만 [Only Particle]
만 essentially means "only" and it is used after a noun. Sometimes, 오직 is used before a noun to emphasize the "only-ness."
- 나만 떠났다. = Only I left.
- 아빠만 TV를 보셨다. = Only Dad watched TV.
- 룻만 이스라엘에 왔다. = Only Ruth came to Israel.
- 물만 마셨다. = I drank only water.
- 스티븐은 구두만 샀다. = Stephen bought only shoes.
- 오직 나만 먹었다. = Only I ate.
- 오직 폴만 한국어를 공부했다. = Only Paul studied Korean.
- 오직 존만 떠났다. = Only John left.
Eg.
- 나는 먹기만 했다. = I did only eating.
- 폴은 1주일 동안 한국어 공부하기만 했다. = Paul, for a week, did only studying Korean.
- 동물원에서 본 코알라는 자기만 했다. = The koala, which I saw at the zoo, did only sleeping.
For a detailed explanation of the descriptive verb, see (Verbs - Descriptive I)
hi ^^~~
ReplyDeleteonly use in past time?
thank you
Hi 에블린,
ReplyDeleteNo, you can use it in any tense.
For example,
나만 캠프 가 = Only I am going to the camp.
다니엘은 저녁에 물만 마셔 = Daniel only drinks water in the evening.
You're welcome. =)
In English, we say something like 'X only'. For example, What did you eat for lunch? Apple only. Can I use the same pattern in Korean by saying '사과만.'?
ReplyDeleteYes, you can. :)
ReplyDeleteHere's an example conversation.
아침에 뭐 먹었어? = What did you have breakfast?
사과 하나 먹었어. = I had an apple. (Lit. I ate one apple)
사과만? = An apple only?
응. 사과만. = Yeah. An apple only.
Hi! Thank you so much for posting this. I was wondering if you could explain what 있구만 means.
ReplyDeleteHi hi :D are sentences like " I did only eating" and "only I left" the translation of 나는 막기만 했다 and 나만 떠났다? Cause both of them are grammatically very weirdly structured,
ReplyDeleteMay u clear y isn't it "I ate only" or "I left alone"? The sentences I left only and I only left dont not mean the same thing.
Sorry for the complicated question, hope u understood my doubt :)
감사합니다!!!
Hi,i have a question.
ReplyDeleteso why did you write 떠났다 and not 떠났어?