"하늘에 구름이 꼈어."

Translation: There are clouds in the sky.

[LiKenun]

To make sense of why the past tense is used reinterpret the literal translation this way:

Clouds were hung in the sky.

The result of clouds in the sky is the present state we call “cloudy.”

[fbr_brazil]

Thank you for existing Kevin Li.

[nleconte]

The most blunt but real compliment one can give :)

[YunisR]

You're extremely helpful as well ☺

[ShaileeKap]

Thanks to you and @nleconte for your straightforward and easy to understand explanations. Both of you have helped me immensely.
감사합니다

[nleconte]

Very helpful, thank you!

[Pamela909830]

Could this sentence also be written "하늘에 구름이 있어요" or not?

[Iron_Venema]

Yes possible

[lameskydiver]

You can, but it's more like 'There are clouds in the sky' rather than 'It's cloudy'.

[Pamela909830]

I am still wondering. Aug. 13, 2019

[mikemirow]

Also wondering...

[Pamela909830]

I am still wondering. Nov. 24, 2019.

[oee16]

Of course.

하늘에 구름이 꼈습니다 is just a pictorial way of saying "The sky clouded over/ (is/was) clouding over"

Worth noting:

The sky is cloudy/It's overcast = 하늘이 흐립니다.

[ 흐리다 used for weather, means to be overcast ].

[mcguirepatr]

The words for cloud 구름 shadow 그림자 and shade그늘 share similar characters. Can somebody explain the etymology?

[okdal]

I'm no expert so take this with a grain of salt but they might be related through Hanja - the Hanja equivalent to 그늘 is 陰 which as you can see includes the character 云, an archaic word for 'cloud'. Considering how some radicals in Chinese characters influence how a word is pronounced, this might explain why they sound similar?
As for 그림자, the Hanja doesn't seem to resemble either word, but I did find someone claiming that the 그ㄹ part originally meant 'sun' so maybe there's a connection there.

[Iron_Venema]

I think 그림 in 그림자 means painting

[nogi132]

그림 means painting, 자 means person, so 그림자 (shadow) is kind of a painting of a person ("painted" by the sun)

[Pamela909830]

Thank you! That is helpful! :)

[Lorenzo410951]

끼다:hang,cloud over

[hayakawa_masa]

Why only plural?

[Pamela909830]

I suppose you could say there is a cloud in the sky. However, that is a rare occurrence; usually we see more than one cloud. :)

[soobee620]

I said "There were clouds in they sky" and it was marked wrong. How would you say that?

[oee16]

구름이 끼다 is a clausal adjective which literally means (구름이) clouds (끼다) are covering/filling up. So,

하늘에 구름이 껴. clouds are (currently, continuously) filling up the sky => There are 'being' clouds in the sky. (current state)

하늘에 구름이 꼈어. clouds have been (may still be) filling up the sky => There are clouds in the sky. (existing state)

하늘에 구름이 꼈었어. clouds were (no longer are) filling up the sky => There were/had been clouds in the sky. (past state)

[ARMY1365244BTS]

Thanks oee16. Whenever I stuck i try to find your explanation. English and Korean both are foreign language to me. Sorry for my bad English.

[mylespost]

Ah yes, and the floor is made of floor

[multipara]

Is it wrong to translate this as "the sky got cloudy" or "the sky clouded over", or would you say that in a different way?

[oee16]

(1) It's idiomatic.

~이/가 끼다 (intransitive verb) = be shrouded in; be covered with
[ => object complement has to be marked with 이/가.]

"구름이 꼈어." (idiom) = be shrouded in clouds

하늘에 구름이 꼈어.
= [Lit.] Over the sky, it is shrouded in clouds

= The sky is shrouded in clouds

=> Clouds shrouded over the sky (by inference)

(2) The sky clouded over / became cloudy or overcast = 하늘이 흐려졌어.

[from 흐려지다 (a reflexive verb) = get cloudy; overcast; bleary...]

[multipara]

thank you for your explanation! yes i guess i'll have to remember it's idiomatic. the confusing bit for me is the past tense – i would guess if "끼다" is "to be shrouded", "꼈어" should be "was shrouded"...

[oee16]

끼다 = be shrouded

껴 = is [being] shrouded = is shrouding
=> current occurence

꼈어 = (is/has been) shrouded
=> existing (continuing) occurence

꼈었어 = (was) shrouded
=> past (complete) occurence.

Few points to keep in mind:

▪Time of speech = moment when the statement is made

▪Korean simple past tense implies the event (action/state) happened before the time of speech. It does not necessarily mean the event is complete [ =The completion factor is irrelevant.] => open-ended past tense.

▪Korean 'pluperfect' on the other hand describes a complete event in the past. [The completion factor is guaranteed].

[multipara]

ah, i think i understand! this is super helpful, thank you!