1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Korean
  4. >
  5. "The man runs to the sea."

"The man runs to the sea."

Translation:남자가 바다로 달립니다.

September 10, 2017



When it's with a place 에 means in and 로 means to. The sentence with 바다에 would translate to 'runs IN the sea', not 'runs TO the sea'.


What about a sentence like "저는 집에 가요"? That would translate to "I go home" or I go to the/a home. (으)로 could be used there and it would mean the same thing right? I'm just unsure why 에 doesn't work in the example given. I understand that a sentence like 저는 의자에 앉습니다 would translate to "I sit IN a chair". So I guess I'm asking if you absolutely cannot use 에 in this situation.


I'm not sure yet. I will start looking to see if some 에 and 으로 etc are paired more often with certain verbs or places, motion or in the process of doing.

[deactivated user]

    But 에서 means IN the sea? I'm confused.


    에서, is more like "to" and the other rendition of this conjecture is "에" is "at". Hope this helps.


    When i am sending a gift to someone i use 에 after the person i send it to. When i am receiving a gift from someone i use 에서 after the person i receives it from. Why is the logic suddenly different in this case?


    Sending letter to a friend 친구에게 편지를 보냅니다 Receiving letter from a friend 친구에게서 편질를 받습니다.... I think....


    Yes, prepositions are not used the same way in different languages. In korean, it matters if you say to a place, to a direction, to someone or to a thing.


    Ooohh 감사합니다


    what are you trying to ask?


    in the other exercise, "the man runs in the park" is [남자가 공원에 뜁니다.] here "the man runs to the sea" is translated into [남자가 바다로 달립니다.] what is the difference between 뜁니다 and 달립니다?I interchanged them in these exercises and got both wrong..


    뛰 means jump and 달리 means run


    why doesn't 까지 work here? :0


    I'm a beginner, but as far as I understand it, 바다로 means "towards/in the direction of the sea" whereas 바다까지 means "to the sea" where the sea is the final destination. I think it would work but with a different meaning. 로 =emphasis on direction 까지 = Emphasis on destination


    Sure but if the input is in english, where you literally can't make a difference if the 'to' is used for both forms then uhm... If linguigists make these stuff then why they don't make more accurate examples?


    If the sea were the final destination, wouldn't we say "into the sea" in English?


    Why is 남자는 and 뜁니다 not accepted?


    Can we say 바다까지 ?


    So the VERB comes last?


    yes, (S)ubject; (O)bject then (V)erb is how it is structured.


    To be sure, it's used 으로 when the previous letter is a consonant and 로 when it's a vowel? Like 바다로 and 길으로?


    Whats the difference between 까지 and 로 ?


    Is 달려요 the proper word in polite form?


    I might sound really stupid, but I'm having a bad time trying to understand the particles and the meaning when it's "to" "at" "in" "on", can someone help me understand this?


    Prepositions are different in every language. Prepositions tie a word to a sentence. Particles tie a word to a sentence, but not exactly in the same way. So whatever we would use in a particular sentence. We would not say “The man runs at the sea.” We wouldn’t use “in” or “on”. We would use “to”. So, the particle does not translate directly to one of these prepositions. You just have to put a location particle. It is not as specific. When translating to English, we have to know which preposition would best fit the sentence.

    We also use "to" to mean very many things, that in Korean may use different particles, so it matters in Korean if it is to someone, to a place, to a direction, to a thing or to a time. Then Korean is more specific.


    See tips and notes, starting with https://www.duolingo.com/skill/ko/regular-verbs/tips-and-notes

    Really helps. I'm making cheat sheets, and writing out sentences.


    When do I use 로 / 으로 / 까지 ?


    The difference between 으로/로 and 에/게 is that 으로/로 emphasises where one is headed/has gone whereas 에/게 doesn't.

    나는 집으로 갔다 = I went home. (I didn't go to any other place.)


    why is it not 바다에??


    I think 바다에 should also be accepted but I'm still not 100% sure if it can be used in this example.

    To my understanding, both 에 and (으)로 indicate direction towards a place. For example, 저는 학교로 가요 and 저는 학교에 가요 both mean "I'm going to school."

    The main difference between 에 and (으)로 is that the former is used when the destination is SPECIFIC while the latter is used to indicate a more GENERAL direction.

    저는 학교로 가요=I'm going towards school ( in the direction of the school)

    저는 학교에 가요= I'm going to school (more specific destination)

    Idk if this will help, but I think this is right.


    에 means "at", like runs at the sea. They are asking for runs "to" the sea


    When do i use 달립니다 vs 뜁니다???


    From what I've noticed, when two ㄹ characters meet, it is pronounce as "L", not ㄹ.

    Therefore 달립니다 is pronounced "Talibnida"

    Another example: 몰라 is pronounced "Mola"


    Why is 남자는 not acceptable? Aren't ~는 and ~가 interchangeable if there is no context?


    When is it namjaga and when is it namjaneun


    What is the most important thing in this sentence? If it were a generalization "A man eats food." or "Men eat food." then I think you would use the topic marker (namja neun). If you want to tell what the man is doing, then I think you would use the subject marker. https://www.duolingo.com/skill/ko/basics-1/tips-and-notes


    I can't understand the difference between 가 and 는.


    I said 남자는 and they said it's correct but also said that another translation would be 남자가. I don't understand, are both correct?


    What about 바다에게? Shouldn't that be correct too??


    why 남자가 and why not 남자는


    because it is "THE MAN" and not "A MAN"


    how can i differentiate whether the sentence is saying "towards" or "up to the"??? duolingo used "to the" on both i'm so confused


    Using ~로 means 'in the direction of/towards'. Using 〜까지 means 'to/until (and no further)'


    can someone help me on the man runs to the sea help


    Why is it wrong to use 남자는 here???


    because it somtimes dont have it in the sentence . dont worry i got suck on that to . if you need any thing im on my computer every day so feel free to ask me any thing.


    When does we use 남자가 , 님자는


    I thought 에 means in, 에게 means to the


    Yeah but in some sentences, it's just different. for example for this sentence: the dog goes to the house, I translated as 개가 집에게 갑니다. But Duolingo underlined 집에게 and said I had a typo, and the correct answer is 집에!! As I said I thought 에 meant in. So I just watched a video on youtube about it and there was this teacher who said there are so many different meanings for 에. So I kinda concluded that I need to learn through trial and error!


    I have also seen 달려라 used before, what is the difference between 달립니다 and 달려라?


    what is the difference between 로 and 를?


    I am not getting the last two letters


    and they are what


    is 까지 possible? and what's the diference with 로?


    남자가 바다한테 달립니다 would this also be correct?


    Knowing달립니다 from run bts


    Why it's 바다로 and not 바다까지 ?


    Again bad engrish, good english would be he runs toward the sea.


    Not necessarily, he could be in his swimming trunks and he runs to the sea. “Towards” means “in the direction of”, so it could be used in some situations also, but both are correct English statements. He can even run into the sea.


    The funny thing here is almost every question contains the male object 남자 but not 여자


    What makes you call that “object” ? That is going to confuse some people, because the word for “man” is the subject of the sentence in English and has the “subject marker” in this Korean sentence. http://organickorean.com/advanced-topic-marker-은는-vs-subject-marker-이가/

    Why are the Korean letters for “man” used more often than the Korean letters for “woman”? I think that is a world wide phenomen and possibly culturally common for Korea too. Also, for those who are taking this course though English is not their first language, “funny” here probably means “strange. Although, I think it is “funny” as in “laughable”, because there would be no one without women.

    The sentence above is not a question. I actually think that Duolingo does use both words quite a lot too.

    “lanternish”, I love your profile picture !

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