~에 '대'한: 대對 means -in short - "to face". "to target", or "to objectify" And yes, it is passable when you want to say <about>. But not all the time. 관하여 would be a better fit if you want more all-around preposition that means "about" ("관" means "in relation to" ) So! Other than definition#1 "about", 대하여 can mean 1) facing, 2)targeting 3)taking as object 발명품에 대한 권리 Right to (your) inventions (Right targeting inventions) 발명품에 관한 권리 sounds similar. But tiny difference in nuance. 발명품에 관한 권리 - I'd translate it to <Right pertaining to invention> It doesn't necessarily mean your right(say, a copyright) that you have to your inventions. It could mean any right so long as it pertains to(관=in relation to) the invention of discussion. It can even include the rights of the people who use the invention under license contract, for example a license holder's right) Just saying. Bye

I digressed. Back to your question. Below is basic one on one mapping To wake up: 깨다.(깨어나다) To be awake: 깨어 있다. To get up: 일어나다. To go to bed: 자러 가다. To lie down: 눕다 To fall asleep: 잠들다(enter sleep) To sleep: 자다. 1. "Why are you still awake?" (왜why, 아직still, 깨어..be awake) Baby talk: 왜 안 자? (lovely if you are a five year old or speaking to your lover or sibling) Informal: 왜 아직 깨어있어? Formal Threshold: 왜 아직 깨어 있어요? To people 15 yrs older: 왜 아직 깨어 계세요? (계시다 higher in politeness ladder than 있다) To your boss: 왜 아직까지 안 주무십니까? (주무시다 is extremely courteous version of 자다. You can say this to a King) 2."You're still awake?" ( 너you, 아직still, 깨어있..awake ?) Intrusive: 자? (person asking assumes the other is awake - I get furious when I get these texts) Rude: 안 자? (slightly better, since this one assumes that I go to bed early) Informal: 아직 깨어 있어? Formal Threshold: 아직 깨어 있어요? To your boss: 아직 깨어 계신가요? (you can gear up your politeness like: 늦은 시간 결례를 무릅쓰고 여쭙니다만, 혹시 아직 주무시기 전이라면....) 3. "I was tired but strangely enough now I feel perfectly awake!" (i will take the liberty of changing tired to "sleepy") Informal: 많이 졸렸는데, 지금은 신기하게 (잠이) 깼다. Formal: 많이 졸렸는데, 지금은 신기하게 (잠이) 깼어요. To your boss: 아까는 몹시 피곤했습니다만, 지금은 괜찮습니다. Hope it helps!

Hi! That's a legitimate question that you're asking, I think. When people say "아직 안 잤어?", what they intend to say is "Didn't go to bed yet?" "아직 안 잤어?" means "You didn't sleep yet?" It is in past tense: So it's inaccurate in a strict sense. What they should be asking is "아직 안 자? (still not asleep?)" or better yet "아직 깨어 있어?(still awake?)" for more clarity (자다-derivatives can mean many things) "아직 안 잤어?" would be correct in certain contexts for example, suppose a magazine company just before the deadline, everyone is pulling all-nighters and working late into the night. People are taking turns to go to the utility room and take a nap. You take a nap too at some point. You see one person who looks especially tired, then you can go ask that person "아직 안 잤어?" Though vague, I think people -- including myself -- prefer <안자?> to <깨어있어?> because it is the most efficient since it has the least syllables. 5syllables. Whereas <왜 아직 깨어있어?> takes longer. I guess since this question is used so... frequently, people are just trying to convey their intent in the quickest way possible. Hence the inaccuracy. I sometimes make do with "자?". I don't even type this. It's such a nuisance. Because I write this every day. I sometimes just summon Siri and say 자? then Siri does all the work for me.

I have no idea what a Collaborative Reality is, and have never heard of the term before; but I like the sound of it. I made some leaps of doubt, but I'm quite sure this is what 'the sayer' meant.

- In the meantime... 그 동안에, ...하는 동안, Mom and dad discussed the matter in depth. In the meantime I finished my dinner. 엄마 아빠가 사안을 논의했다. 그 동안 난 저녁을 다 먹었다. - Keep track of ~~ 계속 주시하다, 계속 파악하다, 관심을 기울이다, I no longer go to ballparks, but I try to keep track of the game results on news. 야구장은 이제 안간다. 그래도 뉴스로 경기 결과는 파악하려고 한다. - Keep in mind that ~~ ... 는 명심해라, ....는 알고 있어라, 주의하고 있어라 You can drink soju on streets in Seoul. But do keep in mind that cops can arrest you when they feel like. 서울에선 길에서 소주를 마실 수 있다. 그러나 경찰이 원하면 체포할 수 있다는 건 명심해라(/알고 있어라/ 주의해라) - On the other hand, 반대로 생각해보면, 달리 생각해보면, 한편, 반면 Well yes, it was quite a good bargain; on the other hand, do we really need one? 그래 맞아, 좋은 값에 잘 샀어; 그런데 한편, 과연 필요했나 싶기도 해. 그래 맞아, 좋은 값에 잘 샀어; 그런데 달리 생각해보면, 과연 필요했나 싶기도 해. 좋은 값에 잘 샀다고 생각했다; 그러나 한편 불필요한 걸 사진 않았나 하는 생각도 들었다. - It didn't take long before ~~ ~~하는 데는 오랜 시간이 걸리지 않았다/ or 오래 지나지 않아 ..... It didn't take long before the teacher found out what I had done. 선생님이 내가 한 일을 알아차리는 데에는 오랜 시간이 걸리지 않았다. 오래 지나지 않아, 선생님은 내가 한 일을 알아차렸다. - Believe it or not, 믿거나 말거나/ 믿기지 않겠지만 Believe it or not, I kissed a man today. 믿기지 않겠지만, 나 오늘 남자랑 키스했다. - I’m in a hurry. 나 지금 급해/ 나 서둘러야 해 - To deal with (something) 처리하다 I have to deal with an angry-boyfriend problem this weekend. 나 이번 주에 화난 남자친구 문제를 처리해야 돼. - For as long as I can remember, 내가 기억하는 한 (한 = limited by) For as long as I can remember, they were couples. 내가 기억하는 한, 걔네는 항상 커플이었어. - If I were you, I would ~~ 내가 너라면, 나는 --- 할꺼야/ 내가 너였으면, 000 한다. If I were you, I would go with it. It's an once-in-a-life time opportunity. 내가 너였으면, 그거 한다. 흔치 않은 기회야. - To act as if ~~ ~~인 양, 행동한다. ~~인 것처럼 행동한다, She acted as if everyone in the room was madly in love with her. 걔는 방안의 모든 사람이 자기를 열렬히 사랑하기라도 하는 것처럼 행동했다.

Several expressions available: Other than(其他 기타)-literally meaning "他other" + "其that" - 이 책은 번역이 나빴다. 기타는 다 괜찮았다 (sounds too literary but passable) outside from that- 그것 외(外)에는, 그 밖에는 (外 stands for "밖, 바깥") excluding that - 그 점을 빼면, 그런 측면만 제외하면, In use: 영화에는 페미니스트적 문제의식이 부족했어. 그거 외에는 썩 괜찮은 영화였는데.. 그 남자는 이빨이 노란 색이야. 그것만 빼면 참 좋은데. 방금 말한 문제점을 제외하면 재밌게 읽었어(책을).

I think the Korean phrase you quoted is grammatically wrong. Yes, it is rather complicated since Korean laws are written notoriously in pretentious Kanji(Chinese-origin) based Korean words, but much more so due to its syntactical errors. I looked it up. Following is the full semantic extension of the sentence above. 1. "민간투자법 25조" regulates that when it is forseeble that the actual working expense would change from that of the reported expense, the contractor must abide by the related regulations. 2. As to its specifics, "민간투자법 25조" is referring them to "민간투자법 시행령 22조" which states when the contractor can or cannot change it. 3. Contractors of turn-key contracts are naturally bound by these regulations. 턴키계약이란 민간투자법 시행령 제 22조에서는 실시협약상 총사업비에 관하여 사업 시행자는 법 제 25조 제3항에 따라 실시협약에 명시된 총사업비를 다음 각 호의 경우외에는 변경할 수 없다. This is the sentence. It has critical errors, i.e., it opens with "턴기계약이란" meaning "the definition of turn-key contract is" and never corresponds in the later part of the sentence. 80% of this is a direct excerpt from the pertaining codes(법 25, 시행령 22) It's outrageous that a professional submits such a nonsensical half or no assed garbage and can keep his job. If it were up to me I would change the Korean sentence like this: 턴기계약의 사업자도 민간투자법과 민간투자법 시행령의 규율을 받는다. 그러므로 실시협약에서 명시한 사업비를 변경할 때에는 "민간투자법 시행령 22조"에서 서술한 경우에 한한다(한정되어야 한다). Now the translation is yours. Good luck! Here are the links I looked up: 시행령22조: http://www.law.go.kr/%EB%B2%95%EB%A0%B9/%EC%82%AC%ED%9A%8C%EA%B8%B0%EB%B0%98%EC%8B%9C%EC%84%A4%EC%97%90%EB%8C%80%ED%95%9C%EB%AF%BC%EA%B0%84%ED%88%AC%EC%9E%90%EB%B2%95%EC%8B%9C%ED%96%89%EB%A0%B9/(26928,20160122) 법 25조: http://www.law.go.kr/%EB%B2%95%EB%A0%B9/%EC%82%AC%ED%9A%8C%EA%B8%B0%EB%B0%98%EC%8B%9C%EC%84%A4%EC%97%90%20%EB%8C%80%ED%95%9C%20%EB%AF%BC%EA%B0%84%ED%88%AC%EC%9E%90%EB%B2%95

You worked hard...rest well then please come back 수고했습니다. 잘 쉬고 내일 봅시다. Literal translation'd be "잘 쉬고 돌아와 주세요", an expression never used in real Korean.