"산은 공원에 있습니다."
Translation:The mountain is in the park.
Break down the sentence and think of it like that:
산은 = 산 mountain + 은 topic marker = The mountain, as for the mountain
공원에 = 공원 park +에 place marker = In the park
있습니다 = there is, there exists
So, altogether it can be translated word by word as:
As for the mountain, in the park, there is.
Or, in better english = In the park there is a mountain/The mountain is in the park.
Not quite. "There is a mountain in the park." would be acceptable. The indefinite article is typically required in English after "there is" for singular, countable nouns. (Not required for uncountable nouns like "mercy" or "ice", e.g., "there is ice on the mountain.")
"은" is a topic marker, often to indicate what someone is speaking about in a sentence, and as I've come to understand it, is a more inflexible particle used with nouns to often denote concrete emphasis on that noun (which makes sense when the similar form, "는", is used so much with "저는"; The definition of one's self rarely falters for many).
Whereas "이" is a subject marker, often indicating who/whom is doing what in a sentence. It also seems to be used more dependently of the topic/in dependence of the context of the sentence, but that's just my beginner's observation.
I hope this helped a little (I know this was a late reply, though XD).
I apologize if any of the information I gave was incorrect, as I am still a beginner myself.
I wish you success in your studies!
I know this is a late reply, but since no one answered your question, I wanted to try and help the best that I could.
(I apologize ahead of time for any misleading information I may give: I am still a beginner myself, but I've always been an advocate of the phrase, "the best way to learn is to teach"! Regardless, please forgive any mistakes lol)
Real quick: none of the markers used denote anything is set "on" anything else, but rather, they denote existence.
The sentence, "산은 공원에 있습니다"/ "The mountain(s) is/are in the park", is using two particles ("은", and "에") attached to nouns, in combination with the verb ("있습니다" [that can also be used to create compound adjectives]) at the end, all of these which can again, depending on the context in which you're speaking/writing, imply existence-in this case, the location of the mountain(s) in this park.
In my understanding, "은" is often used when talking about specific things, (such as "the mountains are in the park"), instead of using "는", which-if I'm not mistaken-is often used to make a more general statement (e.g. "mountains are in parks").
(SIDE NOTE FOR ANYONE ELSE READING: I've come to understand that "은" and "는" are used as topic markers to denote the inflexibility or limit of the topic. By using them, you're saying, "regardless of anything else/in spite of the sparse options around, this is how it is"...or at least that's how I've come to comprehend their usage.)
"에" is how "의" can be read/pronounced, so with it being tacked on to the end of "공원", we might infer that the mountain(s) is/are "of" the park.
Also, since "있습니다" as a verb can be used as "to be", we might break down a somewhat literal translation of the sentence as:
"The mountain(s) exist of the park."
OR more simply:
"The mountain(s) is/are of the park."
From there, we might see how the sentence can then read,
"The mountain(s) is/are in the park."
I hope this helped a little! Sorry for the rambling; again, I apologize if any of the information I gave was incorrect in any way! XD
I wish you success in your studies!