About the Verb1+ては+Verb2 structure


# Background

According to the [大辞林](https://sakura-
paris.org/dict/%E5%A4%A7%E8%BE%9E%E6%9E%97/prefix/%E3%83%8F), the particle は
can be used to emphasize a description after attaching to the 連用形 of a verb
followed by the particle「て・で」. Example:

> 少なくとも分かってはいる。

I think this emphasizing function stems from the usual "contrast marker"
function of は, as in

> 故障した車は進んではいくが、速度はかなり遅い。

After reading a few of these example sentences, I noticed that in all of them,
the verbs following は were
[補助動詞](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%A3%9C%E5%8A%A9%E5%8B%95%E8%A9%9E).

[Example](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/68978/%e3%81%a6%e3%81%afs-
role-in-
this-%e8%bf%bd%e3%81%84%e3%81%8b%e3%81%91%e3%81%a6%e3%81%af%e6%9d%a5%e3%81%aa%e3%81%84%e3%81%a7%e3%81%97%e3%82%87%e3%81%86/68984#68984):

> 追いかけてはこないでしょう。

# Question

Can any combination of Verb1 and Verb2 be used in this construction, as long
as the sentence makes sense?




Whether は can be inserted in `[V1]-て[V2]` seems to be determined less by the
combination of verbs itself than by the function of the て-form, which, of
course, restricts combinations of verbs.

It works best when `[V1]-て[V2]` makes up a compound verb to express one idea.
分かっている, 進んでいく, and 追いかけてくる in your examples all satisfy this condition as you
observed.

Other examples include:

> 一応買ってはおいたが、使わなかった。【〜おく】

> やってはみたけど、うまくいかなかった。【〜みる】

> 気付いたら、どうしても気になってはしまう。【〜しまう】

It also seem to work if the て-form of V1 expresses either a means or attendant
circumstances, but mostly in a negative sentence that emphasizes that the
action of V2 is not performed by the said means or under the said
circumstances.

> 箸を使っては食べない。

I’m not very sure if this は should be considered part of the `[V1]-ては[V2]`
construction you asked about.

I cannot think of an example that sounds natural, not even a negative one, in
which the て-form of V1 expresses a cause, a reason, or one of a series of
actions.

In 座って落ち着く in the other answer, 座って can be interpreted as expressing either a
means, attendant circumstances, or the first of two sequential actions. Either
way, 座っては落ち着く doesn’t make much sense. If I had to make some sense out of
negative 座っては落ち着かない, I would understand it as meaning this person chooses to
relax not by sitting but by other means.

飲んで食べる, which I used as a counter example in my comments above, also describes
two actions except they don’t necessarily happen sequentially. 飲んで **は** 食べる
is possible but it describes a way someone repeats to drink and eat
alternately and doesn't have the emphasizing effect.




Whether は can be inserted in `[V1]-て[V2]` seems to be determined less by the
combination of verbs itself than by the function of the て-form, which, of
course, restricts combinations of verbs.

It works best when `[V1]-て[V2]` makes up a compound verb to express one idea.
分かっている, 進んでいく, and 追いかけてくる in your examples all satisfy this condition as you
observed.

Other examples include:

> 一応買ってはおいたが、使わなかった。【〜おく】

> やってはみたけど、うまくいかなかった。【〜みる】

> 気付いたら、どうしても気になってはしまう。【〜しまう】

It also seem to work if the て-form of V1 expresses either a means or attendant
circumstances, but mostly in a negative sentence that emphasizes that the
action of V2 is not performed by the said means or under the said
circumstances.

> 箸を使っては食べない。

I’m not very sure if this は should be considered part of the `[V1]-ては[V2]`
construction you asked about.

I cannot think of an example that sounds natural, not even a negative one, in
which the て-form of V1 expresses a cause, a reason, or one of a series of
actions.

In 座って落ち着く in the other answer, 座って can be interpreted as expressing either a
means, attendant circumstances, or the first of two sequential actions. Either
way, 座っては落ち着く doesn’t make much sense. If I had to make some sense out of
negative 座っては落ち着かない, I would understand it as meaning this person chooses to
relax not by sitting but by other means.

飲んで食べる, which I used as a counter example in my comments above, also describes
two actions except they don’t necessarily happen sequentially. 飲んで **は** 食べる
is possible but it describes a way someone repeats to drink and eat
alternately and doesn't have the emphasizing effect.

