I just had a quick question about relative clauses the use of subject and topic markers to identify the subjects of the sentences do these always go at the front or is it more common to arrange it like the first sentence the subject of that sentence goes at the front of that clause? Will it ever be 저는 어마가 with both subjects in the front of the sentence and 저는 would apply to the main clause and then 어마가 to the dependent clause? What is normal as far as determining the subjects of the clauses and where those can/should be put in the sentence to make sense?
example sentence 1 :그녀가 그 셔츠가 거기에 없는 것을 깨닫지 못할 거기 때문에 저는 그냥 가져갈 거예요
Example sentence 2: 나는 내년에 대학교에 갈 것이기 때문에 지금 열심히 공부하고 있어
Also are time nouns/adverbs more common to go at the front of the first part of the clause like 내년에 here or can it go at the beginning of either? what is more preferred?
Sentence 1: 그녀가 (SUBJECT) 그 셔츠가 거기에 없는 것을 ( whole chunk roughly meaning “the shirt isn’t there” 깨닫지 못할 거기 때문에 (because she (그녀가 from earlier) won’t notice) 저는 그냥 가져갈 거예요 (i’ll bring it [the shirt])
Is 그 셔츠가 거기에 없는 것을 the part that is confusing you? It seems like it based on your question about relative clauses. The shirt has to have a subject particle (unless the speaker decided to drop a particle) because 없다 is an adjective (형용사) and not a verb (동사). There are tons of sentences that have a topic marker followed by a subject marker because there is an adjective and not a verb. There has to be a subject doing the realizing ( 깨닫지 못할 거기 때문에 ) in this clause so the initial she (그녀가) is the subject. The topic particle with I is there basically so that you don’t have to repeat the entire phrase about the shirt. It’s implied
People talk about time and places a little more flexibly, but I’m sure there is a formal writing rule that I don’t know. Sentence 2 looks fine and I wouldn’t think it were strange if 내년에 were at the beginning of the sentence either.
9그녀가 is the subject of the clause that it is in front of but could the the first sentence be written as 그녀가 저는 그 셔츠가 거기에 없는 것을 그냥 가져갈 거예요 (btw i hope sentences cant be written like this)
instead of
그녀가 그 셔츠가 거기에 없는 것을 저는 그냥 가져갈 거예요
is there a rule where the subject of the clause has to come before the sentence it modifies?
another example
저는 어마가 집에 도착하기전에 고동학교에 걸어가야 해요 is this sentence fine or should 저는 be at the start of the clause that it modifies?
should it be 어마가 집에 도착하기전에 (저는) 고동학교에 걸어가야 해요
the placing of the subjects is troubling me if both subjects are thrown up front thats alot to remember while the sentence is said if longer than a few words. like I는 he가 stole my wallet at the bar last week (I) know. with both subjects at the front its hard to decipher who belongs to each clause im hoping my english example is incorrect and subjects must start the clauses.
Also those 외국인을 의해서 읽기 are awesome right at my level im not quite at iyagi level yet thanks for reccomendation!
저는 어마가 집에 도착하기전에 고동학교에 걸어가야 해요 is a good sentence.
In these two: 그녀가 그 셔츠가 거기에 없는 것을 저는 그냥 가져갈 거예요// 그녀가 저는 그 셔츠가 거기에 없는 것을 그냥 가져갈 거예요 I think you forgot to add 깨닫지 못할 거기 때문에 back into the sentence here. I would think you could put 저는 at the beginning because of everything and it still makes it clear that you (저는) are the one bringing the shirt, but it feels less natural to me than putting it infront of the 그냥 가져갈 거예요 phrase. I’m not the best source for grammar rules to be honest, but based on how it reads 저는 seems better in those two places than anywhere else. Does this sentence come from a larger context, or is it an example you made?
I’m glad that they’re helpful I think that they’re one of the better and more interesting resources for learners.
If you search comprehensible input Korean on youtube, there are also a couple channels with a few videos that might be helpful as well, but they’re very specifically targeting things like colors or specific things rather than telling stories.
I made 저는 어마가 집에 도착하기전에 고동학교에 걸어가야 해요 and 그녀가 그 셔츠가 거기에 없는 것을 저는 그냥 가져갈 거예요// 그녀가 저는 그 셔츠가 거기에 없는 것을 그냥 가져갈 거예요 from how to study Korean website. But its good to see that both can be done thank you also I will check YouTube for comprehensible input! Also how long did it take you to tackle the Iyagi’s I really like them but they are tough. I remember reading that you listened to them like 50 times each? Did this repetitive listening help with the patterns etc.?
When I first started reading them it probably took me 2-3 hours to do the lessons. By about the 50th one it was probably about 1 hour per lesson and after 100 maybe 30 minutes or so. I think I was also watching quite a bit of Korean TV at the time as well. I don’t mean that I sat there an listened 50 times and did nothing else. I listened to them mostly while doing chores, commuting, stretching/exercising, or while watching soccer games (my only volume was the podcast because I don’t care much for the commentary). I would generally only listen to episodes that I had already read and I would rotate them once I had done more episodes. I don’t think LingQ actually had the mini stories at the time, but alternating with those would be good I imagine. I also listened to lots of Korean music at the time too, but I was mostly just using anything that I could get my hands on because listening seemed so important at the time. It wasn’t the optimal way to go about it, but I don’t think it mattered too much because the process wasn’t particularly taxing for me other than the reading at the beginning, but I was so interested in figuring out what they had to say that it wasn’t as draining as I’d expected. I had a really hard time finding good Korean materials to bridge the gap from that lower beginner to upper-beginner/lower intermediate stage.
I think that they’re one of the better and more interesting resources for learners.