45 Comments
So, 나는 나는개입니다 would be "I am a flying dog? The first 나는 can be omitted given context, no?
This seems ambiguous, though I'm sure it's fine in practice.
날다 is one of those irregular verbs that lose the bottom consonant for certain situations. 나는 비행기 = flying plane. Without the rest of the sentence it's kinda weird but in terms of a sentence fragment it makes a lot more sentence to say "flying dog" than "I dog."
Excellent explanation, but every verb whose stem ends in ㄹ does the same conjugation as 날다, so technically is not considered irregular.
나는 comes from the Korean verb 날다 which is to fly. 나는 comes from 나 with the marker 는 on it. So yea it's tricky.
T-T i still have to see it... But the commercial kinda spoiled a death for me...
Would 날린 개 mean the same thing? What is the difference between 날다 and 날리다?
하늘을 나는 새
The bird flying in the sky
(the bird flies itself)
소년이 하늘로 날린 연 The kite flying in the sky by the boy 바람에 날린 연 The kite blown by the wind (someone or something make the kite fly)
I thought this is trick. But after checking above discussion I believe this practice is quite necessary. :)
I, dog... or Flying dog. Is a flying dog more logical than a sentence fragment? hahaha
do you remember Satanas et Diabolo which was a flying dog https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfBCbQEUpMg
Do you remember "Dastardly and Muttley" the dog Muttley was a flying dog. Here you can watch them. Ich wish it'll amuse you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_T9rklJ2sg
