# 았/었/였을 때



## wonlon

았/었/였을 때

I meet this set phrase in my textbook. It is one topic of the chapter.

The book explains* "it shows that when an action or state (before the particle) ends, another action (which follows the particle) starts / appears." (original statement: 表示前面的動作或狀態結束後，再出現後面的行為或狀態)*
It means one action finishes, and the other follows.

But the examples of the book shows quite different things.

1. 선생님께서 교실에 들어섰을 때 학생들은 모두 잡담을 하고 있었어요.
2. 시험이 끝났을 때는 벌써 12시가 넘었어요.
3. 제가 대학교에 갓 입학했을 때는 저건물에서 수업을 했어요.
4. 제가 처음으로 그를 만났을 때는 젊은 청년이었어요.

The examples rather mean  _simultaneous _ actions in the _past_.

 Then I check out another book which gives:
4. 길에서 어른을 만났을 때 공손히 인사해야 한다.
5. 뜻밖의 일을 당했을 때 침착하게 행동해야 해요.
6. 그것은 처녀였을 때의 일이었다.

Sentences 4 and 5 are not about past actions (e.g. sentence 5 ends in 해요), but about some present habits, so I don't know why they uses 았/었/였 before 을 때.

So to sum up,
i. Does 았/었/였을 때 indicates simultaneous actions or one action after another?
ii. Does it mean only past action or present actions, too?


----------



## Ljoe

았/었/였을 때 are used when you want to say what happened in the past or suppose a certain situation. 

Sentences 4 and 5 are showing the examples of hypothetic situations. Situations are not about past actions, yes, but about some present habits because it can happen someday in the future. 

았/었/였 is the past tense. 때 means "when" but also means "if".

To answer your questions,

i. They indicate actions that happened in the past.
ii. They are about only past actions but you can use them in the subjunctive. If you want to assume/suppose something, you should use the past tense, not the present tense. (Subjunctive mood)


----------



## kenjoluma

1. -았- or -었-
Remeber. Whenever you encounter with Korean "-았-" or "-었-", that is NOT always 'past' tense. It is more likely to be 'perfect' tense, saying "The action is complete".
This 'past tense' misconception is quite broad in many Asian languages. For example, well, your first language, wonlon, Chinese Mandarin (sorry I am not sure about Cantonese) has something like this, 了. 

cf) 我写*了*信，就去看电影。You see, this 了 is not _past_. It merely represents the action of 'writing letter' is complete, and then s/he *will* go watch a movie.

But many Chinese learners think 了 is just a simple 'past' marker. As your own language, you know that's not the case at all.



2. -ㄹ or -을
I know this is future, or 'not complete', (or in a fancy term, the conditional). But in this case, it's best you just memorize there should *generally* be -ㄹ or -을 before '때'. 
When describing certain condition which only takes place in your mind or hypothesis , you should use -ㄹ or -을. (This rule applies to your last three examples)

This usage became broadened more and more, and it has quite become custom of using -ㄹ or -을 before 때 unconditionally. 
(Hence, your first 4 examples)


3. 때
때 is.... 'when'. 
"When xxxx, you should / do / did yyyyy." 

All of your examples have this simple structure. But, as I explained in 1, since there is *았/었 perfect(complete)* element, it feels like '*after* something happened, you should....' while it simply is 'When xxx, yyy'.


4. Is it past or present?

To sum it up, it is very easy to see. You just check the last verb written in your examples. You can find those first four examples written in past tense: -있*었*어요, -넘*었*어요, -*했*어요, 청년이*었*어요...
So, they are all 'past'.

The next two examples, they are just simple assertions: "You should..." Look at the last verb -한다, -해요. It's a bit off, but yes, you can say they are 'present'.

Hope this helps, wonlon.


----------



## wonlon

*Ljoe*      씨 and* kenjoluma* 씨,

Thanks a lot for your detailed explanation. 정말 감사합니다. Let me tidy up my mind:


1. So 았/었/였을 때 means "when"
i.) in the past tense (if the last verb is in past tense), or
ii.) in hypothetical situations (if the last verb is in present tense).

2. Should I say that my book is wrong or misses the point in putting the use of 았/었/였을 때? since it makes me feels that the phrase means something like ㄴ 후에, 다가.

3. How is 았/었/였을 때 different from the simple ㄹ/을 때 or sometimes I see ㄴ 때?

Thanks again.


----------



## Ljoe

wonlon said:


> *Ljoe* 씨 and* kenjoluma* 씨,
> 
> Thanks a lot for your detailed explanation. 정말 감사합니다. Let me tidy up my mind:
> 
> 
> 1. So 았/었/였을 때 means "when"
> i.) in the past tense (if the last verb is in past tense), or
> ii.) in hypothetical situations (if the last verb is in present tense).
> 
> 2. Should I say that my book is wrong or misses the point in putting the use of 았/었/였을 때? since it makes me feels that the phrase means something like ㄴ 후에, 다가.
> 
> 3. How is 았/었/였을 때 different from the simple ㄹ/을 때 or sometimes I see ㄴ 때?
> 
> Thanks again.



1. Correct. But please do not make an abrupt conclusion. 
The past tense does not always mean past actions. 
Likewise, present tense does not always mean hypothetical situations. 

You noticed the difference of sentence 4 and 5 with 1,2,3 and 6, I am sure you will find the subtle differences in other sentences.

2. Your book is fine. They are natural and good sentences. 
후에 is more like 'after' in English. 다가 is more like 'while' or 'during'.

3. ㄴ 때 is rarely used. ㄹ 때 is more commonly used. 
If the writer used -ㄴ 때, the writer might want to focus on the very time when it happened. 
But I am not sure that is a correct sentence.


----------



## wonlon

Ljoe said:


> 2. Your book is fine. They are natural and good sentences.
> 후에 is more like 'after' in English. 다가 is more like 'while' or 'during'.



I also think that the sentences have no problem. But is its stated rule - * "it shows that when an action or state (before the particle) ends,  another action (which follows the particle) starts / appears." (original  statement: 表示前面的動作或狀態結束後，再出現後面的行為或狀態)* true?



Ljoe said:


> 3. ㄴ 때 is rarely used. ㄹ 때 is more commonly used.
> If the writer used -ㄴ 때, the writer might want to focus on the very time when it happened.
> But I am not sure that is a correct sentence.



I just check another book, which states:
*"았을 때" can also mean "an action in the state of completion" (某動作處於完結的狀態).
e.g. 발을 밟았을 때에는 "미안합니다."라고 하세요.*

How is it different from 발을 밟*을 때*에는 "미안합니다."라고 하세요.?


----------



## Ljoe

wonlon said:


> I also think that the sentences have no problem. But is its stated rule - * "it shows that when an action or state (before the particle) ends,  another action (which follows the particle) starts / appears." (original  statement: 表示前面的動作或狀態結束後，再出現後面的行為或狀態)* true?
> 
> 
> I just check another book, which states:
> *"았을 때" can also mean "an action in the state of completion" (某動作處於完結的狀態).
> e.g. 발을 밟았을 때에는 "미안합니다."라고 하세요.*
> 
> How is it different from 발을 밟*을 때*에는 "미안합니다."라고 하세요.?




i. It is true, but there are exceptions as you quoted in your thread(4,5 and 6).

ii. '발을 밟았을 때에는 ...' means 'When you stepped on someone's foot, say "Sorry."'
As you already stepped on someone's foot, 밟았을 때 is correct.
밟을 때 is awkward because it sounds like you (will) step on someone's foot.


----------

