"That is a dog."
Translation:그것은 개입니다.
21 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
really, 저것은 isnt needed but the 것 signifies that its a thing. if it were translated correctly it would be "that thing over there is a dog"
820
n English, we can use "this" and "that" alone as a noun (that is big) and to describe nouns (that thing is big).
In Korean, 이, 그, and 저 can't be used alone and must describe a noun.
Particles, dipthongs, and word + 니다 changes are driving me to start over, to redo all from website. Because website explains grammar and app does not.
We really do not have that much context to determine whether to use 저 or 그, isnt it all about seeing for yourself how far the object is from you or the person you are talking to?
It is a subject particle. 은 after a consonant and 는 after a vowel. There is also the 이/가 pair, which has basically the same role but is used when one wants to emphasize on the subject or when the subject of the sentence is a new information.
I don't understand why this is incorrect. I doesn't say,..that is a dog over there. So why do we use 저.
Besides the whole "over there" thing, proximity is also a factor. So I would assume whatever "that" the speaker is referencing is perhaps across the room, or the speaker and whoever he/she is speaking to is in a car and the dog is not.
It is the same endinf we have been seeinf 은(는). The emphasis/topic focus is "that" so THAT is a dog.
Why is the pronunciation of 저갓은 different than what it should be? Anyone feel that?
- 453
When you hover over "that", there are 3 options: 자것, 그것, and 그 - so could someone please explain by only the first one is accepted?
the question is that is a dog , i put that is a dog but it says it is asking for that dog over there, how can I know whch one to answer when the question is so vage?
