Japanese Language Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for students, teachers, and linguists wanting to discuss the finer points of the Japanese language. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

When using the potential form of a verb, I was taught that the particle を becomes が. However, in real life this seems to not always be the case. I've even heard Japanese people use を instead of が quite often.

What's the difference between the following two sentences? Is を actually grammatically correct?



share|improve this question
I was taught the same thing (を --> が before potential) so I'm wondering about this too. +1 – Lukman Jun 5 '11 at 4:43
As a child, I was shocked to find a book (in Japanese) on Japanese grammar which claimed that using が with a potential form was a common mistake. I learned from the book not to believe what a book says without thinking. :) – Tsuyoshi Ito Jun 5 '11 at 16:15
up vote 14 down vote accepted

In the が + potential construction, the focus is on the noun.

新聞が読める (what I am able to read is newspapers [as opposed to other written media])

ここで切符が買えますか (is this where tickets [as opposed to other items for sale] can be bought?)

In the を + potential construction, the focus is on the entire phrase.

新聞を読める (what I am able to do is read newspapers)

ここで切符を買えますか (is this where I am able to buy tickets [as opposed to doing some other action]?)

を + potential is not yet considered standard, but has begun to gain acceptance among some speakers.

(Paraphrased from Japanese: The Spoken Language)

share|improve this answer
+1 for noting that wo + potential form is not grammatically correct. – Mark Hosang Jun 5 '11 at 6:24
since を is not considered standard, is it true that if someone uses が, there may be no intention at all in focusing on the noun? – Pacerier Aug 12 '11 at 17:23
@Pacerier, they could also use ~ことができる if they wanted the emphasis on the phrase instead of the noun. – Muhd Nov 3 '11 at 2:06

A well known difference (noticed by Tada 1992) is the scope of the quantifiers in relevant positions.

'It is possible for Tanaka to bend only the pinky finger without bending the other fingers.'
'It is only the pinky finger that Tanaka can bend.' (Marginal)

'It is only the pinky finger that Tanaka can bend.'

'It is possible to exclusively invite two people to dinner without companions.'
'There are only two people that I can invite to the dinner.' (Marginal)

'There are only two people that I can invite to the dinner.'

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.