# comparison structure



## vientito

we usually attach a 보다 or a 느니 as a suffix to something we want to compare against

My question is concerning the order of things in korean.  Usually sentence order in korean is:  Subject- Object- Verb.

Say we compare an action (A) against another (B).  We will attach 보다 to (A) then proceed to form the sentence.  My question is since we are comparing two things here, so essentially what are the subjects and the objects?  My understanding is that in certain cases, both actions could be a subject or both could be an object depending on the main verb employed.  Now this is the problem I am facing, in structuring a sentence if we are comparing two things that are the same (say, both are objects) what is the order of thing.  Should we place A ahead of B or B ahead of A?

for example.  A보다----B---verb or B---A보다----verb .


----------



## kenjoluma

I am not quite sure if I understood this question thoroughly. Can you specify a little bit more?
If I understood correctly, the word order doesn't really matter.


----------



## vientito

I am going to quote an example from a googled web headline:

AMD 8코어 CPU "인텔 4코어보다 못해"

translated as "AMD 8 core cpu is inferior than Intel 4 core"

Here the position is AMD8 first than Intel 4 second.  If word order is not important I suppose I could put it like this

 인텔 4코어보다 AMD 8코어 CPU 못해

Is that right?


----------



## kenjoluma

A subtle nuance differs. A subtle nuance that I don't even know there is.  But there should be. 
All the examples written in Korean above look okay to me. 
 Wish you gave me more colloquial example, though. Your examples are probably a headline of some newspaper. They tend to omit the grammatical markers, which may sound strange in spoken language. But anyway you get the idea.


----------



## vientito

I'd like to pursuit this a little bit further if it is ok with you.  I have another example to give.  I will give the correct version first.

칭찬도 칭찬 나름이지 그런 칭찬은 안 하느니만 못해요

This whole thing is basically composed of (1) 칭찬도 칭찬 나름이지 (2) 그런 칭찬은 (3) 안 하느니만 (4) 못해요

Now look at (2) this one is denoted with topic marker so apparently it serves as the subject of the second part.  Therefore we know the subject is inferior than (3) .

I have asked some koreans before whether I could change the order to let (3) go in front of (2), like this : 안 하느니만 그런 칭찬은 못해요.  They say no.  I can't do that but they could not tell me why.  It just does not sound right.  I am not sure but I suspect that for all sentences that have a topic marker that part associated with a topic marker HAS TO BEGIN the sentence not right in the middle of it.  Am I correct?

But what if I change the situation around -say, the sentence is not marked by a topic marker but by a subject marker (I know it won't make sense with a reference based on (1)).  I will assume we just drop (1) for the moment and change the sentence like this:

안 하느니만 그런 칭찬이 못해요

Do you think it is still nonsense?  Does it work better with 그런 칭찬이 안 하느니만 못해요?  If it is, could you explain to me why one is correct and the other is not?


----------



## kenjoluma

1.
The answer to this can be very simple.
- 느니만(도) 못해요 is a fixed expression.

http://krdic.naver.com/detail.nhn?docid=8131500


2.
And second rule: Before and after -느니, there should be 'verb phrase'. 
And as you know, in Korean, a verb or... something like verb (I hate to explain Korean grammar in English...) ends the sentence. S+O+V, you know the drill, right?

So, as our great Chomsky dictated us, we can demonstrate how -느니 works: [VP1 + 느니] + VP2

If I'm correct, your question was, 'can I change [VP1 + 느니] + VP2 to VP2 + [VP1 + 느니] ?
No you can't. Because this is against the very general rule of Korean language. 
You know, Subject + Object + Verb, Modifier + Modificand, this stuff...


3.
Even if you didn't know this fixed expression and this general Korean grammar, you should know the meaning of '못하다' changes after you switch the word order. '못하다' in the original text means, as you understood, 'it is inferior to something...', but if you change the word order, it becomes '...칭찬은 못해요.', literally meaning 'unable to compliment...'



4.
Again, if it is -보다, then it's a whole different story. Because unlike -느니, -보다 can go along with noun phrase.

[NP1 + 보다] + NP2 + (And possible verb or verb phrase can follow...)
NP2 + [NP1 + 보다] + (And, again, verb that finishes the sentence can follow...)

Those two are very possible.


----------



## kenjoluma

Conclusion: 

안 하느니만 그런 칭찬은... is wrong.
Before and after 느니, there shouldn't be a noun. 그런 칭찬은 should go away.

느니:
이걸 먹느니 차라리 죽겠다. (I'd die rather than eating this)
먹다(to eat) 죽다(to die) Two verbs

보다:
이 음식을 먹는 것보다 죽는 게 낫겠다 ('dying' would be better than 'eating' this)
먹는 것 (eating) 죽는 것(dying) Two... nouns.

= 죽는 게 이 음식을 먹는 것보다 낫겠다.


----------



## vientito

from your explanation, I am gathering that you cannot break up 느니만(도) 못해요.  It just would not do.  Won't work.  It has to be considered as a single unit.  This unit is your V in the S+O+V rule.   I decide to look up 못해요.  This is what I have found 

주로 비교격 조사 ‘보다’와 정도를 나타내는 의존 명사 ‘만’ 다음에 쓰여

To have that meaning of inferiority it really has to satisfy this limiting condition.  No question asked, meaning something I have to swallow and memorize.


----------



## vientito

could you elaborate the structure to label something as a VP (verb phrase)?  A verb phrase cannot contain a subject, right?


----------



## kenjoluma

I forgot almost everything about generative grammar.... Gee. I guess you're right.
S + VP... right? yeah, maybe you're right


----------



## vientito

hello I found these in my grammar text.  they seem wrong according to your definition 

그 아이를 기다리느니 내가 가지 -  looks what follows 느니 it is a subject, a noun

추운 하숙집에 가느니 교실에 있는 게 편해 - (있 는게 = 있 는것이 , also a noun and a subject as well)

Do they both break the rule you have stated earlier that what follows 느니 should be a verb phrase?  Do you think the examples are wrong in my grammar text?


----------



## kenjoluma

vientito//
I guess VP in Korean is not quite fit for Chomsky. Or, I was just wrong to pick up this theory and shove it to the Korean grammar. 

I'm pretty sure that in English, it goes like this:

cf) Mary painfully learned a lesson that Korean is a difficult language.
In this sentence, Mary is S(Subject) and anything else (painfully....language) can be VP. (hmm. sorry. still not sure at all)

But looking at your example, yeah, why bother an Jewish American's European-centered not-legit-anymore theory anyway? 
Let's say it may include 'subject', shall we?


----------



## kenjoluma

Wait. Maybe I was wrong to say 'VP' in the first place. Maybe it is... Oh, I was so wrong! 
S is not Subject. S stands for Sentence in Chomsky's theory. Oh my... S=NP+VP, Now I remember!

Just forget whatever I said, vientito. Anyway, now you get the idea.


... S for subject? What was I thinking?!


----------



## vientito

i think this one may be ok

그런 칭찬을 안 하느니만 그 것을 하는 게 못한다

But of course it is quite different from the original structure


----------



## Superhero1

We say 그런 칭찬은 안하느니만 못하다.

그런 칭찬을 안하느니만 그것을 하는 게 못하다 is very verbose and difficult to understand its meaning immediately.


----------

