# I went to the market, bought some apples and came home. (coordination)



## Nino83

Hello everyone.

Are these sentences correct?
Which is the difference between these diferent types of coordinating forms?

I went to the market, bought some apples and came home.
Ichiba ni itte, ringo o katte, ie ni kita. 市場に行って、りんごを買って、家に来た。
Ichiba ni iki, ringo o kai, ie ni kita. 市場に行き、りんごを買い、家に来た。
Ichiba ni mo ikeba, ringo mo kaeba, ie ni mo kita. 市場にも行けば、りんごも買えば、家にも来た。
Ichiba ni mo itta ga, ringo mo katta ga, ie ni mo kita. I市場にも行ったが、りんごも買ったが、家にも来た。
Ichiba ni mo itta shi, ringo mo katta shi, ie ni mo kita. 市場にも行ったし、りんごも買ったし、家にも来た。
Ichiba ni ittari, ringo o kattari, ie ni mo kita. I市場に行ったり、りんご買ったり、家に来た。

Thank you


----------



## frequency

You're arranging the verbs sequentially: 1→2→3. The first and second are very good! Say 家に帰って来た。

In the third, I guess you say: 市場にも行き、りんごも買い、家にも帰って来た。 You're implying like "I did it too, I did it too, ..."  and "I did such many things!" So this is different to the 1st and 2nd. I sense something similar to an add-on effect and sequence, too.


In the fourth, you're contrasting using が. If it's 市場にも行ったが、りんごがなかった。, then okay.
市場にも行ったが、りんごも買った？ A bit odd, and I guess it would _just semantically_ not possible.

市場にも行ったし、りんごも買ったし、家にも帰って来た。 This is slightly a casual version of the third one, I guess.

市場に行ったり、りんごを買ったり、家に帰って来たりした。 This is what Shenrais asked us the other day. It is, another version of the first one, ambiguous and problematic. Not always though, you can suggest other things/actions than those listed in it.


----------



## frequency

Nino, I wonder if there was anything else I need to tell you about. Post us back. And other member would answer you and add more information


----------



## Nino83

frequency said:


> In the fourth, you're contrasting using が. If it's 市場にも行ったが、りんごがなかった。, then okay.
> 市場にも行ったが、りんごも買った？ A bit odd, and I guess it would _just semantically_ not possible.


My book gives these sentences:
Fa sport *e* anche musica.
Kare wa supōtsu mo yaru shi ongaku mo konasu. 彼はスポーツもやるし音楽もこなす
Kare wa supōtsu mo yareba ongaku mo konasu. 彼はスポーツもやれば音楽もこなす
kare wa supōtsu mo yaru ga ongaku mo konasu. 彼はスポーツもやるが音楽もこなす
He says that "mo + B3 + shi" =  "furthermore, in addition, moreover" ("inoltre", "per di più"), and then it is said that "mo B5" and "mo B3 ga" are the less frequent versions of "mo B3 shi". Do these sentences (mo ikeba, mo itta shi, mo itta ga) mean the same thing, i.e "I went to the market and, in addition, I bought some apples"? 

Is the "B2a + ri" or "-tari" form more similar to the first two sentences ("B2 + B2", "-te + -te") or to the other sentences (mo B5, mo B3 shi, mo B3 ga)?


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> 彼はスポーツもやるが音楽もこなす・市場にも行ったが、りんごも買った



This 市場にも行ったが, ～～にも～～が gives a special effect: "Although I went to X (or more), in addition to the market!" your action ended up a disappointing result like the absence of an apple.

図書館にも行ったが、本屋にも行ったが、Saint Seiyaがなかった！ Although I went to the library too, I went to a bookshop too, I couldn't find a comic book of Saint Seiya!


But in 彼はスポーツもやるが音楽もこなす, 彼はスポーツもやるし音楽もこなす, 彼はスポーツもやれば音楽もこなす, these are add-on or contrast.
が isn't always _but, however, although_. I talked about this with a girl a long time ago in #12.
And notice that these が and ば works like "whereas", at the same time. やるし is somewhat add-on. (Sorry I might add info tomorrow, if necessary)


----------



## Nino83

frequency said:


> This 市場にも行ったが, ～～にも～～が gives a special effect: "Although I went to X (or more), in addition to the market!" your action ended up a disappointing result like the absence of an apple.





frequency said:


> And notice that these が and ば works like "whereas", at the same time. やるし is somewhat add-on.


Thank you, frequency!
From what I read from the book, these three forms were treated like different types having the same meaning but from what you say it is not so.
もするが and もすれば express contrast or concession while もするし addition.

What is the difference between 行き, 行って and 行ったり? I read that the first two are used for closed lists and the third one for open lists (I did this, that and so on...). Is that the only difference?


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> 彼はスポーツもやるし音楽もこなす ・mo itta shi,


～し is easy: plus, plus..add-on. 図書館にも行ったし、本屋にも行ったし、大満足！



Nino83 said:


> もするが and もすれば express contrast or concession


Indeed. Well, particles が and ば are very difficult, having multiple tasks

彼はスポーツもやるが音楽もこなす
This が would be whereas/on the other hand,

彼はスポーツもやれば音楽もこなす
For ば, weblio says that it lists similar or simultaneous things in parallel: 「金もなければ地位もない」 
I think your example fits with this interpretation.

And I must say that I see parallelism in these three cases. (In the first one, I see both add-on and parallelism.)


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> What is the difference between 行き, 行って and 行ったり? I read that the first two are used for closed lists and the third one for open lists (I did this, that and so on...).



Good point. About 行き and 行って, I don't see the difference between them.



Nino83 said:


> the third one for open lists (I did this, that and so on...).


Agree.
図書館に行き、本を探してきた。
You went to the library to look for the book.
図書館に行ったり、本を探してきた。
This sounds like you say you looked for the book. And one of your alternatives to find it, you went to the library, etc..you're suggesting/implying other action(s) than go to the library.

難しいね！I don't know if it's helpful but I give you a link lol.


----------



## Nino83

frequency said:


> For ば, weblio says that it lists similar or simultaneous things in parallel


In other words もすれば is more similar to ～し than to もするが, have I got it right?


frequency said:


> you're suggesting/implying other action(s) than go to the library.


Thank you!


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> In other words もすれば is more similar to ～し than to もするが, have I got it right?


U~~m, yes and no. I've found out that the three particles are interchangeable.

金もなければ地位もない
金もないが地位もない
金もないし地位もない


----------



## Nino83

frequency said:


> I've found out that the three particles are interchangeable.


Lol, ok!


----------



## Nino83

Hello again!

In this sentence there are _godan_ verbs, which have a different, specific, continuative form (連用形). 
Ichiba ni iki, ringo o kai, ie ni kita. 市場に行き、りんごを買い、家に帰って来た。
Can I use the same form with _ichidan_ verbs, whose continuative form is equal to the imperfective form?
Pabu ni iki, panīno o *tabe*, bīru o nomi, ie ni kaette kita. パブに行き、パニーノを*たべ*、ビールを飲み、家に帰って来た。
Does "tabe" work in this sentence? Is it right?

Thank you


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> パブに行き、パニーノを*たべ*、ビールを飲み、家に帰って来た。


Perfect. Why 連用形？ I don't know.

Tell us why 連用形 is good, please. I know other members know much


----------



## Nino83

Thank you, frequency! 
My doubt was the following. Seeing that _ichidan_ verbs don't have a specific _ren'yō-kei_ different from _mizenkei_, there could have been some confusion, but, from what you said, it seems it doesn't pose any problem.


----------



## ktdd

Among Nino's original sentences, the first two
_1) 市場に行って、りんごを買って、家に帰ってきた。
2) 市場に行き、りんごを買い、家に帰ってきた。_
are essentially the same. Except #2 is the original form and appears more often in formal writing.
連用形 is used because it's three independent verbal phrases stringed together. Just like in the English sentence:
_He eats, shoots, and leaves._
In Japanese grammar, て is but a conjunction. The so-called te-form is simply the continuative form with a "-te" tacked on, then underwent a series of phonological changes, something like 行きて => 行いて => 行って, 遊びて => 遊みて => 遊んで. (I'm not saying that's exactly what happened, but the idea is familiar and reasonable)
So the te-form in #1 is really:
_He eats-and, shoots-and, leaves._
The continuative form has been used to express a sequence of actions since ancient times. Just think about how compound verbs are formed. Even today, the all-familiar V-ている "tense", we can still think of it as "V and stay that way": (And て was not originally a part of it. 広辞苑 uses 籠りゐて君に恋ふるに心神もなし as an example to illustrate いる【居る】(historically ゐる)'s use.)
食べている = eat and keep doing that
起きている = rise and stay that way

Edit: Continuative form is also the basis of #6
_市場に行ったり、りんご買ったり、家に帰ってきた。_
The modern past tense marker た comes from 完了助動詞「たり」, whose forms are たら・たり・たり・たる・たれ・たれ. So #6 comes to mean what it means because they are really just a idiomatic use of continuative forms.


----------



## frequency

Do you see this


ktdd said:


> _市場に行ったり、りんご買ったり、家に帰ってきた。_


almost the same as _市場に行き、りんごを買い、家に帰ってきた。_?


----------



## Nino83

ktdd said:


> then underwent a series of phonological changes, something like 行きて => 行いて => 行って, 遊びて => 遊みて => 遊んで. (I'm not saying that's exactly what happened, but the idea is familiar and reasonable)


I don't know the Japanese phonological history (if someone knows, please let us know), but it seems to me that in many cases there is the loss of the vowel and an assimilation with the following or with the preceeding consonant: nomite > nomte > nonde, tachite > tachte > tatte.


----------



## ktdd

frequency said:


> Do you see this
> 
> almost the same as _市場に行き、りんごを買い、家に帰ってきた。_?


No, I know #6 is non-exhaustive. But I have a way to explain it lol, probably not very scientific.
My theory is たり ultimately comes from て＋あり right, あり is the old form of ある, which means 'exist'. So …たり…たり…する is like "eating-exists, shooting-exists, and leaving-exists. 'To exist' is not a concrete action, no particular sequence is required, so it gradually began to mean "to do things like such and such". Just my groundless guesswork


----------



## frequency

ktdd said:


> "to do things like such and such". Just my groundless guesswork


Good! Not groundless guesswork at all; I agree!


----------



## ktdd

Nino83 said:


> Thank you, frequency!
> My doubt was the following. Seeing that _ichidan_ verbs don't have a specific _ren'yō-kei_ different from _mizenkei_, there could have been some confusion, but, from what you said, it seems it doesn't pose any problem.


Oh that, there won't be confusions. Because 未然形 is always followed by ない (negative) or よう(volitional). Think of it as bound morpheme. It doesn't have a sequential use like 連用形. If you see 「食べ、」 in an article, you can be 100 percent sure it's 連用形. Pretty neat, isn't it. 

There's only one or two exceptions as far as I know concerning ichidan verbs' renyoukei used this way. One is you can't do it like in (2) if the verb is ichidan and it has a single kanji as root, e.g. 見る. (The reason is obvious. 「食べ」 is OK but 「見」? We don't even know if it's a verb!) Two is ～ている, it doesn't look right when it becomes ～てい, so people use ～ており instead.

I hope this addresses your concerns.


----------



## Nino83

ktdd said:


> I hope this addresses your concerns.


Yes, ktdd.
Two days ago, after writing that comment, I thought a bit about it and I came up with a similar conclusion.
Thank you for confirming my thought.


----------

