"첫 번째 사람은 사과를 먹어요."

Translation: The first person eats an apple.

[JonathanSc315860]

Isnt the 번째 awkward here? Wouldnt people normally just say 첫 사람 the first person?

[Ash358]

번째 signifies '-th' (i.e. First, second, third, fourth, fifth etc.) Without it, it would just be one, two, three, four, five etc.

[GiovanniSantucci]

What I don't get (and I'm sure it makes sense, it just wasn't explained in the notes): how come 70th uses 70 (일흔) + 번째, but 1st doesn't use 1 (한) + 번째 and uses 첫 instead? Is one/first unique in this way?

[JaydenLaury]

Like in English 1st is not onest.
첫(처음)= prime

[Esteban849655]

첫번째 두번째 세번째 네번째
한(하나) 두(둘) 셋(세) 넷(네)

첫 and 두 is the except

[Brickerbrack]

And we've been paying for it ever since...

[OyaOyaOya14]

번째 is not actually necessary in the sentence. We could just write 첫 사람은 사과를 먹어요

[RollyRP]

Yes

[123letsgojeouju]

Adam and eve vibes

[Stella11209]

Ugh I was going to write the first person eats and apple but it didn't seem to make sense so I wrote the person eats an apple first

[Kwang-Joon]

Man 은 안될까요?

[Rae781]

Why is it 첫 and not 한?

[JaydenLaury]

When I first learned English, I thought why first, second, and third are not oneth, twoth, and threeth, when the next ones keep the rule.

[J7jx10]

because it is "the first" not just "one" person

[flowerkityy]

Would this also work as "The first person is eating an apple"?

[Miana_bi]

Sounds like Squid Game...

[pipper724298]

Why is '1st person eats an apple' incorrect?

[EmmaSweetiePie]

I wrote "the first to eat an apple" :/ I got it wrong

[NiRiBu]

Why is -- The first eats the apple -- not accepted as the correct answer?

[remsedevir]

jesus hates apple i think