"모래를 먹는 아기가 참 기뻐요."

Translation: The baby eating sand is really happy.

[Kathinskowitz]

So... The sand eats babies?

[madison.b11602]

It's talking about a baby that is eating sand, not the other way around

[wintertriangles]

Other way around.

[songEsongE]

예문이 왜 이렇죠? 한국에서는 모래를 먹는 아기들이 없어요~ ㅋㅋ 또한 모래를 먹는 아기는 위험해서 못 먹게 해요~ 예문을 좀 바꿨으면 합니다.^^

[erudis]

예문이 왜 이렇죠?

이상한 예문들은 기억하기 더 쉽기 때문이에요. 또한 모래는 맛있어요. :P

[songEsongE]

좋고 아름다운 문장은 더욱 더 뇌리에 오래 머물거든요... 저는 기분 나빠서 이 문장 안 외워지던데...ㅋㅋ 이러다 소변도 마시고 똥도 먹고 폐도 뇌도 먹겠넹~ ㅎㅎ

[3nx48]

한국에서 모래 먹는 아기는 절대 없어요. 이런 이상한 문장을 만드는 링고가 정말 이상하네요.

[jinnsoojenny]

Mr. Garam is back. First plastic, now sand, Just stop it!

[Tandolfriend]

This sentence is verrrrrrrrry wierd. Please change this sentence.

[ThomasWelc4]

I know this "The baby is really happy eating sand." is marked wong because of the way the contributor wrote the sentence . But really!

[dreamsaddict]

I may be wrong but I think in this case the sentence has a different meaning.
"The baby eating sand" or "The baby who is eating sand" is a relative clause to indicate that specific baby, so "the baby eating sand is happy" means that that particular baby who is eating sand is happy.
"The baby is really happy eating sand" indicates that the baby is happy "while eating sand" or "because he is eating sand", so it's a different clause.

[honeyrbw]

It's a very odd sentence.

"The baby eating sand is really happy." should be "모래를 먹는 아기가 참 기뻐해요" "모래를 먹는 아기가 참 좋아해요" etc.