# Japanese verbs ending



## Aoyama

We know that japanese is a_* syllabical language*_ , meaning that the syllabary (hiragana and katakana) is always composed of ONE sign/one sound, like *a,i,u,e, o* (basic vowels), *ka,ki,ku,ke,ko, sa,shi,su,se,so, ma,mi,mu,me,mo* etc
Unlike korean, which combines different elements in one single unit of "letters", kanas in japanese cannot be _divided_ like in *ka k-a*.
But there may be another way to look at things :
If we take verbs like *yomu* (read),* asobu* (play),* aruku* (walk), *tatsu* (stand), *sasu* (pierce)* harau* (pay) etc, we can see that the declension of the endings of those verbs goes as follow :
*yomanai asobanai arukanai tatanai sasanai*
*yomimasen asobimasen arukimasen tachimasen sashimasen*
*yomu asobu aruku tatsu sasu*
*yomenai asobenai arukenai tatenai sasenai*
*yomo asobo aruko tato saso*

*harawanai*
*haraimasen*
*harau*
*haraenai*
*harao*
(nai ending can of course be masen)
another way to write this (in latin/romaji) could be :
*arukanai, arukimasen,aruk**u* , clearly showing in so doing that _the consonant and the vowel of the ending can be separated_ and follow the same scale as the "kana scale".
*Is there a way to make a theory out of this ?*


----------



## SpiceMan

Hmmm, all the verbs you used are of the same kind (grouped as "group 1" in usual group classifications).

Other verbs (group 2) drop out the last kana when inflecting, such as taberu, miseru, kaeru (変える), etc.

tabenai misenai kaenai
tabemasen misemasen kaemasen
taberu miseru kaeru
tabereru misereru kaereru
tabeyou miseyou kaeyou

Then, there's the irregular verbs (usually classified as group 3): suru, aru and kuru.
konai nai shinai
kimasen arimasen shimasen
kuru aru suru
korenai [no inflection] dekinai
koyou arou shiyou 

Usually left from those classifications are the so-called "aru" verbs, such as gozaru and irassharu, which show the following inflection:

goza*i*masen irassha*i*masen

Back on the first group verbs (the ones you listed) the main difference is at the TE and TA forms:
yomu -> yonde, yonda
asobu -> asonde, asonda
aruku -> aruite, aruita
tatsu -> tatte, tatta
sasu -> sashite, sashita
harau -> haratte, haratta

You might add:
iku -> itte, itta (I think it's the only ku-ending verb inflected this way that I've come across)
isogu -> isoide, isoida
shinu -> shinde, shinda
tanoshimu -> tanoshinde, tanoshinda
heru -> hette, hetta

I'm not sure what kind of theory are you seeking for, so I'm just adding more information that I think must be considered.


----------



## Aoyama

I agree that this "scheme" does not work for all verbs, though the "kana scale" may turn out in other forms, even incomplete.
For the -_te_ (progressive) form and the _-ta _(past) form, being a different ending from the basic ending, scheme does not apply, we agree.
For _korenai_ (cannot come), it is also a different ending from the basic ending.
_Dekiru_ could be considered as an auxiliary verb, different from so called "normal" verb.
For* iku* : ikanai, ikimasen, iku, ikenai, iko, it works ...
For *kuru* : konai, kimasen, kuru, koyo , it does not quite ...

There are two things I am trying to find out here :
- (some) japanese verb endings admit a "breaking" of the syllabic rule, that is : you could write *iku* as *ik**u* and consider the root as being *ik* (this, of course applies to other cited verbs, but NOT all japanese verbs)
- what is the role, or the value, or the use of what I call the "kana scale" (*a,i,u,e,o*), which works here almost like a _music scale_ .

Let's wait for Flaminius to give us some light on the matter .


----------



## SpiceMan

Well, if you want to find a root, that's the kanji:

読む　読まない　読めない　読みません
行く　行かない　行けません　行きません
立つ　立たない　立てません　立ちません

the "syllabic rule" can be "broken" using the roman alphabet, and only in the inflections you listed.

some "rules" maybe:
- leaving u -> infinitive (sometimes used as present tense)
- turning u into i + masu/masen -> teinei: yomu -> yomimasu, naru -> narimasen
- turning u into i -> nominalization(?): asobu -> asobi, hanasu -> hanashi
- turning u into i + iku/tsuzuku etc. -> phrasal verb (?): hanasu -> hanashitsuzukeru, tobu -> tobikomu, omou -> omoidasu
- turning u into a -> negation: tatsu -> tatanai, sasu -> sasazu, shiru -> shiranu
- turning u into e: imperative -> iku -> ike, tatsu -> tate, aruku -> aruke
- turning u into e + ru/nai -> possibility: aruku -> arukeru, tanoshimu -> tanoshimenai
- turning u into e + ba -> conditional: aruku -> arukeba, tanoshimu -> tanoshimeba
- turning u into o -> volitional: iku -> ikou, harau -> haraou


----------



## Aoyama

Yes, all this is true. It does not yet give real grounds for a _rule_ or a _theory_ , but gives food for thought .
*The "syllabic rule" can be "broken" using the roman alphabet* is a good way to put things. It would mean that using the roman alphabet would bring those verb endings close to_ korean_ where clusters of graphic elements (hangul signs/letters) make up words. *Kak* is ONE element in korean (it would be *kaku* , TWO elements, in japanese). But you can also consider (in roman alphabet) _*kaku , yomu, tats*__*u*_ (or here *ta-ts**u* with the change on the ta chi tsu te to scale). 
The _root_ of the verbs would then be : kak , yom , ta_t_ etc.


----------



## kknd

You're somewhat right. I crossed upon such explanation in one book some time ago:
_kak_ as a stem
and
_-(r)u_ for "present simple",
_-(i)masu_ for honorific.

You can see parenthesis in those suffixes - it's included if stem doesn't join suffix by giving a proper 'syllable' (kak-u) and ommited in other case (ex. tabe-ru -> tabe-masu). it should be even -mas-, with final -u, because you can negate it (-en). If you want I can try to write down most of thoughts given in the book, it happened, I have.

I wrote 'syllable', because it's not the point. Kanas aren't syllabic but moraic; compare two syllables: _kyo_ [きょ] and _kyou_ [きょう]. First one has one mora and second one has two. Small kanas mean that you don't want to extend a length of syllable (cf. _kiyo_ [きよ] and _kyo_ [きょ]).


----------



## manekineko

The answer about how break down Japanese verbs in cristal-clear system is at:

omoshironihongo.weebly.com/grammar.html

You won't find a better break down anywhere!

Enjoy

It's called the 2inshix

The 2inshix system differs and breaks away from traditional-conventional Japanese verb grouping systems in two ways.
"Traditional-conventional systems" group Japanese verbs in 3 groups, in other words, according to traditional-conventional systems a japanese verb can either belong to:

  "Verb group 1" or "Verb group 2" or "Verb group 3" and these systems come with a very ambiguos set of rules.

On the other hand, the 2inshix (_*D'Martini's*_) system breaks down Japanese verbs into 8 groups and incorporates a new, clean-cut, readily understandable,　simple set of rules.


----------



## Aoyama

www.omoshironihongo.weebly.com/grammar.html 
This site does not respond.


----------



## manekineko

Spiceman's explanation is one of the best ones I've seen to date.
Aoyama's AIUEO breakdown is quite accurate, except for the -E part.
The -E inflection is for the Imperative form, and not for the potential form:
It should be:
*yome! asobe! aruke! tate! sase! etc*
Otherwise, how would you inflect verbs like taberu, miru, iru etc?

Cheers


----------



## Aoyama

> Aoyama's AIUEO breakdown is quite accurate, except for the -E part.
> The -E inflection is for the Imperative form, and not for the potential form:
> It should be:
> *yome! asobe! aruke! tate! sase! etc*


*Yome *is OK and would fit together with *yomenai* . We also know *yonde* ...


> Otherwise, how would you inflect verbs like taberu, miru, iru etc?


*tabete*, *mite*, iru is special, iku will be *itte *, yuu (say) *yutte*...


----------



## manekineko

Hello, I don't know how long you have been learning japanese. Your user name is Japanese, which probably implies a second generation; but, regardless of that, I've been studying Japanese for at leat 15 years. 
I've been living in Japan for 7.
For most verbs;             for  verbs ending in -E+RU
A - nai                                  Tabe-nai
I  - masu                               tabe-masu
U - koto                                tabe-ru koto
E - imperative                         tabe-ro
O - future (Volitional)               tabe-yo


----------



## manekineko

The right place for the potential form you are using is not the =E declension line; but the infinitive line +ru or +u
For example;
Iku + eru =         ikeru
Tabe+ru + eru =  tabereru
Au+eru =            AERU
For Suru and Kuru are the exceptions of course.
Su+ru >     S+eru example: ai-seru
Ku+ru >    Koreru


----------



## damas17

I don't know much about what you're talking about  but I will explain in my way [I hope you already know the hiragana and the rows (Ex:The row A: contains ka-sa-ta-ha-ma-na-ra...)] :

- Japanese looks a lot like Turkish , it has the same Subject-Object-Verb system, and there are so many suffixes that can be attached to the end of the verb (the root/stem ), to explain different ideas...


- a Japanese verb in a sentence, is a set of three parts : 
The Stem, which is normally written in Kanji and represent the main idea of the verb. Ex:食 (Ta=eat) - 飲 (No=Drink)...
The Ending, is the most interesting part because it's the one that changes. Ex: 食べる - 飲む...
The suffix, is something that gets stuck on the verb to express a meaning related to the verb. Ex: 食べない(Don't eat) - 飲まなかった(Didn't drink)...


----------



## damas17

- The verbs in Japanese are divided into two categories (+ some few exceptions): 

The 一段. (Ichidan) Litterally means 1-row group, because the verb ending does not change and remain in the U row. This categorie contains verbs ending with -eru/-iru. For Ex. The verb 食べる remains 食べ for all the bases.
The 五段. (Godan) means 5-row group, because the verb ending('s last syllable) changes its row according to what the suffix requires (and because we have only 5 rows : A/E/U/I/O), Let's take an Ex. such読む(Yomu=To read) :


----------



## damas17

- As you can see the verb (yomu) ends with the hiragana -mu, so the verb will have 5 different bases (Ending changes) : yoma / yomi / yomu / yome / yomō. Let's see some suffixes and understand what's happening here : 

- Naide kudasai : (Negative request : Please don't do...) requires the 1st base : yoma.
Ex : この本を読まないで下さい (kono hon o yomanaide kudasai) = Please don't read this book.
- Hajimeru : (means=to start, it's attached to the verb to mean : begin doing...It can also be conjugated!!) requires the 2nd base : yomi
Ex : ３時間前に読み始めました (sanjikan mae ni yomihajimemashita) = I started reading three hours ago.
- No-Suffix : (Casual Present tense : I do) requires base 3 (which is the dictionary form).
Ex : 毎日新聞を読む (mainichi shinbun o yomu) = I read the newspaper everday.
- No-Suffix : (Really abrupt command : DO IT!!) requires the base 4 of the verb ending.
Ex : 読め (Yome) = Read!! (This form is offensive!)
- Ka : (The question particle, used after this form to mean : Shall we...?) requires base 5.
Ex : 一緒に読もうか (Issho ni yomō ka) = Shall we read together?

So the suffix decides what the base should be.

(To be continued [I think])
ご幸運を祈ります.
Damas17​


----------



## damas17

Here is a useful table 
the first word in each line is a verb example, followed by the 5 bases :
----------------------------------------------------------------------
*Godan Verbs : *
au = awa = ai = au = ae = aō (to meet) [*pay attention to the w added]
tatsu = tata = tachi = tatsu = tate = tatō (to stand)
kiru = kira = kiri = kiru= kire = kirō (to cut) [*this is a Godan verb.]
aruku = aruka = aruki = aruku = aruke = arukō (to walk)
oyogu = oyoga = oyogi = oyogu = oyoge = oyogō (to swim)
dasu = dasa = dashi = dasu = dase = dasō (to send)
shinu = shina = shini = shinu = shine = shinō (to die) [The only verb with -nu]
nomu = noma = nomi = nomu = nome = nomō (to drink)
tobu = toba = tobi= tobu = tobe = tobō (to fly)

*Ichidan Verbs :*
ageru = age = age = ageru = agere = ageyō (to give)

*Irregular Verbs :* (the whole verb changes) 
kuru = ko = ki = kuru = kure/kore = koyō (to come) [notice that there are 2 forms in base 4]
suru = shi = shi = suru = sure = shiyō (to do)


(I may add the TE/TA-forms later )


----------



## manekineko

Hello, damas17
I thought you were doing a great job at explaining everyone how japanese verb conjugations work, and you actually were sounding like someone who really has his/her Japanese conjugations down....
Then, I read the last part; where you breakdown the irregular verbs:
suru and kuru.
Damas17, I'd suggest you check your irregular conjugations for irregular verbs, namely the imperative forms (you even went as far as to say that there are 2 forms for the imperative? Please, tell me where you learnt that, I'd love to see that book!)
Anyway, I'm telling you, The imperative forms for kuru and suru are not:
kure/kore, nor sure.
Please, check again.

Cheers


----------



## manekineko

And, what do you mean "I don't know much about what you're talking about ",

You explained exactly the same thing I explained, except you used a lot more words!

My explaination assumed you understand what's going on, that's why I purposely kept it short and simple.


----------



## harunoyuki

Hi,
          1形  2形  3形  4形  5形  6形
１．読む ま/も み/ん む む め め 
　　　　　　ア・イ・ウ・エ・オの五十音図の五段に活用する。
　　　　　　almost verb, such as -er french verb 
　　　　　　2形は次の音にもなる。　　聞いた/行った/飲んだ い/っ/ん/
２．見る み み みる みる みれ みろ/みよ
　　　　　　五十音のイ段に活用する
３．食べる べ べ べる べる べれ べろ/べよ
　　　　　　五十音のエ段に活用する。

1形　　「ない」「う・よう」につながる形。　 ～nai/～u/～you
2形　「ます」「た」「だ」につながる形。 ～masu/～ta/～da
3形　言い切る。基本形。 ( basic)
4形　「時」につながる形。 ～toki
5形　「ば」につながる形。 ～ba (suppositionf)
6形　命令の意味になる形。 (order)
I hope this will help you.


----------



## hoshiboshi

SpiceMan said:


> the "syllabic rule" can be "broken" using the roman alphabet


 
Interesting conversation you all have going! I'll have to slow down and take a closer look at all that conjugating some other time...

I do have something to offer, though, about breaking the syllabic rule.
I'd have to disagree - I don't think you can consider conjugations to be "breaking" the rule; and therefore I don't think you can make a theory out of that.
Let me grab your example:
*yomanai*
*yomimasen*
*yomu*
*yomenai*
*yomo*
Indeed, you are replacing a "letter/vowel" if you look at it using romaji. But I think if you look at it from the perspective of hiragana, it's a different matter.
Japanese doesn't quite recognize that "m" is separate from "a, i, etc." What the language does recognize is that "ま,み,む,め, and も" are in the same category, since they have the same initial sounds (we'd call them "consonant" sounds), and thus are interchangable depending on the conjugation.
In the end, these are just two ways of dealing with sound. While English deals in consonants vs. vowels, Japanese deals in blocks, or syllables, that can be grouped together by similarities in how they sound overall.
Allow me one more example:
The gojuuon system groups these sounds together:
た ち つ て と
We romanize them as "ta, chi, tsu, te, to."
The consonant-vowel theory just breaks apart here. "t, ch, ts," plus the 5 Japanese vowels? And they're grouped together? It makes no sense from the English perspective! You have to look at it from the Japanese point of view: these syallables are treated as a set simply because they sound similar.
I'm not native Japanese, so I'm not quite sure if that's how Japanese think of it. But that's what helps me to understand it. Multiple-components (English) vs. One-component (Japanese). The very writing system proves this - that in Japanese, と is と is と. "t-o" is only an approximation students of Japanese use until they understand thing that is universally understood by the Japanese as と. The "approximation" element is the reason we can draw no conclusions from romaji.

(I hope that made sense... I really get too into the specifics and just ramble on and on, heheh. I enjoy that process, though: precisely articulating differences to, ultimately, understand concepts better. But, in the end, it doesn't matter too much. Language is just association; a matter of human thought. It's hard to get perfectly precise in that area, but we try anyway.)


----------



## Aoyama

> Indeed, you are replacing a "letter/vowel" if you look at it using romaji. But I think if you look at it from the perspective of hiragana, it's a different matter.
> Japanese doesn't quite recognize that "m" is separate from "a, i, etc." What the language does recognize is that "ま,み,む,め, and も" are in the same category [...]


Let me come back here, as the initial poster of this thread ...
Of course, if you follow the "kana scale", ま、み、む、か、き、く etc ,are each a unit, which theoretically should/could not be broken.
But there is another way to look at things (already mentioned here). The classical example is IKU (ikanai, ikimasu, iku, ikenai, iko , on the same scale as yomu).
Some grammar books will consider IKU as ik-u. The k being found in Korean (many Japanese words coming from Chinese will take a* k *coming either from some Chinese dialect or from Korean) , countless examples :
作 zuo/sa*k*u, 爆 bao/ba*k*u, 木 mu/bo*k*u,mo*k*u (here b/m as in Korean, ban/man etc) ...


----------



## hoshiboshi

Hmm... you do have a point. I prefer to think in syllables for Japanese - as explained above - but your way is just as valid. (I kinda got carried away arguing my point, haha!)


----------



## Aoyama

Well, the truth  (if there is any) is that I don't really know if I have a point. The examples with words in Chinese, Korean and ultimately Japanese are food for thought but do not make a theory.
One thing though is that we tend to accept _kanas_ as a syllabic entity because it is the way this _syllabary_ (not alphabet, mind you) was devised. But if you take Korean, which is (though arguable) close to Japanese, the hangul "alphabet"/script (one of the most complete and achieved script in the world of languages) is not syllabic. It will combine two, three even four elements into one entity/phonem.


----------



## wtrmute

Well, it would certainly be easy for a Western linguist to posit that Type I verbs/五段動詞 could be called *consonant-stem* and Type II verbs/一段動詞 could be *vowel-stem* verbs.  It's an interesting way to view the Japanese verbal conjugations, but it's unfortunately inconvenient to write in Japanese, as we can't write a single consonant without a following vowel.  But while I think that's _linguistically_ interesting, speaking as a fellow student of Japanese, I don't feel that it would help _students_ master the verbs any better than the current 〇段 theory.  For one, they're equally helpless at incorporating the irregular Type III verbs...


----------



## Aoyama

> it's unfortunately inconvenient to write in Japanese, as we can't write a single consonant without a following vowel


that is one of the points to take into account when trying to accept the theory that in that particular case (verb ending), you should consider (for example) ma, mi, mu, me ,mo (or the rest) as m-a,m-i,m-u,m-e, m-o.


> I don't feel that it would help _students_ master the verbs any better than the current 〇段 theory


Probably not, that is true. But it may shed a different light on understanding the relationship between what I call the "kana scale" and Japanese grammar ...


----------

