은/는 mark the "topic" of a sentence, while 이/가 mark a "subject". This alone doesn't really help all that much to know when exactly to use which. For me, it really clicked when I learned longer English translations of the two:
나는 집에 왔어
As for me, I came home.
Talking about me, I came home.
내가 말한 거야.
It is me who said that.
너는 뭐 해?
Regarding you, what are ...
I think there is a lexical sensitivity to the choice between 에게 and the more formal and universal 에 의하여 (for 'by').
That is to say, most any active form can go into the passive and take 에 의하여. Your examples would become:
수프가 요리사에 의하여 섞이다.
문이 남자에 의하여 닫히다.
But only a subset of verbs can take 에게 (or more colloquially 한테) in addition to 에 의하여.
Here 이 is not a particle, but a suffix added to human's name whose last character has final consonant. (See here)
When someone call one's full name, adding the suffix '이' is unnatural.
김아영은 눈 깜짝할 사이 사라졌다.
particles usually can be omitted, so 수현이 아침 식사 안 먹었어? is allowed.
Both 에 and 에서 are both 조사(助詞 - Particle)1 used after a noun, used to describe a location.
에 is a 조사 that describes 상태(狀態 - state of being).1 에서 is a 조사 that describes 행동(行動 - state of action).1
For 에, there are limited number of 서술어(敍述語 - Predicate) that can be used after it. Common examples include:
서다 (to stand)
앉다 (to sit)
눕다 (to lie down)
없다 (to have ...
To answer the very question asked,
why would we not just use 는/은 for that (그 것은 알고 싶다 , 사과는 먹고 싶어요)?
that's because it would sound very strange.
I can assure you that no native speaker would say
그것은 알고 싶다
in isolation. He might say:
그것은 알고 싶고, 이것은 알고 싶지 않다.
Here the contrast justifies 은 and 는.
I find your hypothesis of 그것이 or 사과가 acting as de ...
The particle 은/는 is sometimes used as an emphasiser. Ultimately, you could argue that this is always what it is being used as.
Although Korean learners are taught (at least I was) that 은/는 is a subject marker, it really is just being used as a marker that indicates emphasis or weight in a sentence.
So, in your example, 휴게실에는 누가 있습니까? is asking who is in ...
This is how the sentence is explained in Korean school grammar:
당신은 (이름이 뭐예요)
이름이 뭐예요 forms a single predicate clause, and the subject of the predicate clause is taken by 당신은. That means there are two (nested) clauses in this sentence,
당신은 (이름이 뭐예요)
Then the clauses get to avoid the two-subject dilemma, since technically, the only subjects in ...
There are different ways to analyse the grammar, but one common way employed is to say that this sentence has a Topic - Comment structure.
In a topic - comment sentence, the topic does not necessarily need to be an argument of the verb (it can, but doesn't need to). What it does is to establish the context of the sentence. Then the comment is a ...
From what I've read, Koreans use the word '접속사'(接續詞 - Conjunction) when discussing English conjunctions. To be really exact, the examples you gave have more complicated labels than just '접속사'. For the following, I consider:
-아서/어서 to be 연결어미(連結語尾 - 'Connecting Ending').1
-니까 to be 어미(語尾 - 'Ending').
-때문에 - Not precisely sure. I know that 때문 is 의존명사(依存名詞 - '...
(이)나 is pretty much the equivalent of 'or' (although, it's a more restrictive 'or' since 아니면 covers the part that (이)나 can't). However, in a list that doesn't outline options or selections to choose from, you don't use (이)나.
As for your example, we can do both:
사과와 오렌지와 배와 수박과 파파야가 있다.
사과, 오렌지, 배, 수박, (그리고) 파파야(가/도) 있다.
Explaining 아무도 as "nobody" is a bit misleading.
아무 is translatable to "any" and "anyone".
아무 말이나 해 봐라. say anything.
아무나 할 수 있습니다. anybody can do it.
아무 때나 찾아와. come find me anytime.
And, of course it can be used with 가(although this usage is rare), or any other particle in that matter:
고집 세거나 영악스러운 데는 없어도, 아무가 보아도 순하고 말썽 없는 아이로 생긴 모습이었다. (...
I'm learning about the usage on (으)세요, but my textbook explains that
you cannot use 이다 in (으세요) form. So the following sentence is invalid:
You can add the honorific particle (으)시 to 이다 and the 요 ending, to make 이세요. When you add this to a word that ends in a vowel, like 의사, the initial '이' just gets dropped due to spelling/pronunciation ...
비행기를 보는 사람이 많습니다. [pihaenggi-reul po-neun saram-i manh-seumni-da]
Presumably, 이 is the verb "to be"
Here, 이 is the subject marker. 많습니다 on its own conveys the full meaning of 'there are a lot', so there's no need for another verb 'to be'.
착륙하는 비행기가 많습니까? [ch'angnyuk'ha-neun pihaenggi-ga manh-seumni-kka]
with the verb "to be" omitted ...
I don't know how modern grammarians interpret similar sentences, but when I learned Korean grammar in middle school, they were called 서술절 ("verb clauses"). It is not found in English or (I think) many other languages: basically you have a whole clause with its own subject and verb, and then the clause itself acts like a verb for the outer subject. ...
이야 is just an emphasizing particle(put after nouns or adverbs), nothing else. In other words, you can drop it or replace it with 은/는 with no changes in meaning.
남이야 하나 마나 우린 꼭 합시다. = 남이 하나 마나 우린 꼭 합시다.
이런 일이야 문제없다. = 이런 일은 문제없다. I have no problem doing things like this.
며칠 밤 새우는 것쯤이야 견딜 수 있다. = 며칠 밤 새우는 것쯤은 견딜 수 있다. I can stand not sleeping for a few days....
-이자 consists of two parts: 이다 and -자. 이다 is just the standard copula, and -자 is a verb ending, which indicates both states are simultaneously engaged.
So yes, it does mean "as well as" when it's attached to 이다 like your example.
그는 나의 학교 선배이자 스승이다. He is my school senior as well as my teacher.
그 일은 개인의 일이자 나라의 일이다. That matter is personal, and ...
"저는 여기가 처음이에요" actually has a very interesting structure, called 서술절: it seems this term is translated into English as "predicative clause" or "predicate clause".
Basically, "여기가 처음이에요" (literally, "this place is the first", or "this place is a first experience") is an inner clause, but then the clause itself acts like a verb for the outer subject, 저. In ...
You always attach 도 to a noun, so if you want to use it with a verb, you have to use a noun form of that verb.
Also, depending on which word you attach 도 to, you emphasize that the "also/too" refers to the specific word.
For instance, I feel like "저는 영어를 가르쳐요" and "저는 영어를 가르치기도 해요" mean exactly the same thing.
These sentences are not the same.
First, the choice of -다 as "base dictionary form" is, in a sense, an arbitrary convention.
Unlike English, Korean verbs always require a suffix. You will never see someone just saying "많", "없", or "아름답". It's simply not grammatical at all - that's like someone saying "Engl" instead of English. Because of ...
이/가 is used at the end of a noun to express that the noun it accompanies plays the role of the subject of the sentence.
That being said, 이/가 can be used with any verb or the verb-like form of any adjective, and that, naturally, includes 이다.
[Examples with 이다]
내가 이 수업의 선생님이다. (I am the teacher of this class.)
이것이 내가 어제 잃어버린 축구공이다. (This is the soccer ball ...
The 는 and 은 markers are "topic markers" and are used when introducing a new subject. The 가 and 이 markers are "subject markers" and are used when discussing a known topic. The difference can be subtle.
For example, "책은 재미있다" and "책이 재미있다" both translate to "this book is interesting," but the first one implies that a particular book is being discussed (...
You can say:
카페도 많고 식당도 많습니다.
카페와 식당이 많습니다. (These two are almost equivalent, I personally can't tell any difference.)
카페도 식당도 많습니다. (This also makes sense, but my personal impression is that this form sounds more natural when used with negative adjectives. For example: 카페도 식당도 없습니다. You can also add 다, like 돈도 명예도 사랑도 다 싫다.)
Something not relevant but I ...
'을' is an object particle(목적격/대격 조사). In that case, '펜' should be an object, and we need a transitive verb. In the sentence '있다' seems to have the meaning 'to have', but lexically it just means 'to exist' or 'to be'. Thus '있다' does not require an object. the correct sentence should be either 저는 펜을 가지고 있어요 or 저는 펜이 있어요
이 or 가 is used as the following:
A "subject" marker (I would call it a subjective "focus/topic" introducer.)
어떤 사람이 걷는다.
어린애가 생각이 많다. (어린애 is the governing subject; 생각 is directly connected to 많다. I would say 생각 is the sub-subject.)
내가 좋다는데 네가 왜 싫어해? (But do not say "나는 좋다는데 너는 왜 싫어해?")
((Used before ...
I'm not professionally trained so take it with a grain of salt.
The usage of 은/는, 이/가, and 을/를 is very subtle. It has a lot to do with emphasis, the context, and your nuance.
Suppose we have A and B having a conversation.
Example 1: They are pretty much interchangeable.
A: 무엇을 먹고 싶으세요?
B: 저는 사과가 먹고 싶어요. / 저는 사과를 먹고 싶어요.
Example 2: 이/가 adds ...