# topic 는



## Green3apple

사라*는* 한국 사람*이* 아니에요 

is it possible to change the sentence above to:

사라*가* 한국 사람*을* 아니에요


----------



## Superhero1

No, you can't.

You can say 사라는 한국 사람이 아니에요.

Also, You can say 사라가 한국 사람은 아니지만, 한국어를 잘해요.


----------



## ggonak4001

The first is  correct.  

사라가  한국 사람을 아니에요 is not right. but, We can understand what you says.

 if you want to use '가'   like    A: hey~ Jane in this room, who isn't Korean?   B : oh~ 사라가 한국 사람이 아니에요.  We just use like this (pointing someone 저사람 이요~)


그녀가 밥을 먹어요
사라가 운전을 해요
너가 하니?


----------



## Green3apple

Superhero1 said:


> You can say 사라는 한국 사람이 아니에요.



is 한국 사람이 here act as subject sentences?
if not, why they put -이 behind it?


----------



## Green3apple

ggonak4001 said:


> The first is  correct.
> 
> 사라가  한국 사람을 아니에요 is not right. but, We can understand what you says.



what does it sound in english? is it sound funny? maybe from the sound i can thoroughly comprehend why it's not right.


----------



## Superhero1

Green3apple said:


> is 한국 사람이 here act as subject sentences?
> if not, why they put -이 behind it?




사라 is the subject, 아니에요 is the verb and 한국 사람이 is the complement.


----------



## Superhero1

Green3apple said:


> what does it sound in english? is it sound funny? maybe from the sound i can thoroughly comprehend why it's not right.




It sounds weird. We can notice that the expression is grammatically incorrect right away. 
Now you know what is right, so just use the right expression.


----------



## Green3apple

Superhero1 said:


> It sounds weird. We can notice that the expression is grammatically incorrect right away.
> Now you know what is right, so just use the right expression.



hehe, okay


----------



## ggonak4001

aaa. You know, this Korean sentence is not correct so  I can't translate it   It look like not " this is what we want." but, "this are what we wants."

so a... You have something wrong in "을, 를, 이, 가," I mean like these kind of things "on, at, about, by etc" in English It's hard to tell you why you are wrong... sorry


----------



## FMotley

Green3apple said:


> 사라*는* 한국 사람*이* 아니에요
> 
> is it possible to change the sentence above to:
> 
> 사라*가* 한국 사람*을* 아니에요




_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

    I am not Korean and I am actually learning the language myself, but I think there are two problems here. One is that you should not use 을 in the second sentence. I am not sure if you meant to change the 이 to 을, but 을 is an object marker. It marks the direct object in the sentence. Here 아니에요 (to be) is not an action happening to the 사람 (that wouldn't make sense even in English) so you should use 이. 
    I had a hard time before differentiating between 는 and 가 too, because many Korean people that I have talked to could not explain the concept well. My understanding now is that 가 is used when the subject of a sentence is doing something, but 이 is used to mark the topic of a sentence. Here you are talking about SaRa and describing some unchanging thing about her. So you should use 는/은 . That is why in this sentence, it is okay to use 가: 사라가 한국 사람은 아니지만, 한국어를 잘해요. The 가 is okay here because Sara's ability to do Korean is not a basic fact/description of her being. This sentence doesn't describe some basic characteristic about her. It tells about her, but it's not something innate or essential to her being. I am writing this, because I understand your confusion on this topic. This is my rule of thumb. Even though there are some times when we can interchange 이/가 for 는/은 , it's not as common to be able to change 은/는 for 이/가. Some of these things are just common practice, so you will pick up on when it's okay to interchange from conversation. I agree that it's difficult to distinguish and at some times it seems to be unexplainable in terms of grammatical rules. I'd like someone to correct me if I am wrong here, as I am still trying to be certain about my understanding of this usage.


----------



## Coogah88

I to am not Korean but came to Korea to study the language. Every single book I read or every time I am taught 이/가 and 는/은 there is never a end-all discussion about the differences between the two. The only intercourse is that 는/은 is a topic marker. And since in English we don't have this direct concept, we don't consciously think about it. But we can pick out the subject in a heartbeat. And because of this, I am still searching for a that answer.

However, after spending some time with Koreans and hearing them talk, I have come to the same conclusion as well. The word that is most closely tied to the verb gets stuck with the 이/가 particle. I had a big slew written up, but as I delved deeper into the Korean grammar I realized I really don't know a lot yet. So I'll just ask a question instead:

What is the implied difference between A and B?
(A)사라가 한국 사람은 아니지만, 한국어를 잘해요
(B)사라*는* 한국사람_*이*_ 아니지만 한국어를 잘해요.


----------



## Kross

There might be a difference in meaning in the expert level. But in my view as one of ordinary Koreans, both sentences are interpreted the same as 'Although Sarah is not a Korean, she speaks Korean very well.' in English.


----------



## Kross

Coogah88 said:


> What is the implied difference between A and B?
> (A)사라가 한국 사람은 아니지만, 한국어를 잘해요
> (B)사라*는* 한국사람_*이*_ 아니지만 한국어를 잘해요.


 According to an expert of Korean, ~는 in 사라는 of (B) can be interpreted as contrast, topic, or emphasis depending on the context.


----------



## Kasumi Tsuyuiri

(A)사라가 한국 사람은 아니지만, 한국어를 잘해요.
(B)사라*는* 한국사람_*이*_ 아니지만 한국어를 잘해요.

-은/는 in Korean is the *topic marker*. So, with the topic marker attached to 한국 사람 'a Korean', (A) can be translated as following: "Even though Sarah is not a Korean, she speaks Korean well." In contrast, (B) is like "Sarah is not a Korean but speaks Korean well." (A) carries the sense that a non-Korean individual, in general, doesn't speak Korean well. So, (A) would be inappropriate when talking about, say, the increasing number of learners of Korean and citing Sarah as an example of such learners. Only (B) is acceptable in this context.


----------



## Coogah88

Right, I guess it is hard to pick anything apart without knowing context. Korean grammar holds a great deal of secondary meanings when compared to English, in my mind. I'm hoping I can quickly get to a level where I can get read some grammar related books. There seems to be nothing in English  >_<


----------

