1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Korean
  4. >
  5. "빵이 쌉니다."

"빵이 쌉니다."

Translation:The bread is cheap.

September 21, 2017



I think its funny how English needs more words to say something than Korean does. Korean is right to the point without all the extra words.


English seems much more precise, we have tons of articles and suffices to exactly describe what we mean. "Bread cheap" could mean a lot of different things in different contexts in korean, but in english "bread is cheap", "the bread here is cheap", "this bread is cheap", "that bread is cheap", mean different, specific, things - which all seem to be covered by this one ambiguated korean phrase. You would need to add more words or context to disambiguate it, which isn't tackled here yet.

Im still very new to this, but thats what im getting from these lessons and the speakers i know.


-hold my Spanish dictionary


Both sentences take about the same time to say though.


Yep. The English sentence actually has one fewer syllable!


-Hold my portuguese


빵이 쌉니다. bbang-i ssabnida. The bread is cheap.

방이 쌉니다. bang-i ssabnida. The room is cheap.

Hard to tell the difference.


When it comes to pronunciation

I think

(bread) is more of a strong P sound

and (room) is more of a subtle combination of P and soft B sound


ㅃ= p. Hard press p. No aspiration while the pronunciation. ㅂ= b. With a gust of air while speaking. :)


In this situation, is "cheap" also implying that the bread's quality is low? Would "the bread is inexpensive" also pass as a translation?


Just as the cost:) It means 'inexpensive"

[deactivated user]

    Oh no! My phone autocorrected 'bread' to 'Brad'. Lol


    Btw I wonder why they put an apostrophe if they're going to take it as a wrong answer anyway.


    Can someone explain why it's subject particle and not topic particle?


    This is how it was explained to me: descriptive sentences (where you are just saying that 'X is [some adjective]') take the subject particle because an adjective can't have an object.

    For example, 개는 음식을 먹습니다. <-- Dog is the topic; the object is food because the dog eats it.

    On the other hand, 개가 큽니다. <-- Dog is the subject; there is no object in this sentence because the dog can't big anything.

    Hope that makes sense.


    Why is it 빵이 and not 빵이는 or 빵이가? Sorry if its kind of a dumb question


    이/가 are subject markers and dont come together. 은/는 are topic markers and they also dont come together. bread is the subject here and 이 is the subject marker here


    must be some dingy bread then cuz there is no way you find cheap bread in america


    The cheap bread is for dogs (bts haters) :D


    빵이 sounds like pani and pani is a hindi word . Pani = water.

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