What Does Not Count as an Action for the ば Conditional Clause


I'm here for yet another confusing thing from the Dictionary of Japanese
Grammar. In the ば conditional, it states the following:

> S2 can be a command, a request, or a suggestion, as in Exs. (e) and (f). In
> this case, however, S1 cannot be an action.
>
> (e) 見たければ見なさい。 If you want to see it, see it.  
>  (f) 出来ればこれもやってください。 Please do this, too, if you can.

I cannot wrap my head around why the given sentences are actually not action,
when they are in fact verbs.

From what I reckon though, it's because they are not exactly actions. Example
(e) is the conditional of the desire form of 見る, hence what is actually being
brought into question there is the desire of seeing. Meanwhile, Example (f) is
the conditional of the potential form of する; hence here what is actually being
questioned is the ability to do, not the act of doing it.

So to summarize; when a verb is not exactly in the indicative form, and are
instead in other forms such as the desire or potential form, they are not
considered actions. Is my understanding correct?




Let me start by saying that _verb_ need not be equated with _action_. The verb
_to be_ in English is definitely a verb, but you're not doing anything (and if
you want to say you are, then we've gone off into the land of philosophy).
Think of _action_ as something actually performed, actually done. To _verb_
isn't necessary to _do_ ; it can also just be a _state of being_.

There's a difference between saying みる and みたい. With みる, you're actually doing
something, you're _seeing_ something. However, みたい is rather different. There
is no _doing_ being done. みたい describes, not an action, but a frame of mind, a
desire for something.

It's the same with using the potential form. When you say, 食べられる you're not
really _doing_ anything. You're definitely not _eating_. 食べられる describes what
you're capable of doing.

In English we don't really care about these distinctions. So that creates a
bit of a challenge.

Now, what I am not sure about is verbs like 見える and 聞こえる. These are both
_potential_ forms, but they are used a bit differently. For example,

Suppose you were out in the woods bird watching. You could ask your fellow
birdwatcher

> 鳥が見えますか？

It would sound very strange to ask

> 鳥が見られますか？

So, I wonder whether the following is grammatical.

> 鳥が見えれば写真を撮ってください

I suspect that because it **is** a _potential_ form, it still falls safely
within the realm where such a conditional construction is grammatical.




Let me start by saying that _verb_ need not be equated with _action_. The verb
_to be_ in English is definitely a verb, but you're not doing anything (and if
you want to say you are, then we've gone off into the land of philosophy).
Think of _action_ as something actually performed, actually done. To _verb_
isn't necessary to _do_ ; it can also just be a _state of being_.

There's a difference between saying みる and みたい. With みる, you're actually doing
something, you're _seeing_ something. However, みたい is rather different. There
is no _doing_ being done. みたい describes, not an action, but a frame of mind, a
desire for something.

It's the same with using the potential form. When you say, 食べられる you're not
really _doing_ anything. You're definitely not _eating_. 食べられる describes what
you're capable of doing.

In English we don't really care about these distinctions. So that creates a
bit of a challenge.

Now, what I am not sure about is verbs like 見える and 聞こえる. These are both
_potential_ forms, but they are used a bit differently. For example,

Suppose you were out in the woods bird watching. You could ask your fellow
birdwatcher

> 鳥が見えますか？

It would sound very strange to ask

> 鳥が見られますか？

So, I wonder whether the following is grammatical.

> 鳥が見えれば写真を撮ってください

I suspect that because it **is** a _potential_ form, it still falls safely
within the realm where such a conditional construction is grammatical.

