1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Korean
  4. >
  5. "손님, 너무 걱정하지 마십시오."

"손님, 너무 걱정하지 마십시오."

Translation:Sir, do not worry too much.

October 18, 2017



I looked up on naver translate and know from experience that 손님 means guest/costumer/patron. It doesnt just mean "Sir". Korean is a language that rarely genders words.


Are you saying that "sir" is wrong, or that they should add "ma'am"? I'd agree about the latter only.


I'm saying they should make the word "guest" because thats what the word means. It doesnt mean sir nor ma'am.


Agreed with Owlspotting. Translation has two routes you can take. Literal translation (which helps foreign speakers understand what makes up the word which can help in memorization) which is also known as transliteration or semantic translation, and then you have practical translation, which is how you would translate something to make sense in the language you're translating to.

It does no one any good to rely on a semantic translation if we're wanting to learn a practical translation.


It is better to know the literal translation if one is already a native English speaker because the point of learning a new language is to speak THAT language that one is learning. Unless you are a translator, keeping in mind that 손님 means "guest" is crucial to know.


As a literal translation that would be OK, though for translating into English, it would sound pretty strange.


"Guest" is not a term of address in English.


2019 Seotember. It seems feedback resukted in change. answer now accepts Ma'am instead of Sir.

The two choices are appropriate in English when addressing or welcoming a patron/customer/ guest / visitor, or to get someone's attention, or to warn a person if they are near danger like a car or attack.


"Honored guest" on the other hand seems to work . . .


I've never been addressed as "guest" in many years of being guests in all kinds of places in English speaking countries.

Nobody says stuff like "Guest, please sit at any table" or anything like that, let alone "Guest, please do not worry too much".


I agree. I asked a Korean about this and she would not agree that it meant "sir" until I showed her this specific example, to which she conceited but said it's a bad example. Another example of assumed masculine vocabulary in English, in my opinion. It should be something like customer/patron/guest then finally madam/sir. The Duolingo page for 손님 says "customer, visitor, miss.", so there's some reprieve there, but I've noticed Duolingo very often defaults to masculine pronouns where it may not even be appropriate and certainly not good form to teach.


I was at a temple stay and the think the female head monk used this as her title. Not 100% though


You're probably thinking of 스님, not 손님


I'm confused >.< On some of the other sentences, they had 너무 and 많이 grouped together to mean "too much," so why is only 너무 made to mean "too much" here? Shouldn't it be grouped with 많이?

  • 1774

In Korean, unlike English, 너무 can directly modify a verb. 너무 많이 is not incorrect, but redundant.


So 너무 많이 운동하지 마십시오 can actually be said as 너무 운동하지 마십시오?


Please correct me if my understanding is wrong. 너무 is "too much", 많이 is "many". They are used dependent on the context. And if they are used together in the same sentence, it will sound redundant if translated directly/literally.


just mentally keep note that 손님 is a gender neutral equivalent to sir/ma'am that doesn't really need transcription into English.


Did anyone else get the answer wrong because they put sir last as in "don't worry too much, sir" (it was corrected to madam)?

  • 1774

"Don't worry too much, sir." is now accepted.


네 손님 두두두!!!!!! Stay ❤


TANG TANG TANG TANG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


It counted as wrong when I had Sir don't worry about too much (instead of do not)...


I suspect it does not accept "about" too much.


In English, adding 'too much' had the effect of weakening the statement Don't worry -> no worry at all Don't worry too much -> some worry

Is this the same in Korean or does 너무 actually intensify the statement.

In not sure that's clear so, put differently, does adding 너무 make this more or less polite?


How come this can be translated as "Sir, do not worry...", but if I translate it as "Mr, do not worry..." Duo marks it as incorrect? I mean, "Sir" and "Mr" should be kind of interchangeable in English.

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