The difference between 못 and 안- 2

In the last post about 못mot / not and 안-an- / not we looked at using it when you talk about yourself. It's important to note that when talking about other things 안-an- / not is used much more commonly.

• 비 안와요bi an-wayo / it's not raining
• 영국 날씨가 안좋아요Yeonguk Nal-shi-ga anjo-ayo / English weather is not good
• 수업 아직도 안마쳤어요su-ob ajik-do an-ma-cheoss-eo-yo / class hasn't finished yet

안-an- / not is used in the case of other things and often people because you the reasons for it not happening are not external. You can't really explain why it isn't raining, or why the English weather is bad, and there is no particular reason whey class isn't finished yet.
Obviously when talking about other people, you often don't know their inner motivations and reasoning, so 안-an- / not is more appropriate. However if you do know and what explain that someone is late for reasons beyond their control, it's just as applicable to say 안-an- / not.

• 민수 안왔어요minsu an-wass-eo-yo / Minsu didn't come You don't know why he isn't here, because you don't know the circumstances
• 민수 못 왔어요minsu mot wass-eo-yo / Minsu didn't come You know the circumstances and why he didn't come. In some cases you could translate this as "Minsu couldn't come"

The difference between 못 and 안-

I wish someone had explained this to me at the beginning. Normally my teacher would just correct me every time without explanation when I used either 못mot / not or 안-an- / not. Someone had half explained that 못mot / not means something more like "can't/couldn't" but it didn't seem to fit. After all, you don't normally answer the question "did you see Phil" with "no, I couldn't see him." The answer would be "no, I didn't see him"

In Korean, however, you answer this question with 못mot / not, not 안-an- / not. The difference, in theory is pretty simple. In practice, for English speakers it's a little more difficult. We don't think about this circumstances of why something "isn't" nearly as much as Koreans. For us, something simply "is" or "isn't". But basically put:

• 못mot / not is used for when something didn't happen because of external factors
• 안-an- / not is used for something which didn't happen because of you, you didn't want to, or you didn't choose to

Imagine your teacher asked you: "Have you done your homework?" If you hadn't done it how would you answer? In English you just say "I didn't do it because...", but in Korean if you say: "숙제 안했어요sukje an-haesseoyo / I didn't do my homework" it means you didn't want to, and there is no real excuse. If you say "숙제 못 했어요sukje mot haesseoyo / I didn't do my homework" it means there is a reason that you didn't do it. So which one would you answer with?

Here are some other phrases where 못mot / not is more common than 안-an- / not:

• 비터 만났어요? / 아니요, 못 만났어요peter mannass-eo-yo? / aniyo, mot mannass-eo-yo / Did you meet Peter? No I didn't. - you couldn't meet him because you were sick
• 김치 많이 먹어요? / 아니요, 못 먹어요kim-chi mani mog-eo-yo? / aniyo, mot mog-eo-yo / do you eat a lot of kimchi? No I don't - you don't eat it because it's spicy
• 장학금 받았어요? / 아니요, 못 받았어요jang-hak-geum padass-eo-yo? / aniyo mot padass-eo-yo / did you get a scholarship? No I didn't. - you didn't get it because you grades weren't good enough

Two of those sentences would be strange if you used 안-an- / not. And one would be ok. Which ones?
That's right! If someone asks you: 김치 많이 먹어요?kim-chi mani mog-eo-yo? Do you eat a lot fo kimchi, you can answer 아니요, 안먹어요aniyo, am-mog-eo-yo / do you eat a lot of kimchi? No I don't. But that would mean that you don't eat it because it's spicy, you don't eat it because you choose not or don't want to.

So for the other two sentences, especially with number three, you can't really use 안-an- / not at all. Who doesn't want to get a scholarship? And why did you choose not to meet Peter? You don't like him?

I hope that's clear! Easy to understand, but a little complicated to put into practice. Now every time I hear 못mot / not or 안-an- / not Im going to be thinking about this, and then try to use it myself.

Translation of 최후의 승리를 향하여 앞으로 / (DPRK Forward to Final Victory)

I was reading this article and thought to myself I should make glorious translation of Kim Jong Un’s “signature song”:

최후의 승리를 향하여 앞으로 (DPRK Forward to Final Victory)

or

“Turn to the final triumph, forwards!”

Turn to the final triumph, forwards!
Yes! let’s go, turn to the final triumph, forwards!

Millions of citizens and soldiers of one spirit, unleash your power!
North Korea, mighty country, beat the marching-drums,
Let’s go! Country of BaekdusanBaekdusan is Korea's iconic and highest mountain, follow the call of the communist partyin Korean it's actually Central party!

Turn to the final triumph, forwards!

Indomitable military power, make your invincibility known in all the world and,
North Korea, mighty country, thrustThe Korean is actually "butt", but I don't think that's an appropriate word for this song" forwards with your gun barrels!
Let’s go! country of Baekdusan, the flag of the late father flies high.

Turn to the final triumph, forwards!

Turn to the final triumph, forwards!

A new century, the beacon of the industrial revolution is being held up,
North Korea, mighty country, make known your spirit to the world,
Let’s go, great country of Baekdusan, and embrace the blessing of the sun's glow.

Turn to the final triumph, forwards, forwards!

Turn to the final triumph, forwards!

-와/-과, -이랑/-랑, -하고: and, and, and and! (Meaning)

this is a continuation of this post

-하고-hago is used to join nouns together in a list. There is no relationship between them. So imagine you're looking in the fridge and you see rice and kimchi, you don't want to eat them together, you're just saying they're there. Also -하고-hago is used more in writing than speaking.

-랑/-이랑-rang/-irang is used in speaking, and you will often here it in the restaurant when making an order. It has a more general meaning than -하고-hago in the sense it can be used to denote some kind of relationship between people:

• 수민이랑 시내에 갔어요Su-Min-i-rang shi-ne-ae gass-eo-yo / I went to town with Su-Min - Here it means "with" because it's a person (you could also say me and Sumin went to town)

-와/-과-wa/-gwa, is used in writing instead of -랑/-이랑-rang/-irang, but generally it has an extra meaning, and is therefore a little different. When you use -와/-과-wa/-gwa you are saying that the two things are linked or have a relatiosnhip:

• 밥과 김치bab-gwa kimchi does mean "Rice and kimchi" but it more exactle means "rice with kimchi"

If you look in the fridge and say "there's rice with kimchi" it means that they are mixed together! In English you can say "I like Kimchi and rice" which can mean "rice with kimchi" but in Korean 밥과 김치bab-gwa kimchi only means "rice with kimchi".

Here are some more examples of -와/-과-wa/-gwa showing a relationship between two things

• 동생과 싸웠어요dong-seng-gwa ssa-weo-sseo-yo means "I fought with my brother"
• 대구와 써울 달라요degu-wa seoul dal-la-yo means "Daegu and Seoul are different" (compared with)
• 친구와 이야기 했어요chin-gu-wa i-ya-gi hess-eo-yo means "I spoke to (with) my friend" not "I told my friend..."

So -와/-과-wa/-gwa is used when comparing 2 things and to emphasize that there is an exchange or a relationship. In fact -와/-과-wa/-gwa is nearly always used in conjunction with words 함께ham-ggae and 같이ga-chi which roughly mean "together".

Why Koreans translate so strangely

I met one of my friends after dinner once (in Korea), and he was visibly upset. He said “There was seaweed in my porridge!” you might think that this is a culinary travesty like jam in fried egg sandwiches, but this time it wasn’t. It was the result of mistranslation

What my friend had, had absolutely nothing to do with porridge. It was something closer to risotto called 죽juk. Rice cooked a long time, served with savoury flavourings like kimchi or octopus or seaweed. But all Koreans call 죽juk “porridge”. You actually see it written outside 죽juk restaurants

The same goes with 찌개jjigg-ae. Much to the disappointment of new arrivals when they look at a menu, they see this translated as stew. Suddenly potatoes and tender meat in a thick sauce come to mind. You couldn’t be further from the truth. This is soup, plain and simple, albeit delicious.

Of course there are cultural reasons as to why all Koreans categorise these foods like this (I have to admit, I once saw 찌개jjig-ae called soup), but that’s for another time. This is pure conjecture, but I believe that these terms were coined pre-50s.

Porridge is not exactly a commonly eaten food, and to be honest, I am the only person who has such happy feelings when I think about stew. These are both foods of the past, which have been replaced by fancy things like "cereals" and "tagine".
I think that these words entered Korean when, either, the Americans occupied the South in the 1950s, or it could have taken place even earlier with the first missionaries. The Korean language has adopted these words so much that when you say (even in English) “찌개jjig-ae is not stew” no one believes you!

Korean doesnt just create Korean, and it doesn't just create Konglish, it even creates English. These odd translations remain to this day cemented in the Korean language, and will continue to confuse foreigners long into the future.