"음식이 없는 식당"
Translation:A restaurant without food
54 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
food here is the subject because its marked by 이 , so why is the correct answer "restaurant without food" and not "food without restaurant" ? I know the second one is an absurd sentence but if the focus of the sentence is the restaurant why the subject marker is not on the restaurant ?
From the past lessons it was my understanding that the first word/noun is more or less the subject in the case food 음식이, won't it then stand to reason that the answer will be food without a restaurant. Of which this phrase makes no sense. I need to understand the difference between putting food 1st in a sentence and restaurant 1st in a sentence. 음식이 없는 식당 and 식당이 없는 음식. I am assuming the last statement is wrong as I put the restaurant as the subject. Can someone tell me why its wrong or if it's correct in relation to the phrase 'a restaurant without food.'
신 과일 describes sour fruit and 긴 책 a long book. So the adjective describing something comes before the thing it describes. 재미있는 is with fun and 재미없는 is without fun. So adding 있는 or 없는 can also create an adjective that comes before something. In the same way, 음식이 없는 regarded as a whole acts somewhat like an adjective. ( 음식이 없는) 식당 is a restaurant without food ( you could say food-less restaurant) and ( 식당이 없는) 음식 is food without a restaurant (restaurant-less food)..
Hope this helps you. This is my interpretation from what I've seen so far, I was not taught these points. I hope someone will correct me if I'm wrong.