강미 | learning korean상태
Does this sentence:
지금 제 컴퓨터 상태가 이상해서 인터넷이 잘 안돼요.
Posted by kangmi on June 25, 2005 at 10:23 AM12 comments
Trackback URL
Trackbacks and Comments
|
Esther 25 Jun, 2005 12:35 PM 
|
I think the second one.
상태 - 狀態 (condition) |
|
Charles 26 Jun, 2005 12:09 PM 
|
It is the second one. For future reference, the first 상태(常態) is the less common of the two--the b definition, if you will. In fact, it's safe to say that 99.9% of the time you hear or read the word 상태, it will be 狀態. When talking about normalcy, the word 정상(正常) is usually used.
It's interesting that the Yahoo dictionary lists the definitions is that order. They don't seem to go in order of usage... |
|
oranckay 08 Jul, 2005 09:44 AM 
|
Yes, it's 狀態.
Anyone who writes 상태 to mean 常態 should be hit with something, even if he has the sense to write it in hanja, but even if he does he should be hit with something for being so pretentious & obnoxious. Maybe, MAYBE you might find 常態 in writing from decades past. |
|
dda 14 Jul, 2005 11:43 AM 
|
I'm sure 최선배 used it :)
|
|
강미 14 Jul, 2005 11:51 AM MSN: kangmi 
|
Who's 최선배?
|
|
dda 14 Jul, 2005 12:45 PM
|
A typo for 최현배 http://www.hangeul.or.kr/person/choi_hb.htm
|
|
oranckay 14 Jul, 2005 04:41 PM
|
I think dda trying to be funny... Choe Hyeon Bae surely did NOT use 常態, not without the han'geul either. We're talking about a man who insisted on saying 배꽃계집큰배움터 for 이화여자대학교 because he disliked hanja and hanja-based words so much.
|
|
dda 14 Jul, 2005 08:22 PM
|
I was *indeed* being funny on several levels. 선배 and 현배 are close homophones, esp in some dialects, and 선배 [先輩] being was it is, well, you know...
As as Oranckay said, that guy wasn't the funniest man on Earth... |
|
Sewing 25 Aug, 2005 03:40 PM 
|
In reply to what Charles wrote (late update, eh?), as far as I know, Hanja-derived words of identical spelling are listed in Korean dictionaries in character order—in other words, by the order in which the word's first character would appear in an okp'yŏn.
|
|
Charles 25 Aug, 2005 10:20 PM
|
Sewing: Ah, I had never thought of that. What a perfectly useless way to do it. It does make sense, I suppose, since it is a defined order, but it serves no practical purpose.
The truth of the matter is (some may disagree with me, but this has always been my impression) that Korean-English dictionaries are written for Koreans, not foreigners. In other words, they assume a knowledge of Korean rather than a knowledge of English. What we need is a good Korean dictionary compiled for and by foreigners. And then we need someone to put it up on the net for free. ;) |
|
Sewing 26 Aug, 2005 03:06 PM
|
I was just going to post something on my blog on this very subject in the next couple of days. There is simply no such thing as a decent Korean learners' dictionary—either monolingual (which would be the ideal) or even bilingual!
I concur that Korean-English dictonaries are written exclusively for Koreans: why else would the 머리말 and other front matter be in Korean only, and the little glosses in entries (to differentiate meanings) be in Korean as well? In other words, to really effectively use even a Korean-English dictionary, an English reader must first study Korean! |
|
Charles 27 Aug, 2005 03:57 AM
|
I would be interested to hear what you have to say on the subject, so I'll be keeping on eye on your blog. I've had this impression for a while (pretty much ever since I came to Korea), but my previous comment was the first time I ever actually articulated that impression in public.
|
Next entry: 그녀가 돌아왔다, 1회, 씬18, 14:43
Previous entry: Stepchildren
Copyright 2008 Kangmi | Expression Engine Design by Reese