1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Korean
  4. >
  5. "저에게 사과 다섯 개와 오렌지 세 개가 있습니다."

"저에게 사과 다섯 개와 오렌지 개가 있습니다."

Translation:I have five apples and three oranges.

September 20, 2017



Using -에게 would make sense since 있다 more specifically means "there is" or "to exist" rather than "to have". I'm not 100% certain if Korean does this commonly, but many other languages, like Irish, use a similar construction, "at me … there is" to denote possession, in absence of a specific verb for "to have".


I wouId say that it has something to do with 저에게 meaning 'to me' and 있다 being 'there are', so 'there are apples n oranges to me' = 'i have ...'.


But 있어요 already means to have


있어요 also means "there is/are".

So perhaps, in this sentence, it means "To me, there are five apples and three oranges"

= "I have five apples and three oranges"


Yes. 에게 have various meanings in English depending on the verb in use.

In this example, as a postposition of 있다,

에게 = for, belonging to.

저에게 사과 다섯 개와 오렌지 세 개가 있습니다

= Lit. There are 5 apples and 3 oranges for (belonging to) me

= I have 5 apples and 3 oranges [by inference]


some1 competent please respond


@spaqin is right. This sentence structure is common in Korean to say 'I have ____'. You can also replace 'I' with another person, for example, 너에게 or 그녀에게.


Would just 나는 or 자는 be wrong in this situation?


(You mean 저는.)


(1) Single statement

저에게 사과 다섯 개와 오렌지 세 개가 있습니다 = There are 5 apples and 3 oranges for me

(2) Open statement (Introducing a topic for discussion)

저는 사과 다섯 개와 오렌지 세 개가 있습니다 = As for me, there are 5 apples and 3 oranges ( implying 'but what about so-and-so...' ).

By inference, both sentences carry the same meaning " I have 5 apples and 3 oranges " but there is a subtle difference in meaning when the topic tag is put to use.

(3) Note:

저는 사과 다섯 개와 오렌지 세 개가 있습니다 =

저(에게)는 사과 다섯 개와 오렌지 세 개가 있습니다, where the postposition marker "에게" is elided.


Yup, this is the most sensible answer, judging from what I have learnt about the complex usages of ~은/는. The topic particle is very versatile.


The krdict.korean.go.kr/eng entry on 에게 has three parts. The first one says: A postpositional particle that indicates whom a certain object belongs to. In this case the five apples and the three oranges belong to "me".


Trying to make sense of the 에게 and 있다 as "there are", I wrote like this: There are five apples and three oranges with me. Unfortunately, it was marked wrong. But I think it should be accepted, right?


Source: "Korean, A Comprehensive Grammar" by Jaehoon Yeon and Lucien Brown, Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, London and New York, Published 2011. the particle 에게 has other uses than just movement. 에게 and 한테 can replace the subject particles 이 and 가 and the topic particles 은 and 는 when used with verb of existence 있다/없다. The example given follows: "민해에게 그만한 돈이 없아요. Minho doesn't have that kind of money". Accordingly, the sentence is correct, because 에게 is acting in the capacity of a subject/topic particle. I also had the wrong answer so I consulted the cited source for help. The key to this use rests with the verb of existence.


에게 could be replacing the topic particle 은/는, but not the subject particle 이/가. In this case the subject particle is on 개, since the 5 apples and 3 oranges are what exist; they are the subject of the "descriptive verb". Since a Korean sentence does not have to have a specified topic we don't even need to say 에게 replaces the topic particle 은/는. It just tags the possessor of the 7 objects which exist. But the sentence would mean the same thing if 에게 were replaced by 는.


It means "For me" The whole sentence may be literally translated as "There are 5 apples and 3 oranges for me" or "5 apples and 3 oranges are for me".


I'm surprised that it hasn't been used before though, in languages like Russian, Irish or Hebrew they use "to me there is..." so 저에게 would make more sense than just 저


Part of evolution of a language aping the rate of societal change perhaps. This is no different to the English omission of the preposition "to" indicating an indirect object, "feeding (to) the dog chocolate".

That said, case marker omission in Korean only happens in casual communications, mainly in speech where if used, they act as emphasis.

Additive markers such as 은/는 (topic);-도 (also), -만(only), -까지 (up to ), -에서 (from) etc. are seldom dropped because on doing so, it might alter the meaning of the sentence.


If i replace 저에게 by 저는 or 나는 is it still correct??


nope. 저는 사과다섯 개와 오렌지 세개가 있습니다 is essentially... without 에게 there is no possessive particle


I don't know what you're talking about. That sentence is grammatically correct; simplify it:

저는 사과 한 개가 있어요. (I have one apple.)

Does this not make sense? You don't need a possessive particle.


I think it's something like "I. It has five apples and three oranges." without the particle. The 에게 links the objects to the subject.


Shouldn't it be 'for me' and not 'to me' ?


I would think both should be correct too


Everybody, the "to me" in this sentence just indicates possessiveness. There are five apples to me in Korean = I have five apples in English.


It told me the correct answer is "There are five apples and three oranges to me." and this is not a correct English sentence. I don't even know what that sentence means unless it's something like "I perceive there to be five apples and three oranges." which is clearly not what the Korean sentence is saying.


"To me" is equal to "I have". Literal translation has to be adapted to what is intended to be understood.


@Cassandra983. In this case, yes. 나-에게 = "to me/for me", where the preposition "to/for" indicates that the attached Noun/Pronoun is the receiver of the 'action'. -에게 = pertaining to

@Ilithios This is not to be confused with the Eng. expression "To me/As for me", 나는 which is used to express opinion or to present a contrasting idea.


. According to Duo lingo the correct translation is: There are 5 apples and 3 oranges to me. (THAT NOT CORRECT ENGLISH) I said: There are 5 apples and 3 oranges for me. (and it was incorrect) everyone knows 에게 is used as to/for


This sounds like the beginning of a math question...


개와 and 개가 both have to do with dogs right? the answer i got right didn't have the word dog anywhere so what do they mean here?


개~ is a counting particle - it's used to denote that you are counting "things" in this case. It gets pretty complex based on what you are counting, unfortunately.


개 is the same word for 'dog' but it's also a 'counter' so '한 개' is the same as 'one thing/object'


If you use the website, they talk about things like this before the lessons. The app goes straight to the lesson.


The word 개 is also a compter, you have to use compter when you count things. Here,개 means "thing". So if you want to say "two apples" you say "사과 두 개" or "두 개의 사과". There is a lot of compter but you can use 개 most of the time (Sorry for my english, idk if it's counter, compter, cumpter or whatever)


Nothing to do with dogs, you know you can click on the word to learn what it is


that's what i did. on this sentence they only say translations including dogs for me, that's why i was so confused. maybe i should flag it


Yeah, it is messed up, but a little bit funny. It's still beta ... :-)


A few points about 에게 (coll. 한테)

• It is called "dative marker"

• It is only attached to nouns indicating people and animals.

• It has some dozen usages but the most common ones are to mark indirect object and destination. [Roughly translated as N에게 = to N].

• when used with impersonal verbs and adjectives s.a. 있다 (there is), 없다 (there is not), 남다 (there is left), 많다 (there is many), 같다 (it seems), 적다 (small), and 생기다 (it happens) ..., 에게 indicates the entity who actually gets affected by the main verb/indirect object [often translated to: for, to or by (in case of passive verbs].

• Given the above example:

저에게 사과 5 개와 오렌지 3 개가 있습니다 =

Lit. There are 5 apples and 3 oranges for (belonging to) me.

There = dummy subject Apples and oranges = real subject I = indirect object

The sentence can be re-worded as:

-> 5 apples and 3 oranges belong to me, or

-> I have 5 apples and 3 oranges

• 은/는 are tags, not real grammatical markers. They are used to categorize topic/theme for discussion.

In common usage, as the grammatical markers are often omitted when the roles of the attached nouns seem obvious, 은/는 tends to get misinterpreted as playing the marker role.

• Again taken the given example, it can be used with both marker and tag, if wished.

저에게는 사과 5 개와 오렌지 3 개가 있습니다.

The meaning of the sentence does not change apart from the implication that the conversation may continue with 저 (I, the speaker) being the main theme.


There is absolutely no situation when the sentence; "There are five apples and three oranges to me." would be correct or even used in slang. If you made it for me it would have some use I think that's what was meant. Just a little typo. I still love this new program.


my korean friends say that this is a common mistake koreans make as well that 에게 has 2343234234 different meanings sometimes and one of them is possession.

so it's showing possession.

they said it depends on the sentence tbh


Everyone is either confused about 저에게 or complaining about how the how another answer should be accepted, but... Am I the only one who's starting to get worried about how complex the sentences look? I can find the meaning when I assess the sentence word by word, but it's just overwhelming when you look at it head on... That's a lot of words, grammar structures, and grammatical rules I'm not ready for...


Duolingo has been drinking again!


thanks again to all the people putting their time in to make the Korean language section. I catch myself making errors sometimes too.


I disagree with the way this sentence is written in Korean and subsequently translated in English. In order for the participle "~에게" to be used correctly in this sentence, there needs to be another clause stating who gave the pieces of fruit to the subject. As is, the sentence resembles that of a fragment.


Ahh, just like being back in math class


The "hover translation" is seriously messed up. If you listen to the whole sentence, it runs together. The counting word, "개" goes after the number of things. In this sentence there is no dog (It's like a synonym).

Better spacing for hovering definitions would be 사과 다섯 개 와 오렌지 세 개...and I would have said 나는 here with 있습니다.


I just don't understand these sentences am I dumb lol


does 개 have to be separate?


Would it be right to say that 개를 and 개외 are kind of like saying "5 of the apples" or "2 of the cakes" not in the same way that we would in English but just attributing the number to the thing...?


개 is a generic counting word, so 사과 다섯 개 translates literally to "five things of apples". 를 and 와 are both particles (the object particle and the conjunctive particle ('and,' basically), respectively) you can add to counting words.


why 저에게?, i think it should be 저는


Why is it "오레지 세 개가 있습니다" and not "오레지 세 개 있습니다"?


오렌지 세 개가 있습니다 has the subject particle 가 on the counter word 개. In Korean the pattern (being currently taught) is: noun(오렌지,orange), space, numeral(세,three), space, counter word(개,thing)(no space) particle(가, subject). In English we say "three oranges exist" but in Korean one says "orange three things exist". The 가 tags the component that exists. [error corrected]


Mr. Mathguy, 세 means "three," not "four." :)


Of course, you are right. My mistake. I fixed my post. Thanks.


These recordings are really, really poor. I had the right answer here, but it keeps marking me wrong. (The above sentence is exactly what I typed in). At this rate it will be impossible to get out of this lesson. Help!


tricky, you are giggling expecting us to misunderstand 'pieces' as "dog", which blunder I did.


So, when you want to say that you have something, is it okay to say both 저는 A이/가 있다 and 저에게 A이/가 있다?


Yea, both are fine. I even heard a source once, which advised using ~에게 ending rather ~는 in such sentences, although I think that it was just author's prefference. Anyways, for example:《남자에게 책이 있다》and《남자는 책이 있다》both mean the same thing.


Why is "dog" showing up after the numbers please?


개 has various meanings. They are mainly transliterations of Chinese characters (Hanja).

• In this instance, 개 is the unit- counter for things (inanimate objects)

다섯 개 = 5 units of

사과 (다섯 개) = (5 units of ) × apple = 5 apples

• Unit-counter for animals: 마리

5 dogs = (5 units of) × dogs = 개 (다섯 마리) = 개 다섯 마리


it's written 개와 what means and the dog and also 5 than it's written : 세 개가 what mean three dogs ! How can I understand that sentence means I have 5 apples and 3 oranges.


in Korean counting the word order is 'noun, number, counting marker'. 개 is the generic marker, (마리 is the marker for animals.) so 세 개가 must mean 3 of the previous noun. 3 dogs would be '개 세 마리' hope this helps


I have 2 grapes and 1 pear.


And it marked you wrong .... what's up with that?!?


'I have got five apples and three oranges.' should be accepted here.


No, "I have got" and "I have" mean two different, yet similar, things.


Eh, no. "I have got" in British English is the "I have" in American English.


"have got" is typically used as a synonym for "have" in American English, and also in British according to the other reply.


Why is everone so advanced in the comments. am i the only one who still wondering what the "dog" phrase is for?


There is no dog. 개 can mean dog when used alone, however when following a number, it is used as a counting word. We don't have many counting words in English, but a few examples would be: piece, loaf, bit, etc. You can't say "I have 2 soaps", you would say "I have 2 bars of soap". 두 개가 있어요 simply means "I have 2 of something"


Wrong again, Duolingo!


I think that phrase is awkward even in Korean. the Koreans would say cho aegae chuseyo. I never heard cho aegae isoyo for anything while living there for eight years. some of these phrases might be local colloquialisms.

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