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".
(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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
@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.
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)
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.
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...
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.
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.
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]
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
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"