미처 다 읽어낼 수 없는 부분

[carsont]

So I made the foolish decision of trying to read the Korean translation of Haruki Murakami's "1Q84", since there won't be an English translation for about another two years. I thought I'd start a thread here to ask about things I think I still need extra clarification or help with. Thankfully, there aren't too many of these, even though I can only read about 1-2 pages per evening due to the necessity of looking up so many words in the dictionary.

1. "적어도 내가 미처 다 읽어낼 수 없는 뭔가가 들어 있지 않으면 안 돼"
If there's not at least something that I can't thoroughly understand at first (?), it's no good.

Is this interpretation roughly accurate? I'm not entirely sure of the exact meaning of 미처, or of how the meaning of 읽다 is modified by being combined with 내다. My original guess would have been that 읽어내다 meant something like "read completely, from beginning to end", but from context it seems to be closer to "grasp", "understand", or "comprehend". If that interpretation is close, then it seems like an appropriate thread title.

2. "... 어디로도 발전할 가능성이 없는 만큼 속편하고 내용은 충실했다"

Is "속편하다" a variation on "편하다"?

3. "월급은 연공서열로 정해지고, 사생활은 상사에 의해 관리되고, 능력이나 인기 따위는 아무 의미 도 없다"
Pay is determined by seniority, personal leave (?) is managed in accordance with one's supervisor (?); things like talent and popularity mean nothing.

I normally understand "사생활" to mean one's private/personal life, but that interpretation doesn't seem to make sense here. Does it mean something like hours, personal leave, or vacation days in this context?

4. "뭐라셨죠?"

Is this a contraction for "뭘라고 하셨죠"?

5. "알 게 뭐야?"

Is this roughly analogous to saying "whatever" or "who cares" in English?

6. Temporary shifts in style during conversation.

Chapter 2 consists largely of a conversation between one of the main characters (Tengo) and his editor (Komatsu), to whom he uses the 해요 and 합니다 styles. However, there are some lines where he temporarily switches to the 한다 style:

"물에 풍덩 내던져도 기어나올 가망이 없다?"
"그래." 고마쓰는 말했다.
"그래서 최종심에는 올리지 않는다?"
"바로 거기야." 고마쓰는 말했다. ...
...
"그러니까 고마쓰 씨가기 말하는 '조금 특별한 아이디어'가 거기서 등장하는군요?"

I assume that the shift during this particular exchange implies something about it that I don't understand? Also, I assume the fact that it happens is an indication that their relationship is fairly close?

[manyakumi]

1. "적어도 내가 미처 다 읽어낼 수 없는 뭔가가 들어 있지 않으면 안 돼"
If there's not at least something that I can't thoroughly understand at first (?), it's no good.

Is this interpretation roughly accurate? I'm not entirely sure of the exact meaning of 미처, or of how the meaning of 읽다 is modified by being combined with 내다. My original guess would have been that 읽어내다 meant something like "read completely, from beginning to end", but from context it seems to be closer to "grasp", "understand", or "comprehend". If that interpretation is close, then it seems like an appropriate thread title.

It can be used for both meanings.
If the object were 책, 글, etc... it means 'read completely' as you know.
And if the object were 마음, 눈빛, 안색, etc... it could mean 'grasp, understand, etc..'.

미처 has similar meaning with 아직.
It is always used with negative verbs.

2. "... 어디로도 발전할 가능성이 없는 만큼 속편하고 내용은 충실했다"

Is "속편하다" a variation on "편하다"?

속 is 'inside' meaning 마음 in this context.
Sometimes it could mean 'stomach'.

속(이) 편하다.
to be relaxed / to be comfortable

3. "월급은 연공서열로 정해지고, 사생활은 상사에 의해 관리되고, 능력이나 인기 따위는 아무 의미 도 없다"
Pay is determined by seniority, personal leave (?) is managed in accordance with one's supervisor (?); things like talent and popularity mean nothing.

I normally understand "사생활" to mean one's private/personal life, but that interpretation doesn't seem to make sense here. Does it mean something like hours, personal leave, or vacation days in this context?

I think you're right at this point.
No need to be translated as 'personal leave'.

4. "뭐라셨죠?"

Is this a contraction for "뭘라고 하셨죠"?

Yes.
뭐라고 하셨죠?
--> the typo..

5. "알 게 뭐야?"

Is this roughly analogous to saying "whatever" or "who cares" in English?

Correct.
whatever / who cares? / who knows? ...

6. Temporary shifts in style during conversation.

Chapter 2 consists largely of a conversation between one of the main characters (Tengo) and his editor (Komatsu), to whom he uses the 해요 and 합니다 styles. However, there are some lines where he temporarily switches to the 한다 style:

"물에 풍덩 내던져도 기어나올 가망이 없다?"
"그래." 고마쓰는 말했다.
"그래서 최종심에는 올리지 않는다?"
"바로 거기야." 고마쓰는 말했다. ...
...
"그러니까 고마쓰 씨가기 말하는 '조금 특별한 아이디어'가 거기서 등장하는군요?"

I assume that the shift during this particular exchange implies something about it that I don't understand? Also, I assume the fact that it happens is an indication that their relationship is fairly close?

That is a "quote" style.
And it really means...

You are saying 'bla bla bla...', right?


The above lines can be replaced as follow.

"물에 풍덩 내던져도 기어나올 가망이 없다고요?"
"그래." 고마쓰는 말했다.
"그래서 최종심에는 올리지 않는다고요?"
"바로 거기야." 고마쓰는 말했다.

This is not a case of the shift.

[carsont]

Thanks!

That is a "quote" style.

I assumed as much, but I was confused because I thought that the "고" and "요" would be required for it to be polite. Thanks again.

A couple more:

1. 상의 주머니

This is an upper pocket, like a shirt pocket? That's the only meaning of 상 I can find that seems to make sense...

2. 다만 고상하신 본격문학 업계에서는 그런 방식이 공공연히 통용되는 게 아니야

Why "고상하신" instead of "고상한"?
I don't see any connection to an honorific person...
Is it perhaps meant in a sarcastic way? Like the capital letters below:

"It's just that those methods aren't openly used in the field of Serious, High-Brow Literature."

[manyakumi]

1. 상의 주머니

This is an upper pocket, like a shirt pocket? That's the only meaning of 상 I can find that seems to make sense...

Correct.

상(上) : Upper
의(衣) : Clothe

상의 : Shirt, Jacket, etc...

2. 다만 고상하신 본격문학 업계에서는 그런 방식이 공공연히 통용되는 게 아니야

Why "고상하신" instead of "고상한"?
I don't see any connection to an honorific person...
Is it perhaps meant in a sarcastic way? Like the capital letters below:

"It's just that those methods aren't openly used in the field of Serious, High-Brow Literature."

Exactly.
I can see the sarcasm in that sentence.

However, 업계 means 'industry' and it refers to all people related with the industry.

[carsont]

Thanks again!

1. In chapter 5, someone says:

"술이 센 모양이시네."

The speaker is a man in his 50s, the listener a woman in her 30s. They are strangers, so they both use "해요" endings for a while, though the man switches to 반말 shortly after this point.

I'm confused about why there is a "시" in this sentence but not a "요"?
Is it normal to being using casual verb endings around a person, but continue to use 시 when referring to them?

2.

"친구분이 나짜를 잘못 안 거 아닐까요?"
"그런 거겠죠? 옛날부터 덜렁대는 애였어요."

"덜렁대다" is to be... ditzy? clueless? forgetful? Something like that?

3. I'm just having trouble fully parsing these particular sentences:

"나이도 먹을 만큼 먹고서 대체 무슨 생각을 하면서 사는 거예요?"
"After living as long as you have, what on earth are you going around thinking?" (?)

"만주철도 (남만주철도주식회사) 러일전쟁이 종결된 다음 해, 러시아로부터 철도 선로와 그 권익을 양도받는 형식으로 탄생하여 급속히 규모가 확대되었다."

"The Manchurian railroad (South Manchuria Railroad Corporation) was created the year after the Russo-Japanese war ended, in the form of a railroad line (and... rights? land rights...?) ceded by Russia, and was then rapidly expanded."

[manyakumi]

"술이 센 모양이시네."

First of all, this sentence is grammatically wrong.
It should be... "술이 세신 모양이네."
Because 모양(the scene) doesn't need to be honored at all.
술이 세다 is the main verb which describes action(or condition) of hidden "You"(the listener) who has to be honored.
Even native Koreans are using the wrong one without knowing though.

I'm confused about why there is a "시" in this sentence but not a "요"?
Is it normal to being using casual verb endings around a person, but continue to use 시 when referring to them?

Because he is talking to himself with the intention to let her listen.
You can hear this kind of conversation sometimes even among the strangers.
That makes them be able to avoid speaking directly to strangers, which can be considered kinda rude.

"친구분이 날짜를 잘못 안 거 아닐까요?"
"그런 거겠죠? 옛날부터 덜렁대는 애였어요."

"덜렁대다" is to be... ditzy? clueless? forgetful? Something like that?

I guess so.

"나이도 먹을 만큼 먹고서 대체 무슨 생각을 하면서 사는 거예요?"
"After living as long as you have, what on earth are you going around thinking?" (?)

I think this is an example of a literal translation.
I'd rather do as..
"As a mature person, why on earth are you living without thinking?"

"만주철도 (남만주철도주식회사) 러일전쟁이 종결된 다음 해, 러시아로부터 철도 선로와 그 권익을 양도받는 형식으로 탄생하여 급속히 규모가 확대되었다."

"The Manchurian railroad (South Manchuria Railroad Corporation) was created the year after the Russo-Japanese war ended, in the form of a railroad line (and... rights? land rights...?) ceded by Russia, and was then rapidly expanded."

How about this...?
'in the form of being ceded the railroad lines and the rights from Russia'

[carsont]

Thanks so much!

Another thing:

1.

자네도 알다 시피 "공기 번데기"는 워드프로세서 원고 형태로 보내왔고, 그렇다면 새 원고도 똑같이 워드프로세서를 써야 앞뒤가 맞아.

I don't understand "시피" and can't find mention of it in a dictionary or grammar book. I get the feeling it might be an English loan word, but if so I can't figure out what it is.

Because of that, I'm not confident that I understand what the first clause means. I think the sentence overall is something like:

"As you know (?), 'Air Chrysalis (*)' was submitted as a word processor printout, so it will make sense if you write the new draft the same way, using a word processor."

* I've also never been confident that I really understand the title "공기 번데기". I think it's supposed to contain mistakes that are funny, or indicate that its author isn't very skilled. In both chapter 2 and chapter 4, people point out that the author confused "번데기" with "누에고치", but I don't really understand what difference that makes. (To be honest, I don't know the difference between a "cocoon" and a "chrysalis" very well in English either; I had to look it up. ) I suppose it's possible that this title could be something that suffered in the Japanese to Korean translation, also, or that the reader isn't meant to completely understand it yet.

[manyakumi]

I don't understand "시피" and can't find mention of it in a dictionary or grammar book. I get the feeling it might be an English loan word, but if so I can't figure out what it is.

You will find it in the dictionary by searching 다시피.
And I doubt it is related to an English word.


자네도 알다시피
As you know,

I've also never been confident that I really understand the title "공기 번데기". I think it's supposed to contain mistakes that are funny, or indicate that its author isn't very skilled. In both chapter 2 and chapter 4, people point out that the author confused "번데기" with "누에고치", but I don't really understand what difference that makes. (To be honest, I don't know the difference between a "cocoon" and a "chrysalis" very well in English either; I had to look it up. ) I suppose it's possible that this title could be something that suffered in the Japanese to Korean translation, also, or that the reader isn't meant to completely understand it yet.

I think it's weird too, but I've never read that novel so I can't get the meaning of 공기 번데기.
All I know is that the Korean versions of that novel 1Q84 also say it's 공기 번데기.

[carsont]

Thanks again!

I think it's weird too, but I've never read that novel so I can't get the meaning of 공기 번데기.
All I know is that the Korean versions of that novel 1Q84 also say it's 공기 번데기.

That's the version I'm reading, so yes.

I have a grammar question that's prompted by a passage in chapter 8:

"너는 평소에 어떤 책을 읽지?" 덴고는 심심함을 견디지 못해 전철이 미타카를 지났을 즈음 그렇게 물었다. 그건 언젠가 후카에리에게 물어보고 싶었던 것이었다.

후카에리는 덴고를 흘끔 쳐다보고, 그러고는 다시 얼굴을 정면으로 향했다. "책은 안 읽어요." 그녀는 간결하게 대답했다.

"So what kind of books do you usually read?" Tengo asked, unable to bear the boredom as the train passed Mitaka. It was something he'd wanted to ask Fukaeri sometime.

Fukaeri cast a sidelong glance at Tengo, then faced straight ahead once again. "I don't read books," she tersely replied.

My question is: how would the meaning have been different if she had said "책을 안 읽어요" instead? Or "책들을 안 읽어요", or just "책 안 읽어요"?

Does the "은" just clarify that the topic is books in general, as opposed to some specific book?
Or does it signal a contrast, that she doesn't read books, but there are other things that she does read?

If anyone sees something wrong with my translation, I'd appreciate that also of course.

[manyakumi]

My question is: how would the meaning have been different if she had said "책을 안 읽어요" instead? Or "책들을 안 읽어요", or just "책 안 읽어요"?

Does the "은" just clarify that the topic is books in general, as opposed to some specific book?
Or does it signal a contrast, that she doesn't read books, but there are other things that she does read?

책을 안 읽어요 is just a normal sentence.
The meaning would be the same though, not fit at that situation.

She made 책 a topic by using 은 in order to emphasize the fact that she does not read any 'books'.
책 안 읽어요 is okay to use for that situation.
She seemed to mean she would rather do something else than reading books.
Or kind of mad at him because he asked like that.

[carsont]

Again, thanks so much for all your help.

1. This is a sentence I'm not sure I understand completely:

만에 하나 그 위법한 부분만 감쪽같이 감춰버린다고 해도 내가 세상에 태어나 이날까지 더등어온 인생의 합법적인 부분 역시 빈말이라도 정상이라고는 할 수 없다.

I think this could be roughly translated as:

Even if those rare unlawful acts were completely concealed, even the legal parts of the life I've been leading since I was born up until this couldn't very well be considered normal either.

I'm not certain I understand what "만에 하나" is modifying. Does it mean that the "위법한 부분" are exceedingly rare, or that "그 부분만 ... 간쪽같이 감춰버리[는 것]" is exceedingly unlikely?

I'm not sure I completely understand how to interpret "빈말이라도" in this particular case, either.

2.

하지만 나는 완전히 정상이고 주위 세계가 이상해졌다, 는 게 대부분의 정신병환자들이 주장하는 바가 아니던가.

But isn't "I'm perfectly normal, it's the world around me that's gone mad" what most mental patients insist?

I've seen the word "바" many times, and I think I understand what it means, but I don't when you want to use it. Would the above sentence be the same with "것이" instead of "바가"? If not, would "것" be incorrect, or is it just a different nuance?

3. Another sentence I had trouble interpreting:

내 뇌 속에 현실을 재작성하려는 기능 같은 게 생겨나서 그것이 특정한 뉴스만 선택하고 거기에 검은 천을 덮어씌워 내 눈에 띄지 않도록, 내 기억에 남지 않도록 해버렸는지도 모른다.

I think this is roughly:

Maybe a kind of capability to rewrite reality appeared in my brain, chose specific pieces of news, and covered with a black cloth so I would never see nor recall them.

My trouble here is with "재작성하려는". I can't find 재작성 in the dictionary, but I'm guessing it's 재 (再) + 작성 (作成), meaning to rewrite, revise, or something like that?

I'm also not sure how best to interpret the complete phrase "재작성하려는 기능". my understanding of "-려고 하는" is that it expresses an intention, desire, or plan, and my understanding of "기능" is that it means either a person's skill or a machine's function. I have difficulty attributing intent or desire to a function. Does "-려는" mean a purpose in this case, i.e. "a function with the purpose of rewriting reality"?

[manyakumi]

I'm not certain I understand what "만에 하나" is modifying. Does it mean that the "위법한 부분" are exceedingly rare, or that "그 부분만 ... 간쪽같이 감춰버리[는 것]" is exceedingly unlikely?

It literally means "one among 10 thousands" and refers to a very rare situation.
This is kind of an idiom which means "만약(if)" or "혹시(by any chance)".

만에 하나(의 확률로) ...
만에 하나 (그 위법한 부분만 감쪽같이 감춰버린다)고 해도
Even if we suppose that I could hide those rare unlawful acts completely

I'm not sure I completely understand how to interpret "빈말이라도" in this particular case, either.

빈말 is 'empty(meaningless) word'.
I think it could be translated as "at all" in this sentence.

I've seen the word "바" many times, and I think I understand what it means, but I don't when you want to use it. Would the above sentence be the same with "것이" instead of "바가"? If not, would "것" be incorrect, or is it just a different nuance?

You can use both interchangeably.

My trouble here is with "재작성하려는". I can't find 재작성 in the dictionary, but I'm guessing it's 재 (再) + 작성 (作成), meaning to rewrite, revise, or something like that?

Correct.

I'm also not sure how best to interpret the complete phrase "재작성하려는 기능". my understanding of "-려고 하는" is that it expresses an intention, desire, or plan, and my understanding of "기능" is that it means either a person's skill or a machine's function. I have difficulty attributing intent or desire to a function. Does "-려는" mean a purpose in this case, i.e. "a function with the purpose of rewriting reality"?

I can get your point.
It seems to be okay to use just as '재작성하는 기능'.
As you mentioned, however, we could feel the nuance of "purpose" by using "하려는".
I guess the writer used this word to mean the function works automatically not by one's will.