My German teacher and I were discussing this. We translate “frühstücken” as “to eat breakfast”(our translation is intransitive because the verb already takes “breakfast” as it’s object), but while we were reading a passage the passage used “frühstücken” like this:
“Lukas frühstückt sehr gerne eine Honigsemmel mit einer Tasse Tee.”
This usage of “frühstücken” implies the verb is transitive, meaning literally “to breakfast”. What are your thoughts on this?
I'm struggling to differentiate あく and ひらく, as well as 閉める、閉まる、閉じる、and 開ける
I check on Jisho.org for examples, and they are all similar (To Open is the example used for both, and they are listed as being both transitive and intransitive verbs)
あく would be Someone actually opening up a book, door, window, etc., (he opened the window/彼は窓を開いた” as well as a store (for the day, as in "The store opens at 9am/店は9時を開きます"
ひらく would be something opening on it's own? "The door opened/ドアを開いた" or a store opening for the first time?
I'm so confused! lol
Ich bin in letzter Zeit transitive und intransitive Verben rübergekommen und bin mir verwirrt, wie sie sich unterscheiden. Wann für immer man nach einem Verb in einer Webseite (z.B. Wordreference) sucht, dann es gibt immer eine Abkürzung neben dem Wort, die das verzeichnet, was für ein Verb es ist. Ich habe Grammatik Bücher bis den C1-Niveau durchgelesen und solcher Begriff habe ich noch nie gesehen. Könnte jemand bitte mir bei diesem Thema helfen? Danke schön!
[Please forgive the flair, I hope that's the correct one in this case]
A native English speaker had commented to me that my use of the verb 'to call' as intransitive ('can I call?' instead 'can I call you?') is incorrect, or at least, sounds off to a native speaker and that as an editor, they would flag it as an issue.
I see that the verb appears as both transitive and intransitive in the dictionary, and that Anna H. Live, writing on the discontinuous verb in English {1}, calls it 'optionally transitive', but that could refer to the act of crying out.
How does one find out? Is it perhaps a regional difference in use?
{1} Anna H. Live (1965) The Discontinuous Verb in English, Word, 21:3, 428-451, DOI: 10.1080/00437956.1965.11435439
I made a small proposal on Telegram. Copied from there:
> I think Pandunia displays an uncommon alignment, called Active alignment here: https://wals.info/chapter/100 > > The upshot of this is, it would be better, for averageness and intrinsic simplicity, if all intransitive verbs ended in -a. > > ... > > Pandunia doesn't have verbal person marking, but it does align both agents and patients of transitive verbs with subjects of intransitive verbs, depending on the semantics of the intransitive verb: marca 'walk' vs. dayu 'grow'. > > It is much more common for languages to treat subjects like agents, no matter the semantics of the verb: this is known as accusative alignment. It is found in 212 out of 380 languages in WALS's sample. Accusative alignment would mean making every intransitive verb end in -a. > > For simplicity's sake, it would be best not to allow -u derivations from fundamentally intransitive verb roots: these derivations' meaning is unclear, and in most cases probably can be expressed more clearly in other ways. This may be the controversial part. > > ... > > Here's the map: https://wals.info/feature/100A#0/18/150
Is there any tool for quickly looking up the intransitive/transitive equivalent of a verb, if they exist at all?
Jisho and most other dictionaries will list a verb as either intransitive or transitive, but so far I don't see any easy way of finding the other pair.
Anyone know of such tool?
Why is it so difficult for me to recognize if a Latin verb is intransitive or transitive...?
My Chambers-Murray dictionary does not indicate v.i. or v.t., and online dictionaries like Logeion/Whittaker's/Wikitionary/etc are not helpful in this respect either. Am I looking in the wrong place?
For English verbs that can be either transitive or intransitive, I've noticed two patterns when translated into Spanish:
- Some Spanish verbs become pronominal and include a "-se":
Moví la silla al lado del cuarto. / Me moví al lado del cuarto.
(I moved the chair to the side of the room. / I moved to the side of the room.)
Verbs that do this include: mover(se), intensificar(se), esconder(se)
- Meanwhile, other verbs are like English and don't change in form:
El virus aumentó la tasa de desempleo. / La tasa de desempleo aumentó.
(The virus increased the unemployment rate. / The unemployment rate increased.)
Verbs like this include: aumentar, disminuir, mejorar, abrir, cerrar, empezar
Does anyone know of a general rule or a handy list that helps me remember which verbs do this? Or do I just have to memorize them on a case-by-case basis? (Googling it myself didn’t really help...)
Gracias de antemano.
I was tutoring and the student had to identify what type of verb was present in the sentence “The President will be in the country for two days.” I was on the fence because all the tips and tricks I knew about this subject gave conflicting answers.
The verb is followed only by prepositional phrases so I thought it would be intransitive.
But
It completes information about the subject, so I’m also thinking it’s a linking verb.
(I know it’s not transitive because there is no object)
When I checked similar sentences online, I came across “The train is on time for once.” The website said that in that sentence, “is” was intransitive because it was followed only by prepositional phrases, which makes me think the sentence I was working on also contained intransitive verbs.
But
I know that forms of “to be” are almost always linking verbs!
So I’m very torn about this sentence. What say you all?
There are a lot of things that makes this stuff confusing for me but I think knowing the answer to this will help me. What is the difference between these sentences: ゲームが始まりました and ゲームを始めました? Is it that in the first sentence the game just started and that in the second sentence someone started the game? Also, is some of this stuff like when to use what verbs just gonna come naturally after a while?
Hi! I was wondering if in the patterns, a verb is always standard transitive, intransitive or reflexive? Or it depends on the verb itself? What I mean is, e.g. is pattern II always transitive? But on the other hand, is pattern III always transitive but the word انتشر is an exception because it is translated as intransitive?
I'm brushing up on the rules for passive forms and my grammar book says "Intransitive Verben können im Gegensatz zu transitiven Verben kein Passiv und kein Zustandspassiv bilden."
Yet a few pages before this, it gives this example of an active-to-passive conversion: Er arbeitet -> es wird gearbeitet
Is "arbeiten" not intransitive in this case?
I’m trying to figure out why one is “pégale” while the other is “golpéalo/a”, why one has “le” and the other “lo/la” when they are expressing the exact same concept (“hit him/her”).
Also a bit confused how a verb like pegar can remain intransitive while in the imperative form. Whenever people are commanding that one “hits” something... well, that’s just it: there’s always a “something” that must be hit.
So it would need a direct object, no?
If I say “hit him”, whoever “he” is is the one directly receiving the action of hitting.
So why is it not “pégalo” instead?
It sounds wrong to my ears to say pégalo in the context of hitting someone, I’m just trying to better understand why lol. Meanwhile golpear still used direct instead of indirect object pronouns in this case.
Thank you!
Can someone explain the difference? Google isnt helping...
Hello everyone,
I have been focusing on transitivity as of late. I came across this article that I found to be very helpful. I hope that it well help you out as well !
https://www.wasabi-jpn.com/japanese-grammar/intransitive-verbs-vs-transitive-verbs/
Edit(09.21.2020):
I didn't expect this post to get so much attention or reach this many people. I'm glad that so many people found it useful ! Thanks for all the upvotes and rewards. This motivates me to want to help even more.
If I come across any other useful resources, I will be sure to post them here !
Let's first examine some simple Japanese sentences. I hope I didn't make any mistakes.
人が ドアを 開けた。
Person opened door.
This sentence is active-transitive. 人 is the subject and ドア is the direct object of the 開ける transitive verb. Pretty straightforward.
ドアが 開いた。
Door opened.
This sentence is active-intransitive. ドア becomes the subject, and of course there is no direct object because the 開く intransitive verb can't take one.
ドアが 人に 開けられた。
Door was opened by person.
This sentence is passive-transitive. 人 is the originator of the action,ドア is the subject and implied direct object of 開けられる which is the passive conjugation of the 開ける transitive verb.
So far, so good (hopefully). But here's where it becomes contentious.
ドアが 開かれた。
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
I'm not sure what this could even translate to. This sentence is passive-intransitive. My question is: is this even possible? I mean, nothing technically stops us from conjugating the 開くintransitive verb to the passive form. However, the passive voice involves an object becoming a subject and intransitive verbs can not take direct objects. The thing is, searching up 開かれる on Google does return results; in fact, 開かれた社会 is how you translate "open society" to Japanese. So I'm not quite sure.
Some clarifications would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
Hello again, I'm Ojachan, a Japanese woman and a teacher.
Don’t you want to know how to learn Japanese like Japanese kids? This lesson is meant for students that are beginners at Japanese.
Today’s lesson is: Japanese Lesson 15| Intransitive Verbs vs Transitive Verbs ( Jidoushi vs Tasoushi )!
Memorizing verbs by classifying and understanding the difference between an intransitive verb and a transitive verb are very important.
Is there any kind of trick/way/pattern between the transitive and intransitive forms of a verb to learn them faster? Or I'll have to apply the old “read read and keep reading” strategy until I just memorize each one?
I’m sure there are plenty of exceptions but is there a rule of thumb for telling the difference between a transitive vs intransitive verb? I’m on level three of WakiNaki and I’m having trouble memorizing these.
This seems to be the rule, as far as this novice can see. But sometimes, when I look over conjugation tables, it looks like some intransitive verbs have attested personal passive forms.
Take morior, mori for example. This table shows moriendus, -a -um as the gerundive. This despite me having learned, both here and from other resources, that an intransitive verb's gerundive of obligation can only be used impersonally (e.g. "Mihi est moriendum" instead of "Moriendus sum").
As opposed to this table for volo, volare, which shows no attested passive forms besides the impersonal.
Am I missing a piece here, maybe misinterpreting the quality of verbs like 'morior'? Does the fact that it's deponent have something to do with it? Or is the conjugation table just wrong?
Gratias ago!
Hi, ojachan is here. 😄 Today’s lesson is: Japanese Lesson 15| Intransitive Verbs vs Transitive Verbs ( Jidoushi vs Tasoushi )!
Don’t you want to know how to learn Japanese like Japanese kids? This lesson is meant for students that are beginners at Japanese.
Memorizing verbs by classifying and understanding the difference between an intransitive verb and a transitive verb are very important.
The reason why is because it’s essential knowledge to know the usage **particle “を wo”**and particle “が ga”. Besides you can understand easier and use correct Japanese earlier. There are some type of words in English like **“to rise or to raise”**and “to lay or to lie”.
So let’s get started!
Intransitive Verbs and Transitive Verbs
Intransitive verbs can follow “が ga” or “は wa”, and transitive verbs follow “を wo” or “に ni”. An intransitive verb, which is called “自動詞 jidoushi”, can show an action or an effect by the subject.
For example, “行く iku to go”, “走る hashiru to run” and “勉強する benkyousuru to study” etc are intransitive verbs.
https://preview.redd.it/nr5hli28eih51.png?width=1923&format=png&auto=webp&s=74247a8ee9c9e3a65bea4cd396416aaa6ca541c5
While, a transitive verb, which is called “他動詞 tadoushi”, works for others.
For example, “閉める shimeru to close something”, “消す kesu to turn off something” and “壊す kowasu to break something” etc are transitive verbs.
https://preview.redd.it/8erogpjaeih51.png?width=1925&format=png&auto=webp&s=b97126bd7365759958f540875ddfabdd698f9a5e
How to Conjugate from Jidoushi to Tadoushi
Let’s learn how to make from intransitive verbs to transitive verbs.
The stems are same, but the suffixes are different.
Unfortunately, you need to memorize the verbs even though the verbs have several patterns. It’s similar to irregular verbs of English like “know-knew-known”.
5-eru form
・-aru 五段活用→ -eru 下一段活用
https://preview.redd.it/k7httf4deih51.png?width=1924&format=png&auto=webp&s=261b4828e3e2fd1b7a94bc6c40011c06dddc6bc3
Jidoushi (Intransitive Verbs) -aru 五段活用 English
Tadoushi (Transitive Verbs) -eru下一段活用 English
上がる agaru to rise
上げる ageru to raise sth
決まる kimaru to be decided
決める kimeru to decide sth
閉まる shimaru to be closed
閉める shimeru to close sth
集まる atsumaru to gather
集める atsumeru to collect sth
始まる hajimaru to start
始める hajimeru to start sth
... keep reading on reddit ➡Hello everyone!
I am starting to learn korean, and I was wondering, is it important to distinguish between this two types of verbs? I know how they differ (presense of the direct Object) but are there any grammatical difference (like different verb inflexions or so) between these two?
And most importantly, which dictionary makes the distinction? All that I use only say that there are verbs, not distinguishing between the two
From what I understand transitive verbs are those that have some object recieve the action they do (Ik sloeg de bal). Intransitive don't have that (De vogel zong).
But we have these two sentences
De kapitein voer het schip binnen.
De kapitein voer de haven binnen.
Which one is transitive and which one is intransitive and why? And how can we prove it? We had this on a test and I have no idea what the answer is because the captain entered the ship/the harbor so I'd say both are transitive but apparently they are not. Please help.
For English verbs that can be either transitive or intransitive, I've noticed two patterns when translated into Spanish:
- Some Spanish verbs become pronominal and include a "-se":
Moví la silla al lado del cuarto. / Me moví al lado del cuarto.
(I moved the book to the side of the room. / I moved to the side of the room.)
Verbs that do this include: mover(se), hundir(se), intensificar(se), esconder(se)
- Meanwhile, other verbs are like English and don't change in form:
El virus aumentó la tasa de desempleo. / La tasa de desempleo aumentó.
(The virus increased the unemployment rate. / The unemployment rate increased.)
Verbs like this include: aumentar, disminuir, mejorar, abrir, cerrar, empezar
Does anyone know of a general rule or a handy list that helps me remember which verbs do this? Or do I just have to memorize them on a case-by-case basis? (Googling it myself didn’t really help...)
Gracias de antemano.
