てある example sentence question

[seanblue]

This example sentence is really confusing.

@Pushindawood First, the main translation and the part in brackets are so similar that I don’t really understand why they are separate. And I saw little in the translation that indicated I should use てある. I only have a basic understanding of てある so far, so I can’t give a concrete suggestion, but I feel like this sentence needs to be improved in some way.

Now, can someone explain to me how this is a good usage of てある (if it even is), because I’m not seeing it.

[LucasDesu]

I’m not going to deceive you and tell you how easy it is to understand this concept because it can be easily confused with other grammar, not mention most of the grammar explanations I’ve come across regarding this point have always been piss-poor. So I can’t guarantee that this will make your understanding about this clearer, but here goes.

～てある expresses a state resulting from a purposeful action by someone (or something). This is different from ～ている which addresses the continuing state of something (in addition to expressing the progressive aspect). The key about this grammar is the resultant state that you want to bring attention to. The agent (the person who does the action) may not always be clear, however who did the action is irrelevant (with regard to this grammar) because the focus is the resulting state.

The kicker is that this grammar can be confused with ～ている, the Japanese passive, or even the Japanese past tense due to how it can be translated into English. Again, the focus is the resultant state the subject is left in, not who did the action. In many cases, this resulting state is meant to be in preparation for something in the future. I’m going to put down some sentences that will compare ～ている and ～てある.

For example: (These sentences were either created by me or something I came across in the past).

～てある

宿題をやってある --> (My) homework is finished (because I did it earlier).

窓が開いてある 。なんでだろう？–> (Somebody) opened the window (and it’s still open now). Why did they do that?

リンクをクリックして、ホームページに行く。そこには、「文プロ」と書いてあるよ。
–> Click the link and you’ll go to the homepage. You’ll see “文プロ” written on that page.

Versus ～ている

窓が開いている。なんでだろう？ --> The window is open (and it’s still open now). I wonder why it’s open?

昔から、～ている形という文法がわかっているよ。–> I’ve known about the grammar for ～ている for quite a long time.

ビールが冷えているよ！ --> The beer chilled (now).

So if that was clear as mud, please feel free to browse these sites to help you understand. I find that reading a variety of explanations, I’m able to get a fuller understanding of the grammar because people are bound to miss important details. Link 1: ～ている vs. ～てある, Link 2: ～てある vs. past tense, Link 3: ～ている vs. ～てある vs. passive aspect

[seanblue]

Well I understood that explanation and those examples because I did already understand てある to that extent.

Part of my confusion comes from 建てた being used earlier in the sentence along with 建ててある. Of course I understand the function of 建てた in 建てたビル, but I’ve never seen an example sentence with that combination (建てた + 建ててある) before so I’m having trouble putting it together.

For the record, I did try to answer the question with the passive past tense 建てられた due to the English translation.

[LucasDesu]

Ah, I see what you mean. The initial sentence, “The building that has been standing for 1000 years (is still standing).”, can give the sense that passive should be used because of the “has been standing for 1000 years” part. Obviously without a context, it’s is difficult to wrap one’s mind around why the sentence was written this way. For this reason, the clarifying hint (or at least it’s supposed to clarify) addresses 建てたビル in the English and highlights “is still standing” to indicate the resulting state of the building. Unfortunately, if the clarifying sentence is used as the main sentence, users may want to input 建てている because of “is still standing”. To be honest, ～てある doesn’t have a direct unique translation. This means there are no obvious addition of words when sentences like these are translated into English, which makes it difficult to see why this should be correct answer.

In other words, if this sentence came in a paragraph that included the context, it would be easier to spot why it should be written this way. I’m not sure what the devs could do beyond just scrapping this example and choosing a clearer example that doesn’t have the messiness of the same verb being used differently.

At least you understand the concept, that’s the important part.

[seanblue]

Yeah, I feel like maybe they just need to make a clearer sentence instead of using this one.

[seanblue]

@Pushindawood I just got this sentence again and I have a suggestion for how to change it. I would actually make the parenthetical sentence the main sentence and add a new note for the parentheses.

Bolded parts are the yellow parts.

Old version:

The building that has been standing for 1000 years (is still standing). [The building that was built 1000 years ago is still standing] [casual]

Proposed version:

The building that was built 1000 years ago is still standing [remains standing] [casual]

[Pushindawood]

@LucasDesu Thank you for your insight! We still plan to replace this sentence with something easier to understand in the future. For now we have updated the site to reflect @seanblue’s suggestion. Thank you. Cheers!

[seanblue]

Going to reuse this topic since there isn’t a dedicated one for てある yet.

How do you get from 撮り直す to “to put away”?

[Kai]

It looks to me like it was meant to say 取り直す, because I don’t think I’ve ever seen 撮 used to refer to anything other than photography. Which is interesting, come to think of it… makes me wonder about its etymology.

[mrnoone]

@seanblue @Kai

Hey
I have changed the translation to:

I have to retake the photo of the ornaments that are on the tree.

Another possible sentence would be:

ツリーに飾ってあるオーナメントを取り外さなくてはいけない。
I have to remove the ornaments that are on the tree.

[fjdksleiwoqp]

For てある vs てしまう:

1. 友達は私のケーキを食べてしまった。
   My friend finished off my cake (and that’s too bad…)

2. 友達は私のケーキを食べてあった。
   My friend ate my cake (and now it’s gone…)

Do these translations accurately capture the nuance? In particular I’m not sure about the てある one.