1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Korean
  4. >
  5. "예, 남자는 사람입니다."

"예, 남자는 사람입니다."

Translation:Yes, men are people.

September 9, 2017



How do i know it's "men" and not "man"?


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.


But there is not 들 here, in this exercise.


Then why did it say you could use men on this one even though it was "는" (남자는)


는 is the topic maker. The 들 is optional, as the sentence is (in Korean context) makes a general statement.


but why it's 남자는? why 는?


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."


my answer was man is a person, but it's wrong


"Man is a person." isn't valid English, so it wouldn't make sense for them to accept it.


yes but in this sentence there is no 들 so... I think that 는 and 은 can cancel the 들 even if its a plural


No. If you added 들 it would just make it more explicit that you were talking about men as a whole.


I sometimes ask that to my self


남자 for man 남자들 for men


But why in this sentence, used 는. Gosh, i really confused :(


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.


men is 남자들. man is just 남자.


Because if it ends with 는its men and if it doesnt have that then its man


That's not true.

는/은 mark the topic and so the sentence can be a general statement applying to each and every guy.

But it's possible to use "남자는" and still be referring to one man. It's not as common to do it that way, but it happens.


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.


"여자들이" -> "the women/girls"

"사과가" -> "the apple"

But you could leave the sentence using "남자는" and rely on context.


So, '이' and '가' used for 'Man'. Meanwhile '는' and '들' have similiar meaning. They used for 'Men', Right? Gosh, i really confused


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


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?


Definite and indefinite articles don't exactly exist in Korean.


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...


It's a topic marker. It makes "Men" 남자 the topic of the sentence.


Okay I understood that "들" is not necessary, but how can I understand man or men without it?


Phewww good to know! I was starting to think that men were androids!


why is it 남자는 and not 남자들


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."


why is it not 남자들는? i thought it wasnt plural


남자들은 사람입니다 means men are people, this one means a man is a person


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


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


I think my answer is correct, because duolingo says if in korean, there is no different between 1 thing and 2 things


How do I know when to write 사람입니다 (e.g.) as one word? I would put a space in between like 사람 입니다...


Could I use 네 instead of 예?


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.


But why ,,men"? And ,,people"?? We don't have 들, and we don't have text so we can't say it is men and people. It is ,,MAN AND PERSON!!!"


Because in Korean you don't need 들. You only use it when you want to specifically emphasize that it is multiple. But 남자 can both be man and men.


So how can I understand man or men?


Most often, by context.


Okay, but in this situation?


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.


Isn't men supposed to be namjadeul?


It doesn't have to be when using 는 (the topic maker), as it's making a general statement.


Where is 들???


It's not necessary. Unneeded. With people, leaving off 들 is common when used together, especially with the topic maker (는/은), as it's forming a general statement about the people in question (in this case, men).


It was exactly the same before for "a man is a person" so why is it suddenly plural?


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.


If it is "men are people", it should be "남자들 사람입니다" lol.


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


남자들 = men 남자= man


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."


Didnt 가람입니다 mean things and people?? Am i confusing it with something?? Please help


사람 means person/people.

입니다 is the conjugated form of 이다 (which is the verb that means "to be" in the sense of describing a noun).

So, no. Nothing about that means "thing".


Cant it even be person?


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


Actualy I hate this sesion. Why people and person is different? But you tell me 사람 mean person, and i am wrong. I hate you


If you translated it as "A man is a person.", it would also be correct.

는 makes it the topic, so it's a general statement. So, both "A man is a person." and "Men are people." mean the same thing as general statements.


Isn't it 남자 not 남자들? So why the answer is men not man?


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.


what is the difference between imnida and ibnida???


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".


문제가 뭔 이따구야. 제발 남자 하고 남자'들' 단어 구별 좀 제대로 합시다. 구별을 똑바로 안 하니까 man인지 men인지 헷갈립니다.


Does 입니다 mean are


Yes. It is a conjugation of the copula 이다 which means "is/are".


Is this a trap, man


Thank you for your explanations


Saranimidha right? Like 'sa''ran''im''mi''dha'? But isnt 'ㄴㅣ' spell as 'ni'? Uhhhh so confused


입 is "ib" and 니 is "ni/nee"

But when a ㅂ is in the bottom (the batchim) and immediately followed by ㄴ, then the ㅂ is pronounced as "ㅁ/m".

So, 사람입니다 sounds like sa-ram-im-ni-da


I thought we established that 남자 was man and 남자들 was men


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."


now I know, men are people. ;D xD lol


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"?


남자 is Man and 님자들 is Men isn't it???


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."


When using a topic particle 는/은 does it disregard the plurality of both the subject and the object? Starter here lol.


Since the topic marker can make the sentence be a general statement, translating using singular and plural give the same idea either way.

"A man is a human." means that any man is human, so it's the same idea as "Men are humans."


It's 남자 means man not 남자들


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."


Why wrong my answer??..


You'll have to write what your answer was if you want an explanation or some help.


Person is also called as 사람 then people is also called as 사람??


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).


How should I know You meant Men not man A man is a person is also right


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.


But they said that it's wrong,, I am very disappointed now


They asked - 예, 남자는 사람입니다. I write - Yes, man is a person. But they saying my answer is wrong...

<pre>Somebody tell me please why my answer is wrong??? </pre>


The English is ungrammatical. In sentences opening with "Man", "Man" means mankind/the human race which is different from "남자".

And so "Man is a person." doesn't make sense in English


고맙습니다 친구,,, for help me,, that's because I don't know how to write " for help me" in Korean lol...


Finally, Someone noticed


Even if they dont act like it sometimes :/


Please tell me why they used 는 ?


With 는/는, 남자 is marked as the topic and therefore the sentence is a statement that generally applies to each and every guy.

If it were changed to 남자가, the sentence would become about one particular man.


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")


You can click the eord it shows words translation


Im learning bcause of bts lmao

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