I’m trying to get a better understanding of how this works. My confusion is when something like a book is the subject and there is a verb. How can I understand this better in my mind? How can I have a better model on how this works?
In [this video](https://youtu.be/vk3aKqMQwhM) by Cure Dolly she sort of explains it but it’s not really clicking.
私は本がわかる。
I understand that the sentence isn’t,
“I understand the book”
But is,
“As for me, the book is understandable.”
But even this translation isn’t adequate for me because I’m trying to figure out how it works with tense in Japanese. Are the example translations below close?
Does :
私は本がわかる
Mean:
As for me, book understand.
I am also confused here because from what I understand that the verb is in the infinitive. So is this more like the tense of the sentence: “I eat cake”?
Does :
私は本がわかって いる。
Mean:
As for me, book understanding.
Like I’m currently understanding the book?
Does :
私は本がわかった。
Mean:
As for me, book understood.
Sometime in the past I understood the book?
3 comments
I think the main problem here is that you might, ironically, have a wrong impression of the verb わかる: as per [Wiktionary](https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E5%88%86%E3%81%8B%E3%82%8B), the root of this verb comes from わく which means to separate, part OR **be separable, distinguishable**. This is also reflected in the kanji that can be used to write わかる, namely 分 (with the meaning of “parting”) and 解 (with the meaning of “unravel”).
So the idea of “understanding” in japanese is not so much that you yourself understand but that the item of your understanding has unraveled, it became distinguishable, understandable and is thus the subject. Think of it like untying a knot in the fabric of the items nature that keeps you from understanding and suddenly the whole thing comes apart, its details laid bare in front of you, if you will. If you watch more Cure Dolly she goes into very much detail how this is very common because japanese has no problem choosing “strange” subjects because of its animistic nature and it will get clearer with time.
As for tenses, that’s a whole other can of worms but I made [this little graphic](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/669177900205080576/987317969828847647/Japanese_ta-teita-teiru_conjugation_timeline.png) a while ago that might shed some light. Specifically for わかる there is some nuance, however I think it makes a lot of sense if you think about it in the true meaning I outlined above: わかった means “it unraveled” and basically tells whoever you talk to, that the item became understandable (some time in the past, could be mere seconds ago too though) and thus you now get it, understand it. わかっている is the continuous state, it means that it did わかった at some point, yes, but you’re putting more emphasis that it’s been like that for a while, which is why often, when people want to avoid someone giving them a lengthy explanation they say わかってる！ like “I already know!”. わかる in it’s standard form is often used for sentimental agreement, telling people “oh yeah, I totally get that”, you’re basically stating that what your conversation partner said “unravels” or “computes” for you too.
I know this might be a lot of information, sorry I couldn’t keep it more concise but I hope it helps!
this is a matter of unlearning and learning some patterns
XはYがZ
is just an ongoing and extremely commonly used pattern that means “as for X, Y has Z property” or “as for X, Y is Z”
hence
私は背が高い
“as for me, back-length is long/tall”
however this (among others) is why the concept of “is” cannot be translated properly and why です・だ is not “is”
a lot of japanese is simply associating two concepts and allowing context to complete the connection of meaning
for example the famous unagi sentence
ウェトレス：何になさいますか？
Aさん：私はうなぎにします。
Bさん：私もうなぎです。
B is definitely not saying “i am also an eel”. it’s just “as for me as well, the eel”
note that this is not significantly different from some usages in english:
server: who ordered the eel?
B: i’m the eel, he’s the pizza.
I think all the explanations of trying to force “本” to be some kind of “subject” and claim that it really means “As for me, the book is understandable” aren’t helpful later down the line when you realize that apart from using “〜が”, it really is an object in about every sense of the word.
Japanese simply has a concept called “nominative objects”. The object is not always marked with “〜を” but sometimes with “〜が”. This depends on the verb and in some cases both can be used with minimal to no change in meaning.
“分かる” is sometimes colloquially used as with “〜を” nowadays but this not considered “proper” but it happens. With other verbs which were historically only used with “〜が” it is very common and considered acceptable to use them with “〜を” as well such as the potential forms or desirative forms of verbs.
This isn’t very unusual in languages in any case. Icelandic is probably the most studied example of a language with such “quirky cases” where sometimes the subject can be in what generally considered an objective case and *vice versā*, even English has a remnant of it in “methinks” where “me” was once the subject. Cognates to this live on Dutch and German where it behaves more like a subject than an object despite being in an objective case. In “XにYが分かる”, “X” really behaves more as a subject and “Y” more as an object would apart from the case endings. Such as for instance “*貴方のことがよく分かる。*” being possible which it wouldn’t if it were truly a subject.