"예, 남자는 사람입니다."
Translation:Yes, men are people.
230 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
If the word is only 남자 is man, in case 남자들 is Men. The word 들 means plural, can be used with any word
Actually, in Korean, words in singular form can mean either singular or plural, depending on the context. 들 just makes it clearer.
1215
As a Canadian, I'll let you know that the plural of moose is moose. Sometimes in conversations, you can't tell if someone is talking about one moose or several moose.
I'm genuinely wondering how many times that word comes across in conversations between canadians! ^_^
- 356
남자는 can be translated to "a man". "A man" can refer to any man on the planet. In other words, "a man" can be all men in general.
A man = Any man = Every man = Men
Keep in mind that the ending 는/은 can also just mean "a man", depending on context, but it's generally more vague. 들/을 is typically used when talking about a specific group with multiple things.
- 168
I've been struggling with expressions of plurality and this was wonderfully helpful. I appreciate your breakdown of "A man = Any man = Every man = Men." Thank you!!
는 is the topic maker. The 들 is optional, as the sentence is (in Korean context) makes a general statement.
Because they wanted to make a general statement males, so they made 남자 the topic of the sentence.
You could translate that Korean general statement both as "A man is a person." and "Men are people."
"Man is a person." isn't valid English, so it wouldn't make sense for them to accept it.
는 is subject particle Because 남자 end with a vocal so we use 는. If the word end with consonant, we use 은, for example: The book is red (책은 빨간색입니다)
Can we use another word rather than 들 to make nouns plural? Like, is it different with plural and singular nouns? Or are alternatives available?
Adding 는 to 남자 makes it the topic. And that can make it into a general statement about each and every man. So, you can translate it with singular or plural and the idea is the same.
Similarly, 원숭이는 동물입니다. - "A monkey is an animal." or "Monkeys are animals."
오렌지는 과일입니다. - "An orange is a fruit." or "Oranges are fruits."
With 는/은, the thing is marked as the topic and often means the sentence is a general statement to apply to all of the noun in question.
So, they wanted to have the sentence imply that it generally applies to each and every guy.
This case talk about "men" in general. We don't use 들 when making a general statement.
In Korean, 남자 means man. But, if 들 is added at the back it is taken as plural. Therefore, 남자들 means men and 남자 means man.
While it's true that 들 is the plural marker, in reality, it's not used that often.
Apple is 사과. Plural would be 사과들.
But "I like apples." is "저는 사과가 좋아해요." There is no 들 in the sentence.
Isn't 들 what makes a word plural? And isn't 는 used to indicate the subject? Then why is it 남자는 in the plural? Shouldn't the plural be 남자들는 ?
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.
But what I should write for "the man is a person"? It would be the same, just depends on the context?
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.
Examples:
"여자들이" -> "the women/girls"
"사과가" -> "the apple"
But you could leave the sentence using "남자는" and rely on context.
1) Changing "남자는" to "남자들" is incorrect and ungrammatical. When you change the sentence to explicitly plural, it must be "남자들은" or "남자들이" (although those both have slightly different meanings).
2) Yes and no. 남자는 is both individual and plural.
사과는 과일 입나 다. An apple is a fruit. Apples are fruits.
남자는 인간 입니다. A man is a human. Men are humans.
It can be translated either way because it's a general statement that applies to each of them as individuals and therefore to all of them as a group.
I think 남자 or 사람 is not plural and 는 or 은 is not make plural.들 makes them plural
는/은 makes it a topic and a general statement, which makes it apply to more than one singular person. 들 is left off a lot for cases like that
What exactly does "는" mean? I typed in "Yes, the men are people." and the app accepted it. Is there a distinction between definite and indefinite articles in Korean?
Guys i guess its about fact thats it So when it is fact we can say Birds are animals And here men are people So the same in korean
남자는 marks man as a topic and a general statement and in such general statements, 들 is usually left off and especially when referring to humans
I think the 는 makes it general. It would be strange to say ""this man is a person" so 는 makes it general...I think...
Okay I understood that "들" is not necessary, but how can I understand man or men without it?
Just in case this makes it easier for someone to remember these terms if they aren't writing notes like myself.
NOUNS People, places, animals and things. 사람, 정소, 동물, 물건.
는/은 is the Korean "topic marker". "남자는" tells you that 남자 is the topic of the sentence, so in Korean that can mean that it's a statement about each and every man in general. And with a general statement, you could translate it singular or plural and the idea is the same.
"사과는 과일 입니다" "An apple is a fruit." "Apples are fruits."
why "고양이는 사람이 아닙니다" (cats are not people) has the 이 particle after 사람 while this sentence has not?
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")
예 and 네 both mean "yes". They're synonymous.
에 means "at" and "in" for location or time.
The text to speech software that the site uses, for Korean, isn't the best. In fact, it's pretty bad in my opinion.
You' re right. I also took the turkish course a few months ago and the sound quality was indeed much bettter.
들 also come in 'friends' friend in korean is chingu and the plural is chingudeul
는/은 is the "topic marker".
남자는 means that "남자" is the topic. And as the topic, it can mean that the sentence is a general statement about each and every 남자.
So, as a general statement, "A man is a person." and "Men are people." both give the same idea.
- 392
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Koreans use singular form when stating something/talking about habits. For example, you'd say "I like apples" in English, but in Korean they just say "I like an apple" (사과를 좋아해요)
Omfg...thats why my dad says something like "I like apple" in his broken english.
Koreans literally have been directly translating from singular form. You juat blew my mind.
To add on that, ~들 is used when you really want to STRESS that there's multiple things. If it's general, you use the singular.
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."
- 1672
How do I know when to write 사람입니다 (e.g.) as one word? I would put a space in between like 사람 입니다...
Nothing other than being pronounced differently.
예 was the original official way to say "yes", in Korean. But because the Seoul dialect is pretty synonymous with standard Korean, 네 became also official since it's the way people in Seoul far started to say it in late last century...
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.
Yes. It can also be that.
"Yes, a man is a person." is the same general statement as "Yes, men are people."
Both are correct
The use of the plural marker is not necessary and often omitted in Korean. Without further context, either is correct.
I don't get it, isn't the word say "남자" not 남자들. Why the answer is men not man?
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.
입니다 is pronounced imnida.
ㅂ sounds like "b" and ㄴ sounds like "n", but when the ㅂ is in the bottom and followed immediately by ㄴ, the sound of the ㅂ changes to "m".
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."
When the answer options include "man", "is", "person", "men", "are" and "people". And the question is 예, 남자는 사람입니다. How could I know this sentence is telling about "men", not "man"?
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."
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).
salam is person right ? then why is it showing incorrect and replacing it with people ?
You could translate it either way.
With 는, 남자 is the topic of the sentence and so the sentence is taken as a general statement. It generally applies to each and every man.
So, if you translate it to "A man is a person." then it would be correct and is a general statement about each man.
And if you translate is as "Men are people.", that also makes sense because the sentence generally applies to every man.
는/은 is the topic marker.
And in Korean, that often makes the sentence be a general statement that applies to each and every example of the noun.
So, whether you translate it using singular or plural makes no difference.
"Men are people." and "A man is a person." both mean the same thing.
Or some silly examples with fruit: "사과는 과일 입니다." is a general statement about apples. You could translate it both as "An apple is a fruit." and "Apples are fruits."
"저는 사과 좋아해요." means "I like apples." even though there's no 들 in the sentence.
는/은 is the topic marker, so it can mean that the sentence applies to each and every example of the noun (in this case, to 남자).
So, whether you translate it singularly or using plural won't make any difference.
Different example:
"오렌지는 과일입니다." can be translated both as "An orange is an fruit." and "Oranges are fruits."
I dont understand this one. Im reading that "men are people", but im being told that its "guy are people" how can i know if its guy/men
Well, in Korean there's no real difference between "man" and "guy".
You could translate "남자는 사람입니다." as "A man is a person.", "Men are people.", "A guy is a person.", and "Guys are people." All of those are correct
Sorry of someone already asked/ answered this question but what is the different between "person and people"
In Korean, they're often the same.
Literally, people is "사람들", but if it's obvious from context that you're talking about people in general, then people leave off 들.
Ok, let me try to explain, this sentence is not "plural" per se. The "men" is not the word refering to a group of males, but rather the word for men as in "All men are pigs". It is NOT talking about a group of males, rather is a general statement ABOUT males. Males as a whole are the topic of the sentence. How do we know that? Because of the topic marker! That's what the "neun" is doing there. So, at least in this context, you can think about neun as literally meaning "in general". You will later on get a firm grasp on 'markers' and it will get clear, don't overstress about them, specially not at this point, but do keep in mind that they exist.
Korean is a language that was never related to english at point in history, therefore we should not expect english grammar, and we should try to start "thinking" in korean as soon as we can. Do not try translating each and every word, but rather try to understand the messages in each one
A sentence that uses "남자는" can be translated using both "man" and "men", with both being totally correct.
는/은 is the topic marker. So, by making "남자" the topic, the sentence can take the sense of a general statement that applies to each guy individually.
"남자는 인간입니다." means both "A man is a human." and "Men are humans.", as they're both general statements giving the same idea.
Similarly, "사과는 과일입니다." would mean both "An apple is a fruit." and "Apples are fruits."
As well, if you wanted to specifically use 들 to make explicit that you were talking about a plural, you would use "남자들은" or "남자들이".
The sentence gives the same idea either way.
는/은 is the "topic marker". So, 남자 is the "topic" of the sentence.
And so, this means that the sentence be a general statement that applies to each man.
"A man is a human." and "Men are humans." give the same idea.
Similarly: 사과는 과일입니다. -> "An apple is a fruit." or "Apples are fruits." 곰은 동물입니다. -> "A bear is an animal." or "Bears are animals."
In Korean, people will often leave off the plural marker when it's obvious what you mean. Similarly, "저는 오렌지 좋아해요." is "I like oranges." even though nothing in the Korean uses the plural marker.
I don't know, how will i know that it is "men" or "man" if anyone knows so please tell me!!
With the topic marker ("는/은"), it could be translated both ways and give the same idea. With "남자" as the topic, it can mean that the sentence is a general statement about each and every man.
And as general statements, "A man is a person." and "Men are people." mean the same thing. Both sentences give the same idea.
Here are a couple different examples that are gramatically the same.
사과는 과일 입니다.
"An apple is a fruit."
"Apples are fruits."
호랑이는 고양이과 입니다.
A tiger is a cat. / A tiger is a feline.
Tigers are cats. / Tigers are felines.
If you type "person" it is wrong. In another example when youbchoose translation it IS person.
It's because the sentence could be translated using singular or plural, but depending on how you write it in English, only one or the other would make sense.
For a similar example "사과는 과일 입니다." could be translated both as "An apple is a fruit." since the Korean is a general statement about each apple individually and as "Apples are fruits." because it's a general statement that applies to all of them.
Shouldn't it be '남자 들' instead of '남자 는'? So, what exactly '는' means? And what's the difference between '는' and '들'?
는/은 is the topic marker.
When using the topic marker, it's unnecessary to add plural, because the topic marker can make the sentence be a general statement about all men.
And it would be bad grammar to switch 남자는 to 남자들. If you wanted to make the sentence explicitly admit all men with 들, then it would be 남자들은
I think its saying men in general like not a specific man thats why its plural even without 들. Also man is person doesnt sound correct to me
With the topic marker, it often makes no difference. 는 makes "남자" into the sentence topic, so it's a general statement about each and every man.
"A man is a person." is a general statement that each man is a person.
"Men are people." is also a general statement of the same.
사람 means person and 사람들 is people; 들 is the plural marker.
But when it's obvious that you're making a general statement, the 들 marker is left off.
For a different example: I like tomatoes. -> 저는 토마토 좋아해요.
I don't need to add 들 to tell you that I mean plural.
It's wrong, in English.
"men" = plural
"person" = singular
The correct sentence is "Men are people." or (the less common) "Men are persons."
Although, "남자는 사람입니다." could also be translated as "A man is a person."
는/은 is the topic marker. Using "남자는" makes 남자 into the topic of the sentence. And so, it can take on the feeling of a general statement that applies to each and every man.
So, whether you translate it using singular or plural doesn't really matter much.
For a different example that uses the same idea: 사과는 과일입니다.
I can translate that both as "An apple is a fruit." and "Apples are fruits." As general statements, they both give the same idea.
Wth theres no people in there soo i choose the human then now i don't have any life na idoit
I wrote men are persons, which should also be correct, but it marked it as incorrect.
There is no , coma sign so how can i write when i will put all the answers and correct button i will click the there is coma, sign so ho can i write please check it
That's not a typo.
남자는 uses the topic marker. As such, the sentence can take on the meaning of being a general statement about each and every man.
And whether you translate it using singular or plural really makes no difference.
As a different example: 사과는 과일입니다.
"An apple is a fruit." "Apples are fruits."
Dear Duo staff, here in this test in the answers suggested "men are people", I mean plural, but in the translation of korean words there are only singular suggestions, i think there is something not ok
You could translate the sentence with singular or plural and the meaning would be the same.
남자는 tells you that 남자 is the topic of the sentence. And by saying that it's a topic, it can take the idea of being a general statement about each and every man.
"A man is a person." and "Men are people." give the same general statement that each man is a person.
why is "남자는" (men) being pronounced as "damjaneung" when its "namjaneung" (then salam-ibnida) ❤❤❤ ?
Korean people often don't notice when they do it.
ㄴ (N) and ㄷ (d) are both pronounced with the tongue at the roof of the mouth behind the teeth. So, if someone puts more emphasis on the first ㄴ or nasalizes it, it can sound like ㄷ.
I hear people say 네 as 데 all the time.
if 남자 translate to man and 사람 to person. How do they get to "men are people"?
는/은 is the topic marker. It makes 남자 the topic of the sentence. In Korean, having something be the topic can mean that the sentence is a general statement about that thing; in this case, a general statement about each and every man.
남자는 사람입니다. is a general statement that each and every is a person. And similarly, it's a general statement that men as a whole are people.
You could translate it both as "A man is a person." and "Men are people."
Or a different example... 고릴라는 영장류입니다. A gorilla is a primate. Gorillas are primates.
Also, there are plenty of other sentences that have something written as a singular they we would translate using a plural.
Ex: 저는 사과 좋아해요. I like apples.
When the word ends in a consonant, you use 은.
Ex: 학생은, 집은, 길은, 여자들은
You use 는 when the word ends in a vowel
Ex: 여자는, 학교는, etc
"남자는" uses the topic marker. That can mean that the sentence is a general statement that applies to each and every man. And whether you translate it with singular or plural, you'll have the same idea conveyed either way.
Using singular- "A man is a person." tells you that every man is a person.
With plural- "Men are people." also tells you that each man is a person.
Why is always 다 at the last of every or some sentences?!? Ex. 자 람 입 니 다 !??
는/은 is the topic marker. 남자는 means that 남자 is the topic of the sentence.
And in Korean grammar, using the topic marker can make it into a general statement about each and every example of that noun (in this case, each and every man).
And if you translate it with singular or plural, it'll give the same general statement either way.
Example: * 사과는 과일입니다. An apple is a fruit./Apples are fruits.
