# 해야지만 --> 해야만? 해야 하지만?



## Flooooooooor

Hi all, 

Here is some text from 국민은행's mobile app when a new user attempts to open the menu for international wire transfers:

고객 님의 영문 주소 정보를 *등록하셔아지만* 외환포탈 이용이 가능합니다. 한번 입력하시면 이후 겨래에서는 별도의 입력없이 거래하실 수 있습니다.​
I don't think I have ever noticed this particular construction before. If someone were to ask me _without context _what 야지만 means, I would guess that it is a shorter form of 해야 하지만, and perhaps as an example sentence I would make up an example sentence like: 

A: 가입했어요? 신청해야 하는 게 맞죠?​B: 앗 신청을 *해야지만 *요즘 너무 바빠서 아직 안 했네요.​​Or​​A: 동네의 탁구 동호회 분들이랑 연습 좀 해 보고 싶은데 어떻게 하면 되는지 알아?​B: 응, 회원가입하려면 전화번호를 *등록해야지만 *등록 안 해도 모임에 참여하는 게 가능하대.​
(First off, do these example sentences capture accurate usage by native speakers, or is my guess off?)

But in the above bank text, something doesn't seem right about that interpretation. For one thing, I was required to enter an English-text address before I could open up any other options in that section of the app! If the meaning of the sentence were:

You *need to *register an English-text form of your address, *but *it is possible to use the foreign exchange portal.​
Then this would seem to contradict the situation. When I read the sentence, it _feels_ more like the sentence is saying:

You *need only *register an English-text form of your address in order for it to be possible to use the foreign exchange portal.​
It feels as if *해야지만 *is short in this case not for *해야 하지만* but *해야만*.  Looking up this construction online, I found a few other sentences that seem to use the construction for this meaning, where the first interpretation seems less plausible:

[공포게임] [소름주의] *자살해야지만* 나갈수 있는곳 ... (cannot link, but part a YouTube video's title)​각 캐릭터마다 스킬들이 조금씩은 다르고 이를 *이용해야지만 *승리에 가까워지므로... (from here)​또한, 일반적인 토마토 내 리코펜 성분은 *가열해야지만 *체내 흡수가 가능하지만 황금토마토는 그냥 먹어도 체내 흡수가 되는 '시스리코펜'을 함유하고 있는 것으로 전해져 눈길을 끌고 있다. (from here)​원래는 한국에 *살아야지만 *살 수 있다고 생각했었다 (from this post where the answers don't seem to directly address the question...)​실제 상품을 *구매해야지만 *얻을수 있는 팀포트리스2 모자들! (another YouTube video title)​
What exactly is going on here? Can *A야지만 B *mean either "It is true that you must do A, but B is also true." or "You need only do A for B to hold." depending on context? If this is the case, do native speakers tend to use one meaning more than the other in different contexts? (Register/formality, for example?) Thank you for any guidance!


----------



## pcy0308

Hello Flooooooooor,
"A해야만/해야지 B한다" or "A해야지만 B한다" is used to express a necessary/mandatory condition (the fulfilment of "A") in order for "B" to be achieved, attained or realized. On the other hand, "*A*해야 하지만" is translated as "though one must do *A*". Another commonly used alternative would be "*A*해야 되지만". Now, confusion arises from the uncertainty of whether "해야지만" and "해야먄/해야지" can be used interchangeably. Though there is absolutely no doubt most native speakers will be able to understand both expressions, if there is a need to be (extra, extra) strict, the National Institute of Korean Language does not deem "해야지만" 100% appropriate and in fact recommends using "해야만/해야지". Check out the link below: 
국립국어원

Take a look at these examples below:
A1: 가입했어요? 신청해야 하는 게 맞죠?
B1: 앗 신청을 *해야지만해야 하지만/해야 되지만 *요즘 너무 바빠서 아직 안 했네요.

A2: 동네의 탁구 동호회 분들이랑 연습 좀 해 보고 싶은데 어떻게 하면 되는지 알아?
B2: 응, 회원가입하려면 전화번호를 *등록해야지만 등록해야 되지만/등록해야 하지만, *(가입 하지않고, 한번 참석 해보려면) 등록 안 해도 모임에 참여하는 게 가능하대.

A3: 동네의 탁구 동호회 분들이랑 연습 좀 해 보고 싶은데 어떻게 하면 되는지 알아?
B3: 응, 일단 회원가입 해야되는데, 전화번호를 하지만 *등록해야지만 *가입가능해*.*

Notice that those expressions used in B1/B2 and B3 serve different purposes, hence different meanings. In B1 and B2 *"해야 하지만"* is translated as "Though I must apply for it/though I must register first". It imposes a contrast/an opposition between two parts of the sentence, just like "despite", "although". B3, on the other hand, *"해야지만"* simply provides a condition necessary for subscription. All the following examples using *"해야지만*" serve to express a mandatory condition required to realize a certain goal/objective/status:
[공포게임] [소름주의] *자살해야지만* 나갈수 있는곳... 
*= As gruesome as it sounds, "killing oneself" is necessary to "get out of this place".*
각 캐릭터마다 스킬들이 조금씩은 다르고 이를 *이용해야지만 *승리에 가까워지므로... 
*= "Using distinct, respective skills" is necessary in order to "achieve victory/go one step closer to victory".*
또한, 일반적인 토마토 내 리코펜 성분은 *가열해야지만 *체내 흡수가 가능하지만 황금토마토는 그냥 먹어도 체내 흡수가 되는 '시스리코펜'을 함유하고 있는 것으로 전해져 눈길을 끌고 있다.
= "Lycopene must be cooked/heated up" so that it can be "absorbed" (heating lycopene up is necessary in order for it to be absorbed).
원래는 한국에 *살아야지만 *살 수 있다고 생각했었다.
= The speaker used to believe that the only way to survive in this world was to live in Korea (living in Korea is a necessary condition for him to live his life in comfort).
실제 상품을 *구매해야지만 *얻을수 있는 팀포트리스2 모자들!
= Buyers can receive the "Team Fortress 2 hats" only if they purchase some merchandises, "실제 상품".

Hope this helps.


----------



## Flooooooooor

Hi pcy0308,

This certainly does help! The discussion on 온라인가나다 is very informative, too -- it seems in stricter contexts I should just avoid -*해야지만 *altogether. But now I can understand this construction when I see it on the internet, which is great news. Thank you!

A few follow-up questions:

1. In your example sentence by B3, what exactly does the portion "전화번호를 하지만" mean? If there were no "하지만" and the sentence read "전화번호를 *등록해야지만 *가입가능해" I believe I would understand it.

2. When I look up *-야만* in 네이버국어사전, I am directed eventually to this link for *-만*, where it seems that the *-야만* usages fall under meaning #2. That is, the *-만* portion "adds emphasis" to the construction. I am reading this "emphasis" as being a similar flavor to the *만* in a sentence like "*너만* 있으면 행복하다." or "너무 피곤해서 *눈만* 감아도 잠이 올 것 같다." -- which in those sentences, gives a sense of: "_if only_ condition A is achieved, B will hold", or "_even if nothing but _condition A is achieved, B will hold".

When I try to apply this flavor of "emphasis" in *-만* to constructions with *-A어야 B *and* -A아야 B*, the resulting *-A어야만B *and* -A아야만 B *reads as something like: "A is necessary for B, _and is also sufficient for B_," or "It is not merely the case that A is necessary for B; _A is really all that must be done to achieve B_."

Typically when speakers use a sentence like "신발을 *벗어야 *들어갈 수 있다", they mean to describe conditions that are both necessary and sufficient to achieve whatever is in the second half of the sentence. If taking off my shoes were necessary but _not_ sufficient to enter a sauna -- that is, if I needed to do other things beyond just taking off my shoes to go inside -- presumably the man at the door would let me know!

But I think this might be a matter of pragmatics/implicature, since _technically _this sentence communicates _only_ that "taking off your shoes is necessary to enter" (and that there still might be other conditions that need to be met before entering). When *-만 *is added as in "신발을 *벗어야만 *들어갈 수 있다", is the speaker emphasizing that yes, in fact, taking off your shoes is the _only_ condition that must be met before entering?

A few more examples, with my guess regarding the nuance:

그를 *만나야 *모든 문제가 해결될 수 있다. --> "Meeting him" is necessary for "every problem to be solved" (and probably, it is also sufficient -- but the speaker isn't explicitly signalling so.)
그를 *만나야만 *모든 문제가 해결될 수 있다. --> "Meeting him" is not only necessary, but _is really all that must be done_ for "every problem to be solved"

어머니는 할아버님께 허락을 *받아야 *한다고 말씀하셨다. --> "Getting permission from grandfather" is necessary (and probably, also is also sufficient for whatever is desired -- but the speaker isn't explicitly signalling so.)
어머니는 할아버님께 허락을 *받아야만 *한다고 말씀하셨다. -->  "Getting permission from grandfather" is not only necessary, but _is really all that must be done._

사람은 *먹어야 *산다 --> "Eating" is necessary "to live" (but in this case, is certainly not sufficient to live! Since "breathing oxygen" and "drinking" etc. are necessary, too.)
사람은 *먹어야만 *산다 --> "Eating" is necessary _and sufficient_ "to live". (A false statement?)

3. On the other hand, when I look up *-**어야지* and *-**아야지* that correspond to this use case, I find that they are defined as being perfectly synonymous with -어야 and -아야. That is, it seems that unlike *-만*, the *-지* adds absolutely zero additional nuance or meaning to the base construction. If so, is there any particular reason at all a speaker would use *-어야지* instead of *-어야* besides pure chance?

Thank you once again!


----------

