"The employer has not worked."
Translation:고용주는 일한 적이 없어요.
15 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
-ㄴ 적이 있다/없다 = to have done/to have not done something.
그 영화 본 적이 없어 = I haven't seen that movie.
아이슬란드 간 적이 있어? = Have you been to Iceland?
Preceded by a verb that ends in (-)ㄴ and followed by 있다 it means "to have the experience of" 일을 한 적이 있다 is "have the experience of working" or "has worked experience" - but this is a rough translation and not natural English.
It kind of means "experience". So literally, the employer doesn't have work doing experience.
The English translation gives me the feeling that the time period has not been included. Like: The employer has not worked on this project", "The employer has not worked during these last weeks". But the Korean phrase, if I understand the comments below correctly, rather implies that the employer doesn't have work experience. This is also closer to the literal translation: "As for the employer, there is no [zhe has no] work experience. " So why isn't a better translation: "The employer has no work experience"? This is something completely different than the current English phrase, which doesn't give me any sense of the employer lacking experience, but rather that the employer might be lazy or busy with other things at the moment.
of an employer who has not worked during some time, w
why do you have to use 적이 ? I went to a translator online, which said the sentence meant Employers have never worked. And I then deleted the 적이 and it still gave the same meaning.
Without 적이 it would mean that the employer has no work, as in they currently have no work and are unemployed but they may have had a job in the past.
적이 Means that they've never experienced it before meaning that he's never worked ever
This person is brave enough to say that the employer himself hasn't done any work lol