Can が still be modeled as a subject marker in cases where it is sometimes modeled as a direct object marker?


There are a [couple of
posts](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/60953/verbs-
using-%e3%81%8c-to-mark-the-direct-object-subject) suggesting that, with
certain verbs, が can actually mark the _direct object_ of a sentence instead
of the subject. **But it seems to me that, in these cases, we can just
reinterpret the words marked by が as being proper subjects (instead of direct
objects).** The purpose of this post is to see if this model of Japanese is
getting something wrong?

**Example 1: 分かる.** An example of a verb satisfying this is 分かる:

  1. 「ここが分かる」 " _This_ is understandable." ("This" as the sentence's subject)
  2. 「ここを分かる」 "I understand this." ("This" as the sentence's direct object).

**Example 2: Potential verbs.** Then there are the [potential
cases](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/609/the-difference-
between-%e3%81%8c-and-%e3%82%92-with-the-potential-form-of-a-verb), like:

  1. 「新聞が読める」 " _Newspapers_ are readable." ("Newspapers" as the sentence's subject)
  2. 「新聞を読める」 "I can read newspapers.* ("Newspaper" as the sentence's direct object)

This interpretation also seems to preserve the (elsewhere cataloged) nuances
of が vs. を:

  * Using を makes the sentence sound more volitional (since e.g. in the cases above, it forces the subject of the sentence to be a human being, rather than an inanimate object).
  * Using が gives the sentence an exclusionary feel (e.g. " _This_ (as opposed to other things) is understandable" or " _Newspapers_ (as opposed to other things) are readable.).

Is there something wrong/misleading in interpreting が this way (essentially,
insisting that が never indicates direct objects)?




Without any further context, the most reasonable interpretation of 「新聞が読める」 is
that "I am able to read a news paper".

To say, "Newspapers are readable" says absolutely nothing about whether I can
or cannot read a news paper. This construct in English has a somewhat passive
feel to it (how different is from saying "Newpapers can be read").

But the Japanese isn't passive at all.

Is there a reason you're not happy with が marking the subject? This is how
ergative languages can work.




Without any further context, the most reasonable interpretation of 「新聞が読める」 is
that "I am able to read a news paper".

To say, "Newspapers are readable" says absolutely nothing about whether I can
or cannot read a news paper. This construct in English has a somewhat passive
feel to it (how different is from saying "Newpapers can be read").

But the Japanese isn't passive at all.

Is there a reason you're not happy with が marking the subject? This is how
ergative languages can work.

