Questions about coming in Korean.
When talking about motion in English, "come" means moving to the location of the speaker or hearer. In French, "come" can only mean moving to the location of the speaker.
Korean has the verb 오다 that can mean movement towards the location of the speaker, for example: 부모님께서 우리 집에 오세요, my parents are coming to my/our house.
I think that, like French, it can only mean movement towards the speaker, because my dictionary gives me this example: 내일 댁으로 가껬습니다, I will come to you tomorrow. It uses 가다, to go. Am I right that this is the reason for this translation?
Another thing that interests me about 오다 is its use with weather phenomenon. One of the first sentences I learned was 비가 오다, which I guess an over-literal translation would render as "rain is coming."
What if the speaker isn't in the location where it's raining? Would you still use 오다? For example, if I'm in San Francisco, but it's raining in Seoul, could I say 서울에서 비가 오다? I think that 오다 is still the right verb here, but I can't remember.
I've cut the rest of this post because I also have questions about "come" as a euphemism.
My semantics class briefly discussed "come" as euphemism for orgasm and how it might have originated, because doesn't seem to mean motion towards a location anymore.
I got to thinking about it again today as a result of this thread in linguaphiles.
Japanese 来る "to come" seems to work similarly to Korean 오다, in that it can only mean motion towards the speaker, and not motion towards the hearer. Furthermore, someone claims that in Japanese, the verb for 行く "to go" is used as a euphemism for orgasm, though it seems there's some disagreement.
Does Korean use either 오다 or 가다 in this sense?
Korean has the verb 오다 that can mean movement towards the location of the speaker, for example: 부모님께서 우리 집에 오세요, my parents are coming to my/our house.
I think that, like French, it can only mean movement towards the speaker, because my dictionary gives me this example: 내일 댁으로 가껬습니다, I will come to you tomorrow. It uses 가다, to go. Am I right that this is the reason for this translation?
Another thing that interests me about 오다 is its use with weather phenomenon. One of the first sentences I learned was 비가 오다, which I guess an over-literal translation would render as "rain is coming."
What if the speaker isn't in the location where it's raining? Would you still use 오다? For example, if I'm in San Francisco, but it's raining in Seoul, could I say 서울에서 비가 오다? I think that 오다 is still the right verb here, but I can't remember.
I've cut the rest of this post because I also have questions about "come" as a euphemism.
My semantics class briefly discussed "come" as euphemism for orgasm and how it might have originated, because doesn't seem to mean motion towards a location anymore.
I got to thinking about it again today as a result of this thread in linguaphiles.
Japanese 来る "to come" seems to work similarly to Korean 오다, in that it can only mean motion towards the speaker, and not motion towards the hearer. Furthermore, someone claims that in Japanese, the verb for 行く "to go" is used as a euphemism for orgasm, though it seems there's some disagreement.
Does Korean use either 오다 or 가다 in this sense?