S1 たら S2, with S2 being past tense AND volitional


So I was reading through _A Dictionary of Basic Japanese grammar_ and I
noticed a strange contradiction in the たら and あとで entries.

In the あとで entry we see the following note:

> Vinf·past _ato de_ can be replaced by Vinf·past _ra_ when the latter is used
> with a purely temporal meaning (i.e., ‘after’, ‘when’).

Then it lists following examples

> a. ご飯を食べたらすぐ勉強しました。
>
> b. 山田さんはビールを飲んだら寝てしまった。
>
> c. 戦争が終わったら東京にもどりました。

Now when we look at the たら entry:

> When S2 in “S1 _tara_ S2” represents a past action, the action cannot be one
> intentionally taken by the agent after the action or event represented by
> S1.

When I look back at the examples in the あとで entry, I see that examples b and c
make perfect sense and follow this rule correctly. However, sentence a looks
to be a volitional act.

I asked a native Japanese speaker and they said that it is correct because すぐ
is after たら.

> X ご飯を食べたら勉強しました。

I'm quite the beginner so I might be missing something obvious. Can someone
explain to me why すぐ makes this sentence valid?




Directly to your question, I don't think the すぐ would make the sentence any
more (or less) valid. When it's valid with the word, so is without it, and
it's not valid, vice versa.

Your citation from _A Dictionary of Basic Japanese grammar_

> When S2 in “S1 tara S2” represents a past action, the action cannot be one
> intentionally taken by the agent after the action or event represented by
> S1.

just doesn't sound right to me, either. The semantics of たら has more to do
with the speaker-event relationship, rather than the agent-event one (if I
correctly assume the _agent_ is the do-er of an action). That is, when you use
たら, you're saying about something unrealized, unexpected, or you have no
authorization to interfere (includes habits and general truths) from your own
viewpoint.

As the result, たら is quite unlikely to describe what yourself actually did in
past. Sentences like

> ご飯を食べたらすぐ勉強しました。

strikes me as if it's in a testimony: "(I saw him) went to study no sooner
than finishing the meal."

There are other factors make たら usable or not depending on sentence types
(question? order?) or whatever else, but they're too much for this answer.

* * *

Lastly, although it may not be a practical advice, I recommend you to refer
newer books (yours is from 1989!) for Japanese grammar, as the history of
Japanese-as-foreign-language education is relatively short, so it still
continues to evolve. Incidentally, my answer bases on a 2008 book, [現代日本語文法
(vol.
6)](http://www.9640.jp/xoops/modules/bmc/detail.php?book_id=2985&prev=new).




Directly to your question, I don't think the すぐ would make the sentence any
more (or less) valid. When it's valid with the word, so is without it, and
it's not valid, vice versa.

Your citation from _A Dictionary of Basic Japanese grammar_

> When S2 in “S1 tara S2” represents a past action, the action cannot be one
> intentionally taken by the agent after the action or event represented by
> S1.

just doesn't sound right to me, either. The semantics of たら has more to do
with the speaker-event relationship, rather than the agent-event one (if I
correctly assume the _agent_ is the do-er of an action). That is, when you use
たら, you're saying about something unrealized, unexpected, or you have no
authorization to interfere (includes habits and general truths) from your own
viewpoint.

As the result, たら is quite unlikely to describe what yourself actually did in
past. Sentences like

> ご飯を食べたらすぐ勉強しました。

strikes me as if it's in a testimony: "(I saw him) went to study no sooner
than finishing the meal."

There are other factors make たら usable or not depending on sentence types
(question? order?) or whatever else, but they're too much for this answer.

* * *

Lastly, although it may not be a practical advice, I recommend you to refer
newer books (yours is from 1989!) for Japanese grammar, as the history of
Japanese-as-foreign-language education is relatively short, so it still
continues to evolve. Incidentally, my answer bases on a 2008 book, [現代日本語文法
(vol.
6)](http://www.9640.jp/xoops/modules/bmc/detail.php?book_id=2985&prev=new).

