Are Japanese interested in learning Korean?

I found the following video on Matt's blog, Occidentalism. It appears to be a comedy skit of a Japanese man learning Korean. I could get some of the jokes by just listening to the Korean, such as, 코를 성형해주세요 (Please do plastic surgery on my nose), but most I could not understand. I wish I knew Japanese.

Is "너무 출출해서 밥을 먹는다" correct?

출출하다 means "to feel 'somewhat' hungry" (but not really hungry), so it would not make sense to use with it the adverb 너무, which means "excessively." If you want to use an adverb with 출출하다, you should use 좀 or 조금, which mean "a little." Therefore, you could say the following sentence:

좀 출출해서 밥을 먹는다.
I am eating because I was feeling a little hungry.

If you do a Google search on "너무 출출해서," you will get an idea of how common the mistake is.

Why do Koreans say 알겠습니다?

After being admonished by a parent, teacher, or boss, Koreans often respond to the admonishment by saying, 알겠습니다, which always seemed a little strange to me. Why would Koreans use the future tense (겠) with 알다 (to know)?

Well, today I looked up 알다 and found that it has many meanings, including the meaning of "to remember." Therefore, I am guessing that 알겠습니다 means, "I will remember" (what you said). Instead of 알겠습니다, you can also say, "명심하겠습니다," which means, "I will take (your words) to heart."

Mr. Lee Su-yeol (이수열) does not like 알겠습니다, but I do not see any problem with it, at least, not after learning that 알다 can mean "to remember."

Mind if I get off topic?

I have just looked at a Web site entitled "Smartest Detective in the Room," which belongs to one of our commenters, Lance Sleuthe, and was quite impressed. The only problem is that he does not seem to write very often.

Lance,

If you wrote the stuff on your blog, I think you should be writing much more of it because that is good stuff. Are you writing a book or have you already written one? If not, you should consider it. I am not literary, but it seems more than good enough to publish.

By the way, have you tried writing anything in Korean?

Who created "hangeul" (한글)?

In his book, Lee Su-yeol (이수열) wrote that the following sentence was incorrect:

한글을 창제하신 분은 세종대왕이시었습니다.
King Sejong was the person who created hangeul.

Mr. Lee said the sentence was incorrect because the portion I have shown in red should be changed to "이십니다." In other words, he was saying that the ~이었습니다 pattern should not be used in such situations. He explained that since the person who created hangeul could not have changed over time, the 었 in 이었습니다 should be dropped.

To give you an idea of what Mr. Lee was trying to say consider the following English sentences.

1. Thomas Edison is the man who invented the light bulb.
2. Thomas Edison was the man who invented the light bulb.
3. Bill is the man who passed out at the party.
4. Bill was the man who passed out at the party.

Mr. Lee was essentially saying that among examples 1 and 2, example 1 would be the more correct choice since the act of inventing the light bulb could only be applied to Thomas Edison. However, among examples 3 and 4, example 4 would be the correct choice since Bill would not be the only person capable of passing out at a party.

Does Korean need ~고 있다 and ~어 있다?

Korean verbs inherently have a continuous aspect about them, so the ~고 있다 and ~어 있다 patterns do not seem to be needed. Consider the following examples:

• 아이가 울고 있다 = 아이가 운다
  The baby is crying.
• 학생들이 공부하고 있다 = 학생들이 공부한다
  The students are studying.
• 비가 오고 있다 = 비가 온다
  It is raining.
• 내 아들은 학교에 가있다 = 내 아들은 학교에 갔다.
  My son is at school.
• 교실에 난로를 설치해 있다 = 교실에 난로을 설치했다.
  A heater is installed in the classroom.

As you can see from the above examples, the ~고 있다 and ~어 있다 patterns seem to be unnecessary.

Another interesting thing about the Korean language is that adverbs play an important role. For example, a simple adverb can change a sentence from present continuous to simple present tense. Consider the following examples:

• 아이가 운다.......................The baby is crying.
  아이가 자주 운다................The baby frequently cries.
• 학생들이 공부한다..............The students are studying.
  학생들이 매일 공부한다.......The students study daily.
• 비가 온다...........................It is raining.
  비가 자주 온다....................It frequently rains.

Can anyone think of a situation where ~고 있다 or ~어 있다 is necessary? Couldn't 산다 even replace a phrase like 살아 있다 (to be alive)?

Which is correct: 결혼식 때 입던 옷 or 결혼식 때 입은 옷?

I think one could say either 결혼식 때 입던 옷 or 결혼식 때 입은 옷, depending on the circumstances.

In regard to clothes, we wear them, take them off, and then wear them again later, so 어제 입던 옷 (the clothes I wore yesterday) seems more appropriate than 어제 입은 옷 since 입던 would imply a interruption in wearing the clothes, in other words, a change of clothes. Then, what would 어제 입은 옷 imply? It might imply one wore the clothes yesterday, but no longer has the clothes to wear again today.

In regard to a wedding gown, many women in the West wear them just once, but still keep them for sentimental reasons, and some mothers may even allow their daughters to wear their old wedding gowns when they get married, so, in the West, I think a wedding gown could be treated like any other piece of clothing by saying 결혼식 때 입던 옷.

In Korea, however, Koreans normally do not buy their wedding gowns, but rent them, so in Korea, it might be more appropriate to say 결혼식 때 입은 옷 since Koreans would no longer have the wedding gowns to wear again.

Koreans also seem to use 입던 옷 to refer to clothes they no longer wear because they are either out of style or because they no longer fit. Therefore, 입던 옷 seems to refer not only to clothes that we wear on a regular basis, but also to clothes we no longer wear but still have. The common denominator seems to be that one still has the clothes, whether they are worn or not.

The above is just a theory. I do not know for sure if 입은 옷 really implies one no longer has the clothes.

Any opinions?

What looks like a dog house and is called 방활사?

UPDATE:

.

The explanation I had given below for 방활사 was completely wrong. The same reader who first asked me about the word has sent me another email saying that he found that the Chinese characters for 방활사 were 防滑沙, which literally mean "Prevent (防) Slipperiness (滑) Sand (沙)." In other words, it is sand that is spread on slippery roads in the winter to give vehicles traction.

.

However, the word 방활사 (防滑沙) is a non-standard word and does not appear in any dictionary that I have. The word has confused not only me, but others, as well. In a Korean article HERE, the word was used as an example of how Korean government officials and others are creating new words from Chinese characters that that few can figure out without also seeing the Chinese characters. The article asks what good are government information and warning signs when people cannot understand what they mean.

.

By the way, Korean government officials are not the only ones who invent language. When I was in the US navy, I was exposed to a bewildering set of acronyms and initialisms that seemed to grow day by day. The US navy loved acronyms, but I hated them and finally gave up trying to learn them all. However, many of my fellow sailors loved using them because, I suspect, it showed that they had special knowledge that many others did not have. Maybe that is why Korean officials also like using them.

.

I agree with the Korean article I linked to above: What good is a public sign if the general public cannot understand what it says?

.

Below is my original post.

-----------------------------

A reader sent me the following photos of what looks like a dog house and asked me what they were. He said he saw them spaced at different intervals along a road in Gangwon Province.



The sign on the second photo reads 방활사, which is meant to mean "sand for preventing fires," so the structures are for storing sand to be used for smothering fires that may occur along the highway. The ㄹ at the end of 화 is a future tense marker that can be translated here as "for."
,
"Fire prevention sand" is written as 방화사, so 방활사 is a misspelling. If they had intended it to be read as the phrase, "Sand for Preventing Fires," then they should have written it as "방화할 사" or "방화할 모래." It looks like Inje County (인제군) officials need to not only work on their spelling, but also need to refill their sandboxes.

By the way, that is a pretty nice road.

Is 서로가 서로를 좋아했다 a good sentence?

My English-Korean dictionary defines 서로 as "mutually," "reciprocally," "with each other," and "with one another," which implies that it considers 서로 to be an adverb. However, my Korean-Korean dictionary describes 서로 as being both a noun and an adverb and gives the following sentence as an example of it being used as a noun.

서로가 서로를 좋아했다
They (each other) liked each other.

Notice that the Korean literally says "Each other liked each other," which reads and sounds pretty silly and suggests that 서로 was probably not meant to be used as a noun. A better sentence would be the following:

그들이 서로 좋아했다.
They liked each other.

In the above Korean sentence, 서로 is being used as an adverb and sounds more natural than when it was used as a noun, but the English translation of the sentence confuses things because "each other" is considered a pronoun in English, which is probably why some Koreans feel inclined to write 서로 as 서로를.

In his book "우리가 정말 알아야 할 우리말 바로 쓰기," the author 이수열 argues that 서로 was only meant to be used as an adverb and says that using it as a noun or pronoun is a distortion of Korean grammar. He makes a good argument and gives several real-world examples of how sentences using 서로 as a noun can be corrected by simply using it as an adverb. Here are some of the examples.

1. 한, 일 요트 경기를 벌여 서로 상호간의 친선을 과시했습니다.
   * Replace the phrase in red with just 서로 or 상호.
2. 우리는 서로가 서로를 위하고 도와야 한다.
   * Replace the phrase in red with just 서로.
3. 친구와 가족은 이미 상대자를 잘 알고 있으므로, 서로의 관계가 우호적일 뿐 아니라.
   * Replace the phrase in red with 관계가 서로.
4. 학습 활동을 중심으로 서로의 의견을 주고 받는 것이 좋은 방법이다.
   * Replace the phrase in red with 의견을 서로.

Notice that the Korean in Examples 1 and 2 was made more complicated than it needed to be, and that in Examples 3 and 4, the nouns were placed after 서로 instead of before it.

In Korean, there is no need to use 서로 as a noun or pronoun, so why do some Koreans use it as a noun? I think it is because they have been influenced by the English translation "each other," which is a pronoun.

In Korean, the meaning of "each other" is achieved by using the adverb 서로 in combination with a noun that precedes it. Even the English pronoun "each other" is not a normal pronoun because it is dependent on a noun being in the same sentence. For example, you cannot say, "Each other liked." Therefore, I think using 서로 as a noun is unnecessary and is just another example of Korean being polluted by the English language.

By the way, I have written about 서로 before: "How should we use 서로?"

Does 빈정거리다 confuse you, too?

빈정거리다 is one of those words that I have looked up a hundred times, yet still have trouble remembering. So, I have decided to write something about it with the hope that it may help me remember the word in the future.

빈정거리다 can mean "to poke fun at," "to ridicule," or "to make sarcastic remarks." I think one reason I always forget the meaning is that 빈정 and 거리다 do not seem a good match for each other. If the word were just 빈정하다, then maybe I could remember it, but the 거리다 suffix confuses me.

The "-거리다" suffix is added to words to give them a sense of repetitiveness. For example, 중얼거리다 means "to murmur," which is "to make a low, continuous, indistinct sound." 두근거리다 means "to pulsate," which is "to expand and contract rhythmically." 비틀거리다 means "to stagger," which is "to move or stand unsteadily." There is repeated sound or movement clearly inherent in the meanings of such words, which makes them good "-거리다" words. However, the repetitiveness in the meaning of 빈정거리다 is not as clear to me.

You can "ridicule" someone repeatedly, or you can do it just one time. You can make two "sacastic remarks," or you can make just one. 비꼬다 is a synonym for 빈정거리다, yet it does not have any 거리다 attached to it. Why? Even if the word "ridicule" has some kind of implied repetitiveness in it, it is not as clear "to me" as it is in many other 거리다 verbs, which may be why it is harder for me to accept and remember it.

Another reason I may be having trouble with 빈정거리다 is that it can be used as both a transitive and an intransitive verb. See the following examples:

• 그 남자가 나를 빈정거렸다. (transitive)
  He ridiculed me.
• 그 남자가 빈정거렸다.
  He made sarcastic remarks.

According to the definition, the two sentences above should be correct, but they still seem strange to me, and I think it is because of the 거리다 ending.

Also, it seems like 빈정하다 should be an adjective, but there is no such word. However, there is a 빈정빈정하다, which is a verb that means the same thing as 빈정거리다.

Which is correct: "값이 내린다" or "값을 내린다"?

Both 값이 내린다 and 값을 내린다 are correct because 내리다 can function as both an intransitive and a transitive verb.

• 값이 내린다 (intransitive)
  Prices are falling.
• 그 가게에서 값을 내린다. (transitive)
  That store is lowering prices.

Notice that the intransitive 내리다 can be translated as "to fall," and the transitive 내리다 can be translated as "to lower." Since 내리다 can function as both an intransitive and a transitive verb, there is no real need for a passive form. For example, there is no need to say 값이 내려진다 (Prices are being lowered) since 값이 내린다 (Prices are falling) essentially conveys the same meaning. Besides, 값이 내린다 is more Koreanese.

Do we really need to use 했던?

My grammar book (외국인을 위한 한국어 문법2) defines 던 and 했던 the same way:

명사를 수식하게 하고 과거 상황을 회상하거나 그 상황이 완료되지 않고 중단되었음을 나타내는 표현.

It modifies nouns and is used in expressions to show reflection on the past or to show a situation that was uncompleted or discontinued in the past.

Since 던 and 했던 mean the same thing, there is no reason to use 했던. All the example sentences using 했던 in my grammar book can be written with 던. (The English is my translation.)

1. 어릴 때 한 동네에서 살았던 민수를 어제 만났다.
   어릴 때 한 동네에서 살던 민수를 어제 만났다.
   Yesterday, I met Min-su, who had lived in the same village as me when we were children.
   .
2. 작년에 읽었던 책은 어제 다시 읽었는데 여전히 재미있더라.
   작년에 읽던 책은 어제 다시 읽었는데 여전히 재미있더라.
   Yesterday, I read a book I had started reading last year and found it still interesting.
   .
3. 내가 전에 근무했던 회사가 아주 많이 발전했더라.
   내가 전에 근무하던 회사가 아주 많이 발전했더라.
   The company I used to work at has grown a great deal.
   .
4. 고등하교 때는 키가 작었던 영수가 지금은 몰라 볼 정도로 키가 컸더라.
   고등하교 때는 키가 작던 영수가 지금은 몰라 볼 정도로 키가 컸더라.
   Yeong-su was short in high school, but he has now grown so much that I didn't recognize him.
   .
5. 어렸을 때 예뻤던 순이가 지금은 아줌마가 다 되었다.
   어렸을 때 예쁘던 순이가 지금은 아줌마가 다 되었다.
   Sun-i, who was pretty when she was young, has now become an average-looking housewife.
   .
6. 10년 전 초등학생이었던 순이가 벌써 결혼을 한대.
   10년 전 초등학생이던 순이가 벌써 결혼을 한대.
   Sun-i, who was an elementary school student ten years ago, says she is already getting married.

Notice that 던 replaced 었던 in the above sentences without any change in meaning; therefore, why bother learning the 었/았/였던 pattern?

As mentioned above, 던 can be used to show not only reflection on the past, but also to show that an action was uncompleted or interrupted in the past. In Example 2, 읽던 책 means the person started reading the book in the past, but did not finish it. It would be translated as "a book I had started reading (last year)." If he had wanted to say he had already completed reading the book (last year), he would have said 읽은 책, which translates as "a book I had read (last year)."

See the following examples:

1. 어제 마시던 우유가 어디에 갔지?
   Where is the milk I was drinking yesterday?
2. 어제 마신 우유가 무엇이었지?
   What was the milk I drank yesterday?

In Example 1, the person did not finish drinking all the milk yesterday and wanted to drink some more today. In Example 2, the person had drank all the milk yesterday and is curious what brand it was.

Another Reference: "Is 던 better than 한?"

What are the ten usages of 에게 (한테)?

My grammar book lists ten different usages of 에게, which is a grammar marker that acts like a preposition and attaches to the ends of nouns that indicate people and animals. It is most commonly translated as "to" and "by." In most cases, 한테 can substitute for 에게.

The reason that 에게 has so many different usages is that its function and meaning change with different kinds of verbs, which is why foreign learners of Korean are often confused by some of its usages. In fact, even some Koreans are confused.

Here are the ten usages that my grammar book ("외국인을 위한 한국어 문법2") lists for 에게. I have translated the explanations and the example sentences from the book into English.

1. 에게 is used to indication the person or animal that will be influenced by the action.
   .
   * 제가 친구에게 책을 주었어요.
   ...I gave a book to my friend.
   * 선생님은 학생들에게 노래와 춤을 가르쳤다.
   ...The teacher taught song and dance to the students.
   * 어른에게는 존댓말을 써야 합니다.
   ...You should use polite speech with adults.
   * 그 남자는 나에게 취미가 뭐냐고 물었어요.
   ...That man asked [to] me what my hobbies were.
   * 동생이 친구에게 전화를 겁니다.
   ...My younger sister is calling [to] her friend.
   * 닭에게 모이를 주었나?
   ...Have you given feed to the chickens?
   .
2. When used with such verbs as 가다, 오다, or their derivatives, 에게 indicates the direction or destination of the subject.
   .
   * 미영 씨는 왜 재훈 씨에게 왔습니까?
   ...Why did Mi-yeong come to see Jae-hun?
   * 나는 머뭇머뭇 그에게 다가갔다.
   ...I approached [to] him hesitantly.
   .
3. When used with such verbs or adjectives as 있다, 없다, 남다, 많다, 적다, and 생기다, the marker 에게 indicates who is in possession of something that could be material or immaterial.
   .
   * 동생에게 급한 일이 생긴 것 같아요.
   ...It seems my sister is faced with an urgent matter.
   * 여전히 저에게는 큰 문제가 남아 있습니다.
   ...I still have a difficult problem.
   * 김 선생에게 그만한 돈이 있을까?
   ...Do you think Mr. Kim has that much money?
   .
4. When used with such verbs and adjectives as 맞다, 알맞다, 어울리다, 비하다, and 뒤지다, the marker 에게 is used to indicate the object to which something is being compared or measured.
   .
   * 그 옷은 저에게 너무 큽니다.
   ...Those clothes are to big for me.
   *이 옷이 학생에게 어울린다고 생각하니?
   ...Do you think these clothes are suitable for a student?
   * 이 사전이 학생들에게 알맞을 거예요.
   ...This dictionary is suitable for a student
   * 동생은 키는 작지만 공부는 친구에게 뒤지지 않았지요.
   ...My younger sister is short, but in her studies, she keeps up with her friends.
   .
5. When used with such verbs as 잡히다, 빼앗기다, and 발견되다, the marker 에게 indicates who performs the action. (Notice that the verbs are passive verbs, so 에게 would normally be translated as "by.")
   .
   * 숨어 있던 도둑이 경찰에게 잡혔다.
   ...The thief that was in hiding has been caught by the police.
   * 땅 속의 보물이 100년 만에 집주인에게 발견되었다.
   ...After being buried for 100 years, the teasure was discovered by the house owner.
   * 친구에게 깜빡 속아서 일요일에 학교에 갔다.
   ...I was completely fooled by my friend and went to school on Sunday.
   * 호랑이에게 물려 가도 정신만 차리면 살 수 있어.
   ...Even if you are being carried off by a tiger, you can survive if you keep your wits about you.
   .
6. When used with such verbs as 받다, 당하다, 얻다, and 배우다, the marker 에게 indicates the person who causes the action. 에게서 can also be used with these kinds of verbs. (I think 듣다 can also be included among these verbs.)
   .
   *아직 부모님에게 용돈을 받아요.
   ...I still get pocket money from my parents.
   * 이 선생에게 한국말을 배웠지요.
   Yes, I learned Korean from instructor Lee.
   * 이 책을 친구에게 얻었다.
   ...I got this book from a friend.
   * 저는 동료들에게 놀림을 받고 많이 울었어요.
   ...I cried a lot after being teased by my colleagues.
   .
7. 에게 is used to indicate the person who is instructed or made to do something.
   .
   * 엄마가 아이에게 제시간에 숙제를 마치게 했어.
   ...The mom made the child finish his homework on time.
   * 여자는 누워 있는 남자에게 시원한 물을 마시게 했다.
   ...The woman had the reclining man drink some cool water.
   * 선생님께서 내 짝에게 책을 읽히셨어요.
   The teacher had my partner read the book.
   .
8. When used with verbs and adjectives that express feelings and evaluations, 에게 is used to indicate the person who is the subject of that feeling or is in the situation.
   .
   * 지금 딸에게 필요한 것은 아버지의 사랑입니다.
   ...What the daughter needs now is her father's love.
   * 우리에게 참으로 귀한 것은 무엇일까?
   ...What is really precious to us?
   *그 일이 너에게는 쉬울지 모르지만 그 아이에게는 매우 어렵다.
   ...It may be easy for you, but it is very difficult for that child.
   .
9. When used with verbs and adjectives that show emotion, 에게 is used to indicate the person who causes the emotion.
   .
   * 아주, 이제는 나 자신에게 실망했다.
   ...Damn it! Now I have disappointed myself.
   * 여자는 상대방에게 호감을 느낀 듯했다.
   ...The woman seemed to show interest in the other person.
   * 그에게 느끼는 감정이 사랑이야.
   ...The feeling I have for him is love.
   .
10. In the salutation of a letter, 에게 is used to indicate the receiver of the letter. (한테 is not used because 한테 is usually used in spoken Korean, not written Korean.)
    .
    * 사랑하는 벗에게
    ...To my loving friend
    * 보고 싶은 동생에게
    ...To the younger brother I miss
    * 친구에게
    ...To my friend

Among the ten usages, using 에게 with the Number 6 usage seems the most strange to me, but since it says that 에게서 can also be used, I can learn to live with it. Also, I have not been using 에게 in the way shown in the Number 7 usage, but I will try to remember to do so in the future. As for the other usages, I do not seem to have much of a problem with them.

My grammar book says that 한테 can replace 에게 in all the different usages, except for Number 10. 한테 is usually used with spoken Korean, not written, so it would not normally be used in a letter. It also says that 에게 can be used with both spoken and written Korean.

My book also says that 더러 and 보고 can replace 에게 in usages Number 1 and Number 7. It also says that 에게로 can also be used with the Number 2 usage, but I do not like 에게로, for some reason, so will probably just be using 에게 in the case of usage Number 2.

Also, 나에게, 저에게, and 너에게 can be abbreviated to 내게, 제게, and 네게, respectively.

What was Seoul like at the turn of the century?

Part of the following video is supposedly film footage made by Burton Holmes, who was an American explorer and writer who visited Korea in 1901 (and 1912). I found it quite interesting.



The funeral of the former Korean ruler, Sunjong, in 1926



Also, here is an interesting video from 1931

Doesn't 선생님한테 꾸지람을 들었다 seem strange?

선생님한테 꾸지람을 들었다 means "I was scolded by my teacher." The sentence is composed of the following parts:

• 선생님께 -- by my teacher
• 꾸지람을 -- a scolding
• 들었다 (past participle of 듣다) -- heard

I used to think the above sentence was strange, and still do, because I had learned that 한테 meant "to," not "by." I had always thought that instead of saying 선생님한테, people should say 선생님한테서, which would mean "from my teacher." If you "hear" something, shouldn't you hear it "from someone" instead of "to someone"? I have often wondered if it was not originally 선생님한테서.

Anyway, if you look up 한테 or 에게 in the dictionary, you will find that it has, at least, two meanings. One meaning is "to," and the other is "by." Here are the examples from my dictionary with the meaning of "by."

• 나는 그에게 속았다.
  I was fooled by him.
• 범에게 물려 가도 정신만 차리면 산다고 했다.
  It is said that even if you are being carried off in the mouth of a tiger, you can survive if you keep your presence of mind.
• 그것을 누구에게 들었습니까?
  From whom did you hear that?

Actually, I can understand and accept the first two examples because you are fooled "by someone," not "from someone," and you are carried off "by a tiger," not "from a tiger," but there is something about the verb "hear" (듣다) that makes me want to say 한테서 or 에게서 instead of 한테 or 에게. For example, notice that the second example was translated with "from," not "by." So, is it wrong to say 그것을 누구에게서 들었습니까? I don't know, but Koreans say it.

Here are some other examples:

• 어린이에게도 배울 것이 있다.
  We can also learn from children.
• 친구에게 돈을 빌렸다.
  I borrowed money from my friend.
• 스승께 글을 배운다.
  I was taught to write by my teacher.
• 강도에게 돈을 빼앗았다.
  I was robbed of my money by a thief.

Supposedly, 에게 or 한테 are attached to an animate object when the object causes the action. In the case of 그것을 누구에게 들었습니까, the object 누구 apparently causes you to hear 그것을, so 에게, not 에게서, should be used. If that is true, then it should also apply to the following sentence.

I received a letter from my friend?
친구한테 편지를 받았다.

You would not have received the letter if your friend had not sent it, so I guess that would mean that 한테 is used instead of 한테서, right? However, how would the following sentence be translated?

A letter came from my friend.

a) 친구한테 편지가 왔다.
b) 친구한테서 편지가 왔다.

The letter came because my friend sent it, so why doesn't the 에게 and 한테 "by" rule also apply? Does the "to" meaning override the "by" meaning in the about example? In English, we use "by" a lot in passive sentences, but I have still not worked it all out.

Many Koreans are confused by 에게 and 에게서, so I think I have a right to be confused, too.

Aren't there worse places?

Today I visited a blog entitled "Caveat DVMPTRVCK" and came across the following video clips. It seems the blogger has been working in Korea as an English teacher and has recently bought a video camera. Anyway, while watching the first video, which is just a video of the blogger travelling from his apartment to the Kyobo Bookstore in Gangnam, I realized, again, just how nice it is to live in a big city in Korea. Korean cities are very safe and generally clean.

If I had to live in a large city and I could choose among all the large cities in the world, I think I would choose Seoul. Being able to walk the streets safely at any time of day or night is a big plus for me.



I also liked the following video. I think it is an example of why it can be fun teaching English in Korea. Apparently, the girls are some of the blogger's students.



The following video is of a boy named Peter, alias "Skywalker." I think this video is another example of how teaching English in Korea can be a fun job.

How do Koreans quote Lincoln?

In his Gettyburg Address, President Abraham Lincoln used the now famous phrase "that government: of the people, by the people, for the people" to describe the kind of government they were fighting for. In Korean, the phrase is usually translated as follows:

"... that government: of the people, by the people, for the people, ..."
"... 인민의, 인민에 의한, 인민을 위한 정치, ..."

In his book, "우리가 정말 알아야 할 '우리말 바로 쓰기,'" Lee Su-yeol (이수열) took issue with the translation and suggested the following, instead:

"... that government: of the people, by the people, for the people, ..."
"... 인민을 위해, 인민이 하는, 인민의 정치, ..."

Instead of using 인민의 to translate "of the people," Mr. Lee used it to translate "for the people." To translate "of the people," he used 인민을 위해. Also, one of Mr. Lee's pet peeves is that Koreans frequently misuse 에 의하여 to mean "by," so he replaced 인민에 의한 with 인민이 하는.

Personally, I would translate the Lincoln phrase as follows:

"... that government: of the people, by the people, for the people, ..."
"... 인민에서, 인민으로, 인민을 위하여 하는 정치, ..."

I like Mr. Lee, but I think he misunderstood some of the English. However, he was correct to point out the misuse of 에 의하여 for "by."

의하다 is a shortened form of 의거하다, which means "to be based on," "to be founded on," or "to be predicated on." The Korean definition is "어떤 사실에 근거하다." However, if you look at an English definition of 의하다, you will see one listed under "Other" (기타) that defines it as "by." The example in my dictionary is as follows:

브람스에 의한 교향곡
a symphony (composed) by Brahms

My Korean-Korean dictionary (국어사전) does not define 의하다 as "by," so I think this is a case of my Korean-English dictionary defining a popular misuse of the word without explaining that it is a misuse. If I had to choose between an English definition and a Korean definition, I would usually choose the Korean.

UPDATE:

On second thought, I think the original translation of the phrase was basically correct. I think Lincoln's "by the people" essentially meant "based on the people's will or authority." Nevertheless, I would prefer the following translation:

"... that government: of the people, by the people, and for the people ..."
"... 인민 자신으로, 인민 권한으로, 인민 이익 위해 하는 정치 ..."

Also, consider this translation:

"... 인민에서, 인민으로, 인민에게 하는 정치..."

Do you think 잘 부탁합니다 is silly, too?

These days you can frequently hear Koreans say "잘 부탁합니다" after they ask someone for a favor. What they want to say is, "Please do your best for me," but that is not what 잘 부탁합니다 means. 부탁하다 means "ask," "beg," or "request," and 잘 means "well," so 잘 부탁합니다 literally means, "I beg well," which sounds as if the person is bragging about his begging abilities. Instead, when you want to ask someone to do their best for you, the "traditional" Korean way is to say one of the following:

• 청을 잘 들어주십시오. - Please grant my request.
• 잘 돌봐 주십시오. - Please do your best for me.
• 많이 도와 주십시오. - Please do everything you can for me.

잘 부탁합니다 supposedly comes from a Japanese expression, but it does not translate well into Korean.

What is a 항아리손님?

항아리 is a kind of "jar," and 손님 means "guest," so together they mean "jar guest," which is one name for the infectious disease, "mumps." Koreans also refer to the mumps as 볼거리, and Korean doctors refer to it as 유행성 이하선염. Supposedly, the word 항아리 (jar) is used in the name because mumps causes one's cheeks to swell up like a 항아리, which is a jar that has a mouth smaller than its belly.

손님 (guest) is also used in the names of other infectious diseases. Small pox is referred to not only as 천연두, but also as 마마, 손님, 손님마마 and 큰손님 (big visitor). Chicken pox (수두) and measles (홍역) are also referred to as 작은마마 and 작은손님 (small visitor). The names show respect for the diseases, as if they were honored guests.

Koreans used to believe the diseases were actually gods or spirts who were offended with them, so it seems the honored names were an attempt to appease the spirits or to avoid offending them in the first place. Since small pox was referred to as the "big visitor" (큰손님), it seems it was feared more than the other diseases.

What does 새벽 오줌 섞인 사람 mean?

It translates as "a person mixed up with morning urine" and is used to refer to a "simpleton" or "moron" (바보, 천치, 백치, 팔푼이, etc.).

I had never seen nor heard this expression until I came across it today among a list of proverbs. I am posting it because it seems it may have been based on an old Korean superstition. Did Koreans use to believe that mentally handicapped children were the result of their being born before the mother had a chance to take her morning pee?