In a sentence like メニューに値段が書いてない, are we seeing the ～てある pattern in the negative, or a contraction of 書いている?


One way to say that there are no prices on the menu would be to use the ～てある
pattern and say:

> メニューに値段が書いてありません。

Presumably, then, the plain equivalent of this sentence would be:

> メニューに値段が書いてない。

However, I find that when I hear that, I interpret it as a contraction of:

> メニューに値段が書いていない。

There is a part of me that feels that it cannot _actually_ be a contraction of
値段が書いていない, since 書く does not have any intransitive senses. But people really
do use it that way. In fact, if you do the following Google searches in
quotation marks, here's what you get:

  * 値段が書いてありません - 216K hits
  * 値段が書いてない - 559K hits
  * 値段が書いていない - 852K hits

So if people really _are_ using it that way, with the full 書いていない, then it
stands to reason that many (most?) of them might be interpreting 値段が書いてない as a
simple contraction, and not as the negative of 書いてある.

So my questions are:

  1. Can the ～てある pattern be used in the negative, as in メニューに値段が書いてありません, at all?

I searched my grammar resources and dictionaries and I don't see a clear
answer to this question, but I know I have heard this in use. Is this
definitely correct and unremarkable among modern native speakers?

  2. Can 書いてない be taken as the negative of ～てある (the plain equivalent of ～てありません)?

  3. Is 値段が書いていない understood to be grammatical among modern native speakers?

  4. If so, then is 値段が書いてない taken to be the negative of ～てある or a contraction of 書いていない?

Thank you in advance for your thoughts!




The number of hits on Google is far more arbitrary than you might think. When
doing this kind of research, you need to use a corpus like
[BCCWJ](https://clrd.ninjal.ac.jp/bccwj/). Here are the results.

  * **が書いてありません** : 11 hits
  * **が書いていません** : 0 hits
  * **が書いてない** : 24 hits
  * **が書いていない** : 7 hits

* * *

I was really confused when I started to seriously consider this question, but
fortunately, I found a recent article by NHK放送文化研究所 that perfectly discussed
this very issue:
[「本を置いていない」と「本が置いていない」どちらがよい？](https://www.nhk.or.jp/bunken/research/kotoba/20220201_8.html)
The following explanation is largely based on this.

So these are obviously correct:

  * (誰かが)メニューに値段 **を** 書いて **いる** 。
  * メニューに値段 **が** 書いて **ある** 。

What are the negative versions of these? If you apply the basic rules, you get
the following:

  * (誰かが)メニューに値段 **を** 書いて **いない** 。
  * ❗ メニューに値段 **が** 書いて **ない** 。

These are still grammatically correct, but てない is a combination that is
usually considered a contracted ていない, so it's often seen as sloppy or overly
informal. As a compromise, the following sentence has become acceptable, too!

  * ✅ メニューに値段 **が** 書いて **いない** 。 ← Acceptable!!!

This sentence felt _intuitively_ correct to me, but upon closer examination,
it seemed utterly wrong, leaving me quite confused. If it weren't for the NHK
article, I would have had no choice but to say "this is just how it is".

The same problem does not happen with polite forms; you can just use ありません
without any issue. Therefore, you still cannot say 値段が書いていません, which explains
the BCCWJ results above.

  * (誰かが)メニューに値段 **を** 書いて **いません** 。
  * ✅ メニューに値段 **が** 書いて **ありません** 。
  * ❌ メニューに値段 **が** 書いて **いません** 。 ← Wrong!!!

* * *

Lastly, to answer your questions directly:

  1. Can the ～てある pattern be used in the negative, as in メニューに値段が書いてありません, at all? → **Yes.**
  2. Can 書いてない be taken as the negative of ～てある (the plain equivalent of ～てありません)? → **Yes.**
  3. Is 値段が書いていない understood to be grammatical among modern native speakers? → **Surprisingly, yes! This is an exception.**
  4. If so, then is 値段が書いてない taken to be the negative of ～てある or a contraction of 書いていない? → **Both.** But for the latter, perhaps it's more precise to say 値段が書いていない is an "exceptional _expansion_ of 書いてない".

Note that the acceptability of 値段が書いていない varies from person to person. I
personally tend to say either 値段が書かれて(い)ない or 値段 **を** 書いて(い)ない.

[![From NHK's
article](https://i.stack.imgur.com/pKwrE.png)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/pKwrE.png)




The number of hits on Google is far more arbitrary than you might think. When
doing this kind of research, you need to use a corpus like
[BCCWJ](https://clrd.ninjal.ac.jp/bccwj/). Here are the results.

  * **が書いてありません** : 11 hits
  * **が書いていません** : 0 hits
  * **が書いてない** : 24 hits
  * **が書いていない** : 7 hits

* * *

I was really confused when I started to seriously consider this question, but
fortunately, I found a recent article by NHK放送文化研究所 that perfectly discussed
this very issue:
[「本を置いていない」と「本が置いていない」どちらがよい？](https://www.nhk.or.jp/bunken/research/kotoba/20220201_8.html)
The following explanation is largely based on this.

So these are obviously correct:

  * (誰かが)メニューに値段 **を** 書いて **いる** 。
  * メニューに値段 **が** 書いて **ある** 。

What are the negative versions of these? If you apply the basic rules, you get
the following:

  * (誰かが)メニューに値段 **を** 書いて **いない** 。
  * ❗ メニューに値段 **が** 書いて **ない** 。

These are still grammatically correct, but てない is a combination that is
usually considered a contracted ていない, so it's often seen as sloppy or overly
informal. As a compromise, the following sentence has become acceptable, too!

  * ✅ メニューに値段 **が** 書いて **いない** 。 ← Acceptable!!!

This sentence felt _intuitively_ correct to me, but upon closer examination,
it seemed utterly wrong, leaving me quite confused. If it weren't for the NHK
article, I would have had no choice but to say "this is just how it is".

The same problem does not happen with polite forms; you can just use ありません
without any issue. Therefore, you still cannot say 値段が書いていません, which explains
the BCCWJ results above.

  * (誰かが)メニューに値段 **を** 書いて **いません** 。
  * ✅ メニューに値段 **が** 書いて **ありません** 。
  * ❌ メニューに値段 **が** 書いて **いません** 。 ← Wrong!!!

* * *

Lastly, to answer your questions directly:

  1. Can the ～てある pattern be used in the negative, as in メニューに値段が書いてありません, at all? → **Yes.**
  2. Can 書いてない be taken as the negative of ～てある (the plain equivalent of ～てありません)? → **Yes.**
  3. Is 値段が書いていない understood to be grammatical among modern native speakers? → **Surprisingly, yes! This is an exception.**
  4. If so, then is 値段が書いてない taken to be the negative of ～てある or a contraction of 書いていない? → **Both.** But for the latter, perhaps it's more precise to say 値段が書いていない is an "exceptional _expansion_ of 書いてない".

Note that the acceptability of 値段が書いていない varies from person to person. I
personally tend to say either 値段が書かれて(い)ない or 値段 **を** 書いて(い)ない.

[![From NHK's
article](https://i.stack.imgur.com/pKwrE.png)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/pKwrE.png)

