1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Korean
  4. >
  5. "저는 후각이 안 좋아요."

"저는 후각이 좋아요."

Translation:My sense of smell is not good.

September 15, 2017



so the two guys talk to each other in a bar. One of them says: -My dog has no nose. The other one asks in shock: -How does it smell, then? The first one answers: -Terrible

please clap


. 은/는 is a "tag" particle helping to categorize a topic of discussion. It's not a marker like 이/가, 을/를, 에/에서 etc., used to identify the role of the attached noun (subject, object, position etc.). . 은/는 in fact can be tagged to any if not all of the markers and even to final verbs. . As markers do tend to get omitted in Korean sentences if their roles are clear from the sentence, 은/는 often gets misinterpreted as the alternative of those markers. They are not. They are "tags" (as much as the # in social media).

Back to your question: 나는 vs. 나의. The difference is only in the context.

. Your answer:

나의 후각이 안 좋아요 should be accepted as an alternative, in a reverse translation. But it should be understood as a plain, one-off statement.

The given example however,

나는 후각이 안 좋아요 can literally be translated as: Speaking for myself, the sense of smell (mine) is not good. (= My sense of smell is not good).

Here 는- helps to set a category for discussion which is 나 (I, the Speaker) and gets the discussion started with the sense of smell...


why isn't it 저의


"I have a bad sense of smell" is not accepted.


True, because in your sentence the verb is "have" and in Duo's sentence the verb is "is bad".


Then again, I don't see the word "My" in the Korean sentence. Care to elaborate?


It pretty much depends on how literal you want to be with your interpretation/translation. Both answers have the same meaning even if framed in a different way


That's why I proposed "I have a bad sense of smell" as an acceptable answer. This cannot be translated "literally," whatever that would mean.


I'm not a fan of overly literal translations but in this case I feel you're also changing the semantics. "Not thin" is different to "fat" and so are "not good" and "bad" even though the logic is the same, logic is not the only factor. And in this case we don't have to do strange things to the English sentence to maintain the "not good" part. So to me it's more important that it's more accurate and not that it's more literal.


Your translation is more natural to me, as well. I'll report Duolingo's default translation as awkward.


There is a bug where i have to comment to see new comments...so heres a useless comment.


Now I finally understand why Duolingo has so many useless comments.


What about my sense of smell is bad??


My sense of smell is not good = 저는 후각이 안 좋아요. (Negative)

My sense of smell is bad = 저는 후각이 나빠요. (Antonym/opposite)

안 좋아요 (not good) ≠ 나빠요 (bad) => "Not good" does not necessarily mean "bad". It could mean average, mediocre.


oh, 감사합니다 :) Thanks


Better get that checked, bro. RANDOM SENTENCE MADE BY THE LEFTOVER WORDS!!!!!!: "eight fat banks meet."

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