No indication of the verb "came", can someone please explain how came somehow made its way into the translation?
집에 온 개는 - the dog that came home. When you put 오다 before the noun it is 오는 것 (the thing that comes), 온 것 (the thing that came), or 올 것 (the thing that will come). This rule works with every verb.
Thanks. I must've gotten confused because the hint for 온 shows "whole", which probably is an actual definition, and not "came", the definition that fits in this context.
It is confusing that it says that, but as im sure you know, there are words that mean different things depending on context in every language
In 2019, definition doesn't show "whole". Does show various "who came"
So I have done both "the dog THAT came home" and "the dog WHO came home" and was told the other way was right each time.
It's unnatural to say "is not" when referring to the past in English. Even if it's still not their dog, I would say wasn't their dog
I'm confused by how this is a past tense verb, rather then present tense. I wrote, 'The dog that comes home-' and the translation was 'the dog that came home-.' Where does it indicate it is past rather than present tense?
You will find explanation for the past tense action verb in the Modifier 2 Tips and notes on the website.
Wow, the dog has returned from the pet cemetery i guess))))