grammar), but I think I first want to get the BunPro review stack back down to a level where I can complete all remaining reviews in a single reasonably-short session on a daily basis. But that aside, practicing with the actual language (like a reading group) is without doubt one of the best ways to really get an intuitive understanding of the logic of a language’s grammar.
1 Like
I second this. Even though i am lazy and didn’t watch the whole series yet.
1 Like
After reading this, it seemed strange to me that I had not ever heard that before. 
3 Likes
You realize that this was still about the ほうがいい grammar point, right?
1 Like
I think it would surprise you how little I realise…
1 Like
To be honest, I’m glad English is my native language. IMO German grammar is relatively simple for English speakers. I don’t envy people trying to go the other direction though.
Sure the genders are arbitrary and annoying to learn, and German inflects things for cases that generally aren’t distinguished in English, but the grammar is otherwise very similar. Translating things from German to English is basically just a matter of occasionally rearranging a few of the words.
Besides, you don’t actually need to learn the genders to understand German or to get your point across as a tourist (sounding educated speaking German is of course another matter.) And yes I know that there are cases where minimal pairs are distinguished by gender, but they don’t come up much in practice.
On the other hand, people learning English as a second language have to deal with our giant flaming trash heap of a spelling system. At least if you hear a German word, you can spell it, and vice versa. Also, English has fun stuff like all those “do” auxiliaries, and how they are or aren’t used seemingly at random depending on the tense, mood, and negation, and we also actually still use our irregular simple past tense, unlike the Germans. Plus we love to convert verbs to nouns or vice versa with zero indication other than a possible pronunciation change, we drop copulas and demonstrative pronouns and stuff leading to lots of ambiguity when the clauses stack up, etc.
Of course, as a native speaker I understand English grammar pretty much instinctually, so I can only really tell which parts are hard when I notice EASL learners messing them up. I’m sure there’s a lot more hard parts to English that I don’t even know about.
But really, English’s spelling mess alone is probably enough to take the trophy when compared to any language that isn’t written with Chinese characters.
3 Likes
You mean (for example) how you can change “I went to the store yesterday” to “I did go to the store yesterday” to add emphasis? Or something else? I’m really curious, so I’d appreciate a couple examples.
The one of always think of is hypotheticals. For example, “if I were taller”. Many people, including native English speakers, incorrectly say “if I was taller” because they are treating it like past tense.
Oh also, rereading the part of your post I just quoted I remembered another oddity. In colloquial language we commonly shorten things like “there are” to “there’s” even though it’s not technically correct.
4 Likes
Wait, can someone explain this? Why is it like that?
1 Like
What is “being broken” anyway? In that case, all languages are broken, in any degree. From Akkadian or Sumerian to Russian, Spanish, English or Japanese.
1 Like
That’s an interesting point.
I wouldn’t say that “was taller” is incorrect usage though because it is accepted in both spoken and written English.
Of course it would fail you on a grammar test for international speakers, but no one would bat an eyelid if you said or wrote “was taller” instead of “were taller” unless they’re trying to keep the language from evolving. I think that in a few years there’ll be no difference between the two and it will become a “while/whilst” preference.
In fact, when I speak I don’t even differentiate between “were” and “was” because they’re homophones in my accent both said ‘wuh’.
1 Like
Well, first things first, it’s not actually past tense in 〜たほうがいい it’s perfect aspect.
2 Likes
I have a couple mnemonics I came up with when trying to puzzle through these on BunPro:
The ‘base case’ is する, because it’s so irregular. If you can master する, all other verbs’ forms will be much easier to grasp.
Now, focus on the る part, as this forms the seed or kernel of the mnemonic. What does る stand for? Why, those awful RUmours people keep spreading about you! Those jerks!
But hey, to be perfectly honest, you’re not actually totally innocent here, because you tend to pass around juicy rumours about other people, too. But only passively! Only when the topic of conversation turns to the rumour mill, will you passively pass on rumours.
But not just any rumours. When you pass on a rumour, it’s no good if everybody’s already heard it before. You don’t like passing on the same rumours as everyone else. If you’re going to pass a rumour, it’s got to be a rare one! So, one of your mottos is:
- Pass a rare rumour.
[Passive = rare ru = RA + RE + RU = ら + れ + る = られる]
Key point: You only really use the full られる in an ichidan verb, where it’s ichidan-stem + られる.
For godan verbs – and, crucially, for the irregular する in particular – you actually switch the ending to the あ-sound ending, rather than using the whole ら kana. So, for godan verbs it’s あ-stem + れる (still rhymes with られる as a whole, though).
But for する in particular, you’re not modifying る (that’s the ‘rumour’ after all), you’re modifying the す, which like a godan verb gets the あ-sound ending, becoming さ! So:
Passive する + rare rumour
= する + られる
= する+ られる
= (す +) + (ら + れる)る
= す + ら + れる
= (す + らあ) + れる
= さ + れる
= される
= される
(still rhymes with られる!)
At least you’re not one of those jerks who actually cause rumours by inventing them in the first place, though, right?! You wouldn’t want to be the causative agent of a false rumour, especially since so many false rumours about you are caused by insensitive rumour-mongering jerks.
And those jerks, they’re never satisfied with causing harmless, boring rumours, are they? No! Even if the truth is rather boring, they’ll make up lurid details to ensure that they are causing maximum damage to their target’s reputation with the most saucy rumours they can cook up. Their motto is:
- Cause a saucy rumour.
[Causative = saucy ru = SA + SE + RU = さ + せ + る = させる]
Also,‘cause a’ and ‘saucy’ kinda rhyme, especially if you pronounce the “a” as a long “ay” rather than short “ah” or “a”, and pronounce “saucy” in a ‘sassy’ way like “Oooh, my lawd! That rumour is so sau-ssayyy!
” Then convert that into a Japanese pronunciation:
Cause a saucy
= Cauze ay sausay
= Cau + ze_ay + sau + say
= KA + ZE + SA + SE
= か + ぜ + さ + せ
Of course, you don’t need the か + ぜ part in the grammar – it’s just there to help with the rhyming, to help remember that ‘causative’ goes with させる.
Like with the passive られる, the causative させる follows basically the identical pattern:
- Ichidan is ichidan-stem + させる.
- Godan is あ-stem + せる (still rhymes with させる).
For する in particular, once again you’re modifying the す to get the あ-sound ending, becoming さ (same result as with the passive!). So:
Causative する + saucy rumour
= する + させる
= する+ させる
= (す +) + (さ + せる)る
= す + さ + せる
= (す + さあ) + せる
= さ + せる
= させる
= させる
(doesn’t just rhyme with させる – it literally is させる!)
In fact, this was the first mnemonic I used, and the passive られる mnemonic just fell into place when I noticed られ = RARE = rare (rumour), which fit in nicely with the causative mnemonic. Which leads me to the pièce de résistance, the causative-passive mnemonic:
You have a deep dark secret! Sometimes – very rarely, but technically sometimes – well, to be honest, more times than you’d like to admit – you actually do cause a rumour. Just sometimes. Here or there.
But not because you want to! No! Of course not! Only because those nasty, malicious, rumour-mongering jerks keep spreading all those false rumours about you! If they would just leave you out of it, you wouldn’t be forced to fight back by causing the occasional rumour to be passed around about them. In fact, when you really think of it, it’s really actually the case that they made you cause these rumours. You had no control over it! You were just a passive victim in all this! You only caused these rumours passively. But, technically, truth be told, you did actually causative-passively create some rumours. Aaand spread them around, too. Technically.
But! Only some really really super-saucy ones!!! Muahahaha! 
And you used your gift for creativity to make them extra original, too, so these are very very super-rare rumours, too!!! Genius-level! If you do say so yourself! 
After all, if you’re forced, through no fault of your own, to cause a rumour and pass it around, then your other motto is to:
- Cause and pass a saucy, rare rumour!
[Causative-passive = saucy rare ru = SA + SE + RA + RE + RU = さ + せ + ら + れ + る = させられる]
Here’s the big pay-off: Knowing how the previous two mnemonics work, the combination works exactly the same way! Just remember that the causative part is always first, so it’s always causative + passive + rumour = させ + られ + る = させられる:
- Ichidan is ichidan-stem + させられる.
- Godan is あ-stem + せられる (still rhymes with させられる).
Even する also just follows the same pattern as before:
Causative-passive する + saucy, rare rumour
= する + させられる
= する+ させられる
= (す +) + (さ + せられる)る
= す + さ + せられる
= (す + さあ) + せられる
= さ + せられる
= させられる
= させられる
(and again, it doesn’t just rhyme with させられる – it literally is させられる!)
And that’s about it. The only other ‘exception’ I’m aware of is for the other major irregular verb くる, but now that you’ve mastered する, くる is a piece of cake! 
Just change く to こ (same as is done for the negative form, こない), and then just tack on the entire ‘rumour’ – whether it’s られる, させる, or させられる – as if it were an ichidan verb.
Ta da! Or perhaps I should say, じゃじゃーん！
9 Likes
Wow.
Now you only need amnemonic for the short causative-passive a la 買わされる
2 Likes
When did mathematics get involved? 
1 Like
I’ve come across this statement quite a few times (it was just the other day that someone said this in a different thread), but there really isn’t much to support this claim.
German still uses its preterite tense for strong verbs as much as it does for weak verbs, it’s just that the perfect tense has gained a lot of ground, particularly in the spoken language. That doesn’t mean that you won’t regularly come across forms like kam, sah, blieb, gab, fand, hieß in spoken German as well.
Aside from Chinese and Japanese, English isn’t the only language with a fairly irregular or complex orthographic system (sometimes called “deep”). There are other (widely or less widely) spoken languages like French, Arabic, Thai, Hebrew, or Danish that also score pretty low when it comes to the spelling of a word corresponding with its pronunciation.
From a prescriptive standpoint, sources like Grammarly will tell you that only were is correct in this instance, but you’ll find that there are lots of native speakers of English who don’t care (and may not even be aware of said prescriptive rule) and say or write was. So from a descriptive standpoint, both are equally “valid” or “correct”, even if one of them may be considered “non-standard”.
Every language has examples like that, where a (large) number of native speakers diverge from the prescriptive form. In Japanese, you see people using すごい colloquially as an adverb (すごいおいしい！) even though it “should” be すごく. Eventually, a form that was originally incorrect may become an accepted alternative or even the new standard. That’s why, for instance, almost all regional varieties of English no longer use thee and thou (except for effect).
1 Like
Do you have examples? I can’t imagine any case where I’d shorten “there are” to “there’s”. “There’s” is only an abbreviation for “there is” or “there has”.
You just did as far as I’m concerned.
I’m sure there’s a lot more hard parts to English that I don’t even know about.
If you were to remove the contraction, would you say “there is” or “there are”?
10 Likes
Perhaps it would be fairer to say that “was taller” is a colloquial usage, while “were taller” is the technically grammatical usage. I can’t help but cringe at that one though, even if I let most colloquialisms slide (and use plenty myself).
Ha, busted! 
9 Likes