# -다가 / -더니 and -길래



## ilwoo21

Can you guys help me with use of these markers? These are the ones I have the most trouble with 

*- 다가*

I know -다가 is something along the lines of, I was doing this, and then I did this ...
Ex sentence (if you need one): 

여친과 함께 포도를 먹다가 신기한 포도알을 발견했어

However, sometimes -다가 is like and ... 이 길로 똑바로 가다가 완쪽으로 가세요 (Go straight this way, and go left). Why can't you say: "이 길로 똑바로 가고 왼쪽으로 가세요" ??
It also has a hit of "while" ... "길을 가다가 친구를 만났어" (On my way, I met a friend)" ... Why can't you say: "길을 가면서 친구를 만났어" ?? 

*- 더니*

How is -더니 different? They have some rules about the speakers too ... ? For example: -더니 is not used with I/we unless it's in the past tense? What about -다가?
Ex sentence (if you need one)
      윤영이 한국에 가더니 소식이 없네
      밥을 먹었더니 배가 아퍼 


And if you have time, I was wondering about -길래 has something to do with ... because of someone else's actions? But I don't care about learning this one right now as much as I want to learn -다가 and -더니 haha


So sorry I have so many questions, but can you please explain these endings to me with examples?? Thank you so much!!!


----------



## kenjoluma

I'll make it the simplest:

* -더니 and -다가*
An action or a status ceased and another begins.

* -더니 vs. -다가*
-더니 has a perspective of unexpectedness.

* 길을 가다가 친구를 만났어 vs. 길을 가면서 친구를 만났어*
The former is more natural. (You walked the street, you stopped the walking, and you met a friend)
The latter means: you walk the street, you encounter a friend, but never stops walking, your friend follows you walking.

* -고 vs. -다가*
A고 B = There is a distinct (spatial, emotional, temporal) distance between A and B
A다가 B = A causes B, or A is more related(connected) to B.

example) 이 길로 똑바로 가고 왼쪽으로 가세요.(?)
 ("Going straight" and "Turning left" are actually "one" process to get to "one" location. Those two are connected with each other very firmly. Therefore, it's strange)


----------



## ilwoo21

Thank you so much!! 

As you said in the last example with, "going straight and turning are left are actually one process to get to one location..."

Should this rule be switched then?

-고 vs. -다가 

A고 B = There is a distinct (spatial, emotional, temporal) distance between A and B 
A다가 B = A causes B, or A is more related(connected) to B.


----------



## kenjoluma

ilwoo21 said:


> Thank you so much!!
> 
> As you said in the last example with, "going straight and turning are left are actually one process to get to one location..."
> 
> Should this rule be switched then?
> 
> -고 vs. -다가
> 
> A고 B = There is a distinct (spatial, emotional, temporal) distance between A and B
> A다가 B = A causes B, or A is more related(connected) to B.



I don't understand... Why?


----------



## coolbrz

hi , 
*다가*  - the mean of 다가  is in the middle of do something,
example)먹다가,가다가,오다가  
           먹는중,가는중,오는중

*더니 *- in my opinion ,더니 is the word mean of 'after'  and, it`s instead of 후에   
example)가더니,오더니,하더니
           간후에,온후에,한후에

*고 - *하고 , 나고, 오고,
      it`s mean "and" 

bottom line is 
더니,후에,고  is equal mean "do something after and"


----------



## ilwoo21

kenjoluma said:


> I don't understand... Why?



In the rule you said:


-고 vs. -다가 

A고 B = There is a distinct (spatial, emotional, temporal) distance between A and B 
A다가 B = A causes B, or A is more related(connected) to B.


However, in the example, "이 길로 똑바로 가고 왼쪽으로 가세요" you said it sounds weird because: "Going straight" and "Turning left" are actually "one" process to get  to "one" location. Those two are connected with each other very firmly."

So should the rule be switched in a sense that ... 

A고 B = A causes B, or A is more related (connected) to B
A다가 B = There is a distinct (spatial, emotional, temporal) distance between A and B

Therefore, the example: "이 길로 똑바로 가다가 완쪽으로 가세요" Would have more of a meaning like, "Go straight. And then after that, turn left." As compared to the previous example which was errored and meant something more along the lines of, "Go straight but also go left." ??


----------



## kenjoluma

ilwoo21 said:


> In the rule you said:
> 
> 
> -고 vs. -다가
> 
> A고 B = There is a distinct (spatial, emotional, temporal) distance between A and B
> A다가 B = A causes B, or A is more related(connected) to B.
> 
> 
> However, in the example, "이 길로 똑바로 가고 왼쪽으로 가세요" you said it sounds weird because: "Going straight" and "Turning left" are actually "one" process to get to "one" location. Those two are connected with each other very firmly."
> 
> So should the rule be switched in a sense that ...
> 
> A고 B = A causes B, or A is more related (connected) to B
> A다가 B = There is a distinct (spatial, emotional, temporal) distance between A and B
> 
> Therefore, the example: "이 길로 똑바로 가다가 완쪽으로 가세요" Would have more of a meaning like, "Go straight. And then after that, turn left." As compared to the previous example which was errored and meant something more along the lines of, "Go straight but also go left." ??



"Go straight" and "Turn left" are actually expected to be performed as a whole. That is why they are related to each other.
I am afraid I fail to follow your reasonings, though.




> hi ,
> *다가* - the mean of 다가 is in the middle of do something,
> example)먹다가,가다가,오다가
> 먹는중,가는중,오는중



This is questionable. How would you explain the difference between
"밥을 먹으면서 음악을 들었다" and
"밥을 먹다가 음악을 들었다"?

http://krdic.naver.com/detail.nhn?docid=8306100


----------

