29 Comments
question: where would we use 사라져요 in day to day conversation?
and if we learn that word, what about something "appearing"? what if the tv appears again?
appearing is 나타나요 or 생기다 from 나타나다/생기다 so, if the TV appears again, we can say '텔레비전이 다시 나타나요/생겨요'
meaning... it turns off randomly? or it just mysteriously disappears by magic?
Can someone please tell me why 은 is used here instead of 이? I always get confused about this lol.
207
이 is the mark of the subject. 은 emphasises the noun, subject or object (regarding the television, it disappears). Like the Japanese particle は。
If that television disappears, I will catch a fit. I can't miss my favorite shows! Ugh.
Is it supposed to be as signal from a TV or is it actually meant as a TV ?
- 352
Should it not be 텔레비전을 instead of 텔레비전은 because of the verb acting on it?
은 is used as particle for subject while 을 is used for the object of the sentence. As in 텔레비전은 사라져요 the subject is the television which dissappears, the 텔레비전 is added with 은 instead of 을.
- 352
Ah, I see. So if the word in the sentence is both the subject and the object, then you just treat it as the subject. Got it. Thanks
The tv is not the object in this sentence because the tv is the one doing the act of disappearing. If the sentence were, for example, "I get rid of the television", or "I disappear the television" (although you wouldn't say that because disappear can't take an object), then the tv would be the object because I am the subject doing something to the tv.
- 352
Great explanation. Yes, I posted this question many months ago. Thankfully my grasp of particles has improved since then. However, you've shone a light on this from a different perspective for me and I'm now realising why I was confused back then: I was mistaking literal objects for grammatical objects. i.e. Physically speaking, a television is an object, but grammatically speaking, it's only an object if there is someone or something else to treat it as such.
Thanks again.
