✂️

Using 'Suji' (Contextual Omission) in Writing

Agent Progress
Built
Build Order
171
Keywords
생략 법칙
Lesson #
S
Done
Section
Advanced Grammar
🎯
TL;DR 🦄
  • ✂️ Contextual omission means leaving out a subject, object, particle, or repeated phrase when the reader can clearly recover it from context.
  • 🧭 Good omission makes Korean writing tighter; bad omission makes the reader wonder, “Wait… who did what?”
  • 🧩 Use the restore test: if you can restore the missing piece from nearby context without guessing, omission is probably safe.
🔊
🎧 Iru Helper Note — Open
Korean Helper Widgets
Korean Helper Widgets whenever you want to hear a Korean word or sentence aloud. Type it in, listen, and let your ears do tiny grammar push-ups. 🏋️
 

🌈 The Big Picture

Korean often lets context carry information. When the subject, object, or repeated phrase is already obvious, Korean may leave it unsaid. This is 생략 [saeng-nyak] — “omission.” ✂️
 
In speech, omission can feel quick and natural. In writing, especially essays, reports, and polished paragraphs, omission needs control: it should make the sentence cleaner, not mysterious. 🌫️
 
This lesson focuses on writing with these core words: 저는 [jeo-neun] “I,” 지민은 [Ji-min-eun] “Jimin,” 민수는 [Min-su-neun] “Minsu,” 작가는 [jak-ga-neun] “the writer,” 독자는 [dok-ja-neun] “the reader,” 보고서 [bo-go-seo] “report,” 초안 [cho-an] “draft,” 문장 [mun-jang] “sentence,” 결론 [gyeol-lon] “conclusion,” 근거 [geun-geo] “evidence,” 자료 [ja-ryo] “data/materials,” 문맥 [mun-maek] “context,” and actions like 쓰다 [sseu-da] “to write,” 고치다 [go-chi-da] “to revise/fix,” 읽다 [ik-tta] “to read,” 검토하다 [geom-to-ha-da] “to review,” 제출하다 [je-chul-ha-da] “to submit,” and 강조하다 [gang-jo-ha-da] “to emphasize.” 📝
 

🎨 The Core Contextual Omission Family

1. Subject omission — 주어 생략 [ju-eo saeng-nyak] “subject omission” 👤
 
If the subject is already clear, Korean can omit it in the next sentence.
  • Full: 저는 오늘 보고서를 썼습니다. 저는 내일 보고서를 제출하겠습니다. [jeo-neun o-neul bo-go-seo-reul sseot-seum-ni-da. jeo-neun nae-il bo-go-seo-reul je-chul-ha-get-seum-ni-da] — “I wrote the report today. I will submit the report tomorrow.”
  • Tighter: 저는 오늘 보고서를 썼습니다. 내일 제출하겠습니다. [jeo-neun o-neul bo-go-seo-reul sseot-seum-ni-da. nae-il je-chul-ha-get-seum-ni-da] — “I wrote the report today. I will submit it tomorrow.” 📄
 
2. Object omission — 목적어 생략 [mok-jeo-geo saeng-nyak] “object omission” 🎯
 
If the object is obvious from the previous sentence, Korean can omit it.
  • Full: 지민은 초안을 썼습니다. 민수는 초안을 고쳤습니다. [Ji-min-eun cho-an-eul sseot-seum-ni-da. Min-su-neun cho-an-eul go-chyeot-seum-ni-da] — “Jimin wrote the draft. Minsu revised the draft.”
  • Tighter: 지민은 초안을 썼습니다. 민수는 고쳤습니다. [Ji-min-eun cho-an-eul sseot-seum-ni-da. Min-su-neun go-chyeot-seum-ni-da] — “Jimin wrote the draft. Minsu revised it.” 🛠️
 
3. Particle omission — 조사 생략 [jo-sa saeng-nyak] “particle omission” 🏷️
 
Particles like 은/는 [eun/neun] “topic/contrast,” 이/가 [i/ga] “subject,” and 을/를 [eul/reul] “object” can disappear in casual notes or dialogue. In formal writing, keep them unless omission is clearly stylistic.
  • Note style: 자료 충분함. 결론 약함. [ja-ryo chung-bun-ham. gyeol-lon ya-kam] — “Data sufficient. Conclusion weak.”
  • Polished style: 자료는 충분하지만, 결론은 약합니다. [ja-ryo-neun chung-bun-ha-ji-man, gyeol-lo-neun ya-kam-ni-da] — “The data is sufficient, but the conclusion is weak.” 📊
 
4. Repeated phrase omission — 반복어 생략 [ban-bo-geo saeng-nyak] “omission of repeated wording” 🔁
 
When two clauses share a repeated idea, Korean can compress the second part if the meaning stays clear.
  • Full: 첫 문장은 주장을 드러내고, 둘째 문장은 근거를 드러냅니다. [cheot mun-jang-eun ju-jang-eul deu-reo-nae-go, dul-jjae mun-jang-eun geun-geo-reul deu-reo-naem-ni-da] — “The first sentence reveals the claim, and the second sentence reveals the evidence.”
  • Tighter: 첫 문장은 주장을, 둘째 문장은 근거를 드러냅니다. [cheot mun-jang-eun ju-jang-eul, dul-jjae mun-jang-eun geun-geo-reul deu-reo-naem-ni-da] — “The first sentence reveals the claim; the second, the evidence.” 🧾
 

🛠️ How They Work in a Sentence

Safe subject/object omission 🧭
 
저는 오늘 보고서를 썼습니다. 내일 제출하겠습니다. [jeo-neun o-neul bo-go-seo-reul sseot-seum-ni-da. nae-il je-chul-ha-get-seum-ni-da] — “I wrote the report today. I will submit it tomorrow.” 📄
 
Here, 저는 [jeo-neun] “I” and 보고서를 [bo-go-seo-reul] “the report + object marker” are recoverable from the first sentence.
 
Clear object omission with a new subject 🛠️
 
지민은 초안을 썼습니다. 민수는 고쳤습니다. [Ji-min-eun cho-an-eul sseot-seum-ni-da. Min-su-neun go-chyeot-seum-ni-da] — “Jimin wrote the draft. Minsu revised it.” 📝
 
Because 초안 [cho-an] “draft” is already active in context, the second sentence can omit the object.
 
When omission should be avoided 🚦
 
작가는 결론을 강조했습니다. 독자는 불분명하다고 느꼈습니다. [jak-ga-neun gyeol-lo-neul gang-jo-haet-seum-ni-da. dok-ja-neun bul-bun-myeong-ha-da-go neu-kkyeot-seum-ni-da] — “The writer emphasized the conclusion. The reader felt it was unclear.” 👀
 
Here, if we omit too much, the reader may not know whether 결론 [gyeol-lon] “conclusion,” 근거 [geun-geo] “evidence,” or 문장 [mun-jang] “sentence” felt unclear.
 

🧩 General Formation Rule

Use omission only when these checks pass:
 
  1. Recoverability check: Can the reader restore the missing part from nearby context? 누가? [nu-ga] “who?” 무엇을? [mu-eo-seul] “what?” 🔍
  1. Distance check: Is the missing word close enough? If the noun appeared several sentences ago, bring it back. 🧵
  1. Ambiguity check: Could two people or nouns fit the blank? If yes, do not omit. 🚧
 
There is no special conjugation here. This is a writing control rule, not a verb ending.
 

📚 Cross-check note

The explanation above was cross-checked against the National Institute of Korean Language article “실종된 성분을 찾아라” on korean.go.kr, which notes that omitted subjects, predicates, and other sentence elements must be recoverable through surrounding context for a sentence to be understood. ✅
 

🪞 Synonym Alert

  • 생략 [saeng-nyak] — “omission”; neutral grammar/writing term. ✂️
  • 줄임 [ju-rim] — “shortening”; everyday and broad. 🧶
  • 함축 [ham-chuk] — “implication/compression”; more formal and writing-focused. 📦
 

⚠️ Pitfalls to Dodge

  • ❌ 지민은 초안을 썼습니다. 민수는 고쳤습니다. with no prior focus on 초안 → ✅ Keep 초안을 if the object is not obvious. 📝
  • ❌ 자료 충분함. 결론 약함. in a formal essay → ✅ 자료는 충분하지만, 결론은 약합니다. because formal writing needs clearer particles. 📊
  • ❌ Omitting the subject when two people are possible → ✅ Repeat 지민은 or 민수는 so the reader does not guess. 👥
  • ❌ Omitting a predicate so the sentence feels unfinished → ✅ Keep the needed verb, especially 쓰다, 고치다, 읽다, or 제출하다. 🧰
  • ❌ Treating omission as “anything can disappear” → ✅ Only omit what the context can restore. 🐜
 
🎉 Omission is not laziness; it is reader-friendly compression. Trim the sentence only when the meaning still stands upright. ✂️🧍
 

Try this exercise

Instructions: Restore the missing word or particle so each sentence becomes clear. Read the Korean line, say the completed sentence aloud, then open the Answer toggle. 📝
1. 저는 보고서를 썼습니다. 내일 ＿＿＿＿.
[jeo-neun bo-go-seo-reul sseot-seum-ni-da. nae-il ＿＿＿＿]
I wrote the report. I will submit it tomorrow. 📄
Answer
제출하겠습니다 [je-chul-ha-get-seum-ni-da] — The predicate “will submit” completes the sentence.
2. 지민은 초안을 썼습니다. 민수는 ＿＿＿＿ 고쳤습니다.
[Ji-min-eun cho-an-eul sseot-seum-ni-da. Min-su-neun ＿＿＿＿ go-chyeot-seum-ni-da]
Jimin wrote the draft. Minsu revised the draft. 🛠️
Answer
초안을 [cho-a-neul] — Restore the object for maximum clarity.
3. 자료는 충분하지만, 결론＿＿＿＿ 약합니다.
[ja-ryo-neun chung-bun-ha-ji-man, gyeol-lon ＿＿＿＿ ya-kam-ni-da]
The data is sufficient, but the conclusion is weak. 📊
Answer
은 [eun] — 은/는 marks contrast.
4. 첫 문장은 주장을, 둘째 문장은 ＿＿＿＿ 드러냅니다.
[cheot mun-jang-eun ju-jang-eul, dul-jjae mun-jang-eun ＿＿＿＿ deu-reo-naem-ni-da]
The first sentence reveals the claim; the second reveals the evidence. 🧾
Answer
근거를 [geun-geo-reul] — The repeated predicate 드러냅니다 carries both objects.
5. 작가는 결론을 강조했습니다. 독자는 ＿＿＿＿ 불분명하다고 느꼈습니다.
[jak-ga-neun gyeol-lo-neul gang-jo-haet-seum-ni-da. dok-ja-neun ＿＿＿＿ bul-bun-myeong-ha-da-go neu-kkyeot-seum-ni-da]
The writer emphasized the conclusion. The reader felt the conclusion was unclear. 👀
Answer
결론이 [gyeol-lo-ni] — Restore what is unclear so the reader does not guess.
6. 문장이 길면 독자는 ＿＿＿＿ 어렵습니다.
[mun-jang-i gil-myeon dok-ja-neun ＿＿＿＿ eo-ryeop-seum-ni-da]
If the sentence is long, reading is difficult for the reader. 📚
Answer
읽기 [il-gi] — The noun form “reading” completes the idea.
7. 근거가 약하면 주장이 ＿＿＿＿.
[geun-geo-ga ya-ka-myeon ju-jang-i ＿＿＿＿]
If the evidence is weak, the claim becomes unclear. 🧩
Answer
불분명해집니다 [bul-bun-myeong-hae-jim-ni-da] — Keep the predicate when it carries the result.
8. 저는 자료를 검토했습니다. 보고서에 ＿＿＿＿ 넣었습니다.
[jeo-neun ja-ryo-reul geom-to-haet-seum-ni-da. bo-go-seo-e ＿＿＿＿ neo-eot-seum-ni-da]
I reviewed the data. I put the data into the report. 📁
Answer
자료를 [ja-ryo-reul] — The object is recoverable, but restoring it is clearer for practice.
9. 초안은 길었습니다. 그래서 지민은 ＿＿＿＿ 줄였습니다.
[cho-a-neun gi-reot-seum-ni-da. geu-rae-seo Ji-min-eun ＿＿＿＿ ju-ryeot-seum-ni-da]
The draft was long. So Jimin shortened the sentence. ✏️
Answer
문장을 [mun-jang-eul] — Restore the exact object if more than one object could fit.
10. 생략은 좋지만, 문맥이 ＿＿＿＿ 해야 합니다.
[saeng-nya-geun jo-chi-man, mun-mae-gi ＿＿＿＿ hae-ya ham-ni-da]
Omission is good, but the context must be clear. 🧭
Answer
분명해야 [bun-myeong-hae-ya] — Context must be clear enough to restore the omitted part.
📚
Vocabulary Box
  • 저는 → I + topic
  • 지민은 → Jimin + topic
  • 민수는 → Minsu + topic
  • 작가는 → writer + topic
  • 독자는 → reader + topic
  • 보고서 → report
  • 초안 → draft
  • 자료 → data/materials
  • 결론 → conclusion
  • 문장 → sentence
  • 주장 → claim
  • 근거 → evidence
  • 문맥 → context
  • 생략 → omission
  • 제출하다 → to submit
  • 고치다 → to revise/fix
  • 읽다 → to read
  • 검토하다 → to review
  • 넣다 → to put in/add
  • 줄이다 → to shorten
  • 약하다 → to be weak
  • 분명하다 → to be clear
  • 불분명하다 → to be unclear
Tip 💡 If two answers feel possible, restore the missing word instead of omitting it.
🚀
Want more reps? Visit the Practice Hub when you're ready! Your sentences are about to get lean, clear, and suspiciously elegant. ✂️
 
📦
🎯 Practice Hub — Using Contextual Omission in Writing
 
Welcome to your contextual omission gym. ✂️ You’ll practice when Korean can safely leave out a subject, object, particle, or repeated phrase — and when your reader deserves a little more clarity. Think of it as sentence tailoring: trim the cloth, not the whole sleeve. 🧵
 
🔊 Audio reminder: Use
Korean Helper Widgets
Korean Helper Widgets whenever you want to hear a completed sentence aloud.
 
📝 Instructions: Complete each Korean sentence with the clearest missing piece, read it aloud, then open the Answer toggle. Focus on whether the missing part is recoverable from nearby context.
 

Exercise 1 — Restore the Subject 👤

A. 지민은 초안을 썼습니다. ＿＿＿＿ 밤에 고쳤습니다.
[Ji-min-eun cho-a-neul sseot-seum-ni-da. ＿＿＿＿ ba-me go-chyeot-seum-ni-da]
Jimin wrote the draft. Jimin revised it at night. 🌙
Answer
지민은 [Ji-min-eun] — Same subject, close context; it can later be omitted.
B. 민수는 자료를 검토했습니다. ＿＿＿＿ 결론을 강조했습니다.
[Min-su-neun ja-ryo-reul geom-to-haet-seum-ni-da. ＿＿＿＿ gyeol-lo-neul gang-jo-haet-seum-ni-da]
Minsu reviewed the data. Minsu emphasized the conclusion. 📊
Answer
민수는 [Min-su-neun] — The actor stays the same.
C. 작가는 문장을 줄였습니다. ＿＿＿＿ 독자를 생각했습니다.
[jak-ga-neun mun-jang-eul ju-ryeot-seum-ni-da. ＿＿＿＿ dok-ja-reul saeng-gak-haet-seum-ni-da]
The writer shortened the sentence. The writer thought about the reader. ✍️
Answer
작가는 [jak-ga-neun] — Repeating the subject is optional if the context is clear.
D. 독자는 근거를 읽었습니다. ＿＿＿＿ 주장을 이해했습니다.
[dok-ja-neun geun-geo-reul il-geot-seum-ni-da. ＿＿＿＿ ju-jang-eul i-hae-haet-seum-ni-da]
The reader read the evidence. The reader understood the claim. 📚
Answer
독자는 [dok-ja-neun] — Safe subject omission because no new actor appears.
E. 저는 문맥을 확인했습니다. ＿＿＿＿ 생략을 고쳤습니다.
[jeo-neun mun-mae-geul hwa-gin-haet-seum-ni-da. ＿＿＿＿ saeng-nya-geul go-chyeot-seum-ni-da]
I checked the context. I fixed the omission. 🔍
Answer
저는 [jeo-neun] — The subject can be omitted after the first sentence.
F. 지민은 보고서를 제출했습니다. ＿＿＿＿ 결과를 기다렸습니다.
[Ji-min-eun bo-go-seo-reul je-chul-haet-seum-ni-da. ＿＿＿＿ gyeol-gwa-reul gi-da-ryeot-seum-ni-da]
Jimin submitted the report. Jimin waited for the result. ⏳
Answer
지민은 [Ji-min-eun] — Repeat it if the paragraph has many people.
G. 민수는 첫 문장을 읽었습니다. ＿＿＿＿ 둘째 문장을 고쳤습니다.
[Min-su-neun cheot mun-jang-eul il-geot-seum-ni-da. ＿＿＿＿ dul-jjae mun-jang-eul go-chyeot-seum-ni-da]
Minsu read the first sentence. Minsu revised the second sentence. 🛠️
Answer
민수는 [Min-su-neun] — Same subject, two actions.
H. 작가는 자료를 넣었습니다. ＿＿＿＿ 근거를 강조했습니다.
[jak-ga-neun ja-ryo-reul neo-eot-seum-ni-da. ＿＿＿＿ geun-geo-reul gang-jo-haet-seum-ni-da]
The writer added the data. The writer emphasized the evidence. 📁
Answer
작가는 [jak-ga-neun] — Clear repeated subject.
I. 독자는 결론을 읽었습니다. ＿＿＿＿ 불분명하다고 느꼈습니다.
[dok-ja-neun gyeol-lo-neul il-geot-seum-ni-da. ＿＿＿＿ bul-bun-myeong-ha-da-go neu-kkyeot-seum-ni-da]
The reader read the conclusion. The reader felt it was unclear. 👀
Answer
독자는 [dok-ja-neun] — Restore it if another person appears nearby.
J. 저는 초안을 검토했습니다. ＿＿＿＿ 문장을 줄였습니다.
[jeo-neun cho-a-neul geom-to-haet-seum-ni-da. ＿＿＿＿ mun-jang-eul ju-ryeot-seum-ni-da]
I reviewed the draft. I shortened the sentence. ✂️
Answer
저는 [jeo-neun] — Same actor, nearby context, safe omission.
👤
Vocabulary Box
  • 저는 → I + topic
  • 지민은 → Jimin + topic
  • 민수는 → Minsu + topic
  • 작가는 → writer + topic
  • 독자는 → reader + topic
  • 첫 → first
  • 둘째 → second
  • 밤 → night
  • 결과 → result
  • 초안 → draft
  • 문장 → sentence
  • 자료 → data
  • 근거 → evidence
  • 결론 → conclusion
  • 보고서 → report
  • 문맥 → context
  • 생략 → omission
  • 고치다 → to revise/fix
  • 검토하다 → to review
  • 강조하다 → to emphasize
  • 생각하다 → to think
  • 이해하다 → to understand
  • 확인하다 → to check
  • 제출하다 → to submit
  • 기다리다 → to wait
  • 넣다 → to put in/add
  • 느끼다 → to feel
  • 줄이다 → to shorten
Tip 💡 Repeated subject + nearby context = usually safe to omit.
 

Exercise 2 — Restore the Object 🎯

A. 지민은 보고서를 썼습니다. 민수는 ＿＿＿＿ 검토했습니다.
[Ji-min-eun bo-go-seo-reul sseot-seum-ni-da. Min-su-neun ＿＿＿＿ geom-to-haet-seum-ni-da]
Jimin wrote the report. Minsu reviewed the report. 📄
Answer
보고서를 [bo-go-seo-reul] — Restore the object when the subject changes.
B. 작가는 초안을 만들었습니다. 지민은 ＿＿＿＿ 읽었습니다.
[jak-ga-neun cho-a-neul man-deu-reot-seum-ni-da. Ji-min-eun ＿＿＿＿ il-geot-seum-ni-da]
The writer made the draft. Jimin read the draft. 📝
Answer
초안을 [cho-a-neul] — The object is close and recoverable.
C. 민수는 근거를 찾았습니다. 독자는 ＿＿＿＿ 확인했습니다.
[Min-su-neun geun-geo-reul cha-jat-seum-ni-da. dok-ja-neun ＿＿＿＿ hwa-gin-haet-seum-ni-da]
Minsu found the evidence. The reader checked the evidence. 🔍
Answer
근거를 [geun-geo-reul] — New subject, same object.
D. 저는 결론을 썼습니다. 작가는 ＿＿＿＿ 강조했습니다.
[jeo-neun gyeol-lo-neul sseot-seum-ni-da. jak-ga-neun ＿＿＿＿ gang-jo-haet-seum-ni-da]
I wrote the conclusion. The writer emphasized the conclusion. 🎯
Answer
결론을 [gyeol-lo-neul] — Keep the object visible when the action changes.
E. 독자는 문장을 읽었습니다. 민수는 ＿＿＿＿ 고쳤습니다.
[dok-ja-neun mun-jang-eul il-geot-seum-ni-da. Min-su-neun ＿＿＿＿ go-chyeot-seum-ni-da]
The reader read the sentence. Minsu revised the sentence. 🛠️
Answer
문장을 [mun-jang-eul] — The object relation stays clear.
F. 지민은 주장을 드러냈습니다. 독자는 ＿＿＿＿ 이해했습니다.
[Ji-min-eun ju-jang-eul deu-reo-naet-seum-ni-da. dok-ja-neun ＿＿＿＿ i-hae-haet-seum-ni-da]
Jimin revealed the claim. The reader understood the claim. 💡
Answer
주장을 [ju-jang-eul] — Object omission is possible only because the claim is nearby.
G. 민수는 자료를 넣었습니다. 저는 ＿＿＿＿ 검토했습니다.
[Min-su-neun ja-ryo-reul neo-eot-seum-ni-da. jeo-neun ＿＿＿＿ geom-to-haet-seum-ni-da]
Minsu added the data. I reviewed the data. 📁
Answer
자료를 [ja-ryo-reul] — Restore the object because the actor changes.
H. 작가는 생략을 사용했습니다. 독자는 ＿＿＿＿ 느꼈습니다.
[jak-ga-neun saeng-nya-geul sa-yong-haet-seum-ni-da. dok-ja-neun ＿＿＿＿ neu-kkyeot-seum-ni-da]
The writer used omission. The reader noticed the omission. ✂️
Answer
생략을 [saeng-nya-geul] — Without the object, “noticed” feels too open.
I. 저는 문맥을 확인했습니다. 지민은 ＿＿＿＿ 강조했습니다.
[jeo-neun mun-mae-geul hwa-gin-haet-seum-ni-da. Ji-min-eun ＿＿＿＿ gang-jo-haet-seum-ni-da]
I checked the context. Jimin emphasized the context. 🧭
Answer
문맥을 [mun-mae-geul] — Restore the object for clarity.
J. 민수는 결과를 기다렸습니다. 작가는 ＿＿＿＿ 보고서에 넣었습니다.
[Min-su-neun gyeol-gwa-reul gi-da-ryeot-seum-ni-da. jak-ga-neun ＿＿＿＿ bo-go-seo-e neo-eot-seum-ni-da]
Minsu waited for the result. The writer put the result into the report. 📌
Answer
결과를 [gyeol-gwa-reul] — Restore the object before the location phrase.
🎯
Vocabulary Box
  • 보고서 → report
  • 초안 → draft
  • 근거 → evidence
  • 결론 → conclusion
  • 문장 → sentence
  • 주장 → claim
  • 자료 → data
  • 생략 → omission
  • 문맥 → context
  • 결과 → result
  • 쓰다 → to write
  • 만들다 → to make
  • 찾다 → to find
  • 읽다 → to read
  • 고치다 → to revise/fix
  • 검토하다 → to review
  • 강조하다 → to emphasize
  • 확인하다 → to check
  • 이해하다 → to understand
  • 넣다 → to put in/add
  • 느끼다 → to feel
  • 기다리다 → to wait
  • 드러나다 → to be revealed
Tip 💡 New subject + old object = restore the object if clarity wobbles.
 

Exercise 3 — Particles: Keep or Trim? 🏷️

A. 자료＿＿＿＿ 충분하지만, 결론은 약합니다.
[ja-ryo ＿＿＿＿ chung-bun-ha-ji-man, gyeol-lo-neun ya-kam-ni-da]
The data is sufficient, but the conclusion is weak. 📊
Answer
는 [neun] — 자료 ends in a vowel, so use 는.
B. 결론＿＿＿＿ 약하지만, 근거는 분명합니다.
[gyeol-lon ＿＿＿＿ ya-ka-ji-man, geun-geo-neun bun-myeong-ham-ni-da]
The conclusion is weak, but the evidence is clear. 🧾
Answer
은 [eun] — 결론 ends in a consonant, so use 은.
C. 문장＿＿＿＿ 길면 독자는 어렵습니다.
[mun-jang ＿＿＿＿ gil-myeon dok-ja-neun eo-ryeop-seum-ni-da]
If the sentence is long, it is difficult for the reader. 📚
Answer
이 [i] — 문장 ends in a consonant, so the subject marker is 이.
D. 주장＿＿＿＿ 분명하면 독자는 이해합니다.
[ju-jang ＿＿＿＿ bun-myeong-ha-myeon dok-ja-neun i-hae-ham-ni-da]
If the claim is clear, the reader understands. 💡
Answer
이 [i] — 주장 ends in a consonant, so use 이.
E. 저는 초안＿＿＿＿ 고쳤습니다.
[jeo-neun cho-an ＿＿＿＿ go-chyeot-seum-ni-da]
I revised the draft. 📝
Answer
을 [eul] — 초안 ends in a consonant, so use 을.
F. 민수는 자료＿＿＿＿ 넣었습니다.
[Min-su-neun ja-ryo ＿＿＿＿ neo-eot-seum-ni-da]
Minsu added the data. 📁
Answer
를 [reul] — 자료 ends in a vowel, so use 를.
G. 작가는 생략＿＿＿＿ 사용했습니다.
[jak-ga-neun saeng-nyak ＿＿＿＿ sa-yong-haet-seum-ni-da]
The writer used omission. ✂️
Answer
을 [eul] — 생략 ends in a consonant.
H. 독자＿＿＿＿ 문맥을 확인했습니다.
[dok-ja ＿＿＿＿ mun-mae-geul hwa-gin-haet-seum-ni-da]
The reader checked the context. 🔍
Answer
는 [neun] — Topic marker: we are talking about the reader.
I. 근거＿＿＿＿ 드러나면 주장이 분명합니다.
[geun-geo ＿＿＿＿ deu-reo-na-myeon ju-jang-i bun-myeong-ham-ni-da]
If the evidence is revealed, the claim is clear. 🧩
Answer
가 [ga] — 근거 ends in a vowel, so use 가.
J. 보고서＿＿＿＿ 제출했습니다.
[bo-go-seo ＿＿＿＿ je-chul-haet-seum-ni-da]
I submitted the report. 📄
Answer
를 [reul] — The subject can be omitted, but the object marker keeps the role clear.
🏷️
Vocabulary Box
  • 은/는 → topic or contrast marker
  • 이/가 → subject marker
  • 을/를 → object marker
  • 자료 → data
  • 결론 → conclusion
  • 근거 → evidence
  • 문장 → sentence
  • 주장 → claim
  • 초안 → draft
  • 생략 → omission
  • 문맥 → context
  • 보고서 → report
  • 충분하다 → to be sufficient
  • 약하다 → to be weak
  • 분명하다 → to be clear
  • 길다 → to be long
  • 어렵다 → to be difficult
  • 고치다 → to revise/fix
  • 넣다 → to put in/add
  • 사용하다 → to use
  • 확인하다 → to check
  • 드러나다 → to be revealed
  • 제출하다 → to submit
Tip 💡 Particle omission is common in notes; formal writing usually prefers visible particles.
 

Exercise 4 — Repeated Phrase Compression 🔁

A. 첫 문장은 주장을, 둘째 문장은 ＿＿＿＿ 드러냅니다.
[cheot mun-jang-eun ju-jang-eul, dul-jjae mun-jang-eun ＿＿＿＿ deu-reo-naem-ni-da]
The first sentence reveals the claim; the second reveals the evidence. 🧾
Answer
근거를 [geun-geo-reul] — The shared predicate applies to both objects.
B. 첫 초안은 길고, 둘째 초안은 ＿＿＿＿.
[cheot cho-a-neun gil-go, dul-jjae cho-a-neun ＿＿＿＿]
The first draft is long, and the second draft is short. ✂️
Answer
짧습니다 [jjal-sseum-ni-da] — Parallel contrast makes compact writing neat.
C. 자료는 충분하고, 근거는 ＿＿＿＿.
[ja-ryo-neun chung-bun-ha-go, geun-geo-neun ＿＿＿＿]
The data is sufficient, and the evidence is clear. 📊
Answer
분명합니다 [bun-myeong-ham-ni-da] — The repeated structure supports the omission.
D. 지민은 보고서를 쓰고, 민수는 ＿＿＿＿ 검토했습니다.
[Ji-min-eun bo-go-seo-reul sseu-go, Min-su-neun ＿＿＿＿ geom-to-haet-seum-ni-da]
Jimin wrote the report, and Minsu reviewed the report. 📄
Answer
보고서를 [bo-go-seo-reul] — Repeat the object when two subjects appear.
E. 작가는 문장을 줄이고, 독자는 ＿＿＿＿ 이해했습니다.
[jak-ga-neun mun-jang-eul ju-ri-go, dok-ja-neun ＿＿＿＿ i-hae-haet-seum-ni-da]
The writer shortened the sentence, and the reader understood the sentence. 📚
Answer
문장을 [mun-jang-eul] — Restoring the object makes the relation explicit.
F. 저는 문맥을 확인하고, 지민은 ＿＿＿＿ 강조했습니다.
[jeo-neun mun-mae-geul hwa-gin-ha-go, Ji-min-eun ＿＿＿＿ gang-jo-haet-seum-ni-da]
I checked the context, and Jimin emphasized the context. 🧭
Answer
문맥을 [mun-mae-geul] — New subject, same object: restore if clarity matters.
G. 결론은 약하지만, 주장은 ＿＿＿＿.
[gyeol-lo-neun ya-ka-ji-man, ju-jang-eun ＿＿＿＿]
The conclusion is weak, but the claim is clear. 🎯
Answer
분명합니다 [bun-myeong-ham-ni-da] — Contrast markers keep the comparison clear.
H. 민수는 생략을 사용했고, 독자는 ＿＿＿＿ 느꼈습니다.
[Min-su-neun saeng-nya-geul sa-yong-haet-go, dok-ja-neun ＿＿＿＿ neu-kkyeot-seum-ni-da]
Minsu used omission, and the reader noticed the omission. ✂️
Answer
생략을 [saeng-nya-geul] — Without the object, the sentence feels too open.
I. 첫 자료는 보고서에, 둘째 자료는 ＿＿＿＿ 넣었습니다.
[cheot ja-ryo-neun bo-go-seo-e, dul-jjae ja-ryo-neun ＿＿＿＿ neo-eot-seum-ni-da]
The first data went into the report; the second data went into the draft. 📁
Answer
초안에 [cho-a-ne] — Parallel location phrases allow compact writing.
J. 작가는 결과를 기다리고, 독자는 ＿＿＿＿ 확인했습니다.
[jak-ga-neun gyeol-gwa-reul gi-da-ri-go, dok-ja-neun ＿＿＿＿ hwa-gin-haet-seum-ni-da]
The writer waited for the result, and the reader checked the result. ⏳
Answer
결과를 [gyeol-gwa-reul] — Repeating the object avoids a dangling second clause.
🔁
Vocabulary Box
  • 첫 → first
  • 둘째 → second
  • 문장 → sentence
  • 주장 → claim
  • 근거 → evidence
  • 초안 → draft
  • 자료 → data
  • 보고서 → report
  • 문맥 → context
  • 결론 → conclusion
  • 생략 → omission
  • 결과 → result
  • 드러나다 → to be revealed
  • 길다 → to be long
  • 짧다 → to be short
  • 충분하다 → to be sufficient
  • 분명하다 → to be clear
  • 검토하다 → to review
  • 줄이다 → to shorten
  • 이해하다 → to understand
  • 확인하다 → to check
  • 사용하다 → to use
  • 느끼다 → to feel
  • 넣다 → to put in/add
  • 기다리다 → to wait
Tip 💡 Parallel structure is elegant, but clarity still wins.
 

Exercise 5 — Mixed Mastery + Pitfall Patrol 🛡️

A. 지민은 초안을 썼습니다. 민수는 ＿＿＿＿.
[Ji-min-eun cho-a-neul sseot-seum-ni-da. Min-su-neun ＿＿＿＿]
Jimin wrote the draft. Minsu revised it. 🛠️
Answer
고쳤습니다 [go-chyeot-seum-ni-da] — ✅ Object omission is okay because 초안 is close and clear.
B. 자료 충분함. 결론 ＿＿＿＿.
[ja-ryo chung-bun-ham. gyeol-lon ＿＿＿＿]
Data sufficient. Conclusion weak. 📊
Answer
약함 [ya-kam] — ❌ Note style is compact, but formal writing should be ✅ 자료는 충분하지만, 결론은 약합니다.
C. 작가는 결론을 강조했습니다. 독자는 ＿＿＿＿ 불분명하다고 느꼈습니다.
[jak-ga-neun gyeol-lo-neul gang-jo-haet-seum-ni-da. dok-ja-neun ＿＿＿＿ bul-bun-myeong-ha-da-go neu-kkyeot-seum-ni-da]
The writer emphasized the conclusion. The reader felt the conclusion was unclear. 👀
Answer
결론이 [gyeol-lo-ni] — ✅ Restore the subject of “unclear.”
D. 문장이 길면 독자는 ＿＿＿＿ 어렵습니다.
[mun-jang-i gil-myeon dok-ja-neun ＿＿＿＿ eo-ryeop-seum-ni-da]
If the sentence is long, reading is difficult for the reader. 📚
Answer
읽기 [il-gi] — ❌ Do not omit a needed noun-form if the sentence becomes incomplete.
E. 첫 문장은 주장을, 둘째 문장은 ＿＿＿＿ 드러냅니다.
[cheot mun-jang-eun ju-jang-eul, dul-jjae mun-jang-eun ＿＿＿＿ deu-reo-naem-ni-da]
The first sentence reveals the claim; the second reveals the evidence. 🧾
Answer
근거를 [geun-geo-reul] — ✅ This is elegant repeated-phrase compression.
F. 민수는 자료를 넣었습니다. 지민은 ＿＿＿＿ 검토했습니다.
[Min-su-neun ja-ryo-reul neo-eot-seum-ni-da. Ji-min-eun ＿＿＿＿ geom-to-haet-seum-ni-da]
Minsu added the data. Jimin reviewed the data. 📁
Answer
자료를 [ja-ryo-reul] — ✅ Restore the object because the subject changes.
G. 생략은 좋지만, 문맥이 ＿＿＿＿ 해야 합니다.
[saeng-nya-geun jo-chi-man, mun-mae-gi ＿＿＿＿ hae-ya ham-ni-da]
Omission is good, but the context must be clear. 🧭
Answer
분명해야 [bun-myeong-hae-ya] — ✅ Omit only what clear context can restore.
H. 보고서＿＿＿＿ 제출했습니다.
[bo-go-seo ＿＿＿＿ je-chul-haet-seum-ni-da]
I submitted the report. 📄
Answer
를 [reul] — ❌ In formal writing, dropping too many particles can sound like a rough note.
I. 근거가 약하면 주장이 ＿＿＿＿.
[geun-geo-ga ya-ka-myeon ju-jang-i ＿＿＿＿]
If the evidence is weak, the claim becomes unclear. 🧩
Answer
불분명해집니다 [bul-bun-myeong-hae-jim-ni-da] — ✅ Keep the predicate when it carries the result.
J. 저는 문맥을 확인했습니다. 그래서 ＿＿＿＿ 고쳤습니다.
[jeo-neun mun-mae-geul hwa-gin-haet-seum-ni-da. geu-rae-seo ＿＿＿＿ go-chyeot-seum-ni-da]
I checked the context. So I fixed the omission. ✂️
Answer
생략을 [saeng-nya-geul] — ✅ The subject can be omitted, but the object helps the sentence land cleanly.
🛡️
Vocabulary Box
  • 저는 → I + topic
  • 지민은 → Jimin + topic
  • 민수는 → Minsu + topic
  • 작가는 → writer + topic
  • 독자는 → reader + topic
  • 초안 → draft
  • 자료 → data
  • 결론 → conclusion
  • 문장 → sentence
  • 주장 → claim
  • 근거 → evidence
  • 문맥 → context
  • 보고서 → report
  • 생략 → omission
  • 충분하다 → to be sufficient
  • 약하다 → to be weak
  • 불분명하다 → to be unclear
  • 분명하다 → to be clear
  • 좋다 → to be good
  • 길다 → to be long
  • 쓰다 → to write
  • 고치다 → to revise/fix
  • 강조하다 → to emphasize
  • 느끼다 → to feel
  • 읽다 → to read
  • 드러나다 → to be revealed
  • 넣다 → to put in/add
  • 검토하다 → to review
  • 제출하다 → to submit
  • 확인하다 → to check
  • 은/는 → topic or contrast marker
  • 이/가 → subject marker
  • 을/를 → object marker
Tip 💡 Pitfall patrol rule: if the reader must guess, restore the missing piece.
 
🎉 You made it through the omission maze. Your Korean writing can now be shorter without becoming mysterious — the best kind of tiny magic. ✂️✨