1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Korean
  4. >
  5. "동물은 물이 있습니다."

"동물은 물이 있습니다."

Translation:The animal has water.

September 9, 2017



If you try to extract the water from the animal, make sure to filter out the blood and other waste products before drinking!


If "the animal" is the subject and water the object, why is 물이? Shouldn't it be 물을?


있다 is an adjective here. Adjectives do not take objects—only subjects. In this case, is the subject (marked by , the subject marker for syllables ending in consonants).

It does take some mental gymnastics like switching what would normally be the object to a subject (have water → water “haved”/possessed).

As for the animal (topic), water (subject) is “haved”/posessed (adjective)

I’d just look at it as a template/pattern of subject + 있다 meaning to have subject in English. The above interpretation is a bit of a mental stretch.


This is nothing like anything in the notes or any other comments I've seen. A verb is really an adjective, and adjectives can only describe subjects?? Here is an explanation more in line with the notes, that doesn't require treating verbs as adjectives.

있다 is to exist, and means "there is/are." The subject of the verb is water (물이, which has the subject particle). The topic is the animal (동물은, which has the topic marker). Literally, the statement is, "About the animal, there is water" which is how you say "The animal has water" in Korean. That's how the notes explain this kind of sentence construction.


Sorry, but that doesn't explain to me nothing.


을/를 are used with action verbs, they show who/what is the object receiving the action of the verb.

이/가 (은/는 can be as well) are with used description/passive verbs, they show who is the subject you are describing.

"to have (water)" is describing the animal


Is there a way i can see all your comment sections??


"을/를" are articles for marking objecta that are the subject of a verb. The only time you was use this if you said "Animals drink water", because drinking is an action/verb.


it has 이 because the sentence is rather about the animal having the water.. so it's makes it more fixated as to what the animal has.. so what does the animal have? 물이 있습니다


I'm still confused. Does this mean the animal has water as in "the animal consists of water" or "the animal drinks water" or what?


It just means, say the animal has water (to drink) - implied. In other words, you dont have to give the animal watee again, it already has water with it. I hope you understand.


It literally means 'for the animal, there is water' It could sound weird to english speakers, yeah. I'll give an example- -We are leaving the house for a few hours. -Is the dog going to be alright? -He'll be alright. He(The dog) has food and water. We'll be back before 5. See? You could use the phrase in this scenario. Hope this helps.


If I translate this sentence literally, would it mean

'the animal, exists water'

where 'the animal' is only the introduction of the sentence and doesn't bring any meaning except for shedding light onto the subject of the sentence?(the 이 is a subject marker, right?)

Is it like saying 'car stolen, need help'?


있다 has many meanings. I cannot emphasize this enough. To have is one of those meanings. And that is straightforward to apply to this sentence.


Instead of 있습니다, can you also use 있어요?


I think that 있습니다 is for formal speech and 있어요 is for the informal speech but i can be wrong


있어요 is less formal than 있습니다, but both are formal. Informal version is 있어.


Yes you can. That's just different levels of politeness.


Not sure, but I suppose so.


Is someone korean in here?


So you're saying whatever the subject is, if this is its verb, that means it is owned by whoever the topic is?


"There is water in the animal" should be ok then? :/


That can be translated "동물 안에 물이 있어요." The meaning is different.


Duolingo makes a lot of TMI/ disturbing sentences. . .


sometimes I hear "n" as "t" and "m" as "b" at the beginning of the word. Can it be?


"The animal has a water" should be accepted too.


So 있습니다 is basically means "there is something or something to have" If im not mistaken?


She probably talking about a camels


I doubted myself with this sentence

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