-으로 is not just marking direction. Say, someone is looking for a classroom for a test or meeting, and ask you where she should go. To give the room number, you have to say 204호로 가세요, not 204호에 가세요. Room 204 in this case is not a direct the person should go toward, it is the correct destination the person should go to. Another example, if you want to ask where a newly-wedded couple go for a honeymoon, you will say 신혼여행 어디(로) 가세요?, not 신혼여행 어디에 가세요? In response, you will say 괌으로 가요, not 괌에 가요. --You have to use the particle; leaving out a particle here is not appropriate, even in casual speaking. In this case, too, 괌 is the destination of your honeymoon, not a direction in the sense of 'going toward.' The reason why you have to use -으로, not -에, for a destination location here is because the location is a choice made out of usually available possible candidates, say 제주도, 하와이, 경주, 사이판, etc.
oh, yes! you've got the point. i just concerntrated on directing point, or what to say, pointing spot. so what i tried to say was the different things they can imply. (으)로 also implies the selection,choice as you said. 저는 커피로 주세요. you chose 커피 from the options like 차, 코코아, 쉐이크. its hard to decided until what boundaries or levels you teach to the learners of languages. if its not rude, may i ask you whether you are majored in korean linguistics or korean education? unlike pure linguistics, in korean education as a foreignlanguage field, esp. real practical field, we always face the issue of making the boundaries of teaching. depending on the level of learners we should skip certain errors or sometimes just simplify the things. and am just begginer, have taught in 어학당 for only 2 years and so really 부족합니다. not only because of poor experience but also as an academically for am a bad student. thanks to your pointing out, i've just realized i also need to think of the difference between youtube and language center. because in 어학당, we have certain steps so we can just simplify things and dont menttion about all the meaning and rules because we know we can give them more info on further level, but youtube..its not like this. so i shouldnt simplify like this. thanks again really. tell you the truth i didnt think about it at all. and yup, i was going to make a video on omitting the particles but now i should think a lot about to which i should teach. 외국어 교육의 특성상 완벽한 국어학적 지식 전달이 어렵다고만 생각해왔고 적당히 생략하고 단순화하기만 했습니다. 선생님의 지적에 저렇게 안이하게만 생각해온 제 자신을 반성하게되었습니다. 으앙. 너무 길어졌지요. 사실 제가 느낀 것은 더 많은데... 다시 한번 감사드립니다.
@@WBKTYUJIN 안녕하세요? 가르치는 학생의 수준에 따라 한 가지 기능에 촛점을 두어 가르치는 것과 일반적인 대상에게 한국어에 대한 지식을 알려 주는 것과는 다르겠죠. 또 국어학자들조차도 한국어 문법, 특히 한국어의 사용에 대해서는 아직 연구가 미진한 부분이 많습니다. 저는 UCLA에서 유형론, 화용론, 대화분석을 공부했고, 지금은 인디애나 대학에서 한국어를 가르치고 있습니다.
@@yihyosang 와! 그러시군요. 저는 아직 박사과정생이고..어학당에서 2년정도 일한 것이 전부예요. 어학당 시스템에서는 예를들어 1급에서는 장소명사 뒤에는 무조건 '에서'를 붙이고 가다 오다 있다 없다 많다 적다..는 예외다. 이런 식으로만 하거든요. 어차피 나중에 더 할 것...ㅋㅋ 미국 대학에서의 교육은 조금 다르다 들었는데 어떤가요? 선생님의 날카로운 지적덕분에 제가 느낀 것이 많습니다!! 유튜브는 특성상 학생들을 제가 처음부터 주욱 가르칠 것이 아니고...어느정도 단순화하고 어느 범주까지 가르쳐야할지에 대해 좀 더 많이 고민해야 할 것 같아요. 정말 다시 한 번 더 감사드려요!!!! 여담이지만..역시..미국에서 공부하시고 교편을 잡으신 분이라 영어 내공이...한국에서만 살아온 저로서는 그것도 정말 부럽습니다 헤헤.
I have a question. Why can we use both 에 and 으로 with 날씨가 좋으면 우리 공원_ _ 가요? Like with the other sentence, the meaning would still be a bit different right?
omg beth. i read this reply just now. yup. there is subtle different nuance between those two. when you say 공원에 가요 you are saying 공원 as the targeted goal, but if you say 공원으로 가요, this 공원 has weaker meaning, your direction is to 공원, and a lil' bit softer.
@@WBKTYUJIN Ahhh so saying 공원으로 is like saying "I am going in the direction of the park" but not that the park is your destination. 에 marks the park as the targeted destination.....right? I'm hoping that I'm finally understanding this well.
As I pointed out in my reply to the video, what -으로 marks is not direction per se, but a choice among potential candidates, whether the choice is about a location, direction, decision, food you are ordering, or a means of, say, transportation, instrument, an government office title in an election, etc. As Yujin replied, when you say 날씨 좋으면 우리 공원에 가요, 공원 is just one destination location you have in mind. If you say 날씨 좋으면 우리 공원으로 가요, you are pointing to 공원 as a destination location you choose among other candidate, like 바닷가 and 산. Marking direction is just one example of the usage of -으로; a direction is always one of many possible choices. Same explanation for why -으로 is used for a means of transportation: 나는 학교에 차/버스/자전거로 가요, and also why -으로 is used for an instrument of an action: 나는 편지를 연필/볼펜으로 써요, for a food item you choose in a restaurant or a cafe: 저는 오렌지 주스로 할게요/주세요, and a decision you made: 저는 이번에 일본에 가기로 했어요.
It is misleading to say particles can be omitted optionally in conversation. There are cases you have to omit a particle and there are cases where you have to use a particle. It's not like you can omit because you want to. Let's say you go to a store and want a T-card. In that case, you cannot say T-카드를 주세요 or T-카드 하나를 주세요. Instead, you have to say T-카드 하나 주세요, without any particle. On the other hand, if you want to ask what brand of beer sells well, you have to say 요즘 무슨 맥주가 잘 팔려요? with the particle. You cannot say 요즘 무슨 맥주 잘 팔려요. Putting a particle or leaving it out is not an option even in conversation.
카드 하나를 주세요 is not wrong. You're judging too early what's misleading or not. "가르치는 학생의 수준에 따라 한 가지 기능에 촛점을 두어 가르치는 것과 일반적인 대상에게 한국어에 대한 지식을 알려 주는 것과는 다르겠죠." just as you said.
@@seongyeonssem You missed my point. I am not saying 카드 하나를 주세요 is wrong. What I am saying is saying particles can be omitted optionally is wrong, because it is NOT optional. It all depends on context. What I am saying is there are contexts where you say '카드 하나 주세요' and there are contexts where you say '카드 하나를 주세요.' Learners need to know in what context a particle can be omitted and in what context it shouldn't, regardless of who you are teaching in what level.
@@yihyosang you can omit it when there's no particular emphasis on the word used as object. Then she can say 'particles can be omitted optionally in conversation'. You say 'particles can be omitted depending on context. And, going back to '카드 하나를 주세요', you wrote "Let's say you go to a store and want a T-card. In that case, you cannot say T-카드를 주세요 or T-카드 하나를 주세요. ", yes, you can. Omitting is not manatory.
![how to read 맛있다? [마딛따] vs [마싣따] [Real Korean class]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/CbLRi9qFAyA/mqdefault.jpg)
![how to read 맛있다? [마딛따] vs [마싣따] [Real Korean class]](/img/tr.png)
![에 vs 에서 [Real Korean class]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/DyvQKZc87uE/mqdefault.jpg)
![Diggy Graves - Red Vineyard [Official Lyric Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/8Ro085T0mnQ/mqdefault.jpg)
![Summer Walker - Heart Of A Woman [Official Lyric Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/SFddctbZzw8/mqdefault.jpg)
thank you so much for this clear explanation...
hehe thanks for kind word 😍😍
감사합니다. 좋습니다.
영상을 봐 주셔서 감사합니다. 히히!!>_
Great video! 감사해요
thanks! hope you find it helpful ♡ ♡
Nice to see you again~ 감사해요 쌤!
영상을 봐 주셔서 저도 고마워요 ♡ ♡
-으로 is not just marking direction. Say, someone is looking for a classroom for a test or meeting, and ask you where she should go. To give the room number, you have to say 204호로 가세요, not 204호에 가세요. Room 204 in this case is not a direct the person should go toward, it is the correct destination the person should go to. Another example, if you want to ask where a newly-wedded couple go for a honeymoon, you will say 신혼여행 어디(로) 가세요?, not 신혼여행 어디에 가세요? In response, you will say 괌으로 가요, not 괌에 가요. --You have to use the particle; leaving out a particle here is not appropriate, even in casual speaking. In this case, too, 괌 is the destination of your honeymoon, not a direction in the sense of 'going toward.' The reason why you have to use -으로, not -에, for a destination location here is because the location is a choice made out of usually available possible candidates, say 제주도, 하와이, 경주, 사이판, etc.
oh, yes! you've got the point. i just concerntrated on directing point, or what to say, pointing spot. so what i tried to say was the different things they can imply. (으)로 also implies the selection,choice as you said. 저는 커피로 주세요. you chose 커피 from the options like 차, 코코아, 쉐이크. its hard to decided until what boundaries or levels you teach to the learners of languages. if its not rude, may i ask you whether you are majored in korean linguistics or korean education? unlike pure linguistics, in korean education as a foreignlanguage field, esp. real practical field, we always face the issue of making the boundaries of teaching. depending on the level of learners we should skip certain errors or sometimes just simplify the things. and am just begginer, have taught in 어학당 for only 2 years and so really 부족합니다. not only because of poor experience but also as an academically for am a bad student. thanks to your pointing out, i've just realized i also need to think of the difference between youtube and language center. because in 어학당, we have certain steps so we can just simplify things and dont menttion about all the meaning and rules because we know we can give them more info on further level, but youtube..its not like this. so i shouldnt simplify like this. thanks again really. tell you the truth i didnt think about it at all.
and yup, i was going to make a video on omitting the particles but now i should think a lot about to which i should teach. 외국어 교육의 특성상 완벽한 국어학적 지식 전달이 어렵다고만 생각해왔고 적당히 생략하고 단순화하기만 했습니다. 선생님의 지적에 저렇게 안이하게만 생각해온 제 자신을 반성하게되었습니다. 으앙. 너무 길어졌지요. 사실 제가 느낀 것은 더 많은데... 다시 한번 감사드립니다.
@@WBKTYUJIN 안녕하세요? 가르치는 학생의 수준에 따라 한 가지 기능에 촛점을 두어 가르치는 것과 일반적인 대상에게 한국어에 대한 지식을 알려 주는 것과는 다르겠죠. 또 국어학자들조차도 한국어 문법, 특히 한국어의 사용에 대해서는 아직 연구가 미진한 부분이 많습니다. 저는 UCLA에서 유형론, 화용론, 대화분석을 공부했고, 지금은 인디애나 대학에서 한국어를 가르치고 있습니다.
@@yihyosang 와! 그러시군요. 저는 아직 박사과정생이고..어학당에서 2년정도 일한 것이 전부예요. 어학당 시스템에서는 예를들어 1급에서는 장소명사 뒤에는 무조건 '에서'를 붙이고 가다 오다 있다 없다 많다 적다..는 예외다. 이런 식으로만 하거든요. 어차피 나중에 더 할 것...ㅋㅋ 미국 대학에서의 교육은 조금 다르다 들었는데 어떤가요? 선생님의 날카로운 지적덕분에 제가 느낀 것이 많습니다!! 유튜브는 특성상 학생들을 제가 처음부터 주욱 가르칠 것이 아니고...어느정도 단순화하고 어느 범주까지 가르쳐야할지에 대해 좀 더 많이 고민해야 할 것 같아요. 정말 다시 한 번 더 감사드려요!!!! 여담이지만..역시..미국에서 공부하시고 교편을 잡으신 분이라 영어 내공이...한국에서만 살아온 저로서는 그것도 정말 부럽습니다 헤헤.
Great video!! These are beginner concepts that are difficult to grasp, well explained! Thankyou!
am so happy that you find it helpful>_< 우리 같이 한국어를 열심히 공부합시다 :)
Thank You~♡ 🍒
11:34 Naver's Papago translates "저는 어제 비가 와서 서울에 늦게 도착했어요." as "I arrived in Seoul late yesterday because it rained."
감사합니다 유진 씨.
Frank M my poor english T_T thanks for watching ♡ ♡
@@WBKTYUJIN 유진 씨, your English is very good. Just offering help.
@@FrankM you are so sweet!! i wasnt get offensed!!!!! i was grateful but maybe its just koreanish to disgrade myself to show my gratitude.hehe
최고의 선생님👍👍👍
우왕 the best of the best!!! 고마워요!!ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ
I have a question. Why can we use both 에 and 으로 with 날씨가 좋으면 우리 공원_ _ 가요? Like with the other sentence, the meaning would still be a bit different right?
omg beth. i read this reply just now. yup. there is subtle different nuance between those two. when you say 공원에 가요 you are saying 공원 as the targeted goal, but if you say 공원으로 가요, this 공원 has weaker meaning, your direction is to 공원, and a lil' bit softer.
@@WBKTYUJIN Ahhh so saying 공원으로 is like saying "I am going in the direction of the park" but not that the park is your destination. 에 marks the park as the targeted destination.....right?
I'm hoping that I'm finally understanding this well.
@@bethrivera867 well core meaning is right. but we use that sentence as 공원 is the destination. but the firmness of meaning as destination is weaker!
@@WBKTYUJINHmm I think that I do understand it well enough now. Thank you~
As I pointed out in my reply to the video, what -으로 marks is not direction per se, but a choice among potential candidates, whether the choice is about a location, direction, decision, food you are ordering, or a means of, say, transportation, instrument, an government office title in an election, etc. As Yujin replied, when you say 날씨 좋으면 우리 공원에 가요, 공원 is just one destination location you have in mind. If you say 날씨 좋으면 우리 공원으로 가요, you are pointing to 공원 as a destination location you choose among other candidate, like 바닷가 and 산. Marking direction is just one example of the usage of -으로; a direction is always one of many possible choices. Same explanation for why -으로 is used for a means of transportation: 나는 학교에 차/버스/자전거로 가요, and also why -으로 is used for an instrument of an action: 나는 편지를 연필/볼펜으로 써요, for a food item you choose in a restaurant or a cafe: 저는 오렌지 주스로 할게요/주세요, and a decision you made: 저는 이번에 일본에 가기로 했어요.
thank you for the video!! great explanation!
Alina B. hehehe thanks ♡ lets study with me ♡ ♡
새해 복 많이 받으세요!!!!! i will come back soon :)
@@WBKTYUJIN i cant wait
It is misleading to say particles can be omitted optionally in conversation. There are cases you have to omit a particle and there are cases where you have to use a particle. It's not like you can omit because you want to. Let's say you go to a store and want a T-card. In that case, you cannot say T-카드를 주세요 or T-카드 하나를 주세요. Instead, you have to say T-카드 하나 주세요, without any particle. On the other hand, if you want to ask what brand of beer sells well, you have to say 요즘 무슨 맥주가 잘 팔려요? with the particle. You cannot say 요즘 무슨 맥주 잘 팔려요. Putting a particle or leaving it out is not an option even in conversation.
카드 하나를 주세요 is not wrong. You're judging too early what's misleading or not. "가르치는 학생의 수준에 따라 한 가지 기능에 촛점을 두어 가르치는 것과 일반적인 대상에게 한국어에 대한 지식을 알려 주는 것과는 다르겠죠." just as you said.
@@seongyeonssem You missed my point. I am not saying 카드 하나를 주세요 is wrong. What I am saying is saying particles can be omitted optionally is wrong, because it is NOT optional. It all depends on context. What I am saying is there are contexts where you say '카드 하나 주세요' and there are contexts where you say '카드 하나를 주세요.' Learners need to know in what context a particle can be omitted and in what context it shouldn't, regardless of who you are teaching in what level.
@@yihyosang you can omit it when there's no particular emphasis on the word used as object. Then she can say 'particles can be omitted optionally in conversation'. You say 'particles can be omitted depending on context. And, going back to '카드 하나를 주세요', you wrote "Let's say you go to a store and want a T-card. In that case, you cannot say T-카드를 주세요 or T-카드 하나를 주세요. ", yes, you can. Omitting is not manatory.
@@seongyeonssem 헐!