Korean and Japanese: Particle and Grammar Similarities (comprehensive)!
These two countries being so close together, they were bound to intermingle in their grammar. And that they did. Here are some astounding similarities between the two! Note: This article assumes that you are already familar with both language writing systems.
Particles:
은/는 ー は
도 ー も
이/가/께서 ー が
을/를 ー を
에 ー に (when talking about time, place)
에서 ーで (when talking about place)
부터 ー から (when talking about place)
한테서 ー から (when talking about people)
까지 ー まで
에게/한테 ー に (when talking about people)
와/과/하고/랑 ー と
나/(이)나 ー か (can mean “or,” can also “bundle” a question into a clause)
로/ (으)로 ー で (when talking about method or instrumentation)、へ、に (in certain fixed grammatical expressions)
의 ー の (Korean uses this particle less often than Japanese)
라고 ー って、と言う (when quoting or indirectly quoting)
다고 ー と (when quoting or indirectly quoting)
게/이/히 ーに (typically, these are recognized as “adverbial suffixes” in english-taught Korean, which makes no sense to me after all this talk about particles. I prefer to recognize them as adverbial particles rather than suffixes because they make a lot more sense that way. Examples below)
러 ー に (especially in the case of when you go somewhere or do something for the sake of something else, see example below)
(으)로(서) ー として
Grammar:
The grammar at times has a one to one correspondence, which is really thrilling. Both Japanese and Korean have different levels of politeness that are represented by verb conjugation and word usage. The way their systems are organized are nearly matching, actually. The main difference is that Koreans are bigger sticklers about politeness —a side effect, I suppose, of being really into Confucianism, even more so than modern-day China.
My hypothesis is that Japanese absorbed most of its grammatical structures from Korean considering that Korean has many different forms of particles while Japanese tends to generalize more.
에게 for example is used with animate objects, 에 with time and inanimate objects, and 게 with verb stems. Japanese is comfortable with just に in every case.
Particles in Korean also have differing levels of politeness. 께서 for example is the honorific form of the subject particle. 와/과 are more polite than 하고/랑. Japanese do not have such distinctions, as far as I know.
It would follow that the innovator would have a more elaborate understanding than the copier, and so it seems for Korean and Japanese.
In many cases, Korean tends to specify while Japanese tends to generalize. Notice Korean’s 3 ways of saying “It doesn’t matter…”
私たちはいつ行ってもかまわない。
우리가 언제 갈지 상관없어요.
“It doesn’t matter when we go.” (placing emphasis on time)
私たちはどこに行ってもかまわない。
우리가 어디 가든지 상관없어요.
“It doesn’t matter where we go.” (placing emphasis on choice)
그것을 먹어도 상관없어요。
それを食べてもかまわない.
“It doesn’t matter if you eat that.” (placing emphasis on the act of itself)
In Japanese, you would use the -ても form in all cases.
Time expressions:
二週間の ー あいだ
두 주 ー 동안
“For two weeks…(I was doing such and such)”
あいだ also plays the role of 사이 in certain sentences.
どこか ー の店で ー 何かを ー 買う ー たびに
어딘가 ー 가게에서 ー 뭔가를 ー 살 ー 때마다
“Everytime she buys something from some store…”
Notice how both Korean and Japanese turn “where” and “what” into “somewhere” and “something” using “ka/ga”. What a thrill.
会議の最中に ー 停電しました。
회의 중에 ー 정전했습니다.
“During the meeting, a blackout occurred.”
Adverbs
아직 ー まだ
또 ー また
지금 ー 今
언제나 ー いつも
먼저 ー まず
요즘 ー 最近
이미 ー もう
함께 ー 一緒に
혼자서 ー 一人で
Determinatives
이 ー こ (for things closer to speaker)
그 ー そ (for things closer to listener)
저 ー あ (for things far away from both speaker and listener)
이런 ー こんな
그런 ー そんな
Sentence Endings
지/죠 ー ね (both serve the purpose of seeking confirmation from the listener)
나/나요 ー な (both serve as a kind of question you’re asking yourself)
거든/거든요 ー よ (both serve to inform the listener of something they might not be wholly aware of. Beware that Koreans are somewhat less receptive to this ending)
고/고요 ー て (both are originally sentence connectors, and when used at the end of a sentence, perform a “softening” of the statement)
Note: て is at times closer to 서 than 고. It seems that go 고 and て are similar only in fixed grammatical constructions such as in the present progressive form(which both languages construct in nearly the same manner).
Syntax
これーしかーない
이것ー밖에ー없어
“There is nothing except for this.”
없어요 and ない both have the same fundamental meaning of “not existing.”
私たちはー明日の朝にー会うことにーしました
우리는ー내일 아침에ー만나기로ー했습니다
“We decided to meet tomorrow morning.”
こと and 기 both play the role of nominalizing the verb to meet.
好きにーなった
좋아하게ー되었어
“I came to like (it).”
なった and 되었어 are both commonly translated to “became,” as in “it became to me that I started to like it.” Both phrases convey the sense that you had nothing to do in the fact that you started liking something, only that it came to you for no particular reason.
결혼하ー게ー되었어
結婚することーにーなった
“It’s been decided that (we) will get married.”
The same grammatical structure is used to represent a decision that was made outside of a person’s control or desire — a rather logical extension.
思いー出せない
기억이ー안 나
“I can’t remember.”
The same logic here applies in both sentences. If a “thought/memory” can’t “come out” (JP:だす, KR: 나다), you can’t remember it.
気を ー つける
신경을 ー 쓰다
“to be careful, pay attention (in doing such and such activity)”
Both つける and 쓰다 have the english translation of “to apply” or “to wear.” The general idea here is the same — you apply your “spirit/nerves/mind” to a situation to show that you are paying attention.
ビールを ー 飲みに ー 行きましょう
맥주(를) ー마시러 ー 갑시다
“Let’s go out to drink.”
Both verbs in these two sentences are conjugated in their polite, propositive forms. Deference is indicated by ます suffix in Japanese and 시 in Korean.
椅子 ー が ー ない ー の ー に
의자 ー 가 ー 없 ー 는 ー 데
“There are no chairs, but…”
Here we see seem to have found another 1:1 morpheme ratio. However, the slight difference here is that 데 is a noun, as opposed to に which is a particle.
読んだ ー 本の ー中 ーで
읽은 ー 책 ー 중 ー 에서
“Among the books read…”
Here we see the usage similarity between 에서 and で. 중 in Korean is actually written with 中 in Hanja, the chinese characters that Korean originally used in the same fashion as Japanese (thank goodness they stopped doing that).
彼は ー 何が起こったのかを ー みんなに ー 話して ー くれました。
그는 ー 무슨 일이 있었는지(를) ー 모두에게 ー 말해 ー 주었습니다.
“He told us what happened.”
Lit. translation: “What happened? To us, he told us.”
Just like Japanese, Korean can nominalize whole questions allowing them to take object particles as shown above. Japanese does this with the (の)か particle while Korean does this with 는지. And just like Korean, Japanese represents “doing something for someone else” by the use of a helper verb (JP: くれる, KR: 주다).
ベーコンを ー また ー 焦がして ー しまった
베이컨을 ー 또 ー 태워 ー 버렸어
“I burned the bacon again.”
Lit. translation: “I done burn the bacon again.” (think southern accent)
Another similarity is the use of a helper verb at the end to represent an action that is done to completion, often with unexpected or unwanted results. 버리다 does that in Korean and しまう does that in Japanese.
聞かなくて ー も ー わかる
듣지 않아 ー 도 ー 알다
“to know (even) without listening”
Here we see functional similarities between も and 도. Both particles can be translated to “even” or “to the extent of,” in the sense that “to the extent of not hearing of what is being said, I still understand.”
勉強 ー する ー とき
공부 ー 할 ー 때
“When studying…”
Both express “when” with a noun expressing a particular moment or time.
熱が ー 出る
열이 ー 나다
“to catch a fever”
Another semantic similarity. To catch a fever means a fever that “comes out” (JP: 出る, KR: 나다).
信じる ー どころか
믿는 ー 커녕
“Far from believing…”
Important difference to note here is that Korean creates attributive forms (AKA adjective forms) of verbs different from Japanese. 는 is added to the stem of action verbs, while 은/ᄂ are added to descriptive verb stems. 은/ᄂ is the same as the past attributive form for action verbs (because in order for something to be blue, it has to have been already blued, no?).
がちである
경향이 있다
“to be prone to”
たがる
싶어하다
“to seem to want to”
Both languages make use of a helper verb to describe another person’s feelings or state of being. Both seem to maintain the premise that another person’s state can never be truly known, so it’s necessary to distinguish our interpretation of their state from their actual state.
韓国は中国に比べて小さすぎる国です。
한국은 중국에 비해(서) 너무 작은 나라에요.
“Korea, compared to China, is too small of a country.”
Here, we see て perform much of the same function as 서. Just like 서, it is sometimes dropped out and the connective/continuative form (比べ/비해) is used instead.
この計画に ー ついて ー どう思う?
이 계획에 ー 대해서 ー 어떻게 생각해?
“Regarding this plan, what do you think about it?”
A mild difference here between the languages is that Japanese expresses perspective by the “sticking” metaphor (ついて), like a barb that sticks to your clothes (which is similar to to Thai, actually). Whatever “sticks” to the “plan” is related to how you see it. Korean on the other hand, expresses it by “face” (대), in the sense that when “facing” something, you gain some perspective about the “plan.” Quite similar to English, actually. “Regard” originally meant to “face toward.”
Japanese does in fact have the “facing” metaphor in its symbolic lexicon, に対して (ni taishite, in Korean, “ai” becomes flattened to an “e” monophthong), except it is used somewhat more in making a contrast.
せいで
때문에
“Due to/because of”
Both expressions are used to describe the reason for something happening or existing. Both are more common in written and formal speech.
代わりに
대신에
“Instead of…”
かえって
오히려
“Rather/unexpectedly/on the contrary…”
Used similarly to express an unexpected occurrence.
おかげで
덕분에
“Thanks to…”
死ぬほど喉がかわいてる。
죽을만큼 목이 말라.
“I’m so thirsty I could die.”
So far, we have seen that in both languages, there is a tendency towards relying on nouns to express subordinate conjunctions.
ほど can be translated into 만큼, 정도, and 소록.
早ければ早いほどいい
빠르면 빠를수록 좋다
“The sooner, the better.”
かもしれません
지도 모릅니다
“It’s possible that…”
Lit. translation: “…that I don’t know (but it is possible).”
The Khmer language does the same thing. ក៏មិនដឹង is added to the end of sentences to express possibility and it means “don’t know.”
“仕方がない/しょうがない”
“어쩔 수 없다”
“There is no use…”
Similar usage to express that something can’t be helped or changed.
Similar Historical Grammar Changes
Originally, the past tense ending such as in 먹었어 (meogeosseo) was actually 먹어 있어 (meogeo isseo) in historical Korean. This is still seen in a select few verbs, such as 앉아 있어. This is typically translated as “currently sitting” but actually it means that the action of sitting is already completed and left in that state (앉고 있어 means to be currently in the act of sitting down, which nobody would use).
Applying this understanding to the first phrase, to have eaten would mean to eat to completion and left in that state of having eaten.
결혼했다 for example, could be translated as “got married,” focusing on the past, but it can also be translated to “is married” focusing on the present as a result of past actions.
Japanese went through the same change from 食べいた (tabe-ita) to 食べた (tabeta). Both languages got rid of the i- vowel in the same verb. In fact, there are even historical leftovers from past forms just as in Korean. 開いた (hiraita) and other -ku ending verbs are an example of this. Historically, this was hira ita — “hira” being the Kun reading of 開.
Isn’t that just the best?
