# 지를 않다; 지가 않다; 지를 못하다



## vientito

In response to another thread discussion, I'll seek for opinions from the natives whether these forms do exist and if so
what significance is the intervening 를 and 가 there, as compared to a simple 지 않다 /지 못하다?

Here are couple examples I've found from googling:

http://www.sanzeok.com/sogul.htm
title for Autumn 秋: 감이 익어 떨어져도 아무도 줍지를 않슴다. 울 각시랑 둘이서 욕심껏 따다 깍아 곶감 맹글었슴다.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------^

http://www.i-bait.com/m/zine_view.php?start=0&no=217&no2=11
last sentence:  ‘커피 한 잔을 시켜 놓고/ 그 대 올 때 를 기다 려 봐도/ 웬일인지 오 지를 않 네/ 내 속을 태 우는 구 려 … …’
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------^

http://www.82cook.com/entiz/read.php?num=1301443
title:  제 목 : 외국갔을때, 놀란게 아이들이 보채지를 않더라구요
------------------------------------------------------------------------^

http://twitpic.com/6m1sgv
picture comment:  뭐하는거지? 하나도 아름답지가 않잖아! 
------------------------------------------------------------------------^

http://mlbpark.donga.com/mbs/articleV.php?mbsC=mlbtown&mbsIdx=25976
title:  클루버는 써먹지를 못하겠네요 오늘도 배팅기계모드
--------------------------------^


----------



## bonbon2023

'를, 가' in your sentences are 보조사. If you take them away, the sentences become less emphatic.  
(http://krdic.naver.com/detail.nhn?docid=2500)


----------



## vientito

thanks for the reply... I guess it will take me a long time to acquire a real feel on this sort of usage in a sentence but at least now I know the difference.


----------



## rumistar

I beg to differ in the second example.

커피 한 잔을 시켜 놓고 그대 올 때를 기다려 봐도 웬일인지 오지를 않네 내 속을 태우는 구려 … …’

The blue are 목적격 조사 and just only one, the red is 보조사 in the example.
Because 시키다, 기다리다 and 태우다 need object in the sentence, in general.
And 커피 한 잔, 그대 올 때, and 내 속 are each object of them.

감이 익어 떨어져도 아무도 줍지를 않슴다(않습니다). 울(우리) 각시랑 둘이서 욕심껏 따다 깍아(깎아) 곶감 맹글었슴다(만들었습니다).
By the way, you know, this sentence is written in broken Korean.
All the Koreans will understand what this sentence means but please just be careful.


----------



## Rance

I believe rumistar is wrong to categorize -을 -를 to both 격조사 and 보조사.

There are three main groups: 격조사, 접속조사, and 보조사

격조사 merely defines the role of the word in a sentence as in subject, object, verb, etc and they lack any special meaning. 
You would not find a matching English word as they are unique in Korean and they lack any sort of meaning.
Maybe except for pronouns. For example, him in Korean would require a 그(he)+격조사
격조사 can be further diversifed in smaller groups depending on which element(subject, object, etc) of sentence they supports.
As far as I know, -을 -를 is always 격조사(or 목적격 조사 to be more specific). 

As 격조사 lack any meaning, you can still make somewhat comprehensible sentence without using 격조사. 
In English, it would be similar to swapping the order in a sentence. 
In Korean, it's not the order that defines subject or object but 격조사.
So they pretty much serve as anchor in a sentence. But if 격조사 is missing, then the order then matters.
나는 너를 좋아해. 너를 나는 좋아해 (Both sentence means I like you)
나 너 좋아해. ( I like you)
너 나 좋아해. ( you like me)

접속조사 is conjunction. Most commonly used 졉속조사 are 와/과 which comparable to "and" in English. You cannot omit 접속조사 as it will alter the meaning of sentence.

보조사 is different from 격조사 because they add meaning to the sentence. You can NEVER omit 보조사 as it changes meaning completely.
For example:
나는 음식이 좋다. ( I like food)
Here -이 is 격조사 and cannot be translated into English.

나는 음식이라면 좋다. I like (something) as long as it's food.
이라면 is 보조사 because they add special meaning.

Likewise, in the example give by rumistar, 
웬일인지 오지를 않네  can also be written as 웬일인지 오지 않네
It may sound choppy, but it does not alter meaning.
Hence it cannot be 보조사.


----------



## rumistar

Rance said:


> I believe rumistar is wrong to categorize -을 -를 to both 격조사 and 보조사.
> As far as I know, -을 -를 is always 격조사(or 목적격 조사 to be more specific).



저는 현재 국어 문법을 공부하고 있습니다.
보통 "을"과 "를"을 목적격 조사로만 알고 계시는데 보조사에도 "을/를" 있습니다.


----------



## Rance

아 상세한 정보 감사합니다. ^^
그럼 이 경우에는 보조사로써 어떤 뜻을 지니고 있나요?


----------



## rumistar

Rance said:


> 아 상세한 정보 감사합니다. ^^
> 그럼 이 경우에는 보조사로써 어떤 뜻을 지니고 있나요?



제가 가진 유인물 내용을 옮겨 적어드립니다.
*- 을/를 (보조사)*
((부사 뒤에 붙거나, 조사 '에, 으로', 연결 어미 '-아, -게, -지, -고' 뒤에 붙어)) 강조하는 뜻을 나타냄

(예) 
너는 어쩌자고 혼자 시장에를 갔니? 
아무리 해도 흥분이 가라앉지를 않았다.

혹은 구어적인 표현으로 받침 ㄹ 형태로 줄여서도 씁니다.
(예) 너는 또 어쩌자고 그곳엘 갔니?


----------



## Rance

막상 설명해주시니 딱하고 감이 오네요. 감사합니다.

I stand corrected. Rumistar was right with his/her (sorry I don't know the gender..) explanation.
To shorten rumi's explanation in english, when -을/를 comes after another 격조사 it can emphasizes the meaning and is considered 보조사.


----------



## bonbon2023

rumistar gives excellent clarification on the difference between 격조사 and 보조사. When I thought how long the explanation will be if I do this at first I saw it, I couldn't even think of writing the detail.  

WARNING!:Even I thought this is so boring while writing. It can be also a freaking boring thing for you.The words in red are 보조사. The words in blue are 격조사. I specified the original form of contractions(shortened words), and corrected 띄어쓰기 and some words to analyze sentences.
"감이 익어 떨어져도(떨어지어도) 아무도 줍지를 않습니다. 울(우리) 각시랑 둘이서 욕심껏 따다 깎아 곶감 맹글었습니다."
(맹글었습니다 is the dialect variation of 만들었습니다.)
"커피 한 잔을 시켜 놓고, 그대 올 때를 기다려 봐도, 웬일인지 오지를 않네. 내 속을 태우는구려."
"클루버는 써먹지를 못하겠네요."
"뭐하는 거지(것이지)? 하나도 아름답지가 않잖아!"
"외국 갔을 때 놀란 게(것이) 아이들이 보채지를 않더라고요."
"감이 익어 떨어져도 아무도 줍지를 않습니다."


----------



## bonbon2023

There are 9 parts of speech in Korean;명사(noun), 대명사(pronoun), and 수사, 관형사, 형용사(adjective), and부사(adverb), 동사(verb), 감탄사(interjection), and 조사. Notice that 수사, 관형사, and 조사 are not explained by eight parts of speech in English(noun, pronoun, verb, adjective, adverb ,preposition, conjunction, interjection). 

"감이 익어 떨어져도 아무도 줍지를 않습니다." is analysed to the following by 9품사체계(nine parts of speech in Korean), which is related to morphology:


감(noun)이(조사,josa) 익어(verb) 떨어져(verb)도(조사,josa) 아무(pronoun)도(조사, josa) 줍지(verb)를(josa) 않습니다(verb). This is the first step before any closer look.

In the josa part, 조사 is subdivided into 격조사, 접속조사(conjunctive josa), 보조사(bojosa). The case(격) in Korean means relation between 체언(noun, pronoun, 수사) or phrase functioning as 체언 and the other words. 조사 has 격조사, 접속조사, and 보조사 as its subcategory. 

격조사 attaches to 체언 or phrase functioning as 체언 and signifies the function of the word, comparing to other words in a clause or sentence. 격조사 is subdivided to 주격조사, 목적격조사, 서술격조사, 부사격조사, 보격조사, 관형격조사, 호격조사.  
격조사 signifies the subject(주어), the object(목적어), and 서술어, 부사어, 보어, and 관형어, 독립어, and 격조사 can be omitted by context and in spoken Korean.

접속조사 attaches to 체언 and joins two or more than two 체언. 

보조사 is divided into 통용보조사 and 종결보조사. 

Your sentences have 통용보조사 also used as 격조사. 통용보조사 adds a little nuance by directly coming after 체언, 부사격조사, or an adverb or ending of a phrase(This is functioning as 체언, but is not called 체언). What makes 통용보조사 different from 격조사 is the little but *special meaning* or *emphasis*. To explain further, if the word class used as 통용보조사 in a sentence can be also used as 주격조사 or 목적격조사 in other sentences, 통용보조사 adds *emphasis* in the sentence, e.g.*이/가, 을/를*.
"감이 익어 떨어져도 아무도 줍지를 않습니다." 
통용보조사 '도'in the above sentence gives special nuance suggesting the meaning of 'also'.
통용보조사 '를' adds *emphasis*, and 를 in this context is often accentuated(를!), but 를! suggests no additional meaning because 를 can function as 목적격조사 in other sentences, e.g. '대성이는 감을 주웠다.' There is no emphasis or additional special meaning in 을. 을 signifies 목적어 감을.

The above way was analyzing a sentence by 품사.


----------



## bonbon2023

This is by 문장성분, which is related to syntax. There are seven 문장성분 in Korean;주어(the subject), 서술어, and 목적어(the object), 부사어, 보어, and 관형어, 독립어.
The predicate in English is one of the two main parts of a sentence or clause, modifying the subject and including the verb, objects, or phrases governed by the verb, but the predicate in Korean doesn't include object, and sometimes phrases governed by the verb is not the predicate if the phrases are 부사어, 보어, or 관형어.
Generally, a sentence takes one form among 무엇이 어찌한다(Something/A thing does something.), 무엇이 어떠하다, 무엇이 무엇이다(Something/A thing is a something.) 
The subject in Korean a word or phrase can be 무엇이(or 누가 someone or a person).The predicate(서술어) in Korean is a word or phrase can be 어떠하다, 어찌하다, 무엇이다.감이익어 떨어져도(the predicate)/아무도줍지를않습니다(the predicate).

"감이 익어 떨어져도 아무도 줍지를 않습니다."
"감이 익어 떨어져도/ 아무도 줍지를 않습니다."
The first clause '감이 익어 떨어져도' can be 무엇이 무엇하다(감이 익어 떨어지다). 감이(the subject) 익어 떨어지다(the predicate)
The second clause 아무도 줍지를 않습니다 can be 누가 무엇하다. 아무도(the subject) 줍지를 않습니다(the predicate).감이(the subject) 익어 떨어져도(the predicate)/아무도(the subject)줍지를않습니다(the predicate).


----------



## vientito

First I need to thank all of you for such detailed information.  The examples I quotes are pulled from online articles directly without modifications.  

Now that we know a bit about this little creature called 보조사 that gives emphasis, I need to take up another element that I notice from my grammar text.  It talks about a particular usage of (은, 는), one of which is distinctly about adding focus to the subject in question.  Is this also a member of this 보조사 as well, if functioning in this manner?

Also, one other question is all these 보조사:  they all add emphasis but individually (를, 가) do they assume the same role?  In other words, could i substitute one with the other without altering the meaning of the sentence?  In the examples I have provided above there was one that uses 가 after 지 in this case could I just replace it with 를 to achieve the same effect of accentuating my negation?


----------



## bonbon2023

vientito said:


> First I need to thank all of you for such detailed information. The examples I quotes are pulled from online articles directly without modifications.
> 
> Now that we know a bit about this little creature called 보조사 that gives emphasis, I need to take up another element that I notice from my grammar text. It talks about a particular usage of (은, 는), one of which is distinctly about adding focus to the subject in question. Is this also a member of this 보조사 as well, if functioning in this manner? Yes, technically 은/는 is 통용보조사, which belongs to category of 보조사.
> 
> Also, one other question is all these 보조사: they all add emphasis but individually (를, 가) do they assume the same role?
> Not exactly, see this list of 통용보조사 adding a little and special meaning; and 통용보조사 placing emphasis on sentences.
> A little and special meaning: 은/는, 도, 만, 부터, 까지, 조차, 마다, (이)나, (이)든지, (이)라도, 마저, (이)나마, etc.
> Emphasis: 이/가, 을/를.
> 
> In other words, could i substitute one with the other without altering the meaning of the sentence? No.
> 
> In the examples I have provided above there was one that uses 가 after 지 in this case could I just replace it with 를 to achieve the same effect of accentuating my negation?



It's difficult to pinpoint the reason, but I'll try. 
The morphemes of the left sentence is analysed to:하나/도    아름답-/-지/가    않(아니하-)/-잖(-지않)/-아 
The basic form of 않잖아 is 않다, and 않다 in this case is the supplementary adjective or the second adjective (보조용언(supplementary adjective or verb) or 보조형용사(supplementary adjective)) because there is main adjective or the first adjective(본용언) 아름답다.

"하나도 아름답지가 않다."(o)
"아름답지가 않다."(o)

It doesn't make sense if 본용언 아름답지가 is omitted. "않잖아!" (x).
However, it still makes sense if supplementary adjective 않다 is omitted. "아름답다"(o)
The supplementary adjective or verb(보조용언) has similar characteristic like bound noun(의존명사). The supplementary verb or adjective and the bound noun are semi-independent words in terms of lack or thinness of self-reliance and grammatical quality overwhelming lexical quality. This relates to incompleteness of declension(곡용), which refers to 조사 attaches to 체언 or phrase functioning as 체언.
Most of 체언 don't have gap in declension table, but the bound noun and a few independent noun have some constraints combining with 조사.
You can't replace 보조사 '가' with other 보조사 '를' in your sentence:
하나도 아름답지가 않잖아!"(o) "하나도 아름답지를 않잖아."(x) 

cf. "그를 만난 지도/가/는 꽤 오래되었다."(o)  "그를 만난 지를 꽤 오래되었다."(x)
There are 보조사 '도/가/는' and '를' in two, yet the left sentence is wrong. As you know, '가' can be used as 주격조사.
'지' is bound noun has the quality of subject, so '를' can't replace '가'. 보조사 '는' often comes to the place where 주격조사 가 usually comes. 는 is very tricky '보조사' in terms of its quality used as hiding 격조사 and other usage. Unlike '는', '도' gives purely a little special meaning. 
It's individual characteristic which supplementary verb or adjective; or bound noun goes with which 조사.


----------



## vientito

That's indeed quite hard to understand.  

 웬일인지 오 지를 않 네  --> so we are saying  (오 지) should be treated as sort of like an object?   Is it because we look at ( 웬일인지) as the subject of the sentence?  I mean to ask how we view 않다 in general as a verb?  Some verbs like 이다 do not have object at all.


----------



## bonbon2023

vientito said:


> That's indeed quite hard to understand.
> 
> 웬일인지 오 지를 않 네 --> so we are saying (오 지) should be treated as sort of like an object? Is it because we look at ( 웬일인지) as the subject of the sentence? I mean to ask how we view 않다 in general as a verb? Some verbs like 이다 do not have object at all.


It's appropriate to regard '를' in 오지를 as 보조사. 
웬일인지 is not the subject of the sentence.  The sentence is 이어진문장. Now I'm going to show you how I analyze the following sentence by 문장성분(주어(the subject), 서술어(the predicate), 목적어(the object), 관형어(it refers to word or phrase modifying 체언), 부사어(it refers to adverbial word or phrase), 보어(the complement), 독립어(some words like 우와, 수지야, 대성아, 야!, etc)):
"커피 한 잔을 시켜 놓고, 그대 올 때를 기다려 봐도 웬일인지 오지를 않네. 내 속을 태우는구려."
>"(the hidden subject is presumably 내가)/ 커피 한 잔을(the object)/ 시켜 놓고(the predicate)/, 그대(the subject)/ 올 때를(the object)/ 기다려 봐도(the predicate)/ 웬일인지(adverbial word, 부사어)/ (the hidden subject 그대)/ 오지를 않네(the predicate).// (the hidden subject 그대)/ 내 속을(the object)/ 태우는구려(the predicate)."// 

The subject 그대 was omitted between 웬일인지 ans 오지를, and before 내 속을 in the next sentence because there is 그대 at the first of sentence. 웬일인지 modifies or qualifies the clause, 오지를 않네, including the hidden subject
않다 is used as verb, supplementary verb, or supplementary adjective. 
And unlike supplementary adjective 않잖아(basic form 않다) as in 하나도 아름답지가 않잖아!", 않네(basic form 않다) as in 오지를 않네 is supplementary verb. It becomes more obvious if '를' is left out '오지(main verb) 않네(supplementary verb)'. 
이다 is 서술격조사(it belongs to category of 격조사), not verb, e.g. 이것은 꽃(이)다, 그 사람이 범인이다, 수지는 이것을 꽃이라 부른다.
The third sentence shows 서술격조사(the predicative marker(particle or josa) conjugates like verb and adjectives.


----------



## vientito

I guess the part where I do not really get  is  how do I determine a bound noun or for that matter, a supplementary verb/adjective to have a quality of a subject?  when to have a quality of an object?

커피 한 잔을 시켜 놓고, 그대 올 때를 기다려 봐도 웬일인지 오지를 않네. 내 속을 태우는구려.

You (as subject) don't show up.  오 is directly associated with you (the subject) so it follows naturally that we should use 가 --> 오지가 않네.  What's wrong with this logic?


----------



## Superhero1

Just understand the phrase 지를 않네/못하네 as a form 'not+verb .... at all' in English.

e.g. 그녀는 오지를 않네. She doesn't come at all. 
그녀는 오지 않네. She doesn't come

Owing to traffic jam, 

차가 가지를 않네. Cars do not move at all.
차가 가지 않네. Cars do not move.
차가 가지를 못하네. Cars cannot move at all.
차가 가지 못하네. Cars cannot move.

The subject is not 'you' in 그대~오지를 않네. Subject should be 'he' or 'she' and If you would like to use '-가' you need to put '-가' at the end of the subject noun, in this case, 그대가 오지를 않네.


----------



## vientito

by the way the example you quoted above

(1)  하나도 아름답지가 않잖아!"(o) "하나도 아름답지를 않잖아."(x)

(2) cf. "그를 만난 지도/가/는 꽤 오래되었다."(o) "그를 만난 지를 꽤 오래되었다."(x)

That 지 in (1) is a  연결 어미 and the 지 in (2) is a 의존명사.  I don't think they are the same even though they are written the same way.  Granted that what you are saying about the subject nature of 지 in (2), how can you say it is the same for that 지 in (1)?

I have looked up in naver for 가 
가:   (받침 없는 체언이나 부사어 뒤, 또는 연결 어미 ‘-지’나 ‘-고 싶다’ 구성에서 본동사의 목적어나 받침 없는 부사어 뒤에 붙어) 앞말을 지정하여 강조하는 뜻을 나타내는 보조사. 연결 어미 ‘-지’ 뒤에 오는 ‘가11’는 ‘를’이나 ‘ㄹ1’로 바뀔 수 있으며, 흔히 뒤에는 부정적인 표현이 온다.	

here's two examples 
(1) 방이 깨끗하지가 않다.
(2) 철수는 김치가 먹고 싶었다

this is the key of the definition 연결 어미 ‘-지’나 ‘-고 싶다’ 구성에서 본동사의 목적어 뒤에 붙어.  basically if I understand this correctly it is saying it's applied after the direct object of the main verb.  Hence in (2) the direct object of 먹고 싶다 will be 김치 so this becomes the object we put the emphasis on.  This example would be very confusing at first sight because usually we put 를 to signify an object but this is just a special case.  So with example (1) that will imply the phrase (방이 깨끗하지) functions as a direct object of 않다!!!???
Maybe I don't really have a solid basis in grammatical structure but to think of 방이 깨끗하지 as a direct object of 않다 is really beyond my grasp.

Just as comparison I also look up the entry for 를:
를: (조사 ‘에, 으로’, 연결 어미 ‘-아, -게, -지, -고’, 받침 없는 일부 부사 뒤에 붙어) 강조하는 뜻을 나타내는 보조사

ex. 아무리 해도 흥분이 가라앉지를 않았다

The key here => 연결 어미 ‘-아, -게, -지, -고’ 뒤에 붙어 
I guess here we won't think of (흥분이 가라앉지) as a direct object of  않았다?

The only difference I am seeing is the verb form in the phrase:  One is a adjectival verb the other is a normal action verb yet the interpretation of 않다 differs in both case.  Again this is not something that I have read and learned in all my previous research.

I must be testing your patience now but I think I come upon something maybe a bit too advanced for me.   

Looking again at the definition
연결 어미 ‘-지’ 뒤에 오는 ‘가11’는 ‘를’이나 ‘ㄹ1’로 바뀔 수 있으며, 흔히 뒤에는 부정적인 표현이 온다

If I understand this correctly it is saying that following 지, 가 could be changed into 를 or ㄹ?  This is not at all clear to me.  It may be somewhere I still got things mixed up

P.S. I apologize if this is dragging on more than a few posts.  One last try if it does not work I will take a break then go get an advanced grammar text to study some more.


----------



## bonbon2023

vientito said:


> I guess the part where I do not really get is how do I determine a bound noun or for that matter, a supplementary verb/adjective to have a quality of a subject? when to have a quality of an object?
> 
> 커피 한 잔을 시켜 놓고, 그대 올 때를 기다려 봐도 웬일인지 오지를 않네. 내 속을 태우는구려.
> 
> You (as subject) don't show up. 오 is directly associated with you (the subject) so it follows naturally that we should use 가 --> 오지가 않네. What's wrong with this logic?



Noun(명사) is divided to bound noun(or dependent noun(의존명사)) and free noun(or independent noun(자립명사)) by the possibility of whether they can stand alone or not. (There's another way to divide noun such as common noun(보통명사) and proper noun(고유명사))
Independent noun(자립명사) can stand alone in the light of meaning, e.g. 커피, 그대, 잔, 때, 속, etc.
Bound noun(의존명사) can't stand alone, e.g. 이, 분, 것, 지, etc. 
보조용언(supplementary verb or adjective) doesn't have a quality of subject. It's 본용언(main verb or adjective).
"그를 만난 지도/가/는 꽤 오래되었다."

커피 한 잔을 시켜 놓고, 그대 올 때를 기다려 봐도 웬일인지 _오지를_ 않네. 내 속을 태우는구려.
_
오지를=_main verb, 않네=supplementary verb

The characteristic of transitive verb, which belongs in verb, is that it takes object in the light of this, it's probable that 를 following 오지 having quality of object in the light of this way.
Another possible reason, when 오지를 않네 is compared with the basic structure in Korean(Subject Object Predicate), '(hidden subject), although 오지를 않네 is the predicate, this predicate can be again analysed.(Be wary, 오지를 is main verb having quality of a object.)  
You is not subject. 그대 is the subject. What makes 오지가 wrong is not logic but its grammatical quality.


----------



## bonbon2023

vientito said:


> by the way the example you quoted above
> 
> (1) 하나도 아름답지가 않잖아!"(o) "하나도 아름답지를 않잖아."(x)
> 
> (2) cf. "그를 만난 지도/가/는 꽤 오래되었다."(o) "그를 만난 지를 꽤 오래되었다."(x)
> 
> That 지 in (1) is a 연결 어미 and the 지 in (2) is a 의존명사. I don't think they are the same even though they are written the same way.  Granted that what you are saying about the subject nature of 지 in (2), how can you say it is the same for that 지 in (1)?
> I didn't say they are the same. Similar things are not the same things.
> 그를 만난 지가 꽤 오래되었다. (This structure is 안은 문장.)
> 오래되었다 is the adjective.
> 그를 만난 지가 is the subject, and 그를 만난 지가 is noun clause.
> 
> I have looked up in naver for 가
> 가: (받침 없는 체언이나 부사어 뒤, 또는 연결 어미 ‘-지’나 ‘-고 싶다’ 구성에서 본동사의 목적어나 받침 없는 부사어 뒤에 붙어) 앞말을 지정하여 강조하는 뜻을 나타내는 보조사. 연결 어미 ‘-지’ 뒤에 오는 ‘가11’는 ‘를’이나 ‘ㄹ1’로 바뀔 수 있으며, 흔히 뒤에는 부정적인 표현이 온다.
> 
> here's two examples
> (1) 방이(the subject) 깨끗하지가 않다(the predicate).
> (2) 철수는(the Subject) 김치가(The Object) 먹고 싶었다(the predicate)
> 먹고=main verb 싶었다=supplementary verb
> If we don't emphasize the sentence, it becomes 철수는 김치를 먹고 싶었다.
> 
> this is the key of the definition 연결 어미 ‘-지’나 ‘-고 싶다’ 구성에서 본동사의 목적어 뒤에 붙어(2). basically if I understand this correctly it is saying it's applied after the direct object of the main verb. Yes, you're correctly understanding this.
> Hence in (2) the direct object of 먹고 싶다 will be 김치 so this becomes the object we put the emphasis on. Yes. This example would be very confusing at first sight because usually we put 를 to signify an object but this is just a special case. So with example (1) that will imply the phrase (방이 깨끗하지) functions as a direct object of 않다!!!??? No. It's simple sentence(단문 or 홑문장) having one subject and one predicate.
> 
> Maybe I don't really have a solid basis in grammatical structure but to think of 방이 깨끗하지 as a direct object of 않다 is really beyond my grasp.
> The verb or adjective ending(so-called ending) divided to the prefinal ending(선어말어미) and the final ending(어말어미) by their position in sentences.
> The prefinal ending precedes(comes before) final ending.
> The final endings are subdivided to closing ending(종결어미) and 비종결어미(non-closing ending).
> 종결어미 refers to the ending close the sentence, the full stop(or period) '.' can be punctuated after 종결어미.
> 비종결어미 connects clauses or words, or makes clause functioning as other kind of clause.
> The former is conjunctive ending(연결어미). The latter is 전성어미.
> The conjunctive ending is divided into coordinate conjunctive ending(대등적 연결어미), subordinate conjunctive ending(종속적 연결어미), supplementary conjunctive ending(보조적 연결어미).
> The supplementary ending attaches to the stem of 본용언(main verb or adjective) to enable 보조용언(supplementary verb or adjective) following, i.e. '-지, -고' in your examples "방이 깨끗하지가 않다.", "철수는 김치가 먹고 싶었다.", "아무리 해도 흥분이 가라앉지를 않았다."
> http://krdic.naver.com/detail.nhn?docid=35508700
> http://krdic.naver.com/detail.nhn?docid=2509200
> 
> 
> 
> ex. 아무리 해도 흥분이 가라앉지를 않았다.
> 
> The key here => 연결 어미 ‘-아, -게, -지, -고’ 뒤에 붙어
> I guess here we won't think of (흥분이 가라앉지) as a direct object of 않았다?
> 아무리 해도(the predicate) 흥분이(the subject) 가라앉지를 않았다(the predicate).
> 아무리 해도(the subordinate clause or the dependent clause)/ 흥분이 가라앉지를 않았다(the main clause or the independent clause).
> '-여도' as in 해도(하-/-여도) is subordinate conjunctive ending. The subordinate clause having subordinate ending signifies cause, reason, or condition, etc to the main clause. The coordinate conjunctive ending and the subordinate conjunctive ending connects clauses, and the structure of sentence is called 이어진문장. In Korean, the omission of the subject, the object, or other 문장성분 is frequently occurred. The subject of the subordinate clause was omitted in the example.
> 
> The only difference I am seeing is the verb form in the phrase: One is a adjectival verb the other is a normal action verb yet the interpretation of 않다 differs in both case. Again this is not something that I have read and learned in all my previous research.
> 
> I must be testing your patience now but I think I come upon something maybe a bit too advanced for me.
> 
> Looking again at the definition
> 연결 어미 ‘-지’ 뒤에 오는 ‘가11’는 ‘를’이나 ‘ㄹ1’로 바뀔 수 있으며, 흔히 뒤에는 부정적인 표현이 온다.
> ('가11' that follows the conjunctive ending '-지' can be changed to '를' or 'ㄹ1', and usually negative expressions comes after this.)
> If I understand this correctly it is saying that following 지, 가 could be changed into 를 or ㄹ? This is not at all clear to me. It may be somewhere I still got things mixed up Yes, this includes "아무리 해도 흥분이 가라앉지를/가 않았다." But, this phenomenon is rare and notice that it is '가' can be changed to '를' or 'ㄹ1', not '가' is not always able to be changed to '를' or 'ㄹ1'.
> 
> 
> P.S. I apologize if this is dragging on more than a few posts. One last try if it does not work I will take a break then go get an advanced grammar text to study some more.
> I posted a few previous posts before. Luckily, however, I could post this on one post. It's okay. Seeing similar examples as many as possible would be helpful.


----------



## vientito

A big thank you for your detailed explanation.  Though I am not fully getting all of this at first glance, I will chew on this for a while.  The scope of categorization that goes on in korean grammer is truly amazing.  I will let this thread rest from now on.


----------



## youngbuts

I guess there could be three patterns related to '않다.

'1) A+지 않다.
2) A+지를 않다.
3) A+지가 않다.

If A is a verb, you should use '를', that is, you should follow pattern (2). Of course  the basic form pattern (1) also can be possible. For example

먹지(를) 않다./(잠)자지(를) 않다/ (학교에) 가지를 않다/ (공부)하지(를) 않다. : They are OK. However all of them below sound 100 percent worng to me. 

먹지가 않다./(잠)자지가 않다/ (학교에) 가지가 않다/ (공부)하지가 않다. 

However, if it is in literature, some sentences could be possible that contain intrasitive verbs, not transitive verbs. 
기차가 오지가 않았다. / 기차가 오지를 않았다.

Both of them are OK to me, if I see them in a poet. But, in daily life 기차가 오지가 않았다 is too poetic expression. I can not explain the difference between them. The objective information is the same, but there is a difference, which easily can not be verbalized in logical words.  

And if the verb contains passive meaing, you could use both pattern. For example
(음식이) 익혀지지가 않는다. / (음식이) 익혀지지를 않는다. : both OK
영어가 들리지가 않는다. / 영어가 들리지를 않는다.
이야기가 먹혀들지가 않는다./ 이야기가 먹혀들지를 않는다. : both OK
흥분이 가라앉지가 않는다./ 흥분이 가라앉지를 않는다. : both OK
아이가 잠들지가 않는다.(? could be possible only if in spoken.) / 아이가 잠들지가 않았다. (sound natural but literatural, as if usually seen in novels) / 아이가 잠들지를 않는다.(OK) : 잠들다 could be intepreted as passive or not, I'm not sure.   

In this case there is a different nuance, which I can not explain. 



If A is an adjective, you had better use pattern (1) and  alternatively could use pattern (3) that usually sounds more affirmative and emphatic than pattern 1. For example

(꽃이) 예쁘지(가) 않다. /  (이 상품은) 비싸지(가) 않다. / (음식이) 맛있지(가) 않다. /

However, I can not say the following sentence is totally wrong.

(이 꽃은) 예쁘지를 않다. / (이 상품은) 비싸지를 않다. / (이 음식이) 맛있지를 않다.

I might hear them in spoken situations. When I hear them, I suppose that the speaker tries to imply some critisism in their lines. So, I don't prefer those ones above in written Korean(except dialogues) unless I intend a kind of sarcasism. In formal situations, I would directly follow pattern (1). And actually, the follwing sentences are more sound natural and comforable to me than the above containing '-다.'

(꽃이) 예쁘지를 않네. / (이 상품은) 비싸지를 않네. / (음식이) 맛있지를 않네.

To me they don't contain much criticism and sarcasism. The speaker just express their thought as they feel. But it could depend on the speaker's character and situations. This expession is basically negation, especially negates a certain trait of something, which means this expression basically implies a certain of criticism according to situations. What is obvious to me is that '(꽃이) 예쁘지를않다' sounds more critical to me than '(꽃이) 예쁘지를않네.'

Anyway, to me '-를 or -ㄹ' sounds soft and comfortable basically. There is  basic words for human life such as love, human, sky, live , that is, 사랑, 사람, 살다, 하늘 in Korean. These words all contain the '-ㄹ' sound. That's because I guess Korean people feel confortable from '-ㄹ'. (I'm not sure about it completely. It could be just personal preference.) Probably that's one of the reasons why Korean people use '-를' in this situation. I guess the speaker want to hide their critisism by using it. Therefore it is better not to use them as non-native speakers until you totally understand it.  In fact I don't use them, and frankly I don't like people who use those exprssions. However it is just my preference.


----------



## bonbon2023

There is a mistake in my explanation#21, but I can't edit the post so the following is the edition:
not '가' is not always(x) 
But, this phenomenon is rare and notice that it is '가' can be changed to '를' or 'ㄹ1', not '가' is always able to be changed to '를' or 'ㄹ1'.(o)


----------

