1. The WordReference Forums are under attack from some Korean spammers.

    We have created a filter that requires moderation intervention for all messages with Korean characters from new users. The impact should be minimal, but posts from new users will only appear after a few minutes delay.
    Dismiss Notice

김치와 국 위주라

Discussion in '한국어 (Korean)' started by wonlon, Aug 23, 2012.

  1. wonlon Senior Member

    Hong Kong
    Chinese - Cantonese
    아무튼 한식은 무침과 부침, 그리고 김치와 국 위주 담백하고 깔끔하지만 좀 단조로와서 중국인들의 적성에는 잘 맞지않아요.

    1. What does 라 mean in 위주 above?

    2. Is there anything wrong in 단조로와서? I doubt if it should be 조로워서.
  2. vientito Senior Member

    I would chance a guess on this. As far as I know there are two interpretations of 라. Both interpretations assume the verb stem 이다.

    (1) that 라 may be short for 이라서 the structure of 이어 before 서, 도, 야 & 고 will change it into 이라. you have to force memorize this one. So normally it will not be 이어서 but 이라서 not 이어야 but 이라야. So if my guess is correct along this line, then it would seem to mean "Since it is kimchi and soup,.. blah blah"
    (2) Yet another function of 라 would be indirect quoting as in 이라고. That could be roughly equivalent to "said", "so-called"

    As to which one it is used here I'm not sure at all. Perhaps others could help.

    Your second part seems quite normal to me. Keep in mind that 오다 has many meanings. 로 also embeds a sense of the manner how things interact with the rest of your sentence so here it would seem to play the role of an adverb. The only thing I am not sure is whether there should be a "space" between 로 and 와서
  3. ddungbo Member

    Hi guys.

    1. 라 means a reason there. Vientito, I dont know where you heard that rule, but it seems to me the rule is not that sound. For example, I think ~위주 여서(이어서) sounds perfectly good in the original sentence.

    2. Well, I can't say which one is correct. I think I use both, and one of them seems likely to be incorrect one, as this sort of thing usually is, but I just don't know. 워서 looks like the good one to me if I must choose one.
  4. wonlon Senior Member

    Hong Kong
    Chinese - Cantonese
    I think 단조로와서 is from 단조롭다. But I am not sure the ㅂ-irrregular has a variant of 와서 rather than the usual form 워서.
  5. 조금만 Senior Member

    English - England
    Time to get on my hobby horse again, I'm afraid.

    On the issue of the copula and 서, 도, 야 & 고, and, specifically, whether these particles will invariably change the form of the copula into 이라...

    I have indeed seen this stated as a rule in pedagogical grammar texts. I can't cite title and page for any of them, because when I see a Korean grammar book with such "rules" prominently laid down, I put it back on the bookstore shelf, or send it for paper recycling if it's one I bought sight unseen from an Internet second hand dealer.

    The reason why, as vientito rightly says, "you have to force memorize this one", if you indeed believe that it is a rule, is that the more Korean you read and hear, the more examples you will accumulate of that "rule" being "broken" by Korean writers and readers. Hence you have to force yourself to rely on the memorized rule to suppress your accumulating subconscious recollections of actual language use. Many teachers of Korean do that routinely as a consequence of their déformation professionnelle, and not just on this matter. Whether one thinks that's a good thing or not depends on one's philosophy of language learning.

    Here are Yoon and Brown (2010) on the matter.

    On ~(아/어)서 they say in 6.1.1 "Note that the form of the copula after ~(아/어)서 has two variants: ~이라서 is more common and is considered standard, but you may also encounter ~이어서" (p.260)
    On ~(아/어)도 they say in 6.2.5 "The copula may appear in two forms when combined with ~(아/어)도. 이어도, or, more commonly in colloquial speech, 이라도. The latter is considered to be standard Korean (p.276)

    They have similar comments on the other connectives concerned which it would be pointless to cite in full

    That, in my view, how grammar texts should be written and grammar taught. Descriptions of what is actually found "in the wild", combined with indications of which possible phenomena are found in what actual contexts, plus information about what is regarded as correct, or preferable, by whom and when, rather than diktats about what "is" correct, always and everywhere.
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2012

Share This Page