Your first hypothesis simply doesn’t hold. If you thought it might, you may not understand how causative-passives work.
If such a thing exists at all, the passive-causative form of 聞く would be 聞かれさせる, not 聞かれらせる. (A passive form is also valid as an ichidan, or Group-2, verb, and a verb in that group takes -させる to form a causative.)
If 聞かれさせる means anything, ...
There is no "passive-causative form" as you suggest in Japanese. Japanese verb conjugations can be "stacked", but not all combinations are possible. There is a correct order you have to respect. If you want the causative-passive meaning described in your textbook, you must always use させられる, not られさせる.
I was ...
"The conjugations have a commutative property ("causative passive" is semantically identical to the "passive causative")
This would be categorically false. Can you throw me several examples you think it might work? (by commutative I assume it is meant like how addition is commutative, like 2+3=3+2, i.e. can flip orders)
幼児体験で育つ would also be understood but it doesn’t sound any more natural than 幼児体験を送る, which is indeed uncommon. When the verb 育つ is used with the particle で, one would expect that で to indicate a place or environment where the person grows up. 体験 doesn’t quire meet this requirement. (It doesn’t quite make sense as a means, either.)
Yes, 体験を送る is understandable by analogy from 生活を送る, but 体験を送る is not a common collocation. This sentence would be more natural if it were 幼児時代を過ごしている, 幼児時代を送っている, 父親の愛情なしに育っている or something. (The standard verb used with 体験 is する (e.g., つらい体験をする), but 父親の愛情なき幼児体験をする doesn't make much sense anyway, because loveless-ness is not a one-time episode/event.)
I think you have the grammar right, what might have escaped you is that つかれた is not an adjective like "tired" is in English (ex: He is tired.) . When you realize that it's a past tense of a verb and you have to treat it like 食べる・食べた, everything will make sense to you. You'd say, 食べました but not 食べたです。
To repeat everyone here, 「です」applies only to ...
したら is a conditional expression. This is a sentence (or a sentence fragment) that consists only of a long "if-clause". The corresponding main clause has been left out.
たり has two different roles:
Lists multiple actions
On my days off, I read books or do something like this.
Indicates the marked verb is a rare/surprising ...
Closest English counterpart I can think of is, "what if" or "just imagine if"
What if, I looked to my side, and all the landries were nicely folded right there. (how convenient would that be!)
It is a form of ommission, unique to Japanese. Imagine the full sentence being like:
"Why" is seldom a useful question to ask when it comes to language and words -- it is awfully broad. :)
To narrow the scope a bit, and to focus on the etymology that you mention, let's look at the structure and derivation, and whether these words are related at all.
(Note: This gets long.)
Underlying word structure
You describe &...
"Is 来る strictly for coming to a physical location[?]"
The answer to this part of the question is no, of course not. Google/Oxford Dictionary:
"[C]an it be used to describe a product a product release[?]"
Yes, it works but 来る is not the best word for contexts involving movies. It ...
In general, the original verb covers a much broader range of meanings than its 取り counterpart. This means you would have to learn the specific sense of each 取り verb, anyways. So I would suggest you continue treating them as separate words.
Of the examples you listed, I would recognize only 取り揃える and, to a lesser degree, 取り仕切る as cases where 取り is used as a ...
There is a fundamental difference between the English labels "transitive" / "intransitive" and the Japanese labels 他動詞【たどうし】 / 自動詞【じどうし】. Please read the thread about that here:
Can verbs be both transitive and intransitive?
Key point: 自動詞【じどうし】 can sometimes have a syntactic (based on the grammatical structure of the ...
First, as a basic rule, が and の are interchangeable in relative clauses (with a few restrictions). 動きの鈍った魔物 and 動きが鈍った魔物 are totally interchangeable, and 動きが鈍い魔物 and 動きの鈍い魔物 are totally interchangeable, too. See: How does the の work in 「日本人の知らない日本語」?
Then what's the difference between 動きが鈍った魔物 and 動きが鈍い魔物? Simply, the former refers to monsters that are ...