From the very beginning, this lesson feels contradictory about how to handle する verbs, specifically the absence/presence of a prefix (お/ご).
The structure section says:
する → いたす <— LINE 1
お + Verb[stem]+ いたします
ご(1) + [する] Verb + いたします <— LINE 3
(1) お, limited to [する]Verbs like: 電話する、勉強する、散歩する
I’m ignoring the (1) footnote for now, because my confusion is more basic than that: LINE 1 and LINE 3 appear to contradict each toher.
LINE 1 of the structure implies that する verbs simply get the する changed to いたす, with no prefix. The lesson content seems to say the same thing (emphasis added):
In the case of する verbs themselves, simply replace する with いたす. For other verbs, add いたす to the ます stem of the verb, while attaching お, or ご to the beginning
But LINE 3 of the structure then talks about how to choose the correct prefix for a する verb. If no prefix is needed for する verb… why do we need to think about which prefix to choose for a する verb?!
The examples add to my confusion, since they propagate the contradictions above. Note that I am not confused about the 拝 exception.
Here is an example that follows the rule from LINE 1 (it does not add a prefix to the する verb):
私たちが用意いたします。
And here is one that follows the rule from LINE 3 (it does add a prefix):
ご案内いたします。
The (1) footnote appears to identify certain verbs which break a pattern, but there are two issues:
- I’m not even sure which pattern is being broken. Is it the pattern that する verbs don’t get prefixes? Or is it the normal choice of お vs ご which is being inverted?
- I’m not sure what the “like” in
[ する]Verbs like: 電話する、勉強する、散歩する means. What is the common thing that makes these verbs like each other?
So when I get a する verb, apparently I have to decide:
- Do I add a prefix?
- Which prefix do I add?
I think the answer to Q2 is sort of clear. The answer to Q1… I have no idea.
EDIT: I see that the long discussion above addresses some of my issues. It might be nice to have this in the actual lesson.