"예, 남자는 사람입니다."
Translation:Yes, men are people.
1) No, 는/은 does not mark a subject. It marks a topic. The subject marker is 이/가
2) with it making "man" as the topic, it takes on the meaning of being a general statement. Which makes, in this context, the 들 unnecessary. If you added 들, it would have the same meaning but would just have more emphasis on the plurality.
I would write "남자가 사람입니다.", for such a case.
이/가 are the subject markers. They use that for making statements that you don't want generalized and apply to a particular/single subject.
"여자들이" -> "the women/girls"
"사과가" -> "the apple"
But you could leave the sentence using "남자는" and rely on context.
이/가 is the subject marker. It is common to use it to say that the statement applies to a specific example of a noun.
들 is the plural marker.
If I wrote "학생이", I'm likely referring to one student. If I wrote "학생들이", I'm likely referring to one group of students.
But then 는/은 is the topic marker. It often means that the sentence is a general statement, so it generally applies to each individual of that noun.
So, 학생은 would make the sentence apply generally to each student.
"학생은 무책임합니다." could be translated "A student is irresponsible.", "Students are irresponsible.", "Generally, students are irresponsible." and probably more
는 is a subject article used to differentiate things from something that was stated. Truth be told though is that there are many other subject particles besides this.
For example in an introduction someone says"I am a boy" the next person would say "I (는) am a girl" .
If however someone randomly uses it in a sentence like in this question, it means you are NOT something. It's just another way of using a negative
1) 남자들 by itself isn't grammatical.
2) 남자는 and 남자들은 are essentially the same.
는 makes "남자" the topic of the sentence, so it's a general statement.
As a general idea, I can translate 남자는 사람입니다 as both "A man is a person." and "Men are people."
Similar to how "바나나는 과일입니다." can mean both "A banana is a fruit." and "Bananas are fruits."
How do we know to use the topic marker 는 instead of the subject marker 가 in this sentence? We are talking about men so I can see the argument for why to use the topic marker...but on the other hand, the men are the things in the sentence who are doing the action (being people), so I could also see an argument why to use the subject marker. Any native or fluent speakers who can clarify this?
So the 은/는 topic marker is for marking general topics like in this sentence, as you rightly explained already. 이/가 on the other hand sets a special focus on the person who is marked with it. It's usually used when you want to focus on who does an action more than what they do, or to clarify that they are the ones making an action when there are multiple words in a sentence that could be the subject. That's at least how it was explained to me by native speakers, of course there are some sentences where stuff is different, but thats the general sentiment I got.
In this situation, it doesn't matter if it's man or men.
"A man is a person." and "Men are people." both are general statements about all guys.
Just like if I write "사과는 과일입니다.", I could translate it both as "An apple is a fruit." and "Apples are fruits." They're both the same general statement about apples.
With 는, the thing before it is the topic and often makes it a general statement about that thing.
"A man is a person." and "Men are people." both can mean the same general statement.
Similarly, "An orange is a fruit." and "Oranges are fruits." both are general statements saying that every orange is a fruit.
1) That's grammatically incorrect. It would need 은 to mark the topic of the sentence.
2) Since it uses the topic maker, it's making a general statement. So, it's not really necessary to use the 들 marker, since it already has the meaning of it applying to the general case.
For example: 곰은 동물 입니다 can be translated as "A bear is an animal." which is the same general statement as "Bears are animals."
Koreans will use 들 for clarity when needed
Sure, but with it being "남자는", man becomes the topic of the sentence and makes it a general statement about "a man".
And as a general statement, "A man is a person." gives the same idea as "Men are people."
Same as how "자동차는 차량 입니다." could be translated to both "A car is a vehicle." and "Cars are vehicles."
는 is the marker of the sentence's topic and in Korean, this makes the sentence a general statement. Whether you translate the general statement as singular or plural, it's still got the same idea either way.
"나무는 식물입니다." could be translated both as "A tree is a plant." and "Trees are plants."
And if I made it explicitly plural (나무들은 식물입니다.), the meaning isn't really changed; it's just made clear that I mean each and every tree.
In 남자는, 남자 is the topic. It can make it a general statement. You could translate it as singular or plural with the same idea implied with both.
"A man is a person." and "Men are people." give the same idea.
Just like "사가는 과일입니다." could be translated both as "An apple is a fruit." and "Apples are fruits."
는 is the topic marker, which makes the sentence a general statement about man.
You could translate it as "A man is a person.", but "Men are people." is the same idea as a general statement.
Another example: 사과는 과일입니다. I can translate that as both "An apple is a fruit." and "Apples are fruits."
There are many examples in Korean where writing something as singular still implies something plural.
Like, in this example, 는 makes 남자 be the topic, so it's taken as a general statement about "남자".
"남자는 인간입니다." could be translated both as "A man is a human." But that's the same idea as saying that each man is a human, so you could also translate it as "Men are humans."
Similarly, "저는 사과 좋아해요." uses the singular "사과", but I would translate it as "I like apples."
It can be.
See, the sentence uses 남자는, so "남자" is the topic. This often means that the sentence is a general statement. So, whether you translate it as singular or plural, the idea you get is the same either way.
"A man is a person." means every man is a person, ergo "Men are people."
Similarly, 사과는 과일입니다 can be translated both as "An apple is a fruit." and "Apples are fruits."
And further similarly, 저는 바나나 좋아해요 means "I like bananas." even though the Korean sentence uses "singular".
Although, "사람들" literally means people. 들 is the plural marker, but it's often not used (people drop pretty much anything that's not needed by context).
In this kind of case, whether you use singular or plural really is the same.
는 makes "남자" the topic, so it's a general statement about "남자".
As a different example of the same. 사과는 과일입니다.
That's "An apple is a fruit." and it means that every apple is a fruit. So, "Apples are fruits." is the exact same idea.
In reality, in Korean nearly any time a particle could be dropped and still be totally understood, it will be dropped from time to time.
In fact, they drop the entire topic/subject regularly (ex: "뭐 하고 있어요?" is "What are you doing?" even though it has nothing that means "you")