What's the difference between 밥맛이 없다 and 밥맛없다?

ANSWER: One means you are not hungry; the other means you can't stand someone.

밥 means "boiled rice" or "food," and 맛 means "taste," so 밥맛 literally means "food taste." That means 밥맛이 있다 literally means "The food tastes good," and 밥맛이 없다 literally means "The food tastes bad," which usually translates as "I'm not hungry," or "I have no appetite."

Even though the subject marker (이 or 가) is often dropped in spoken Korean, you should keep the 이 and say "밥맛이 없다" when you want to say, "I'm not hungry," because 밥맛없다, without the 이, means you do not like someone and do not want to associate with him or her. For example, if a girlfriend is trying to set you up with a guy you do not like, you could say, "그 남자가 밥맛없다," which can translate as "I can't stand that guy." However, if you were to say, "그 남자가 밥맛이 없대," then you would be saying, "He said he is not hungry."

In the United States, when we are eating and then see something so disgusting that it causes us not to want to eat anymore, we sometimes say, "I just lost my appetite." Also, if we are eating and someone at the dinner table does or says something we do not like, we sometimes show our displeasure by saying, "I've just lost my appetite," and then get up and leave the table. The Korean expression 밥맛없다 is also used to express one's displeasure.

What's the difference between 매우 어렵게 and 어렵사리?

ANSWER: There is no difference in meaning, but one seems easier to say.

My dictionary says that 어렵사리 means "매우 어렵게," which means that it is an adverb that translates as "very difficultly" or "very strenuously," but it does not tell me what "사리" means. I can, of course, guess that 사리 means "very" (매우), but why isn't that definition in my dictionary?

My dictionary also says that the word 쉽사리 means "아주 쉽게," which means that it is an adverb that means "very easily" or "quite easily." So, the 사리 in both 쉽사리 and 어렵사리 seems to mean either 매우 or 아주, both of which can translate as "very."

Anyway, why isn't there a definition for -사리 in my dictionary? I suspect it is because scholars are still unsure of the origin of -사리 and are, therefore, not confident enough to list it as a suffix meaning "very," especially since it seems to only be used to make adverbs out of 어렵다 and 쉽다.

So, why do some Koreans prefer to say 어렵사리 and 쉽사리 instead of 매우 어렵게 and 아주 쉽게? I am not sure, but 어렵사리 and 쉽사리 do seem to roll off the tongue much easier than 매우 어렵게 and 아주 쉽게.

By the way, I found it interesting that my dictionary used 매우 with 어렵게 and 아주 with 쉽게 to define 어렵사리 and 쉽사리. I am not sure of the difference between 매우 and 아주, but, for some reason, 아주 쉽게 sounds more natural than 매우 쉽게." I am not sure if 매우 어렵게 sounds more natural than 아주 어렵게, or if there is a difference in meaning, but it makes me wonder what slight difference there might be between 매우 and 아주, something I might write about later.

Is the Chinese character 的 (적) destroying the Korean language?

ANSWER: Maybe not, but Koreans do seem to use it too much.

In his book “우리글 바로쓰기,” the late writer and author Lee O-deok (이오덕) mentioned six Chinese characters that he believed were destroying the Korean language: 的(적), 化(화), 下(하), 再(재), 諸(제), and 對(대).

I disagree with some of what Mr. Lee wrote about the six Chinese characters, but I do think Koreans use 적 (的) way too much. The following is an example from Mr. Lee’s book in which 적 was used five times in just one short sentence in a 1989 Hankyoreh (한겨래) newspaper article talking about a painting:

이 대작은 ‘형식적으로는 추상적이나 내용적으로는 표현주의적’인 추상표현주의 화가의 작품 세계를 단적으로 보여 준다.

Here is Mr. Lee’s rewrite of the sentence:

이 큰 작품은 ‘형식으로는 추상(화)이나 내용으로는 표현주의’인 추상표현주의 화가의 작품 세계를 바로 보여 준다.

Notice that 적 does not appear even once in Mr. Lee’s rewrite of the sentence. Why? Because it is unnecessary. Even 단적(端的)으로 was reduced from a 4-syllable phrase to a 2-syllable one by using the pure Korean word 바로 instead.

However, notice that Mr. Lee also changed “이 대작은” to “이 큰 작품은.” This is one of the times where I disagree with Mr. Lee because 대작 (大作) translates as “a great work” or “masterpiece,” but 큰 작품 could also refer to the physical size of the work, making its meaning less clear.

Anyway, there is a movement in Korea to try to eliminate Chinese characters, or at least as many as possible, from the Korean language, similar to what was done in North Korea, but Mr. Lee did not seem to be that extreme. Here seemed to want to get rid of only the Chinese characters that were unnecessary or that were making it harder for Koreans to understand their own language. For example, he wondered why some Koreans would choose to use the difficult to pronounce and understand 의의(意義) instead of the simpler pure Korean word 뜻. He suggested that some Koreans use difficult words just to show off instead of speaking and writing in the clearest way possible.

Mr. Lee essentially believed that Koreans should write the way they speak, and speak the way they live.

You can click on the 미리보기 (Preview) button on the linked page HERE to get an idea of what Mr. Lee wrote about in his Korean book.

Which is bigger, a 갈치 or a 풀치?

ANSWER: A 갈치 is bigger because a 풀치 is just a baby 갈치, and a 갈치 is long thin fish known in English as a “hairtail” or “cutlass fish.” LINK

So, I have a question. If Koreans have a specific name for a baby cutlass fish, why don’t they have a specific name for a baby cat (kitten) besides 새끼 고양이? And what are the Korean names for a baby sheep and a baby goat besides 새끼 양 and 새끼 염소?

My English-Korean dictionary defines 새끼 as follows:

새끼 1) [새의] a chicken; a chick; a young bird; a brood (한배의); [동물의] the young (총칭); a cub; [말의] a foal; a colt; [개의] a pup; a puppy; [괭이의] a kitten, a kitty; [양의] a lamb; [염소의] a kid; [물고기의] a fry

So, 새끼 is just a general term (총칭) for the “young” of animals. But Koreans also have specific words to refer to the young of many of the animals mentioned in the definition above. So why aren't there specific Korean words for "kitten," "lamb," and "kid" besides those that use 새끼?

Korean words for specific baby animals:

• Bear: 능소니 (a cub)
• Chicken: 병아리 (a chick)
• Cow: 송아지 (a calf)
• Dog: 강아지 (a puppy)
• Dolphin: 가사리 (a calf)
• Fish: 모이 (a fry)
• Frog: 올챙이 (a tadpole)
• Horse: 망아지 (a foal)
• Pheasant: 꺼병이 (a chick)
• Tiger: 개호주 (a cub)

 For some reason, Koreans have specific names for the babies of certain fish. Some are listed HERE.

What's the difference between 대접 (待接) and 접대 (接待)?

ANSWER: They are the same in one respect and different in another.

The problem with 대접 (待接) and 접대 (接待) is that they each have two definitions, and one of the definitions is the same for both. Here is how my Korean-Korean dictionary defines them:

대접: 1) 손님을 맞아 음식을 차려 올려 먹게 함. 접대. – the act of receiving guests and preparing food for them to eat. [Also,] 접대.

접대: 1) [Also,] 대접

So, the first definition for both 대접 and 접대 is “the act of receiving guests and preparing food for them to eat.” That means the two words are synonyms in this regard and can be used interchangeably. This meaning could be translated as "to entertain guests with food." It is their second definitions where the words differ:

대접: 2) 어떤 인격적 수준으로 사람을 대우하거나 대함. – treating or dealing with people using some characteristic standard.

접대: 2) 손님을 맞이하여 시중을 듦. – receiving guests and waiting on them.

So, the second definition for 대접 seems to be just the general meaning of the word “to treat.” In other words, one could treat someone well, badly, politely, impolitely, or even like a dog.

The second definition of 접대 could be translated as “to greet and wait on guests,” including guests at a restaurant or bar. In fact, the Korean word 접대부 can be translated as “hostess” and refers to a woman who greets people at a restaurant or bar.

So, if one is entertaining at one's home, 대접 seems to imply that the host or hostess supplies the food and lets the guests help themselves, while 접대 seems to imply that the host or hostess not only supplies the food but is also running around waiting on the guests, such as at a big party.

What does the 푸 in 푸대접 mean?

ANSWER: I'm not sure, but I have a theory. 

But first, I have a few questions about the Korean language: 

1. What is the difference between 대접(待接) and 접대(接待), besides just the switching of the Chinese characters? My dictionary says that both 대접하다 and 접대하다 can be translated as “to treat” or “to entertain,” so when do Koreans use one and not the other?
2. The Chinese character 不 (부) means “not,” so if 대접 (待接) means “hospitality,” then 부대접 should mean “inhospitality,” but Koreans do not say 부대접; instead they say 푸대접. Why? Does 푸 mean “not”?
3. If Koreans can use 푸대접 to mean “cold or unkind treatment” or “inhospitality,” why can’t they also say 푸접대?
4. The Korean word 푸접없다 means “unfriendly or cold and distant treatment.” That implies there should be a 푸접있다 or at least a 푸접, and, indeed, there is such a word. 푸접 means “to treat someone in a warm and friendly way,” and that implies that the 푸 in 푸접 means “warm and friendly. So my final question is the following:
   
   Why does 푸대접 mean “cold, unfriendly treatment” instead of “warm and friendly treatment," considering that the 푸 seems to mean "warm and friendly"? Could 푸 come from 품, which means "to hug someone"?
   

I think 푸접 is just an abbreviated form of 푸대접 and that, somewhere along the way, Koreans got the word 푸대접, meaning "warm and friendly treatment," confused with 부(不)대접, meaning "inhospitality." Like Americans, Koreans sometimes confuse the sounds of 푸 and 부.

Moreover, I think 푸대접 was once 품대접, meaning "hospitality that begins or ends with hugs." After all, hugs are warm and friendly.

What does 모금 mean?

ANSWER: a sip, a gulp, or a draft

In my Chinese character dictionary, which lists over 8,000 characters, there is only one character pronounced "끽" (喫). That character can mean "to eat" or "to drink." So, cowards "eat fear" (끽겁 喫怯), parents with teenagers “eat suffering” (끽고 喫苦), the English “drink tea” (끽다 喫茶), smokers “eat smoke” (끽연 喫煙), we all “eat food” (끽반 喫飯), and some of us “eat and drink to the brim” (만끽 滿喫).

The reason I mention this is that I just read in a Korean book that when Deng Xiaoping (등소평 鄧小平) was asked his secret to longevity, he answered "喫煙" (끽연). I am not going to tell you the name of the book because no one really cares, right? I will just say that it is a good book.

Anyway, it makes me wonder why Koreans consider 모금 to be the standard spelling of the Korean word for "a sip," "a gulp," or "a draft." Since 먹다 is the pure Korean word for "to eat," it seems that 먹음 (or 머금) would be the more correct spelling. But Koreans consider 먹음 to be a dialectic form of the word, not the standard form.

By the way, the expression 끽다거 (喫茶去) literally means "drink (喫) tea (茶) and go (去)," which could be translated into Korean as either "차 한잔 마시고 가세요" or 차 한잔 드시고 가세요. 드십시오 is used as the polite form of 마시다 and comes from the verb 들다, which can mean either "to eat" or "to drink." Apparently, using 마시십시오 as the polite form of "to drink" is considered too awkward for many, probably because there are too many 시's in it. However, if you wanted to use the polite form of 마시다 to say "Breathe in the fresh air," you would say, "신선한 공기를 마시십시오," not "드십시오."

The following song is entitled "끽다거":

여보게 세상살이 다 밀어놓고
차나 한잔 드시게나
생이란 무생사는 원래가 허망한 것

맘자락 편히 내려놓고 만상을 들쳐보게나

여보게 세간살이 면이란 다 그런것
있으나 없으나 모두 버리고갈 유산인데
우에 그리 얽메이나
여보게 세상살이 다 밀어놓고
차나 한잔 드시게나 

What is the origin of the pure Korean word "우리" (we)?

ANSWER: Probably 울, which means "the family" or "the clan"

Koreans seem to be unsure of the origin of "우리" (we), but I think it comes from the pure Korea word "울." My dictionary defines "울" as "relatives," "family," "kinsfolk," or "clan," which has always been the core component of Korean society. So, you only have to add the subject marker "이" to "울" to get "울이," which is naturally pronounced /우리/.

When Koreans first started saying "우리," I think they were using it to mean "the family" or "the clan." Therefore, the phrase "우리 친구" would have been the pronunciation of "울의 친구," which would have meant "a friend of the family" or "a friend of the clan." And "우리 남편" would have meant "the husband of the family," and, of course, "우리 아내" or "우리 마누라" would have meant "the wife of the family."

Is the following video funny?

ANSWER: Yes!

What is the Korean for "to throw one's hat into the ring"?

ANSWER: 출사표를 던지다

When one "throws one's hat into the ring," it means the person wants to challenge someone in a contest or something. Today the expression is often used in politics to mean a political candidate wants to challenge the current officeholder, but originally it was used to challenge someone to a boxing match. In other words, someone outside a boxing ring could throw his hat into the ring to challenge the champion there.

In the Korean expression 출사표를 던지다, the verb "던지다" means "to throw," but 출사표 (出師表) does not mean "hat."

The phrase 출사 (出師) means "to dispatch troops." The Chinese character 出 (출) means "to send out" or "to dispatch," and 師 (사) means "troops," though today 師 is more commonly used to mean "teacher" or "master" (스승).  The 표(表) in the expression means "memorial" (장표 章表), which were written documents the Chinese used to communicate with their emperors. So, 출사표 (出師表) literally means "a memorial to dispatch troops."

One of the problems with using 출사표를 던지다 to mean "throw one's hat in their ring" is that the Chinese would have never "thrown" their memorials at their emperors, at least none who wanted to live.

By the way, there is a really cool Korean song called "출사표" that starts at about the 2:50 mark in the following first video. The first video includes the Korean lyrics with English translations. The second video is a live performance, which is also cool.

The song seems to suggest that a young person has decided to finally leave home to take on the challenges of the world. In other words, the person has decided to throw his or her hat into the ring.

How do you say "ants in [your] pants" in Korean?

ANSWER: 좀이 쑤시다

When a person cannot sit still because of some anxiety, impatience, or excess energy, we might ask the person in English, "Do you have ants in your pants?" Well, the Korean equivalent seems to be "(너를) 좀이 쑤시니?" which literally translates as either "Are bugs prickling you?"

The transitive verb 쑤시다 can translate as "to tingle" or "to prickle," and the pure Korean word 좀 can be used as a general term for "bug" (곤충), or as a shortened form of 좀벌레, which is an insect known in English as "a silverfish."

Would you sit still if the following bug was crawling around on your body?

What's the Korean word for "pee shivers"?

ANSWER: 진저리

In an article, HERE, which NBC News jokingly refers to as "yellow journalism,"  the phrase "pee shivers" is described as follows:

When grown men and little boys urinate, occasionally our entire body is abruptly racked with a mysterious, internal blast of cold that makes us visibly shudder from the shoulders down. It typically occurs near the end of the task, lasting roughly one frigid second.

The phrase 진저리 나다 can be used to refer not only to the uncontrollable shivers boys and men sometimes get after urinating but also to the shivers people sometimes get when they are afraid.

By the way, what are 1800 Korean expressions every Korean fifth grader should know?

Click on THIS LINK and find out. Do not be afraid. It is just a link to a new and interesting Korean children's book entitled "초등 국어 표현력 사전," which I will creatively translate as "Dictionary of Expressions Every Korean Elementary School Student Should Know." The linked page shows you an extensive free preview of the 392-page book.

What does 맞팔 mean?

ANSWER: follow each other

In the video below, the young man mentions 맞팔 when talking about replying to posts on Instagram and Twitter, two social media platforms that I do not use. Anyway, he says the 팔 part of 맞팔 is an abbreviation of 팔로우, which is just the Korean pronunciation of the English word follow. Since the Korean language does not have an "F" sound, Koreans often use syllables starting with the letter ㅍ to approximate it.

The 맞 part of 맞팔 is a Korean prefix that can mean each other, so if a Korean friend says, 트위터에서 맞팔하자, he or she is saying, "Let's follow each other on Twitter."

The guy also mentions 잘 보고 가요, which he says is a "common stock phrase" that Koreans use on Twitter and Instagram to mean "Nice post."  However, since there is no past tense in the expression, it literally means, "I will enjoy looking [at it] and leave," which seems a strange way to say, "Nice post." Why not just write, "잘 봤어요," which means "I enjoyed looking at it"? Because the 가요 part of the expression means the commenter is just passing through and will not be staying around to engage in dialog and, therefore, does not expect a reply.

Also, the guy says that someone who writes 잘 보고 가요 might not always be a real person, and suggests that the comment could just be a bot trying to get you to follow a link to a particular Web site.

What does the word 행리 (行李) mean?

ANSWER: baggage or luggage

行 (행) means “walk” or “travel,” and 李 (리) means “plum,” so the Korean word 행리 (行李) literally means “walking plums” or “travelling plums,” which for some reason translates as “baggage” or “luggage.”

This suggests that Koreans and Chinese used to travel pretty light, carrying mainly their walking fruits.

I am unsure of the origin of the word 행리, but I can imagine a mother sending her son off on a long trip with a bundle of plums to eat along the way. 

I do not know if Koreans still use the word 행리 (行李), but the Chinese in Taiwan apparently do use it.

Is this guy a good teacher?

ANSWER: I think he's a great teacher.

But I think he mistakenly explained 맞히다, which really means ""to  guess or do something correctly," not "to make something correct." For example, the sentence "정답을 맞혀봐요," means "Try to guess the correct answer," not "Try to make the correct answer."

In his spoken explanation he does say, "to guess something correctly," but the writing on the screen is "to make something correct," which is wrong.

So, the verb 맞히다 means "to guess or do something correctly," including "hitting a target," and the verb 맞추다 means "to match something" or "to fit something," which often requires some adjustment.

Is the man in the linked video below saying Sentence A or Sentence B?

A: 네 속에 내가 있고 내 속에 네가 있다.
"I'm inside you, you're inside me."

B: 내 속에 네가 있고, 네 속에 내가 있다.
"You're inside me, I'm inside you."

Even if you can distinguish between 내 and 네 in the above sentence, it still seems to be a losing battle in Korea, which is why I have given up and just pronounce 네 as /니/.

Or why not say 너이 instead of 네, which would mean 네가 would be pronounced as 너이가? It would eliminate the need to have dog-like hearing to distinguish between 내가 and 네가.

From what I have read, Korean used to have only one subject marker--"이"--but sometime in the 17th century, Koreans also started using "가. So, before the use of 가, nouns such as 말 (horse) and 소 (cow) would have been made into subject nouns by adding the subject marker 이 to both of them. So, instead of saying 말이 and 소가, they would have said 말이 and 소이. Likewise, if they added the subject marker 이 to the pronouns 나 and 너, that would have resulted in 나이 and 너이.

So, when 가 was introduced, instead of saying 나가 and 너가, Koreans may have just added 가 to 나이 and 너이, resulting in 나이가 and 너이가, which became 내가 and 네가? From what I have read, people in some regions of Korea still use 이가 as a subject marker. For example, supposedly some people in North Gyeongsang Province still say 오늘이가 for "today" instead of just 오늘이.

Anyway, would it really be so bad to say 너이가 instead of 네가? When you write it, of course, you would still write 네가.

https://twitter.com/adonisohn/status/898202316393725955

Is the Korean word for "uterus" a gender-biased word?

ANSWER: Some Koreans think it is.

Korean Dictionaries and Gender-Biased Words

Some Koreans want gender-biased words removed from Korean dictionaries. For example, the Korean word for “uterus” is 자궁(子宮), which literally means either “son’s palace” or “child’s palace,” but some Koreans think that is a gender-biased word and want to see it changed to 포궁 (胞宮), which literally means “cell’s palace.” When referring to a “baby stroller,” Koreans usually say 유모차(乳母車), which literally means “wet nurse car” or “nanny car,” but some Koreans think that is also a gender-biased word and, therefore, prefer the word 유아차(乳兒車), which literally means “baby car.”

Here are more words considered gender-biased words by some Koreans:

• From 처녀작 (maiden work) to 첫작품 (first work)
• From 미혼 (unable to marry) to 비혼 (unmarried)
• From 여직원 (female employee) to just 직원 (employee)
• From 여의사 (female doctor) to just 의사 (doctor)
• From 여교수 (female professor) to just 교수 (professor)
• From 저출산 (low delivery [rate]) to 저출생 (low birth [rate])
• From 여자고등학교 (girls high school) to just 고등학교 (high school)

What does 육하원칙 (六何原則) mean?

ANSWER: The Principle of the Six Ha's

In the video below, a woman gives really good advice, in Korean, on writing book reviews (독서록). By the way, I love her videos.

Anyway, during the video she mentions 육하원칙 (六何原則), which literally translates as "Principle of the Six 'Ha's (하's).'" In the United States, we would refer to "The Six 하's (六何)" as "The Six W's," which refers to "who," "what," "when," "where," "why," and "how." And "The Six W's" is a checklist that reporters and others commonly use when gathering information to tell a story.

So, why do Koreans refer to "The Six W's" as "The Six 하's"? Because in Classical Chinese and Literally Korean (한문), the Chinese character 何 (하) was an interrogative word that could be used to mean any of "the six W's," depending on the words surrounding it.

The Six Ha's (육하 六何)

• 하인 (何人) - Who
• 하사 (何事) - What
• 하시 (何時) - When
• 하처 (何處) - Where
• 하고 (何故) - Why
• 여하 (如何) - How

When did 가까이 become a noun?

ANSWER: I'm guessing sometime between 1992 and 2017.

In my 1992 edition of "Donga's New Korean-Korean Dictionary" (동아 새國語辭典), 가까이 is listed only as an adverb. But recently, while I was looking at a preview of Nam Yeong-shin's 2017 book 보리 국어 바로쓰기 사전, I noticed that he listed it as both an adverb and a noun.

Here are the two example sentences Mr. Nam gave for the use of 가까이 as a noun:

문 가까이에 물건을 두지마라.
"Don't put things close to the door."

개가 아이 가까이에 오지 않도록 해라.
"Don't let the dog get close to the child."

The Korean particle 에 attaches to nouns and pronouns and means "to," "in," "on," or "at," so since the example sentences show 에 attached to 가까이, that means 가까이 is being used in the sentences as a noun. It also suggests that the use of 가까이 as a noun was accepted in Korean society sometime between the publication of my 1992 dictionary and that of Mr. Nam's 2017 book.

Anyway, I am curious to know if Koreans think it sounds better to use 가까이 as an adverb or as a noun. In other words, which of the following sentences sound better? The As or the Bs?

A: 문에 가까이 물건을 두지마라.
B: 문 가까이에 물건을 두지마라.

A: 개가 아이한테 가까이 오지 않도록 해라.
B: 개가 아이 가까이에 오지 않도록 해라.

The following is a page from Nam Yeong-sin's (남영신) 2017 book 보리 국어 바로쓰기 사전, where he listed 가까이 as both and adverb and a noun.

What does 안녕하세요 mean?

ANSWER: Are you feeling well?

I am from Texas, where we frequently say "hello" to strangers as we pass them on a sidewalk. In Texas, strangers even raise a hand in greeting as they pass each other in cars or trucks on narrow country roads. So, I was a pretty surprised when I first went to Korea back in the late 70's and discovered that Koreans did not greet strangers on the street, even if one of them was staring at the other as they passed.

Back in the late 70s and early 80s, foreigners were a much rarer sight in Korea than they are today, so Koreans would almost always stare at me when I would walk down a Korean sidewalk, even a sideway in Seoul. I remember the first time I said "안영하세요" to a Korean stranger on the street. He was a middle-aged man, who was staring a hole in me as he walked toward me on a lonely sidewalk. Since we had made eye contact, I felt obliged to say "안녕하세요" when he was close enough to hear it, but instead of returning the greeting or answering, he just looked a me as if I had asked if his wife were good bed. After a few more similar experiences, I learned not to greet strange Koreans on the street. By the way, even non-military foreigners back then would often ignore my greetings, as if they were New Yorkers or as if they had learned the Korean custom of not greeting strangers on the street.

Today, I read an article entitled "안녕" in Nam Yeong-sin's "Usage Handbook of the Korean Language" ("난영신의 한국어용법핸드북"). The first sentence in the article was as follows:

요즘 한국어를 배우는 외국인이 가장 먼저 익히는 말이 '안녕하세요.' ('하세요'의 높이가 거의 같도록 소리내.)라고 한다.

"These days, it is said that "안녕하세요" (saying '하세요' with almost the same pitch) is the very first expression foreigners studying Korean learn."

The greeting "안녕하세요" is supposed to be a question meaning, "Are you well?" but by saying that foreigners say the "하세요" part of it with almost the same pitch, Mr. Nam is suggesting that foreigners are not using the greeting as a question but rather as a simple "hello." He also suggests that even Koreans are forgetting the true meaning of the greeting. As an example, he gives the following anecdote:

두메 산촌에 의료 봉사를 하러 간 의대생이 거동이 심히 불편해 누워 있는 80대의 할아버지를 찾아가서 "안녕하세요, 할아버지?"라고 인사를 했더니 이 할아버지가 "아니, 난 안녕하지 못해요, 젊은이."라고 하더란다.

In a remote mountain village, a college medical student, who had gone there to do charity medical work, goes up to an old man in his 80s who was lying down because it was very uncomfortable for him to move and asked, "Are you feeling well, Grandfather?" The old man answered, "No, I'm unable to feel well, young man." 

The old man's response was probably his way of saying, "Does it look like I'm feeling well? The point Mr. Nam was trying to make with that anecdote was that even some Koreans are forgetting the original meaning of "안녕하세요?" Mr. Nam did not mention it, but I think a more sincere and appropriate greeting to the sick old man would have been something similar to the following: "할아버지, 어디 아프세요?" which translates as "Grandfather, where does it hurt?"

I have not lived in Korea for about ten years, but I think today if a foreigner were to say "안녕하세요" to a Korean on a sidewalk, the Korean would probably return the greeting, knowing that the foreigner was not being nosey by asking about his or her health, but was just being friendly by saying "Hello."