# 쓴 / 썼던



## idialegre

Hi everybody!

I am just learning Korean past participle endings, and I wonder if anybody could explain to me the difference between, for example, 쓴  and 썼던, as in the following sentences:

어제 쓴 편지를 부쳤어요. 

어제 썼던 편지를 부쳤어요.

My textbook is very vague on the subject.

All comments are appreciated. Thank you!


----------



## Askalon

The way my teacher explained it (I think, my memory isn't the clearest) is that it's essentially the same meaning, but using verb + 었 + 던 instead of verb + ㄴ/은 (i.e. normal past tense ending for verbs) is that the 던 form gives the sense of the action being a bit more distant in the past.

Maybe it could be translated as "I sent the letter I wrote yesterday" vs. "I sent the letter I had written yesterday"?  I'm not sure.  If the difference isn't that great then maybe it's not translatable.

Normally 던 is used in the meaning of "used to", although your textbook likely mentions that.  But if it's verb + 었 + 던 it can be used for a one-time past event.


----------



## idialegre

Thank you for your answer, Askalon. 

So can 내가 불렀던 노래  mean both "A song I used to sing" and "A song I sang"?

And how about  내가 부른 노래  and 내가 부르던 노래 ?

I have asked some native speakers, but nobody has given me a very cogent explanation of the differences. I'm thankful for any help!


----------



## Askalon

내가 불렀던 노래 - A song I used to sing *or* A song I sang/A song I had sung
내가 부른 노래 - A song I sang
내가 부르던 노래 - A song I used to sing

I think.  Hopefully a native speaker can confirm/correct.


----------



## kenjoluma

verb stem + 던 = somewhat adjective.

던 makes verb 'past imperfect', which means the action was incomplete (or continuous) in the past.

Askalon is right, but I can offer some other aspect in this.

부르던 = (past imperfect) I was singing, I used to sing
불렀던 = (past of the past) I had sung, I had used(?) to sing
부른 = (simple past) I sang


----------



## wildsunflower

I agree with "Normally 던 is used in the meaning of "used to", although your textbook likely mentions that. But if it's verb + 었 + 던 it can be used for a one-time past event."

"불렀던" - 1.I sang or 2.I used to sing (but, the usage 1 is more common.)
"부르던" - I used to sing
"불렀었던" - I had sung


----------



## idialegre

Thanks, everybody. So are the following sentences correct?

그 남자는 내가 전에 부르던 노래를 불렀다.  (That man sang a song that I used to sing.)

나는 그에게 내가 썼었던 책을 줬다. (I gave him a book I had written.)

그녀는 일년 전에 돌아가신 아보지와 닮았다. (She looks like her father, who died a year ago.)

I'm really unsure about the last sentence. I appreciate all corrections!


----------



## kenjoluma

> 그 남자는 내가 전에 부르던 노래를 불렀다. (That man sang a song that I used to sing.)
> Perfect!
> 
> 나는 그에게 내가 썼었던 책을 줬다. (I gave him a book I had written.)
> It's grammatically flawless. However, 나는 그에게 내가 쓴 책을 줬다 seems more correct. 쓰던 itself can be 'past'. If you want to stress it was 'past', then you can say 썼던. 썼었던 is somewhat strange, though. This 'past of the past' is only used when something is too old that you don't have it any more. (eg. You only have a slight memory of it...) But in this case you have a book to give someone. Thus you can't use 'past of the past'.
> 
> And one more thing: If you put -던, this act was incomplete(or continuous) in the past, somewhat equivalent to 'was doing' in English. And you didn't give him a book which you didn't complete, did you?
> 
> 그녀는 일년 전에 돌아가신 아버지와 닮았다. (She looks like her father, who died a year ago.)
> Correct.


----------



## idialegre

Kenjoluma, thank you very much. 

Could you perhaps give me one or two sentences using the "past past" participle?


----------



## kenjoluma

철수는 서울에 갔잖아! (=he's probably in Seoul now. This 'past' still affects the 'present')

철수는 서울에 갔었잖아! (=he's probably NOT in Seoul now. This 'past past' does not affect the present)


소설가시군요. 무슨 소설을 쓰셨습니까? (="You're a novelist, what kind of novels have you written?" = past. But probably we can see some novels he has written. This past affects the 'present' where we can see his novels)

무슨 편지를 쓰셨었나요? 난 받은 적이 없어요. (="You wrote a letter (for me)? I haven't received any of them" = past past. 


Let me rephrase. All the 'past past' in Korean stress the separation between past and present. Korean 'past' usually affects the 'present'. But if you want to stress the empty timeline between past and present, you use 'past past'.


----------



## wildsunflower

I feel "무슨 편지를 쓰셨나요? 난 받은 적이 없어요." sounds more natural than "무슨 편지를 쓰셨었나요? 난 받은 적이 없어요." I think the use of the past past participle is not so evident in Korean. Usually the past participle replaces the past past participle. The past past condition is understood in the context. Only when the past past participle needs to be clear, as in "철수는 서울에 갔었잖아!", you may emphasize it. 

I believe that is why "나는 그에게 내가 썼었던 책을 줬다." sounds strange, even though writing that book happened prior to giving it to him. The past past situation is obvious without the past past particle. Also, perhaps "I" still write. But if you use "쓰다" for the meaning of "use", you may say  "나는 그에게 내가 썼었던 자동차를 줬다." It implies that I gave him the car that I had driven but didn't drive any more.

"그녀는 일년 전에 돌아가신 아버지와 닮았다." - You can also say "그녀는 일년 전에 돌아가신 아버지를 닮았다."


----------



## idialegre

Wow, every answer opens up new questions in my mind! But for the moment, I think I understand pretty well. 정말 감사합니다!


----------

