"여자는 한국 출신입니다."
Translation:The woman is from Korea.
157 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
You're exactly right because Kanji and Hanja are based off of the traditional Mandarin scripts.
The Japanese version of 漢字 has undergone several rounds of simplification the same as with the script used in mainland China. But the Japanese did not take the process to the same extremes as mainland China. The Koreans never considered work on 漢字 and instead focused on standardizing 한글. Thus, the Koreans (ironically) use the most conservative version of 漢字; they have both the complexity of the traditional forms and the extreme simplicity of 한글!
You can see the difference between the locales here (Korean, Japanese, Chinese):
- 廣広广 (all different)
- 圓円圆 (all different)
- 關関关 (all different)
- 鐵鉄铁 (all different)
- 國国国 (Mainland Chinese = Japanese)
- 學学学 (Mainland Chinese = Japanese)
- 話話语 (Korean = Japanese)
- 罐缶罐 (Korean = Mainland Chinese)
The rule of thumb is that mainland Chinese is simplified to a greater degree than Japanese, but in some cases they are just different.
Korean hanja is closest to Traditional Chinese used in Taiwan then! And a lot of the pronounciation is similar to Taiwanese too :)
The beautiful and lovely woman with sensual, bright brown eyes is from the alluring honeymoon destination Korea.
Do you mean romanize? If you can't read it yet I suggest you retake the first few lessons until you attain a comprehensive understanding of Hangul. It really does make things so much easier.
tbh I really needed the romanization, I had the first two words down easy but I was having trouble with the last word, the part before (imnida) was giving me trouble so it helped a bit to be able to read the romanization, and hear it so I could understand it.
Then I would suggest really grinding on learning Hangeul. You should be able to easily recognize characters at this point and continuing to use romanization can be very harmful to your learning and will make you associate those words with the romanized version rather than the real word. Make sense? I hope you've gotten past this by now :)
Chuurl-shin-ibnii-dah or as you say it quickly the “bn” tends to get close to an “m” sound.
출신입니다.
Where...from?
It’s pAinful going but I revisited the alphabet lessons in pieces until I could get the sound in spite of how off the romanization was. When I hear the sound, I stare at the Hangul to push the Romajin out of my view.
if you mean that sometimes you here sounds but they write different ,watch batchim lesson https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yE6p6V7UpEY&list=PLECz2rpRD3Z0W9QQzvPb3KtVYm1gtphv_&index=3 they help you to read when two consonant come next to each other (sorry if my English and explanation are bad)
Yeojaneun hangug chulshinibnida, but you really need to learn the alphabet because Koreans use sounds Westerners don't usually have so we can't really write them in Roman alphabet since it's something in between. Like ㅈ and ㅊ.
Refer to the alphabet of hangul. Try pronouncing it on your own while looking at each character. And figure it out, because while reading aloud, I have found it hard for me to read hangul f I had read the romanization of it and rely too heavily on it. Practice and see if you can. Just a thought.
imy experience, too. Also practiced writing lessons by hand if I was not remembering.
The romanisation for the given sentence is :- Yeojaneun hanguk chulsinibnida.
The phrases they were providing were descriptive and they were not complete sentences.
How would "A woman from Korea" differ from the accepted answer "A woman IS from Korea"?
The ending 입니다 is the verb 이다 - to be in polite form. "A woman from Korea" would be like "한국 출신의 여자". Sorry if it's not totally correct, I'm not a native korean.
The former (a woman from Korea) is an incomplete statement corresponding to: 한국 출신인 여자. This is the form you use when you need an expression as part of a larger statement.
thanks, Duolingo's version does sound weird, along with the 'meaningless bread'
I don't know much but I think it's because "A woman from Korea" is a phrase and "A/The woman is from Korea." is a sentence. The question above is a sentence and I guess the translation should also be a sentence.
Because that translation is just a noun, it doesn't include a verb like the original does.
I'm sorry, I wasn't clear. I was looking for an example in Korean of the difference.
“to be from”...is from...that is the verb.
A person can be from Korea. ...Moved there. ...Working there. ...Born there but not looking as Korean as we assume. ...Or of two people one looks Korean but is 4th generation Chinese. context is supreme.
I wrote 'the woman is Korean' but was told its wrong. Am I to assume that being of Korean citizenship and being Korean birn are two different things? Or is my answer correct?
This is a very, very good point. It is always tricky to teach the word '출신' to foreigners. The sentence literally means that "the woman is from Korea." Since one can be from Korea without being a Korean citizen, those two sentences do not necessarily mean the same.
maybe it's about the descent of the woman being born in Korea but do not have Korean parents
Your assumption is right. It's the same in English to. For example I could say "I am from America" and "I am American." It's not said the same way So "The woman is Korean" would translate to "여자는 한국 사람입니다."
Korea doesn't grant citizenship to people based on simply being born in Korea. If you were born in Korea and both parents were citizens of another country, you would not be a Korean citizen and could only become one through naturalization.
It’s hard to explain, and knowing Chinese would probably make it more intuitive.
한국출신 (韓國出身) should be interpreted as a single unit meaning “Korean-born” (or more broadly as “of Korean origin”) attached to the verb 이다, meaning “to be.” Chinese-based compounds are light on the particles and rely on positional information to convey meaning.
Whats the difference between 한국입니다 and 한국 출신입니다? I mean they mean the same dont they?
Where are you from? --> 당신은 어디 출신입니까?
It is Korea. --> 한국입니다.
I am from Korea. --> 나는 한국 출신입니다.
"한국인 입니다" and "한국 사람 입니다." mean "I'm a Korean person." or "I'm Korean."
"한국 출신 입니다." means "I'm a native Korean."
They're similar. The difference being that 출신 implies that you were born in Korea. Whereas someone born outside of Korea to with family from Korea may call themselves "한국 사람".
They do mean the same its just that 한국입니다 is more commonly used then 출신입니다.
Yes, that's correct since 아닙니다 is basically 아니 conjugated into the Formal High Respect so putting it with 출신 can make: "is not from"
That would be a general statement. It's grammatically valid, but it would be a weird (and false) thing to say. Thus, in cases where a statement in Korean can, by the grammar, be either a general statement or a statement about a specific topic (a specific woman in this case), if the general statement interpretation is false and weird, I would assume that it is referring to a specific topic (a specific woman).
But then, Duolingo has dancing dogs, frogs that take out the trash, and many more creatures from some fantastical world (or probably from many fantastical worlds), so it wouldn't surprise me if woman really are from Korea as a general statement in one of these fantastical worlds.
Yes, both sentences are commonly used by Koreans. In practice, Koreans use those expressions to express a particular city they are from: 저는 제주도 출신입니다. 저는 제주도에서 왔습니다.
Does anyone know what the difference between "The woman is from Korea." and "The woman is Korean." would be?
The woman is from Korea. --> (그) 여자는 한국 출신입니다.
The woman is Korean. --> (그) 여자는 한국인입니다.
出生 would be 출생. Both Mandarin and Korean generally preserve the final /ŋ/ sound so you would not find many examples of Chinese-derived words where Mandarin has /ŋ/ but Korean has /n/ instead.
I would really like it if the lesson didn't move on until I have practiced and learned how to speak the sentence. Having it move on before I am able to soeak the sentence fluently, makes it difficult for me to ever do so. Thank you.
Pronunciation question regarding 출신: It sounds as though the voiceover is not pronouncing the ㄹ. Does this letter become silent before ㅅ? Or is it ever-so-slightly pronounced and just hard to hear?
출신 says nothing about where a person currently lives. It means "native" and/or "origin".
I live in Korea, but "나는 미국 출신입니다."
isn't it the same if I say 'The woman is Korean' and 'The woman is from Korea'?
출신 means "native".
But "The woman is Korean." could refer to someone born in, say, Australia whose grandparents were from Korea.
출신 means native.
"The woman is Korean." could refer to a woman whose grandparents were from Korea.
"is Korean" and "from Korea" should be about the same right? If you're born in Korea, aren't you Korean and from Korea? Unless you're just visiting, therefore you're literally "from Korea" after you've left the country.
They're not exactly the same.
Imagine a Korean couple move to Germany and while there they have a baby. The kid is both "from Germany" and "Korean".
I thought "the woman" in this sentence would be "여자가". I think without a context it's kinda hard for me to know how I should be using 가 and 는
The sentence makes more grammatical sense with 여자가, but 여자는 is perfectly fine. 는 just makes 여자 the topic. In a lot of cases, this makes the sentence have the feeling of a statement in general about each and every example of the noun, so it kind of becomes a plural. But in this case, it clearly can't mean that generally speaking, women are from Korea.
Because they're the same.
출신 is "出身"; both are loanwords from Chinese.
출신 is hanja (한자) whereas the Japanese one is "kanji".
Because the sentence doesn't really/exactly mean "I'm from Korea."
출신 means "native". 한국 출신 means "Korean native" or "native of Korea".
"저는 한국 출신입니다." means "I'm a Korean native."
If you want to use the location marker, 에서 can mean "from", so a common way to say where you're from is "저는 (place)에서 왔습니다." It literally means "I came from (place)", but it can be used for your hometown/home country assuming you're now located away from your hometown.
(home/region) a native, origin, birth, affiliation
(school/occupation) a graduate
에서 is a particle that can mean is or is from depending on the context of the sentence
Should there be a location marking particle on 한국? Which is more correct/natural? 여자는 한국 출신입니다 여자는 한국에 출신입니다
"한국에 출신" is ungrammatical.
The confusion is that "출신" doesn't actually mean "from". 출신 means "native" and "한국 출신" simply means "Korean native" or "native of Korea".
Similarly, "Korean food" is "한국 음식" and "Korean person" is "한국 사람", with no particles.
"여자는 한국 출신입니다." really means "The women is a Korean native." It doesn't even mean she's from there, neccesarily. For instance, if you were born in Korea but moved when you were a baby, you probably wouldn't say you're from there.
It could be the particles that was added onto 여자 or you could have a minor spelling mistake
It would most often be the same thing, but a person who gains Korean citizenship after birth would not be "한국 출신".
For instance, on naver's entry for citizen (시민), they use the following example: She’s Italian by birth but is now an Australian citizen. 그녀는 이탈리아 출신이지만 지금은 오스트레일리아 시민이다.
는/은 is often called the topic marker. But the "topic" of a Korean sentence would be the subject of the equivalent sentence in English.
And 이/가 is often called the subject marker. But something marked with 이/가 may or may not be the "subject" of the same sentence in English.
Lesson with 는/은 as "subject marker":
https://www.howtostudykorean.com/unit1/unit-1-lessons-1-8/unit-1-lesson-1/
Lesson with 이/가 as "subject marker":
https://www.howtostudykorean.com/unit1/unit-1-lessons-1-8/unit-1-lesson-2/
Yes, I use Howtostudykorean.com as well its good it teaches you grammar and words as well im not that far im on Unit 1 lesson 15
I cant pronounce 습니다 to save me life. So all those words are inplausible for me to pass on speaking tests. Its bloody annoying
Yes, although that only makes sense if the woman is no longer in Korea.
왔다 (왔어요) means "came".
"(place)에서 왔어요" means "came from (place)."
"I'm from here." makes sense in English.
"저는 어기에서 왔어요." doesn’t make sense.
I sometimes say it as shusshin[Japanese] instead of chu(l)shin[Korean] cuz both sound the same.
why "the woman is korean" is wrong? someone who's from korea is korean
"The woman is Korean" could refer to a woman not from Korea who has Korean parents.
In 한국 출신, 한국 isn't a location but is the country/nation.
한국 음신 = Korean food
한국 음악 = Korean music
출신 = native
한국 출신 = Korean native / native Korean.
If you want to use a marker, then you could use 한국의 출신.
의 is a possessive marker. It means "belonging to" / "of".
Can you use this phrase with cities, or countries only? Can I say: 남자는 파리 출신입니다. If not, what is the correct phrase? Thanks.
615
When do we use , "from" and when to use "in" ? Can someone explain pls? I mean , "The woman is in Korea" or the woman is from korea
The woman is in Korea = 여자는 한국에 있[다/습니다]. - This sentence means that the woman is in Korea right now. The woman is from Korea = 여자는 한국에서 왔습니다. - This sentence means that the woman came from Korea.
Hi Hatchy93, I actually agree with you and you are right in most cases. However, there are cases when someone is no longer Korean even if he or she is originally from Korea. For example, if you search the name Viktor Ahn - one of the most accomplished short-track speed-skaters of all time, you will find that he is now Russian but originally from Korea. He was born and raised in Korea and won many gold medals in the 2006 Winter Olympics as a member of the Korean national team. However, he later chose to join the Russian team as he felt that he was not being fairly treated within the Korean national team. In the 2018 Olympics, he won three gold medals as a Russian citizen. There are many similar cases like him and vice versa - the woman may be Korean now but originally from a different nation or the woman is no longer Korean but originally from Korea. I hope this explanation deepens your understanding of the Korean word - 출신이다! Keep up the great work and continue to enjoy learning Korean!
They don't quite mean the same thing.
For example: A woman born and raised in America with Korean parents is "from America", but also is Korean (by heritage).
Edit: And a child born in Korea to non-Korean parents isn't Korean despite arguably being from Korea.
I just got a typo in my sentence when I write it but it's taking the gearts awat
출신 means "native".
But "The woman is Korean." could apply to a woman born outside of Korea to Korean parents. Such a woman would be "Korean", but not "한국 출신".
"(country) (noun)"
American food - 미국 음식
Chinese person - 중국 사람
French music - 프랑스 음악
출신 means native
한국 출신 - Korean native /native of Korea
한국에 출신 doesn't make sense, because they're a native even if they leave Korea.
