文法 and 表記: grammatical relations and written forms
Compare an understandable sentence with a grammatical error, a check of a name’s written form, and standardized unit notation, without treating a check as proof of an error.
The relationships that grammar governs
「新しい文法を学んでから、例文を三つ作りました。」 describes learning new grammar and then making three example sentences. Preserve the order of learning and producing sentences.
「この文は意味は通じますが、文法に誤りがあります。」 states that the sentence is understandable but grammatically incorrect. Comprehensible meaning and grammatical correctness are separate judgments.
Written representation of names and units
「名前の漢字表記を申込書で確認した。」 describes checking the name’s written kanji form on an application. The object is the written form; the sentence does not state that an error was discovered.
「単位の表記を文書全体で統一した。」 describes standardizing the notation of units throughout the document. The change concerns written representation rather than correction of every grammatical feature.
The axis of a check and its scope
文法 concerns grammatical relationships and rules within sentences. 表記 concerns how a name, unit, or other content is represented in writing. Errors on both axes can coexist, so the categories need not be exclusive.
Read whether a grammatical error is stated or only a check of the name’s written form is described. The name of a check is not proof of an error, and these examples do not supply a complete grammar or new pronunciation rules.
Which axis is involved in the understandable sentence with a 文法 error and in the check of a name’s 漢字表記? Do both examples state that an error was found?
Show the answer and why
The first explicitly states an error in grammatical relationships. The second describes checking the written kanji form of a name without stating that a notation error was found. Distinguish grammatical relations from written representation.