1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Korean
  4. >
  5. "남자가 마시는 우유는 차갑습니다."

"남자가 마시는 우유는 차갑습니다."

Translation:The milk that the man is drinking is cold.

October 1, 2017



How do I know if the man or the milk is cold?


It takes getting used to but the phrasing here 남자가 마시는 is all describing the milk, thus the adjective 차갑다 is as well.


I don't understand how it's describing the milk I thoght it was The man that is drinking milk is cold


The topic is "the milk that (someone) drinks". On grammatical grounds 남자가 "the man" could be the subject either for the verb "to be cold" or for the verb "to drink" (but not both at once), The first option leads to an incoherent sentence: "as for the milk that (someone) drinks, the man is cold". It is incoherent because the statement "the man is cold" seems not to be related to the milk, so how can the milk be the topic? The second possibility ("man" is the subject for the verb "to drink") leads to a coherent sentence: "as for the milk that the man drinks, (it) is cold". This is coherent because the topic, the milk, is also naturally the thing which is cold. So the first option is rejected, not on grammatical grounds, but because of the semantic role the topic, identified by 은/는, must play in any sentence.


I too am having trouble seeing how this is not "The man drinking the milk is cold," as that's there's nothing wrong syntactically or grammatically with that English sentence. So what would it look like in Korean if you said that?


"우유를 마시는 남자가 춥습니다 (feels cold)/차갑습니다 (cold to the touch)."


The particle attached to man (가) and milk (는) indicate which is the subject of the verb


So the man is the subject of the verb 'to be cold' or the verb 'to drink'? Is there a rule that a noun tagged by 이/가 must be the subject of the first verb appearing after it in the sentence? Added 2019.02.04: As Ash-Fred says, 남자가 마시는 우유 is the topic of the sentence, where 남자가 마시는 is a subordinate clause that modifies 우유. The trick for English speakers is realizing that in Korean it is possible for a sentence to begin with a subordinate clause. In English the first thing we expect to see in a sentence is the subject, so when we see 남자가 we jump to the (wrong) conclusion that 남자 is the subject of the sentence. There seems to be a word-order rule in Korean that "words of a subordinate clause are contiguous". However the main sentence elements (topic, subject, object, indirect object, verb) are not necessarily contiguous (hence subordinate clauses can be inserted at various places). However this rule does not help us see where subordinate clauses begin. There is also the general rule that old information (e.g. topic) comes first in a sentence and newer information later, with the verb at the end. Also, sometimes the item marked with 는 can be both the topic and function as the subject, as in this sentence. Thus in this sentence, if 남자가 were the sentence subject, rather than part of a subordinate clause modifying the topic, this would be an odd order of things (subject before topic, and different from the topic). Thus it is more natural in view of these rules to think of 남자가 as part of a subordinate clause modifying the topic 우유.


How would you say "the man is drinking cold milk" ?


남자가 차가운 우유를 마셔요.


"The milk that the man drinks is cold." has been counted as wrong.... whereas in a similar sentence "eating" was counted as incorrect.


"The milk that the man drinks is cold." is now accepted.


yeah i keep coming across the same thing


Sentence breakdown:

  • 남자가   ← 男字 (man) + (subject marker)
  • 마시는   ← 마시다 (to drink) + (present attributive ending)
  • 우유는   ← 牛乳 (milk) + (topic marker)
  • 차갑습니다차갑다 (to be cold) + 습니다 (formal ending)

Parse thusly:

  • [(남자가 마시는) 우유는] 차갑습니다.
  • [The milk (the man is drinking)] is cold.

A different sentence:

  • [(우유를 마시는) 남자가] 차갑습니다.
  • [The man (drinking milk)] is cold.

Yet another different sentence:

  • [(우유를 마시는) 남자가] 춥습니다.
  • [The man (drinking milk)] feels cold.

In Korean, the descriptive part and the described part are always in the same order: descriptor first followed by the described. In English, which has adjectives as a separate word class follows the same order if adjectives are used. But it uses the opposite order if relative clauses are used. For example, the following are equivalent in English using different word ordering:

  • The pink milk is cold. ← concise and likely to be used
  • The milk that is pink is cold. ← verbose and unlikely to be used
  • The pink milk that is coldadjective and relative clause (as part of a complete sentence)
  • The cold, pink milkadjectives only (as part of a complete sentence)


I'm not the biggest fan of this sentence being a part of the Modifier lesson since it jives better after learners have seen Korean gerund constructions.

남자가 마시는 is the modifier form of the sentence 남자가 마시다.

  • 남자가 마시다. = The man drinks.
  • 남자가 마시는 = that the man drinks

People who have seen the ~는 것 should draw heavily from that lesson.

Here's another way to look at this sentence though a construction series:

  • 우유는 차갑습니다 = The milk is cold.
  • 마시는 우유는 차갑습니다 = The milk that drinks is cold.
  • 남자가 마시는 우유는 차갑습니다. = The milk that the man drinks is cold.


Why is "The man drinks cold milk" not correct?


Look two comments above you


the structure of the sentence is so strange ! man+drinking+milk+is cold become : The milk that the man is drinking is cold. Even that sentence sounds weird to me. The man is drinking cold milk. Would sound better.


Yeah, it's an odd literal translation. It sounds like the milk is drinking the man...

I think it's because in English, the present participle construct can allow for object + pres. participle + subject, ie: 'car driving man' or 'time keeping person'

but never subject + pres. participle + object, ie: (by) man being drank? milk... ???


"The man is drinking milk that is cold" was not an accepted answer.


That would be "남자가 차가운 우유를 마십니다."


This is another tough one...


Why can't it be "the man is drinking cold milk"? it's the same thing


Would the phrase "The man is drinking cold milk" also make sense in this case? :0


No that would be 남자가 차가운 우유를 마십니다 In your sentence, "is drinking" is the verb, therefore it goes at the end of the sentence. In the sentence given by Duolingo, the verb is descriptive "is cold"


Why is "the man is drinking cold milk" wrong?



The adjective 차갑다 is describing the topic of the sentence 우유.


The milk is drinking the man who is cold.


That would be "우유가 차가운 남자를 마십니다."


in this, what is the particle 가 doing???


It is a subject marker in the subordinate clause.


Wouldn't it be 마시는 남자의 우유는 차가워요?


Oh man, the 는 suffix doubling as a topic marker and a modifier ending can make things confusing


The man that is drinking milk is cold is not correct i guess


The man is drinking cold milk...should be accepted


Kingina lagi akong mali ng grammar dto

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