1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Korean
  4. >
  5. "우리는 시외에 집이 있었어요."

"우리는 시외에 집이 있었어요."

Translation:We had a house outside the city.

December 5, 2017



우리는 市外에 집이 있었어요.


Where is the word city? This sentence is incomplete.


시 means city, 외 means outside. They are Hanja words: 市 and 外。: )


although Matthew is right, remember that 시외 is a singular word and it's best translation would be 'suburbs'

also don't try to randomly use '외에' the same way as '밖에'. Although I am not 100% sure, '외에' by itself doesn't really mean anything nor is ever used


What's the difference between 외에 and 밖에?


One of the solutions offered was 'We'd a house outside the city'. We'd a house?? That's some strange English there ...


Not at all. English allows word contractions just like Korean. An omitted part is indicated by an apostrophe. We'd means we had or we would depending on context. I am sure that you are familiar with can't, don't etc.


As a native speaker of (American) English, I would NEVER say (and have never heard anyone else say) "We'd a house" to mean "We had a house." I think we use the "'d" contraction for "had" only when "had" is an auxiliary verb, e.g., "We'd already done that."


Where is the indication of possession? I.e. Why is it we 'had a house'? Why couldn't it be 'We were at a house outside the city?'


When 있다 is used as "to be" the verb does not take an object, but when 있다 means "to have" then the verb takes an object.

So the way to see if this sentence means "We are at the house" vs "We have a house" is to see the particle attached to house/집. If house was used to indicate a place then -에 would be attached, but here it is used as an object so -이 is attached.


Why is "We had a house in the suburbs" wrong?

EDIT: Still wondering in May 2021, since 시외 is translated elsewhere as "suburb".

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