1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Korean
  4. >
  5. "길이 한국에 없습니다."

"길이 한국에 없습니다."

Translation:The road is not in Korea.

September 9, 2017

68 Comments


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Ceratius

This is wrong! Source: Am there, saw lots of roads


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Zoeliza_

so far, according to Duolingo, Korea has no roads or rooms. Bit insulting!


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/gustavjp

Ancap paradise :')


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/enbykey

something tells me this is not true.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Npatch

I wonder how typo acceptance works. I type fast and many a time make mistakes on smartphones. This time "The road is jot in Korea" was flagged as incorrect instead of a correct with typo.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/matilda411115

What about there are no roads in Korea?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Ash-Fred

"There are no roads in Korea." is now accepted.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/fffelipoo

Ah I don't know why it marked me wrong the first and right the second though I gave this same ans both times

And the suggested answer was "there is no route in korea" does route use the same words? I don't think i saw any discussion on "route"


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/pabochan

How about "Roads are not in Korea?"


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/SongPhilip

I wrote "There is no road in Korea" and got it wrong. Why is this wrong?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Ash-Fred

"There is no road in Korea." is now accepted.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/CuppaTae

How do you differ between saying "there is" and "there is not" its a dumb question but i cant figure it


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/enbyjay

있습니다 is to have / to exist (there is) 없습니다 is to not have / to not exist (there isn't)

(the beginning of the verb is different by one letter)


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Peder97764

"There are no roads in [South] Korea." should also be a possible answer. Korean allows for this ambiguity.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Ash-Fred

"There are no roads in Korea." is now accepted. Korean has a separate word for South Korea, 남한.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Rae143336

They did not accept mine. ☹


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Tridib13

The road is not in Korea


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/blossom560476

The same over here


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/GioLim1

I think it's the difference between the marker "이 and 은" If you want the sentence to be "There are no roads in Korea" then you can use the 은 marker.

Correct me if i'm wrong.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Peder97764

No, the topic and subject particles do not alter the meaning that way. "There is/are ~" isn't a Korean structure, but that English meaning can be inferred from the target sentence. Duolingo's translation is only correct if the sentence were something like 그 길이 한국에 없습니다 which is more like "That road is not in Korea." Korean also doesn't have definite or indefinite articles so they could go a step further and say "The/A road(s) are not in Korea."


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/cactuscoffeerose

Would the first two words being switched lend more credence to the "there are no roads in korea" translation?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Peder97764

If the two constructions "There are no roads in Korea" and "The road is not in Korea" in English emphasized "road" or "Korea" more you'd have a point, but where you place both words has less to do with untranslatable "there is/are ~" constructions. Generally, word order in Korean emphasizes what the speaker thinks is more important since word order is way more fluid than in English. So

길이 한국에 없습니다

or

한국에 길이 없습니다

both mean the same thing in Korean except in what the speaker is emphasizing. "There are no roads in Korea" and "The road is not in Korea" don't convey this difference.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/GeraldMath4

If I were asked to put "There are no roads in Korea" into Korean, I would come up with 한국에는 길은 없습니다 . How bad is that?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Helenayustika

it makes sense, thanksss


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/deelady4real

Agree with no roads but in Korean north and south have different names.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/CaptainOfStones

Where were going we don't need... Roads


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/ayla_es

I wrote "there is no road in Korea" and it said I was wrong, can someone elaborate on that?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/jeonhaeso

Lol bu ne lan"Korede yol yok" bu ne biçim cümle


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Kelisendra

Did they change the voice? I haven't studied for a few months and it kind of sounds different :)) Not bad, just different :))


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Choi751345

이런말은 안배워도 됩니다. ㅠㅠ


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/ILikeThisA

I always thought time and location came first in korean sentences. Can someone give me more info


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Ceratius

Basically, the only really set in stone rule is that the verb is last. Since everything else is marked with particles, you can switch around many things without changing the meaning. 한국에 길이 없습니다 is right too and means exactly the same.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Ricardo815422

The road is not in Korea = (road + subject-marker) + (Korea + subject-marker) + (to not be located) = 길이 한국에 없습니다 = gil-i hangug-e eobs-seubnida


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Raychel691918

There is no "in" in the choices


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/chaiyunlee

길이 한국에 없습니다. means theres no road in Korea not 'the road is in Korea' because if you want to say 'the' road then you have to type something at the beginning of the sentence. I don'r have a korean keyboard on this laptop so I can't show you guys but just an fyi


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/AndieEvaa

why is -i used here and not -eun


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/HerbalTeeth

So if 에 and can mean "in" and "at" or "toward" how do we make a distinction between them. I assume through context but I'm looking for a less vague answer as I am fairly new.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/mhin1

The meaning of 에 shifts depending on the verb you use.

  • 에 with 있다 or 없다 marks the location where the subject exists or not.

  • 에 with verbs of motion marks the location the subject is verbing "to"

  • 에 with verbs not of motion marks the location where something static is happening

You'll learn more location particles when you learn more verbs.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/AnjaliYoun

I put "roads are not in korea". I feel like that should also be accepted. But maybe phrasing needs to be specific?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/LisaHarris660796

Since -에 can mean at or to, could it mean "there are no roads to Korea"?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/mhin1

No. The alternative meanings of the particle ~에 arise because of the verb it is used with. ~에 only means "to" when used with a verb of motion:

  • 저는 한국에 갑니다 = "I go to Korea."

  • 저는 한국에 있습니다 = "I am in Korea."

Since 없다 is an existential verb, -에 defaults to the location marker "at". If you want to say "There are no roads to Korea." you would use:

  • 길은 한국으로 없습니다

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Ash-Fred

You would say "한국으로 가는 길은 없습니다." In your sentence 한국으로 is modifying 없습니다.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Sandy337573

Why does, "There are no roads in Korea." work?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/DaemonBeats

Are there words in Korean that end in the blocks like 이, 가, 는, or 은 where it's a part of the word and not the particle, or will it always be a particle if I hear a word end in one of them?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Annick227211

Cela n'est d'aucune aide de proposer de fausses réponses. Le verbe avoir au lieu du verbe être ?????


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/lAqv19

It's v.confusing


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Makayla736494

I accidentally put the wrong one


[deactivated user]

    I typed " In Korea , roads doesn't exist".


    https://www.duolingo.com/profile/HannahDaCat

    So the road is in russia?


    https://www.duolingo.com/profile/DaveGHahn

    korea has no roads?!


    https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Helenayustika

    i thought "there is no road in Korea" lol:(((


    https://www.duolingo.com/profile/gopikacsuresh

    There is no road in korea


    https://www.duolingo.com/profile/GihMamutin

    There's not road in Korea. Os right too, why they put as wrong ? Urgh. Computers. I hate. Cuz have to be exactly how is in the computer.


    https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Jesse946236

    "Korea has no roads" was not accepted?


    https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Ruth63073

    You forgot the word (any!!!)


    https://www.duolingo.com/profile/i_purple_u_123

    Can someone translate the last word in korean english???


    https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Srionti

    Can anyone explain to me why this sentence uses '없습니다' and not '아닙니다'? Thanks in advance!


    https://www.duolingo.com/profile/GeraldMath4

    없습니다 says something doesn't exist (in some location, perhaps unspecified). 아닙니다 says something is not something. E.g. 길이 한국이 (not locative 한국에)아닙니다 "A road is not Korea."


    https://www.duolingo.com/profile/TabassumEl

    Can anyone tell me how to write "There is no road in Korea" and "The road is not in Korea"?


    https://www.duolingo.com/profile/ifeeluseless

    Did duolingo run out of sentences to make-


    https://www.duolingo.com/profile/ph.bUY5r3

    Hey any bts army is here


    https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Learning_forTae

    kinda Goblin vibe


    https://www.duolingo.com/profile/shining370665

    What is the difference between 길이 한국에 없습니다 and 한국에 길이 없습니다 ?.

    Learn Korean in just 5 minutes a day. For free.