빌려주다 - confused on direction
I'm confusing myself, and would appreciate some help to clarify my thinking.

I read this sentence:

제가 카메라를 빌려줄 테니까 다음 주에 돌려주세요.

I understand this sentence because everything is fully qualified - subject, direct object, and the use of honorific in the second clause clarifies everything any other questions of direction. However; if I strip this down to a simpler statement like:

카메라를 빌려줬어요.

Does that sentence by itself imply any direction? or could the "줬어요" imply either direction, in which case I must clarify the direction if it isn't obvious? And could I reverse the direction in the sentence without fully qualifying with subject or an honorific?

I think I should know this, but for some reason, I'm mentally cramping on this at the moment.In case I'm not clear ... I think what is confusing me is my basis in English where "Borrow" and "Loan" are opposites and imply a direction. However, we don't normally leave the subject implied in English, so the combination of subject, and the choice of "Borrow" or "loan" tells me exactly which direction the camera, or other object is moving. I think in this case, I'm lacking a direction for 빌려주다 like I have with "Loan" or "borrow."

Question

빌려주다 - confused on direction
I'm confusing myself, and would appreciate some help to clarify my thinking.

I read this sentence:

제가 카메라를 빌려줄 테니까 다음 주에 돌려주세요.

I understand this sentence because everything is fully qualified - subject, direct object, and the use of honorific in the second clause clarifies everything any other questions of direction. However; if I strip this down to a simpler statement like:

카메라를 빌려줬어요.

Does that sentence by itself imply any direction? or could the "줬어요" imply either direction, in which case I must clarify the direction if it isn't obvious? And could I reverse the direction in the sentence without fully qualifying with subject or an honorific?

I think I should know this, but for some reason, I'm mentally cramping on this at the moment.In case I'm not clear ... I think what is confusing me is my basis in English where "Borrow" and "Loan" are opposites and imply a direction. However, we don't normally leave the subject implied in English, so the combination of subject, and the choice of "Borrow" or "loan" tells me exactly which direction the camera, or other object is moving. I think in this case, I'm lacking a direction for 빌려주다 like I have with "Loan" or "borrow."

Answer

I think you can take it simple like this:
"Borrow" means "빌리다"
"Loan" means "빌려 주다"

ex)
Can I borrow your umbrella?
우산 좀 빌릴 수 있을까?
I’ll loan you any books you need.
네가 필요한 책이면 얼마든지 빌려 주겠다.

Answer

If I understood your question correctly, I'll say 줬어요 can imply either direction. Who initiated the action is understood in context most of the time but some people won't clarify the direction even when it's not obvious; either because they think it is or because they want to incite your curiosity about it. It could be just part of their language-using habit. Hope that helps.

Answer

"줬어요" Actually means just verb. Like I gave (Past verb) If you just say "카메라를 빌려줬어요" -> It involves just subject implied, verb, and object. People can be confused because you didn't mention an indirect object ( like to whom? to what?). Even the first sentence (제가 카메라를 빌려줄 테니까 다음 주에 돌려주세요) doesn't have any indirect object.('you' is just implied in sentence.) The Reason I know that there is direction implied in first sentence is that subject mentions both borrowing and returning to one indirect object(implied 'you'). I'll borrow  camera (to you) and give it back to me please. But even in Korean we don't imply direction often. That's just exceptional case i think.
 If you have any more questions, comment on it!

Answers · 3

Still haven’t found your answers?

Don’t miss out on the opportunity to learn a language from the comfort of your own home. Browse our selection of experienced language tutors and enroll in your first lesson now!