The Magician Vanished the Rabbit? (Transitivity) 
Let's begin with the following sentences.
(1) I opened the door.
(2) This key opened the door.
(3) The door opened.
Many English verbs permit different types of subject. In (1) the subject is a human, who can make the door open; in (2) it is a tool that someone can use to open the door; in (3) it is the door itself which was opened by someone or by a natural force, e.g. wind. A more astonishing example is:
(4) I drive a car.
(5) This car drives fast.
Verbs like open and drive are used either transitively, e.g. (1,2,4), or intransitively, e.g. (3,5). However, not all verbs in English can be used in this way. We can't say:
(6) *English speaks here. (= People speak English here.)
(7) *The magician vanished the rabbit. (= The magician caused the rabbit to vanish.)
With a very small number of exceptions (I can think of just several), Japanese verbs are either transitive or intransitive, but cannot be both. Therefore, we must say:
(6) ドアを開けた。 (I opened the door.)
(7) ドアが開いた。 (The door opened.)
Such pairs of verbs as 開けた/開いた are listed in your textbook. Because they are similar in meaning, the same 漢字 is used in both verbs.
Now, let's consider てフォーム＋いる/ある/おく.
(8) ドアが開いています。
(9) ドアが開けてあります。
(10) ドアを開けておきました。
These sentences can be used to describe the same situation; i.e., the door is open now.
First, let's look at the tense. (8) and (9) are in the nonpast tense, whereas (10) is in the past tense. Because these sentences are about the present situation, the use of the nonpast tense is natural, but the use of the past tense requires some explanation. Uttering (10), the speaker indicates that someone (usually the speaker) opened the door, and the speaker implies that the door is still open. In other words, (10) is about a past action and its consequence (a resultant state), but more emphasis is on the former. Therefore, the use of the past tense is justified.
Second, pay attention to the particles. In (8) and (9) ドア is marked with が, while in (10) with を. Because (10) puts more emphasis on the action which involves two participants, viz. someone and the door, ドア must be marked with を, as usual. In (8), on the other hand, because 開く is intransitive, ドア cannot be marked with を, as usual. (9) is puzzling: Although 開ける is transitive and ドア is usually marked with を, it is with が in the 〜てある construction. This construction is somewhat similar to passive sentences, e.g.
(11) Someone opened the door.
(12) The door was opened.
Besides that (9) is in 日本語 and (12) in 英語, the difference between the two is that while (9) indicates that the door is still open now, (12) does not. So, it is more accurate to translate (9) as (13) below.
(13) The door has been opened.
The third point I want to discuss is the differences between 〜ている and 〜てある. Although both (8) and (9) are about the current state of the door and thus either one can be used in many cases, there are situations in which only one of them is appropriate. For example, if you want to know until what time the bank stays open, you may say "Until what time will the bank be open tomorrow," but not "Until what time will the bank be opened tomorrow." The latter (passive) sentence strongly implies that there is someone who keeps the bank open, and that such a fact is relevant to the conversation. Similarly, 「ぎんこうは明日何時まで開いていますか」is natural, but 「ぎんこうは明日何時まで開けてありますか」is not, unless you are asking, say, the bank manager.
Finally, I want to mention another difference between 〜てある and 〜ておく. Both (9) and (10) can be used to indicate that someone opened the door and the door is still open now, but in (10) the person who opened the door is most likely to be the speaker himself/herself, whereas (9) doesn't give any such cue. This is because 〜ておく indicates that the action is purposeful and, as I discussed in the last newsletter, we usually don't have access to others' mind.
Copyright (c) 1996 Yoko Hasegawa. All Rights Reserved.
Updated 5/6/96
Since 5/6/96
Comments to hasegawa@socrates.berkeley.edu