"산은 공원에 있습니다."
Translation:The mountain is in the park.
122 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
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.
i got it wrong when i answered "There is a mountain in the park". I believe they just have the same meaning, but why is it incorrect? :
Yes, you are right. We already have the following as an accurate answer - There is a mountain [at/in] [a/the] park. Did you type it as " There is a mountain in the park."?
I think in your statement " there is a mountain in the park" the subject is the park but in the statement " the mountain is in the park" the subject is the mountain
My answer is, there is a mountain in the park. Why is it wrong? Is the grammar wrong?
135
How is that we use subjet marker for mountain here 산은 공원에... but in a similar sentence we use the topic marker for the sea? 바다가 공원에...
I think many of the learners got confused with the idea that a mountain can be in the park. The creator of this sentence was inspired by national parks. It is not surprising to find a mountain in the national park.
이 is for the topic (like "dogs" in "I like dogs"), instead 은 is for the subject (like "She" in "She likes dogs"). Also, it is 은 when the previous character ends in a consonant (like ㄴ in 산은), and 는 when it ends in a vowel (like 나는)
It's the other way around. 이/가 Is the subject marker. 은/는 is the topic marker.
Yes, 있습니다 is the formal and polite version. 있어요 is the informal and polite version.
Does the order matter? I noticed the nouns are usually beside each other. So if I were to switch them, would it change the meaning? Like ex: 산은 공원에 있습니다 to 공원에 산은 있습니다. (I’m a beginner and it’s kinda confusing)
No, switching the order of the nouns does not change the meaning (except perhaps in what's being emphasized, not sure about that), as long as the appropriate particles (subject marker, topic marker, location marker) are put on the same nouns.
Korean is S-O-V.
subject-object-verb.
Mountain-park-exists (있다)
산은-공원에-있습니다 or... 산은-공원에-있어요 or... 산은-공원에-있어
은 or 는 subject particle 에 location particle (takes place of object particle?)
- This is how I understand it. Correct me if I'm wrong. Thx.
There is no distinction between singular and plural nouns in Korean, unless you list a quantity after it.
I just found out that this Korean sentence is wrong. We will fix this as soon as possible. Thank you everyone!
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.")
- 123
"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 answer it there is a park is on the mountain but i got wrong instead, could anyone explain it? thankss
- 123
안녕하세요!
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!
hi, how about "There is a mountain in the park"? i also got it wrong, but i believe it's just the same as "The mountain is in the park"..
Sorry , I don't have Korean keyboard, but I'm thinking "e" is a new particle or article behind "gongwon"( park)?
Shouldn't it be 산이? I think it would make more sense if it answers to the question: "Where is the mountain?"
for this 산은 공원에 있습니다. is there a specifiy word placement for this sentence, can i said 공원에 산은 있습니다 or both is ok?
is my sentence correct 여자는 반여 있습니다
I'm so confused, isn't this the negative form?? 산은 골윈에 있습니다 san eun issumnida is positive?
why does "There is a mountain in the park" wrong? how is that? it's just the same meaning tho~ :3
What's annoying is that they teach you how to write this sentence two ways:
the topic first then the location or the location then the topic. It confuses me because I read and type because I got use to the first way.
It depends on the type of park. If it is a small park, you may be right. If it is a big national park, mountains can be located within the national park.
It really is tricky, right? I hope this exercise allows you to take a short break to analyze the meaning of the sentence and translate as it is. The creator of this sentence was thinking a big national park that has a mountain.
There is a typo in the translation. The word given means "there is not" while the translation says "there is."
I don't think there is a typo in the translation. The word given means "there is."
Why "There is a moutain in the park" is wrong but "The mountain is in the park" is right? ❤❤❤.
How is it only the mountain is in the park and not there is a mountain in the park
I answer, there is mountain in the park, but the answer is wrong. I really think my answer can be accepted. Right?
