"동물은 물건이 아닙니다."
Translation:An animal is not a thing.
Why is it 아닙니다 as opposed to 안입니다? Is it a specific rule or just the way it is?
Its the special verb to say negatice sentence like 없다(없입니다/없어요)
있다(있입니다/있어요)is used in possitive sentences
The etymology is actually 아니(안) + -이다, but it's a verb as a whole, so it's not some "rule".
And bc theres something in different honorifical level Polite ,formal 아니요 So put in ㅂ니다/습니다 for it becomes 아닙니다
It's pronounced ah nip ni da each segment is a syllable so if 안입니다 would sound like ahn ip ni da which changes how you say it
Your question is about the spelling and not the meaning right? I don't think people understood your question.
can someone pls explain why there is a subject marker after the word 'thing' in the negative sentence but not in the positive sentence.
동물은 물건이 아닙니다. 동물은 물건 입니다.
"-지 않다" is used to negate a verb, thus comes after a verb.
- 저는 예쁘지 않아요. (I am not pretty.)
"아니다" is the opposite of the particle "-이다", thus comes after a noun subject complement.
- 저는 학생이 아닙니다. (I am not a student.)
In Korean, verbs conjugate according to how formal you are being. Anayo is the plain formal conjugation, wheras the course is using the very formal conjugation.
Same here, and when she says it, i can almost hear an r sound not an n sound
The speaker is using highly formal honorifics- dont worry I think honorifics are learn later in the course- they change the ending of words
If you were to use 해요체 (the informal polite level), 아닙니다 would be 아니에요, not 않아요.
I think there is a word they taught in a prev lesson which denotes plurality, but mostly ppl just drop the word and leave it to context
Here it's neither plural nor singular; it could just as well be "an animal isn't a thing".
is the object of the adjective 이다 in a affirmative sentence always written as one word with 이다? and the object of the verb 아니다 in a negative sentence has the "object" particle 이/가 and is not attached to 아니다?
음식 and 입니다 are written together.
동물은 물건이 아닙니다.
물건 has 이 attached to it and formes two words with 아닙니다.
Are "eun" and "i" interchangeable as signifiers when the word ends in a consonant? Could they be swapped here without changing the meaning?
는 and 은 are topic marking particles.
는 is attached to words ending with a vowel
은 is attached to words ending with a consonant
It depends on whether or not the word ends with a consonant or not - similar to how in englisch you use "a" or "an" depending on how the next word starts.
은 if the word ends with final consonant, 는 if it doesn't
you use 은 when the word ends with a consonant, 는 when it ends with a vowel
Ok, lo que estoy entendiendo es que al sujeto se le da la particula 은/는 y al predicado la particula 이/가 Am i right? Use translate please :(
I completely disagree. Things are nouns. We are things. They are things. Your couch is a thing.
How am I supposed to know what this means if I don't even know the individual words themselves? This is the first they have appeared