honorifics

[tesoljon]

What part of speech are honorifics--both in Korean and English? Adjectives? Or do they have their own class?

[Mark van]

높임말 is what the Koreans call honorifics. It's usually a change at the end of the sentence, for example:

you add -으세요 (for present tense) or -으셨어요 (Past Tense)

But these are also certain words (I think of them as exceptions) that change if you're speaking to much older person. Like:

먹다 (to eat) wouldn't look like this (먹으세요) when speaking to an older person but instead with an ending like (드세요).
Or
자다 (To sleep) wouldn't look like this (자요, or 자세요) when speaking to an older person but instead change to (주무세요). 

With Adjectives they usually go before the Noun/object/subject or at the end of the sentence.
When it's before you just ad a 은 to the word. For example:

크다 (Big) will change to 큰 to be an adjective and it will be (큰 + Noun/object/subject)

But if you want to say something like
"It is a big book" -> 큰 책이예요.  (Adj+Noun)

But if you want to say
"Big Book" -> 책이 커요. (Subject+Adjective)

Learn how the adjectives change at the end of the sentence and it will help a lot! I'm still a complete noob when it comes to Korean, there's just so much to learn.

[Jumpman Jr.]

you add -으세요 (for present tense) or -으셨어요 (Past Tense)
으세요 is mostly used when you're telling somebody to do something. It can also be used as a question sometimes (어디 가세요?) but it more commonly used when telling somebody do so something "study hard = 열심히 공부하세요!"

You're mixing up the purpose of "으셨어요"
The honorific past tense is simply 었어요/었습니다. Adding "시" is done when the subject of the sentence is of higher importance, regardless of who your speaking to. For example, I can speak to a baby (which would mean I would not be using honorifics) and talk ABOUT his father. In that case I can say "아버님은 오셨어? (did your father come?" In that case, I use "시" but not the honorific ending of 요 because the person I am talking TO is younger.
But, if I'm talking to somebody older than me... about somebody of importance, I can use (으)셨어요. For example, if I'm talking to my boss about her mother, I can say "어머님이 오셨어요?"

But these are also certain words (I think of them as exceptions) that change if you're speaking to much older person. Like:
먹다 (to eat) wouldn't look like this (먹으세요) when speaking to an older person but instead with an ending like (드세요).
Or
자다 (To sleep) wouldn't look like this (자요, or 자세요) when speaking to an older person but instead change to (주무세요).

Same with that. You only use 세요 when your telling somebody to do something. saying 주무세요 would be telling somebody to sleep.

With Adjectives they usually go before the Noun/object/subject or at the end of the sentence.
When it's before you just ad a 은 to the word. For example:
크다 (Big) will change to 큰 to be an adjective and it will be (큰 + Noun/object/subject)
But if you want to say something like
"It is a big book" -> 큰 책이예요.  (Adj+Noun)

That's right.

But if you want to say
"Big Book" -> 책이 커요. (Subject+Adjective)

That Korean sentence says "the book is big", not "big book"


For the original poster, I'll try to help you a bit.


Every verb and adjective in Korean ends in ~다. 100% of the time, every verb or adjective will end in this.
Also, you must end a sentence with either a verb or adjective in Korean. You must.

When you conjugate your verb/adjective, honorifics come into play as well. It's confusing and hard to teach over a message board, but, for example, using the word "eat":

먹다 = basic word (not used in sentences, as it is not conjugated)
먹었다 = past tense non formal
먹었어 = past tense non formal
먹었어요 = past tense formal
먹었습니다 = past tense very formal

먹는다 = present tense non formal
먹어 = present tense non formal
먹어요 = present tense formal
먹습니다 = present tense very formal

먹겠다 = future tense non formal
먹겠어 = future tense non formal
먹겠어요 = future tense formal
먹겠습니다 = future tense very formal

In future tense (more than past and present tense) Korean people like to use 이다 (to be) to end their sentences. In order to end a sentence in 이다, it must be immediately preceded by a noun (in normal example: 나는 선생님이다). In order to make the word preceding 이다 a noun, the verb can act as an adjective that is modifying the noun "것" (thing):

먹을 것
In that, "먹을" becomes an adjective that modifies 것 (the thing I will eat). Now that we have a noun as our last word in a sentence, it can be followed by 이다

먹을 것이다 = future non formal
먹을 것이야 = future non formal
먹을 것이에요 = future formal
먹을 것입니다 = future very formal



Its confusing as hell at first. Eventually it becomes second nature. Just keep at it. I've been in Korea 18 months and I essentially study all day... I'm at the point now where its hard for me to explain these things because they're so natural for me now.

[Lauren0017]

Thank you. This is very helpful.

[dansk]

Mark and Jumpman, those are both excellent, highly informative responses that entirely failed to answer the OP's question.   ;)

All my formal grammatical training has been in relation to English, so I don't know the technical name for the part of speech that honorifics occupy.  I doubt they're adjectives.  I'm actually quite curious... I think I'll e-mail my old grammar prof and ask her if she knows...

[tesoljon]

Mark and Jumpman, those are both excellent, highly informative responses that entirely failed to answer the OP's question.   ;)

All my formal grammatical training has been in relation to English, so I don't know the technical name for the part of speech that honorifics occupy.  I doubt they're adjectives.  I'm actually quite curious... I think I'll e-mail my old grammar prof and ask her if she knows...

Heh, thanks, dansk.  ;)

Would they be the same as titles? Mr., Miss, Mrs.? Those really don't feel like nouns, unless they're some sort of proper noun subset.

[tesoljon]

Mark and Jumpman, those are both excellent, highly informative responses that entirely failed to answer the OP's question.   ;)

All my formal grammatical training has been in relation to English, so I don't know the technical name for the part of speech that honorifics occupy.  I doubt they're adjectives.  I'm actually quite curious... I think I'll e-mail my old grammar prof and ask her if she knows...

Heh, thanks, dansk.  ;)

Would they be the same as titles? Mr., Miss, Mrs.? Those really don't feel like nouns, unless they're some sort of proper noun subset.

[Mark van]

Mark and Jumpman, those are both excellent, highly informative responses that entirely failed to answer the OP's question.   ;)

All my formal grammatical training has been in relation to English, so I don't know the technical name for the part of speech that honorifics occupy.  I doubt they're adjectives.  I'm actually quite curious... I think I'll e-mail my old grammar prof and ask her if she knows...

Firstly, I think I did answer the OP (but Jumpman did a much better job at it :) ) The OPs question could be interpreted 2 ways. What part of speech are honorifics and what part of speech are adjectives, OR are adjectives the parts of speech which are honorifics. Either way both of us tried to explain the relationship adjectives and honorifics play in speech. As Jumpman said a Korean sentence ends in either a verb or adjective so when you use honorifics certain words are replaced or the sentence structure at the end changes.

Secondly, you failed to answer the OPs question ;)

But dansk seriously!!!!??? hahaha. You say two people are wrong and then follow your statement by saying that you have no clue what you are talking about or how to answer the OPs question since you only know English. If you actually read what Jumpman said about how honorifics play a role when conjugating a verb/adjective you might have understood what we are talking about.

[tesoljon]

Mark and Jumpman, those are both excellent, highly informative responses that entirely failed to answer the OP's question.   ;)

All my formal grammatical training has been in relation to English, so I don't know the technical name for the part of speech that honorifics occupy.  I doubt they're adjectives.  I'm actually quite curious... I think I'll e-mail my old grammar prof and ask her if she knows...

Firstly, I think I did answer the OP (but Jumpman did a much better job at it :) ) The OPs question could be interpreted 2 ways. What part of speech are honorifics and what part of speech are adjectives, OR are adjectives the parts of speech which are honorifics. Either way both of us tried to explain the relationship adjectives and honorifics play in speech. As Jumpman said a Korean sentence ends in either a verb or adjective so when you use honorifics certain words are replaced or the sentence structure at the end changes.

...

No, Mark, you didn't answer my question. Well, you gave an answer, but it wasn't what I was looking for. But perhaps "honorifics" was not the correct word for me to use.

I was referring to suffixes such as "-nim" and "-ji". Or even words like "hyung" and "nuni".

[Mark van]

Yeah I suppose you have to ask the right question to get the right answer

Hyung, and nuna are titles (or roles within the family) to older family members, just like dongseng is a title for younger family members. However, Koreans only think of people the same age as themselves as "real" friends so if you are friends with someone older or younger then you could use these family titles to show that you are close (or on friendly terms).

I was told that adding Nim at the end of someones name just shows that you are being respectful. For example, a younger brother will say to his other brother (older brothers name +Nim). But this is not to be confused when you are just talking about someone. You can use "shi" after someones name when referring to someone casually to be polite or after you just met them. Eg. John-shi, James-uh shi.

[dansk]

Holy.  We're all talking circles around each other here.

Apparently no one understood the OP's post, myself included!  I also thought you were talking about the honorific suffixes attached to verbs, Jon.  (I'm assuming that's your name and not an acronym for something!)

And Mark, you're obviously proficient in Korean and I wasn't questioning the content of your post.  The only reason I said you missed the point is because Jon wasn't asking HOW to use honorifics, but rather WHAT honorifics are.  You did a fantastic job of explaining how to use them, but you didn't touch their grammatical identity.  (And for what it's worth, the comments on my personal knowledge of the subject were entirely unnececessary.  It's possible to know that the question has not been answered without knowing yourself what the answer is.  I was simply pointing out that it hadn't been answered.  Frankly, I think it's much more honourable to admit ignorance rather than pretend to have knowledge you actually don't, and I think it's rather childish to attack someone for that.)

Anyways, titles like hyung, nuna, etc., are just ordinary nouns.  I don't think there's anything particularly special about them.  (I hope that's the question you were asking when you spoke about 'parts of speech', Jon.)

The reply I got from my grammar prof with regard to honorific suffixes (-ya, -yeyo, -imnida, etc.) is that they're "pragmatic articulations of politeness" and associated with stance.  In other words, I don't think they have a real designation as a formal part of speech in the sense of nouns, verbs, adverbials, etc., beyond labelling them as particles.

[tesoljon]

...

Anyways, titles like hyung, nuna, etc., are just ordinary nouns.  I don't think there's anything particularly special about them.  (I hope that's the question you were asking when you spoke about 'parts of speech', Jon.)

The reply I got from my grammar prof with regard to honorific suffixes (-ya, -yeyo, -imnida, etc.) is that they're "pragmatic articulations of politeness" and associated with stance.  In other words, I don't think they have a real designation as a formal part of speech in the sense of nouns, verbs, adverbials, etc., beyond labelling them as particles.

So things like -nim/-ji in Korean and -kun/-chan/-san in Japanese would be considered noun particles?

[Mark van]

Holy.  We're all talking circles around each other here.

Apparently no one understood the OP's post, myself included!  I also thought you were talking about the honorific suffixes attached to verbs, Jon.  (I'm assuming that's your name and not an acronym for something!)

And Mark, you're obviously proficient in Korean and I wasn't questioning the content of your post.  The only reason I said you missed the point is because Jon wasn't asking HOW to use honorifics, but rather WHAT honorifics are.  You did a fantastic job of explaining how to use them, but you didn't touch their grammatical identity.  (And for what it's worth, the comments on my personal knowledge of the subject were entirely unnececessary.  It's possible to know that the question has not been answered without knowing yourself what the answer is.  I was simply pointing out that it hadn't been answered.  Frankly, I think it's much more honourable to admit ignorance rather than pretend to have knowledge you actually don't, and I think it's rather childish to attack someone for that.)

Anyways, titles like hyung, nuna, etc., are just ordinary nouns.  I don't think there's anything particularly special about them.  (I hope that's the question you were asking when you spoke about 'parts of speech', Jon.)

The reply I got from my grammar prof with regard to honorific suffixes (-ya, -yeyo, -imnida, etc.) is that they're "pragmatic articulations of politeness" and associated with stance.  In other words, I don't think they have a real designation as a formal part of speech in the sense of nouns, verbs, adverbials, etc., beyond labelling them as particles.

I'm sorry I'm not trying to belittle your opinion, I just think differently to you. I would think it's only possible to know something isn't the answer in a more extreme situation. Anyways, I apologize because I misunderstood the sincerity of your post. I assumed that since you said all your formal training has been in English that when you said "you'd contact your old grammar professor" I didn't think it was a Korean teacher (So I thought you were being sarcastic).

Damn confusion all around :D

[dansk]

...

Anyways, titles like hyung, nuna, etc., are just ordinary nouns.  I don't think there's anything particularly special about them.  (I hope that's the question you were asking when you spoke about 'parts of speech', Jon.)

The reply I got from my grammar prof with regard to honorific suffixes (-ya, -yeyo, -imnida, etc.) is that they're "pragmatic articulations of politeness" and associated with stance.  In other words, I don't think they have a real designation as a formal part of speech in the sense of nouns, verbs, adverbials, etc., beyond labelling them as particles.

So things like -nim/-ji in Korean and -kun/-chan/-san in Japanese would be considered noun particles?

Haha yes, I suppose, if by that you mean they're particles that are commonly affixed to nouns.

[Jumpman Jr.]

I didn't really understand your original question... but I was just trying to clear up what Mark van was saying.

Trying to answer your original question... is very difficult. Honorifics aren't used in English, so it is hard to tell you what they are. It just makes the sentence sound more polite. For example:

밥을 나에게 줘 = Give me some rice
밥을 나에게 주세요 = Please give me some rice

The second one, in English, sounds much more polite than the first one. BUT, it still doesn't correctly identify what part of speech honorifics are. For example, in these sentences;

저는 학교에 갔어 = I went to school
저는 학교에 갔습니다 = I went to school

Both of those have the same meaning in English... and there is no way you can make them sound more polite. When you are asking for something (in English) you can make a sentence sound more polite, but in Korean you can make any sentence sound more polite if you want to.

If I had to choose a part of speech that honorifics belonged to, I would say it belongs to 'conjugation.'

[tesoljon]

I didn't really understand your original question... but I was just trying to clear up what Mark van was saying.

Trying to answer your original question... is very difficult. Honorifics aren't used in English, so it is hard to tell you what they are. It just makes the sentence sound more polite. For example:

밥을 나에게 줘 = Give me some rice
밥을 나에게 주세요 = Please give me some rice

The second one, in English, sounds much more polite than the first one. BUT, it still doesn't correctly identify what part of speech honorifics are. For example, in these sentences;

저는 학교에 갔어 = I went to school
저는 학교에 갔습니다 = I went to school

Both of those have the same meaning in English... and there is no way you can make them sound more polite. When you are asking for something (in English) you can make a sentence sound more polite, but in Korean you can make any sentence sound more polite if you want to.

If I had to choose a part of speech that honorifics belonged to, I would say it belongs to 'conjugation.'

How do you conjugate a noun? o.O