"여행은 피곤해요."
Translation:Traveling is tiring.
16 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
817
Adding -기 to a verb changes it into a noun, but for verbs like 여행하다, it's just 여행 + 하다, so you can take off 하다 to get the noun base instead of adding stuff.
True, but since many qualifications or further descriptions of the action can only relate to verbs and not plain old nouns, I'm assuming that you need the 하기 form in those cases. It's best to illustrate with some examples. If I'm right about this, then:
- 여행 (travel) - correct
- 여행하기 (travel/traveling) - correct
- 일본에 여행 (traveling to Japan) - incorrect (could be correct in a sentence but in that case 일본에 relates to the verb of the sentence rather than to 여행)
-
일본에 여행하기 (traveling to Japan) - correct
-
공부 (studying) - correct
- 공부하기 (studying) - correct
- 영어를 책 없이 공부 (studying English without books) - incorrect
- 영국어를 책 없이 공부하기 (studying English without books) - correct
Maybe in cases of adverbs (e.g. 없이), the verb can be broken up so that the adverb goes directly before 하기:
- 영국어 공부를 책 없이 하기
Not really sure if that's correct.
1009
We are saying different things for the same effect. Think of 피곤하다 as running-low-on-energy. "To (make) tire" (what the trip does) has a causative quality, so literally it would be 피곤하게 하다, and "to be (made) tired" (what the traveler feels) would be something like 피곤해지게 하다 or 피곤하게 뒤다. Nobody uses grammar like this and says it that way, but if you ever need to explain it . . .
329
Is 피곤해요 not "tired"?
How would i differentiate between "Peter is tired" and "Peter is tiring" (because he talks too much)?
302
Not sure if it's correct but using "Peter's talking too much" as the subject could make it clearer, since Peter's talking too much can't get tired but it can tire others so that's the only thing it could mean.