# if he couldn't be made/forced to do something



## Nino83

Hello everyone. 

Excuse me if I ask something stupid, but I'm a beginner.
As far as I know (if I'm not wrong) it's possible to combine causative, passive and conditional inflections, for example 食べさせられなかったら (if he weren't made/forced to eat). 
Is it possible to add the potential inflection in order to write something like 食べられさせられなかったら?
If it is possible, what does it mean? "If he couldn't be made/forced to eat" or "if he could be made/forced not to eat"? 

Thank you


----------



## jamesh625

"If he wasn't made to be able to eat (it), ..."

I think this conjugation is technically possible but I've never seen it "in the wild". I.e., people would probably never say this; not only would it become confusing it doesn't sound elegant.

Its sense might be more easily understood with/in some context, but like I said, I don't think one would be easy to find.

A Google search shows no results for the exact phrase.


----------



## Nino83

Thank you, jamesh625. 
I asked this because I've found some result for the first conjugation, 食べさせられなかったら, but no results for 食べられさせられなかったら.


----------



## frequency

You Nino are going to make/have him eat something, but you wonder whether or not you can make him eat it.
(Sorry I'm using you, instead of he.)
And you say _If I couldn't make him eat it,.._ We say 食べさせられなかったら, and this is better and already more sufficient than another.

Unfortunately, you don't need the passive for the example. られない in yours isn't the passive; this られない（られる） would be ability's jyodoushi (auxiliary verb).

Does that answer your question?

PS: jamesh, られる・られない って日本語で助動詞でいいんだよね？そう覚えた？（Passiveを兼ねる問題は別として）


----------



## jamesh625

frequency said:


> Unfortunately, you don't need the passive for the example. られない in yours isn't the passive; this られない（られる） would be ability's jyodoushi (auxiliary verb).
> 
> Does that answer your question?
> 
> PS: jamesh, られる・られない って日本語で助動詞でいいんだよね？そう覚えた？（Passiveを兼ねる問題は別として）



まず、なぜ「使役」+「られる」は必ず「使役」+「可能」と見なすのでしょうか。例えば、「先生に感想文を書かせられました」の「書かせられました」とは、「使役」+「受け身」でしょう。

次に、「られる」のことだけど、このサイトでご覧になれる通り、複数の役割がありますね。すなわち、*受身･尊敬・可能･自発*というものですね。文字の形においては、違いはないから、そう簡単に「可能」か「使役」かどうか言えませんね。

いや、難しい〜！


----------



## Nino83

frequency said:


> You Nino are going to make/have him eat something, but you wonder whether or not you can make him eat it.
> (Sorry I'm using you, instead of he.)
> And you say _If I couldn't make him eat it,.._ We say 食べさせられなかったら, and this is better and already more sufficient than another.
> Unfortunately, you don't need the passive for the example.


Thank you.
So _if I made him eat_, _if I could make him eat,_ _if he were made to eat, if he wasn't made to be able to eat_ are translated 食べさせられなかったら in Japanese?


frequency said:


> られない in yours isn't the passive; this られない（られる） would be ability's jyodoushi (auxiliary verb).


Ok, られない is the passive negative in the present tense.
食べられる = it is eaten
食べられない = it is not eaten
食べられた  = it was eaten
食べられなかった = it wasn't eaten
食べられなかったら = if it weren't eaten
Is it right?


----------



## jamesh625

> Ok, られない is the passive negative in the present tense.
> 食べられる = it is eaten
> 食べられない = it is not eaten
> 食べられた  = it was eaten
> 食べられなかった = it wasn't eaten
> 食べられなかったら = if it weren't eaten
> Is it right?



It's not necessarily the passive. It could be one of a few things if context is not given:
- potential ("can")
- passive ("is" + past participle)
- honorific (no English equivalent)
- spontaneous (no English equivalent, but maybe something like an intransitive or pronominal verb in Romance languages)

That being said, what you posted wasn't wrong, but it could also be
食べられる = I can eat
食べられない = I cannot eat
食べられた = I was able to eat
食べられなかった = I was not able to eat
食べられなかったら = if I was not able to eat
(I used "I" as the subject but it could be anyone else.)

Although there is a special honorific word for eating, in order to keep the same example, it could also be:
食べられる = he eats
食べられない = he does not eat
食べられた = he ate
食べられなかった = he did not eat
食べられなかったら = if he didn't eat
Since the honorific can only refer to someone other than oneself, I've used the pronoun "he". The problem is, as I said above, the honorific version of 食べる is 召し上がる(めしあがる).

I can't see a way to apply the spontaneous form here, because it's pretty limited in scope.

(In order to get back to the original question, now that I think about it, it doesn't make sense to have a potential form and then a causative and then a passive. )




Nino83 said:


> So _if I made him eat_, _if I could make him eat,_ _if he were made to eat, if he wasn't made to be able to eat_ are translated 食べさせられなかったら in Japanese?


If I made him eat = 食べさせたら
If he were made to eat = 食べさせられたら
If he wasn't made to be able to eat = ??? (suddenly, I'm not sure. I want to say 食べられるとさせられなかったら but for one it now has と and secondly it sounds awful...).

I advise that you wait for more opinions.


----------



## Schokolade

食べさせられなかったら can be interpreted in at least two ways:

1. 食べ(verb 食べる) + させ(causative auxiliary verb させる) + られ(*potential* auxiliary verb られる) + なかっ(negative auxiliary verb ない) + たら(hypothetical form of auxiliary verb た)
i.e. "If (you) can't make (someone) eat" or "If (you) can't feed (someone)"
(≒ 食べさせることができなかったら)

2. 食べ(verb 食べる) + させ(causative auxiliary verb させる) + られ(*passive* auxiliary verb られる) + なかっ(negative auxiliary verb ない) + たら(hypothetical form of auxiliary verb た)
i.e. "If (you) are not forced to eat"
e.g. 「無理やり食べさせられなかったら、絶対に食べなかっただろう。」(I would never have tried it unless forced to.)


----------



## frequency

うん・・ｗ
Nino's example is:
食べさせる （have/make, しえき, as jamesh says.) + ability's られる
食べさせる＋られる
The first る is dropped off: 食べさせられる, but make it negative: 食べさせられない. (I can't have him eat)
..don't mix the passive in it in your head. In other words, I'm saying
食べさせることができる・食べさせることができない。

Plus, what confusing is that hypothesis　たら is added.
So it's 食べさせられなかったら. In other words, it says:
食べさせることができなかったら.
Am I correct? If so, the all sound _If I couldn't make/have him eat (sth)._



jamesh625 said:


> まず、なぜ「使役」+「られる」は必ず「使役」+「可能」と見なすのでしょうか。例えば、「_先生に感想文を書かせられました_」の「書かせられました」とは、「使役」+「受け身」でしょう。


これは、Nino's caseと違うものだと思う. This could be different to the Nino's case. 確かに、「使役」+「受け身」です。



jamesh625 said:


> 次に、「られる」のことだけど、このサイトでご覧になれる通り、複数の役割がありますね。すなわち、*受身･尊敬・可能･自発*というものですね。文字の形においては、違いはないから、そう簡単に「可能」か「使役」かどうか言えませんね。


うん・・ｗ


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> Thank you.
> So _if I made him eat_, _if I could make him eat,_ _if he were made to eat, if he wasn't made to be able to eat_ are translated 食べさせられなかったら in Japanese?


食べさせられなかったら is okay and correct.
Let's omit hypothesis in it. And if you mean that you _can't_ have him eat sth, it is:
（彼に）食べさせられない.

For example, you have a tomcat. You want to have him eat food including a pill. But he gets very angry with you! You say 彼に(foodを)食べさせられない.


----------



## Nino83

It's my fault, because I used an ichidan verb.
Let's make some example with 歌う.
私は彼を*歌わせる* = I make him sing
私は彼に歌を*歌わせる* = I make him sing a song
Can I say: 私は彼に*歌えさせる* = I can make him sing a song. ?
Then:
私は彼に歌を*歌わせなかったら* = If I didn't make him sing a song
Can I say: 私は彼に*歌えせなかったらる* = If I couldn't make him sing a song. ?
Are causative, potential and conditional tenses compatible?

歌は彼にうたわれる = The song is sung by him
歌は彼にうたわれなかった = The song was not sung by him
歌は彼にうたわれなかったら = If the song were not sung by him ?
Are passive and conditional compatible?

Then there is also うたわせられる = to be made to sing
How can I use this form?
歌は彼に私からうたわせられる?
Is it compatible with conditional conjugation?


----------



## Schokolade

Nino83 said:


> Can I say: 私は彼に*歌えさせる* = I can make him sing a song. ?


For 'I can make him sing a song' I would say 私は彼に歌を歌わせられる or ～歌わせることができる.



> Can I say: 私は彼に*歌えせなかったらる* = If I couldn't make him sing a song. ?


For 'If I couldn't make him sing a song' I would say 私が彼に歌を歌わせられなかったら or ～歌わせることができなかったら.



> 歌は彼にうたわれる = The song is sung by him
> 歌は彼にうたわれなかった = The song was not sung by him
> 歌は彼にうたわれなかったら = If the song were not sung by him ?
> Are passive and conditional compatible?


Yeah they look alright to me.



> 歌は彼に私からうたわせられる?
> Is it compatible with conditional conjugation?


It makes little sense to me. Do you mean 彼は私に歌を歌わせられる (He is made to sing a song by me.)? Then 'If he is made to sing a song by me' would be like 彼が私に歌を歌わせられたら.


----------



## Nino83

Schokolade said:


> For 'I can make him sing a song' I would say 私は彼に歌を歌わせられる
> 彼は私に歌を歌わせられる (He is made to sing a song by me.)


Thank you very much, Schokolade.
It means that 歌わせられる means both "can make him sing" and "he is made to sing", i.e both potential+causative and passive+causative?


Schokolade said:


> Do you mean 彼は私に歌を歌わせられる (He is made to sing a song by me.)


Yes.
So, also the negative sentence is possible, 彼が私に歌を歌わせられなかったら "if he is not made to sing a song by me", is it right?


----------



## karlalou

Nino83 said:


> So, also the negative sentence is possible, 彼が私に歌を歌わせられなかったら "if he is not made to sing a song by me", is it right?


At first, I took it as "If he fails to make me sing a song", but yes it can also mean "If he is not made to sing a song by me". 

れる・られる needs context to know what exactly it's saying.
To avoid such confusion, 
彼が私に歌を歌わせられることがなかったら (If he is not made to sing a song by me)
彼が私に歌を歌わせることができなかったら (If he fails to make me sing a song)

By the way, we don't say 食べられさせられなかったら.



jamesh625 said:


> "If he wasn't made to be able to eat (it), ..."


This is 彼が食べられるようにされなかったら


----------



## Nino83

karlalou said:


> 彼が私に歌を歌わせられることがなかったら (If he is not made to sing a song by me)


Literally "if doesn't happen the fact that he is made to sing a song by me", right? 
Here you use the form なかった, is it an abbreviated form of ある? If I write 彼が私に歌を歌わせられることがあらなかゝたら, is it the same, correct? 


karlalou said:


> 彼が私に歌を歌わせることができなかったら (If he fails to make me sing a song)


Literally "if he's not able to make, the fact that he fails to make me sing a song, happen", right?  


karlalou said:


> This is 彼が食べられるようにされなかったら


How would you explain grammatically this construction? 
In my grammar notes I have "-u + you ni + suru" = "try to do" and "-a + you ni + suru" = "try not to do".


----------



## karlalou

Nino83 said:


> karlalou said:
> 
> 
> 
> 彼が私に歌を歌わせられることがなかったら (If he is not made to sing a song by me)
> 
> 
> 
> Literally "if doesn't happen the fact that he is made to sing a song by me", right
Click to expand...

Right.


> Here you use the form なかった, is it an abbreviated form of ある? If I write 彼が私に歌を歌わせられることがあらなかゝたら, is it the same, correct?


No. なかった is past form of ない. ない is an antonym of ある. あらない doesn't exist.



> karlalou said:
> 
> 
> 
> 彼が私に歌を歌わせることができなかったら (If he fails to make me sing a song)
> 
> 
> 
> Literally "if he's not able to make, the fact that he fails to make me sing a song, happen", right?
Click to expand...

mm..ah.. I guess you mean "if he's not able to make the fact that I sing a song happen". Yes, it's something like that.



> karlalou said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jamesh625 said:
> 
> 
> 
> "If he wasn't made to be able to eat (it), ..."
> 
> 
> 
> This is 彼が食べられるようにされなかったら
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How would you explain grammatically this construction?
> In my grammar notes I have "-u + you ni + suru" = "try to do" and "-a + you ni + suru" = "try not to do".
Click to expand...

"try to do" is する ようにする 
"try not to do" is *しない *ようにする

and here* ～できる・（ら）れる ように される = be made to be able to do ~*
Negation of される is されない. The past form of されない is されなかった.


----------



## Nino83

karlalou said:


> あらない doesn't exist.


I see. There is an error on verbix.com 
thank you


----------



## Nino83

Another question. 
Seeing that _-(ra)reru-_ is both passive and potential, the sentence 私は彼女に手紙を書かせられる can mean both "I (私は) can make her write (彼女に書かせられる) a letter (手紙を)" and "I (私は) am made/forced by her to write (彼女に書かせられる) a letter (手紙を)", is it right?  
So, in order to make it unambiguous, if I don't want to use the -_koto ga dekiru_- construction, I should say, 私は彼女*によって*手紙を書かせられる "I am made/forced to write a letter* by *her", am I right?


----------



## karlalou

Nino83 said:


> Seeing that _-(ra)reru-_ is both passive and potential, the sentence 私は彼女に手紙を書かせられる can mean both "I (私は) can make her write (彼女に書かせられる) a letter (手紙を)" and "I (私は) am made/forced by her to write (彼女に書かせられる) a letter (手紙を)", is it right?


Right.


Nino83 said:


> So, in order to make it unambiguous, if I don't want to use the -_koto ga dekiru_- construction, I should say, 私は彼女*によって*手紙を書かせられる "I am made/forced to write a letter* by *her", am I right?


Yes.


----------



## frequency

Nino83 said:


> So, in order to make it unambiguous, if I don't want to use the -_koto ga dekiru_- construction, I should say, 私は彼女*によって*手紙を書かせられる "I am made/forced to write a letter* by *her", am I right?


 
No. Use に in される cases.

上司＿飲まされる
先生＿書かされる
母＿手伝わされる
They all take に.
The three people are 'commanders'. You're forced to drink alcohol by your supervisor/Your supervisor has you drink alcohol.
Strangely, we use に for commander.

But in the passive, use によって.
彼によって書かれた手紙
訪問者によって使われるPC (There's a PC in a public office and it is used by visitors.)
But we sometimes use に: 訪問者に使われるPC, because it's easier.
On the other hand, 彼に書かれた手紙 almost sounds to us _a letter to him_, because a letter comes and goes from person to person, it reminds us of a letter to/from sb. So the use of によって is better, if you mean a letter written by him.

We don't use _koto ga dekiru_ with _sareru_: We don't say 上司に酒を飲まされることができる。


----------



## Nino83

Thank you!


----------

