My language buddy asked me what I did for a living, and I told her I was a company employee. Then she asked which company and I didn't know how to answer.

For context, I work for a large hospital network, but I don't actually work AT the hospital. How do I express specifically that I work "for" the hospital but not "at" the hospital to avoid confusion? Does "병원을 위해서 일 하지만 병원에서 일 안 해요. 집에서 일 해요." sound natural? (And are these sentences correct in the first place?) Is there a better way to express this besides using 위해서?


1 Answer 1


In Korean, there is no single phrase that works for every meaning of English "for". 위해서 is like "for the good/sake of", and doesn't really work in the sense of "work for a company". "working for company XX" is typically expressed as "XX에 다녀요" or "XX 직원/사원이에요" (사원 if it's a corporation, 직원 more generally).

  • X-에 다녀요 is literally "go/commute to X", but also means working at X or going to school there.
  • 직원 = worker / employee.
  • 사원 = company employee (사 is from 회사, a comapny/corporation).

So your first sentence is correct but not very natural. We might say:

병원 직원인데 (병원으로 출근하지 않고) 집에서 일해요 = I'm a hospital employee but (rather than reporting to work at the hospital) I work at home.
병원에 다니는데 일은 집에서 해요 = I work for a hospital but do the work from home.

Another example:

우체국 직원인데 배달은 하지 않고 사무실에서 근무해요 = I'm a post office worker but only work in the office rather than doing delivery.

  • Thanks so much for this response! This was something I often had to clarify when talking to people even in English, especially pre-pandemic. I would always have to specify "I work for X hospital, but I don't actually work at a hospital. I work in an office building" because otherwise people assumed I worked with patients if I just left it at "I work for X hospital". Googling how to make this distinction in Korean was a lost cause so thanks again! Also, is there a reason ㄴ/는 데is used vs (하)지만? Does (하)지만 imply too strong of a contrast between the first and second clause?
    – Vera
    Commented Dec 30, 2021 at 20:02
  • You're welcome, and yes, your thought about -ㄴ/는데 and -지만 is correct. 는데 can express a weak contrast and sometimes a parallel fact with subtle irony, whereas 지만 makes a strong contrast. I would prefer 는데 in these examples but 지만 can also work.
    – Tony
    Commented Dec 30, 2021 at 22:23

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.