Log inSign up

megane wo kakeru to, kokuban no zi ga hakkiri mieru you ni natta.

眼鏡めがね　を　かける　と、　黒板こくばん　の　字じ　が　はっきり　見みえる　よう　に　なった。megane wo kakeru to, kokuban no zi ga hakkiri mieru you ni natta.
When I put on my glasses, I started to see the letters on the blackboard clearly.
Elon.io is an online learning platform
We have hundreds of Japanese lessons and thousands of exercises.
Start learning Japanese

Start learning Japanese now

Questions & Answers about megane wo kakeru to, kokuban no zi ga hakkiri mieru you ni natta.

Why is 眼鏡 followed by を in 眼鏡をかける? I thought を marks a direct object, but “to wear glasses” feels more like a state than an action.

In Japanese, 眼鏡をかける is treated as a concrete action: “to put on / wear glasses.”

  • 眼鏡 (めがね) = glasses
  • を = direct object marker
  • かける = to hang / to put on (items like glasses, necklaces, etc.)

So grammatically, you are doing the action of “hanging/putting” the glasses onto your face, so 眼鏡 is the direct object and takes を.

Compare:

  • 帽子をかぶる – to put on / wear a hat
  • 指輪をはめる – to put on / wear a ring
  • コートを着る – to put on / wear a coat

All these use を because they are treated as actions on objects, even if in English we think of “wearing” as a state.

What does the と after かける do? How is this different from using たら (眼鏡をかけたら)?

The と here is the conditional と, which often means “when(ever)” or “as soon as,” and it introduces a natural or automatic result.

In this sentence:

  • 眼鏡をかけると、〜なった
    = “When I put on my glasses, (the result was that) …”

Key points about 〜と conditional:

  • It often describes natural, automatic, or inevitable results.
    • 春になると、暖かくなります。
      “When it becomes spring, it gets warm.”
  • It usually doesn’t go well with volitional actions in the result clause (like “I decide,” “I will do X”), but it’s fine for describing states or changes that happen.

眼鏡をかけたら is also correct, but たら is more general: “when / after / if.”

  • と here sounds a bit more like “as a result, naturally / automatically, I could see clearly.”
  • たら is more neutral: “after I put on my glasses, I could see clearly.”

Both are acceptable; と emphasizes the cause–effect relationship a little more strongly and feels very natural for this sort of “cause → immediate result” sentence.

Why is 黒板の字 used instead of just 黒板? What exactly does の mean here?
  • 黒板 (こくばん) = blackboard
  • 字 (じ) = (written) characters, writing, letters
  • 黒板の字 = “the writing on the blackboard” / “the characters on the board”

The の here is a possessive/attributive marker, similar to “of” or “’s” in English. It’s indicating a relationship:

  • 黒板 の 字
    = “the writing of the blackboard”
    = “the blackboard’s writing”
    → naturally, “the writing on the blackboard”

So the sentence isn’t about seeing the blackboard itself, but seeing what’s written on it.

Why is が used after 黒板の字, not は or を?

In 黒板の字がはっきり見える, the が marks the subject of the verb 見える (to be visible / can be seen).

  • 黒板の字 が 見える。
    = “The writing on the blackboard can be seen / is visible.”

見える is an intransitive verb; it doesn’t take a direct object with を. Instead, the thing that “appears / is visible” takes が.

Why not は?

  • は would turn “the writing on the blackboard” into a topic:
    • 黒板の字ははっきり見える。
      = “As for the writing on the board, (it) is clearly visible.”
      This is possible, but changes the nuance to contrast or topic-setting (maybe compared to something else that isn’t visible).
  • が simply states what is visible, with no topical contrast implied: “It is the writing on the board that is visible.”

In a neutral, descriptive sentence like this, が is the default choice.

What does はっきり mean, and what part of speech is it?

はっきり means clearly, distinctly.

In 黒板の字がはっきり見える, it modifies the verb 見える, so it functions as an adverb here:

  • はっきり (adv.) + 見える (verb)
    = “can see (it) clearly”

はっきり can also be used before some forms like はっきりした (clear, distinct) to modify nouns, but in this sentence it’s purely adverbial.

Why is 見える used instead of the potential form 見られる?

Japanese has two ways to express “can see”:

  1. 見える

    • Basic meaning: “to be visible,” “to appear,” “to come into sight.”
    • Implies that something is naturally visible to you (whether you’re actively trying or not).

  2. 見られる (potential form of 見る)

    • Meaning: “to be able to see (because you have the ability or opportunity to look).”
    • Focuses more on your ability to perform the action of seeing.

In this sentence:

  • 眼鏡をかけると、黒板の字がはっきり見えるようになった。
    → “When I put on my glasses, the writing on the blackboard became (naturally) clearly visible.”

Using 見える emphasizes that the blackboard writing has become visible, not so much that you have gained the skill of seeing it. It sounds very natural here.

You could say 見られるようになった, but that sounds a bit more like “I became able to see (it)”—slightly more about your ability, less about the “visibility” of the letters themselves. 見える is more idiomatic for things physically coming into clear view.

What does the pattern 〜ように なる mean here? How is it different from just saying 見えるようになった vs. 見える?

〜ようになる is a very common pattern meaning “to come to (be able to) do ~ / to reach a state where ~ happens.” It describes a change of state over time.

Structure:

  • Verb (plain, often potential or intransitive) + ように なる

In this sentence:

  • 見えるようになった
    = “(It) became such that (I) can see (it).”
    = “(I) came to be able to see (it).”

Difference:

  • 黒板の字がはっきり見える。
    = “The writing on the blackboard is (now) clearly visible.”
    (Just states the current situation.)

  • 黒板の字がはっきり見えるようになった。
    = “The writing on the blackboard became clearly visible.”
    → There was a before (couldn’t see clearly) and after (can see clearly now).

So 〜ようになる highlights that a change has occurred, which fits with the idea that putting on glasses changed your ability/condition.

Why is なった in the past tense? Could I say なる instead?

なった is the past tense of なる: “became / came to be.”

  • 見えるようになった
    = “(I) became able to see / It came to be visible.”

This sentence is describing a completed change in the past: after you put on the glasses, your situation changed at that point, so past tense is natural.

Could you say 見えるようになる?

  • Yes, but that would describe a future or general change, for example:
    • 眼鏡をかけると、黒板の字がはっきり見えるようになります。
      “When you put on your glasses, (you) will be able to see the writing on the blackboard clearly.”
      (This could be said in a general explanation or polite instruction.)

In the original sentence, the speaker is narrating a specific event that already happened, so なった is correct and natural.

Could the sentence be 眼鏡をかけたら、黒板の字がはっきり見えるようになった? Would that change the nuance?

Yes, that sentence is grammatically fine and natural:

  • 眼鏡をかけたら、黒板の字がはっきり見えるようになった。
    = “When/after I put on my glasses, the writing on the blackboard became clearly visible.”

Nuance difference:

  • 〜と:
    • Strongly suggests cause → automatic result.
    • Often used for natural, predictable outcomes.
  • 〜たら:
    • More general “when / after / if.”
    • Feels a bit more like a sequence of events in time.

In most everyday contexts, the difference here is subtle, and both are fine. と just sounds slightly more “if you do X, inevitably Y happens” than たら.

Is 眼鏡をかける the only way to say “wear glasses”? What about 眼鏡をする?

The most standard, natural expression for wearing glasses is:

  • 眼鏡をかける – to put on / wear glasses

You may also see/hear:

  • 眼鏡をする – also used in everyday speech to mean “wear glasses.”

However:

  • 眼鏡をかける is more standard and is the safest/most neutral choice.
  • 眼鏡をする is colloquial and not wrong, but かける is preferred in writing and in careful speech.

When describing a permanent state, you also have:

  • 彼は眼鏡をかけています。 – He is wearing glasses.
  • 彼は眼鏡をかけている人です。 – He is a person who wears glasses.
Why does ように come between 見える and なった? Can I say 見えるなった without ように?

You cannot say 見えるなった; it is ungrammatical. In this pattern, ように is required.

Structure:

  • Verb (plain) + ように なる
    • 見えるようになる
    • 分かるようになる
    • 話せるようになる

ように here roughly means “in such a way that / to the extent that.” So:

  • 見える ように なった
    ≈ “It became (so) that (I) can see (it).”

Without ように, the sequence 見えるなった doesn’t make sense because なる needs something like a state or adjectival phrase before it (大きくなる, きれいになる, 便利になる). With verbs expressing ability or occurrence, Japanese uses Verb + ようになる to turn them into “states” that can change.

So the ように is an essential part of this “change of ability/state” pattern.

Is there any difference between 黒板の字 and 黒板の文字 here?

Both 字 (じ) and 文字 (もじ) refer to characters / writing, but there is a slight nuance:

  • 字:
    • Common, everyday word for handwriting / written characters, often with a slight emphasis on the handwriting itself or simpler/individual characters.
  • 文字:
    • Slightly more formal/technical, can refer to letters, characters, script in a broader or more abstract sense.

In this sentence, 黒板の字 sounds very natural, because it’s typically handwritten writing on a blackboard.

黒板の文字 is not wrong, but feels a bit more formal or textbook-like; it slightly shifts the feel toward “characters/text on the blackboard” rather than everyday “writing.” For a normal school/classroom context, 黒板の字 is more colloquial and natural.

Could I say 黒板の字ははっきり見えるようになった instead of が? How would that change the feeling?

Yes, you can say:

  • 黒板の字 は はっきり見えるようになった。

Difference:

  • が:

    • Marks subject: simply states what became visible.
    • Neutral, descriptive.
    • 黒板の字がはっきり見えるようになった。
      → “The writing on the blackboard became clearly visible.”

  • は:

    • Marks topic and often implies contrast.
    • 黒板の字ははっきり見えるようになった。
      → “As for the writing on the blackboard, (it) became clearly visible.”
      → Implies contrast with something else (maybe the projector screen still isn’t clear, etc.), or sets “blackboard writing” up as the topic of further explanation.

If you’re just neutrally describing what happened, が is more straightforward. Use は when you want to contrast or highlight “blackboard writing” as the topic.