charge vs. accuse

A common point of confusion: to charge vs. to accuse

To "charge someone with something" means to make a formal claims of wrongdoing against someone, 기소하다 in Korean.

• The police charged him with arson but he adamantly claimed innocence: 경찰은 그를 방화 혐의로 기소하였으나 그는 자신의 결백을 단호하게 주장하였다

To "accuse someone of something" means to allege or blame someone for doing something, 비난하다, 혐의를 제기하다 in Korean. It usually implies that there is not enough hard evidence to substantiate the accusation yet, or that the accusation is not made in a legal or official form.

• Currently on a publicity tour of the UK, Bhutto has given talks to packed houses hosted by luminaries such as Henry Porter, the London editor of Vanity Fair. In India, her book is topping the non-fiction bestseller list. But back in Pakistan, Songs of Blood and Sword has stirred an angry reaction from critics, including several relatives, who accuse her of twisting history to make unsubstantiated allegations that slur the memory of her aunt Benazir, who was assassinated in December 2007. (Guardian, April 29, 2010)
  

Seoul vs. South Korea

As you know, in English writing, capital cities represent their respective countries. For example, instead of saying "the United States decided to do something," you can say "Washington decided to do something."

However, make sure to use a country's capital only when the national government is doing something on behalf of the entire nation. Otherwise, your sentence could be misunderstood as concerning the city government or the capital city itself. Take a look at the following examples.

미국의 지적자본이 경쟁국들의 지적자본보다 뒤쳐짐에 따라 우리의 명성이 위험에 처해있다.

• As Washington's intellectual capital lags behind that of its competitors, our prominence is at risk (x): You are not talking about the intellectual capital of federal government officials or the city of Washington, D.C.
  
• As America's intellectual capital lags behind that of its competitors, our prominence is at risk (o) (Wall Street Journal, June 20, 2009)

영국의 한 저명한 기후과학자는 영국 정부의 기후 변화 정책이 위험할 정도로 낙관적이라고 경고하였다.

• A leading UK climate scientist warned that the UK government's climate change policies are dangerously optimistic (o) (Guardian, June 23, 2009)
• A leading UK climate scientist warned that London's climate change policies are dangerously optimistic (x): London here could mean either the city government of London or the UK government, depending on the context.
  

come out vs. turn out

When something “comes out,” it means that the entirety of the situation has been revealed to the public (진실이 알려지다, 사실이 드러나다). When something “turns out,” that means something ultimately becomes something else, or something is proved/found to be something else (되다, 밝혀지다). Take a look at the following examples:

• When I first saw the film, it struck me as the most impressively articulated response to the Reagan era I'd seen. Since then it has come out that Moore has -- either intentionally or through lack of skill -- fuzzied the chronology of events, creating the impression that the plant closings and layoffs took place all at once, around 1986 and '87, instead of over a period of more than a decade. (Washington Post, January 12, 1990)
  

• Much of the intelligence on Iran's nuclear facilities provided to UN inspectors by US spy agencies has turned out to be unfounded, diplomatic sources in Vienna said today (Guardian, February 22, 2007).

especially & because

Constructing a sentence with especially or because without the second clause is a mistake that many many many many Korean and Japanese speakers make.

"특히 ~은 ~하다" is perfectly fine in the Korean language. It is a complete sentence with a proper beginning. However, in English, this is neither a complete nor a good way of starting your sentence. Especially is an adverb to mean particularly or notably, not a conjunction (접속사) as it could be in Korean. So especially should be used to modify something, not to start a sentence. Take a look at the following:

정부는 고용 안정을 위한 구체적인 조처를 취해야 한다. 특히 취약 계층의 직접 고용이 필요하다.

• The government should implement concrete measures to stabilize employment. Especially, direct hiring of the disadvantaged is needed (x): this is a direct translation of 특히 into especially. "Especially + S + V" is not a complete sentence.
  
• The government should implement concrete measures to stabilize employment, especially direct hiring of the disadvantaged (o)

The same is true for because. In Korean, "왜냐하면 ~하기 때문이다" is a complete sentence with a proper beginning. But "because+S+V" as a sentence does not make sense in English. Take a look at the following:

이란 청소년 여자 축구팀이 청소년 올림픽에 참가하지 못하게 되었다. FIFA 규정에 따르면 선수들은 이슬람식 두건을 착용할 수 없기 때문이다.

• The Iran girl's soccer team was thrown out of the Youth Olympics scheduled for August in Singapore. Because the rules of FIFA prevent players from wearing an Islamic headscarf (x): This is a direct translation of 때문이다 into because. Because subordinates a clause to a sentence, but "because+S+V" alone cannot be a sentence.
  
• The Iran girl's soccer team was thrown out of the Youth Olympics scheduled for August in Singapore because the rules of FIFA prevent players from wearing an Islamic headscarf (o) (April 5, 2010 New York Times)
  

verb contraction, etc., and so on

등등 or 등 is not really informal or colloquial in the Korean language, but "etc." and "and so on" are very much so in English.

Do NOT use "etc." or "and so on" in your formal essay. They make you look very lazy, vague, uncertain, and informal.

Using "such as" is a good way to be more specific. Take a look at the following example:

• The government is faced with difficult challenges, such as health care reform and the war in Iraq (o)
• The government is faced with difficult challenges like health care reform, the war in Iraq, and so on (x)
  

And do NOT contract your verb with an apostrophe in a formal essay. This also makes you look very lazy. You should spell it out.

• They don't, he doesn't, the government won't .... (x)
  
• They do not, he does not, the government will not .... (o)
  

wordy expressions - issue of direct translation II

The other day, my husband and I had sort of an unexpected eureka moment. My husband, who is a native English speaker and also happens to be learning Korean, said something that represented exactly what I am going to explain in this post.

In Korean, people do not usually say "매운 떡볶이에 설탕을 넣어야 한다." More natural sentence would be "떡볶이가 매우면 설탕을 넣어야 한다." Note the difference between the two: the first sentence is one single clause with 넣어야 한다, and the noun 떡볶이 is modified with an adjective 매운, while the second one has two clauses with 매우면 and 넣어야 한다. The first sentence is not necessarily incorrect, but it is something my husband would say, not the majority of Koreans.

In other words, the Korean language tends to add an extra clause, rather than modifying a noun. This is why a lot of my students prefer to add extra clauses, i.e. "명사 that 주어 동사", "명사 with 명사", or "명사 of 명사", rather than modifying a noun with an adjective or using an action verb. This is not necessarily incorrect, but often times those sentences are quite wordy and awkward.

Take a look at the following sentences.

• It takes 10 months to get a license with one year of validity (13 words)
  
• Creating jobs related to clean energy is important to revive the sluggish economy (13 words)
  
• Corporations that have lowered prices have had very few successes in this discriminating market (14 words)
  
• The government signed a treaty with legally binding force to fight global terrorism (13 words)
  
• The school can accept more students without the worsening of its quality of education (14 words)
  
• The United States is going to build a ground-based interceptor missile targeting short-range missiles that are easy to intercept (21 words)
  

You might not have noticed anything awkward in the above sentences. In fact, in terms of grammatical correctness, you are well within your rights to say these. They are not necessarily wrong.

However, in 외무고시 or 행정고시, you do not have 5 pages to present your argument. You only have 200 words max. The key to higher score is brevity, not verbosity. Having said that, modifying a noun or using an action verb can come in very handy, and help you avoid adding unnecessary extra clauses. Take a look at the following and note how the above sentences can be made more succinct.

• It takes 10 months to get a one-year license (10 words: -3 from the original)
  
• Creating clean-energy jobs is important to revive the sluggish economy (11 words: -2)
  
• Few corporations have succeeded by lowering prices in this discriminating market (11 words: -2)
  
• The government signed a legally binding treaty to fight global terrorism (11 words: -2)
  
• The school can accept more students without compromising its quality of education (12 words: -2)
  
• The United States is going to build a ground-based interceptor missile targeting easy-to-intercept short-range missiles (19 words: -2)
  

unnecessary words -issue of direct translation I

A difficult challenge in translation is conveying the sense of the original text, rather than simply rendering it word for word. In other words, something that makes a lot of sense in Korean could sound redundant and awkward in English. The following is some of the common mistakes I have seen in essays written by Koreans.

• Korea is making (its) efforts to help developing countries: If Korea makes certain efforts, it is obvious that those efforts are "Korea's" efforts. You don't need to say "its" here.

• If medical costs continue to increase rapidly (as they do now), they will crush household and business budgets: If something "continues," it implies that the current state lasts. So you don't need to say "as they do now" here.

• (Nowadays) A major debate is going on over the government's budget deficit: If a debate is "going on," it is obvious that the debate is currently underway. So you don't need to state "nowadays."

But if you are trying to compare and contrast the past and the present, emphasizing the differences, you can use "nowadays." Take a look at the following:

• The hulking Chrysler stamping plant that once employed thousands will shut down forever in June, and the 400 or so workers left will scatter in search of a paycheck. The plant's slow death has spread throughout the town. As fewer workers stopped by for lunch, the Bob Evans down the block shed waitresses. Faced with declining revenue, the mayor laid off firefighters and raised taxes. Nowadays, the chattering old ladies who used to raid the candy shop for their grandchildren don't drop in anymore (April 19, 2010, New York Times)

Here, the author is highlighting the changes in the town by using "nowadays."


My advice: Once you finish a preliminary translation from Korean to English, do not just compare the Korean text and the English translation, but read your translation and see if it sounds natural in itself as well.

Another post on the issue of direct translation will follow shortly!