지난 12일부터 시작된 부산 APEC이 오늘(19일) 2차 정상회의를 마지막으로 대단원의 막을 내렸습니다.
Today (November 19), with the conclusion of the second round of summit talks, the final curtain came down on the Busan APEC meetings, which began on November 12.
I translated the above sentence in the way I think SBS wanted to say it, but SBS did not say it that way because that one little sentence was full of mistakes. Actually, I found four.
- 지난 12일부터 시작된
-
If SBS wants to use 지난 12일부터, then she should not use the verb 시작된 since 시작하다 describes something that happens in an instant, not over a period of time, which is implied by 부터. Is it really possible for something "to start from the 12th to the 19th"? That would be an awfully slow start.
If SBS wants to use 지난 12일부터, then she should use a verb like 진행해 온, which means "has proceeded," instead of 시작된. If SBS wants to use 시직된, then she should use 에 instead of 부터, which would make it read as 지난 12일에 시작된.
- - 정상회의를 마지막으로
-
There is no verb in the Korean sentence to go with the above phrase. As it is, the Korean sentence is esentially saying, 정상회의를 막을 내렸습니다, which means it has two objects and one verb. 막을 내리다 makes sense, but 정상회의를 내리다 does not. To fix the sentence, SBS would have to say 정상회의에서 막을 내렸습니다, or 마지막으로 한 정상회의에서 막을 내렸습니다.
- - 마지막으로 대단원의 막을 내렸습니다
-
대단원 means "grand finale" or "end." In the SBS sentence, I think they meant for 대단원의 막 to mean "the final curtain." If that is the case, then why did they need 마지막으로, which means "finally." Did they really want to say, "the final curtain was finally lowered"? To fix it, SBS would have to omit 마지막으로 since it is redundant.
- - APEC이 ... 대단원의 막을 내렸습니다
-
The above sentence says, "APEC lowered the final curtain." Did APEC lower the curtain? Or did the curtain simply fall? 내리다 can be used as both a transitive and an intransitive verb, which means you can say 막을 내렸다 or 막이 내렸다. If the sentence was 대단원의 막이 내렸습니다, then it would translate as "the final curtain fell," which I think sounds better.
Anyway, here is how I would rewrite the SBS sentence.
지난 12일에 시작된 부산 APEC 에서는 오늘(19일)에 제2차 정상회의가 끝난 것으로 대단원의 막이 내렸습니다.
Today (November 19), with the conclusion of the second round of summit talks, the final curtain came down on the Busan APEC meetings, which began on November 12.
By the way, I was a little curious about how 대단원(大團圓) came to mean "grand finale," so I looked at each Chinese character individually. Here they are:
I guess 대단원 could be referring to "a large gathering in a circle," the way circus performers might come together in the center ring to signal the end of a performance. I am only guessing, but I must make these kinds of associations to remember the word.
Whoa, Bevers, correcting the Korean language usage of SBS!
ReplyDeleteSonagi,
ReplyDeleteMany Koreans have trouble expressing themselves logically, just as many Americans do, including me. The difference is that many of the people in Korea who you would expect to write Korean well, do not. There are mistakes all the time in the newspapers, on TV, and in textbooks. I have three or four books in Korean that talk about the problem.
I used to translate Samsung newsletters, which was frustrating because many times I could not understand what the Korean writer was trying to say. It was not just the fault of my poor language skills because even Koreans could understand what the writer saying many times. In fact, I could go to the writer, him- or herself, and ask what he or she meant, and many times the writer would have trouble understanding it. Actually, the people who wrote the articles were usually people who worked at small ad agencies used by Samsung. The people in those agency were often overworked and underpaid, which may be one of the reasons for the poor Korean. However, there were other reasons, too.
It has only been in the last few years that Korea has started to pay attention to the problem, but even now many Koreans do seem to take it seriously. For many Koreans, if they can figure out what it being said, that is good enough.
The Korean language does not seem to be stressed much in Korean schools. In fact, my college will be transforming into a medical sciences university next year, but without any language departments, including Korean. The attitude of the school administration seems to be that doctors and nurses do not need communication skills.
It is a pleasure to read and translate good Korean, but one of the reasons I stopped translating was that I got tired of trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.
Your explanation makes sense. I used to teach at a Korean university, and I was astonished when some freshmen students told me that their high school teacher told them there was no way to prepare for the essay portion of the entrance exam because writing is all natural talent. Likewise, well-educated English speakers do not always communicate clearly in their native language, and teaching communication skills is being emphasized across the curriculum in American schools.
ReplyDeleteJust found this blog. Interesting stuff, someone actually analyzing the Korean language. When one takes a closer look at the structure of that sentence it is amazing it even communicates. However, I disagree about one point. I believe the use of "부터" in,
ReplyDelete지난 12일부터 시작된
is fine as stated.
Since you made me think about this for a second I pulled out my Korean dictionary and the definition is as follows, "어떤 일이나 상태 따워의 '시작'을 나타내는 보조사."
So although "부터" is often used in tandem with "까지" to indicate a period of time and does indicate that a state or action is ongoing, "부터" itself merely references a starting point for that state or action and does not refer to the entire process.
I interpret this as not meaning "to start from the 12th to the 19th," but rather "(The APEC summit that) started on the 12th [and continued thereon after that] ... ended today on the 19th...."
"~부터 시작된" is actually textbook usage and many example sentences in the dictionary take this form.
Coming from an English background "~에 시작된" is the more obvious translation, since English regularly merely references a specific starting time with "at" or "on" ("at 5:00", "on the 12th") rather than a preposition like "from" that would also indicate the continuation of whatever started (although logic generally tells us that the starting event did continue beyond it's starting point). However, in this instance "부터" is probably the more natural choice in terms of Korean. Japanese, Korean's closest grammatical cousin, also commonly references the starting points of actions and states in an identical way.
Okay, that was rather long winded about a small point, but it's interesting to think about. I'm glad someone else out there is thinking about the Korean language and I look forward to reading some more of your posts.
Sub8hr,
ReplyDeleteThank you very much for pointing out my mistake. Every point you made concerning "부터" is absolutely correct. Koreans commonly use 부터 with 시작하다. I must have been in a "tear-it-apart" mood and got carried away.
By the way, I am curious about you because you write very well and seem to know a lot about Korean and linguistics in general. Are you a Korean or linguistics major?
I must say you've gotten me obssessed with this odd paragraph. I made a disturbing discovery.
ReplyDeleteThe sentence
APEC이 ... 대단원의 막을 내렸습니다
appears to be textbook grammar.
In my dictionary I found the example sentences with the same structure:
전쟁이 막을 내렸다.
이것으로 3개월에 걸쳤던 노동 쟁의도 막을 내렸다.
This definitely strikes me as odd that an event is lowering a curtain on itself. The only possible explanation I can come up with is that it is somehow a special property of the phrase 막을 내리다 when it is used to indicate the end of an event.
Sub8hr,
ReplyDeleteMy dictionary indicates that 막을 내리다(닫다) has become an idiomatic expression that means "끝을 맺다," which means that 전쟁이 막을 내리다 is an acceptable expression that means "the war concluded." If 막을 내리다 were not an idiom, then 전쟁이 막을 내리다 would be considered awkward. By the way, here are the examples my dictionary gives:
1) 전쟁의 막을 내리다.
put an end to the war.
2) 연극은 슬픈 장면에서 막이 내렸다.
The play ended with a sad scene.
3) ...노동 쟁의가 막을 내렸다.
This ended a labor dispute.
4) 그 긴 이야기도 마침내 막을 내렸다.
The long story has at last come to an end.
Examples 3 and 4 seem to be using the idiom, "막을 내리다." Examples 1 and 2 do not use the idiom. In example 1, a treaty (조약이) could have ended the war, though the treaty is not mentioned in the example.
However, SBS did not simply say 막을 내리다; she said APEC이... 대단원의 막을 내리다. I think that by adding 대단원의 to 막을, SBS negated the idiomatic aspect of 막을 내리다. With or without 대단원의, we would still have to translate the sentence as "APEC concluded."
By the way, for 대단원, my dictionary gives the following examples:
1) 대단원의 막이 내리다
come to an end
2) 해피 엔딩으로 대단원이 되다
come to a happy ending
By the way, I realize that both 막을 내리다 and 막이 내리다 are idioms that mean "to end," and that using 대단원의 to modify 막을 would not really negate that fact, but I think the subject should be considered if 대단원 is added; otherwise, it would be superfluous to add it.
ReplyDeleteFor 막을 내리다 to work it seems like the subject has to be some sort of event like a conference (APEC), 전쟁, 연극, 등 등.
ReplyDelete"~대단원의 막을 내리다" itself actually shows up in my dictionary now that I look again.
I guess in some sense it is superflous depending on how efficient you want to be with words. Thinking about some English examples though, if you go with translations like "the curtain fell on the play" or "the curtain fell on the climactic scene of the play," neither would sound drastically out of place.
Sub8hr,
ReplyDeleteIf 막을 내리다 is an idiom that means 끝맺다, then that means the original SBS sentence could be correct, even though it showed two direct objects. The original sentence was as follows:
지난 12일부터 시작된 부산 APEC이 오늘(19일) 2차 정상회의를 마지막으로 대단원의 막을 내렸습니다.
If we simplified the sentence, it would look like this:
APEC이 정상회의를 막을 내렸습니다.
Notice that there are two objects in the sentence, which would normally not make sense, but because 막을 내리다 is an idiom that means 끝맞다, the sentence is essentially saying the following:
APEC이 정상회의를 끝맞았습니다.
APEC ended the summit meetings.
I think the SBS sentence sounds and looks strange with two objects, but since one of the objects is part of an idiom, I guess it is grammatically correct. The only problem I have with the SBS sentence now is with the use of 대단원.
By adding 대단원의 to 막을, SBS wanted to give the impression that APEC actually lowered a curtain, instead of simply using 막을 내리다 to mean "end." By adding 대단원의 to 막을, SBS essentially separated 막을 from it idiomatic form, creating a situation where the sentence had two objects (i.e. 정상회의를 and 대단원의 막을), which would make the sentence grammatically incorrect.