Usage
i) Causal connective
김은 맨날 지각이야. 그러니까 진급도 못하지.
Mr. Kim is always tardy. For that reason, he doesn’t get a promotion.
ii) Stating agreement
그러니까.
Right!
iii) Repair own dialogue
그러니까, 이거 반이야.
I mean, it’s half this size.
iv) Repair other’s dialogue
그러니까, 그런 식으로 얘기하면 안 되지.
You can’t say it like that.
v) Reshaping set domains
그러니까 우리는 유전자로 하거든?
Well, we work with genes, you know?
Contents
Introduction
i) Causal connective
ii) Stating agreement
iii) Repair own dialogue
iv) Repair other’s dialogue
v) Reshaping set domains
Additional details
Associated grammar
See also
Bibliography
User examples
Introduction
The meaning behind 그러니까 cannot be defined because it’s used in various ways for various reasons. Grammatically, it is a combination of 그렇다 meaning ‘being as such’ or ‘like that’ and –(으)니까, which is used to give reasons. As a sentence-initial phrase, 그러니까’s semantic meaning has been lost and is now used to reformulate speech (explained throughout).
Note that 그러니까 is often pronounced as 그니까 or 그까.
See [UKG-009] for further analysis of dialogues.
i) Causal connective
As a causal connective, 그러니까 links the preceding statement as the cause/reason for what is expressed after it. It basically means ‘because it is so’ or ‘therefore’.
(From Rhee 2015)
김은 맨날 지각이야. 그러니까 진급도 못하지.
Mr. Kim is always tardy. For that reason, he doesn’t get a promotion.
Here the fact that Mr. Kim is always late is given as the reason for why he doesn’t receive a promotion. 그렇다 takes the preceding statement and –(으)니까 marks it as the cause for what effect is expressed after it.
With this connective, speakers express their subjective judgement of a situation. It contrasts with 그래서 which is preferred with objective reasons.
Compare:
영어가 어려워. 그래서 여기서 살기가 힘들어.
English is hard, so life here is difficult.
(Life being difficult is a natural consequence of English being hard)
영어가 어려워. 그러니까 여기서 살기가 힘들어.
English is hard, so life here is difficult.
(In my opinion, life is difficult because English is hard)
ii) Stating agreement
• Details in this section are largely taken from (From Rhee 2015).
그러니까 can also be used to agree with something just said. Here it basically means ‘Right!’, or ‘That’s it!’.
철수: 김은 맨날 지각이야.
철수: Mr. Kim is always tardy.
영희: 그러니까.
영희: Right!
철수: 그러니까 아직 진급도 못하지.
철수: That’s why he still can’t get a promotion.
Here 영희 uses 그러니까 to agree with the preceding statement. Importantly, 그러니까 here loses its semantic meaning of ‘because it is so’ and is instead used to agree with the other speaker to mean ‘Right!’.
How can 그러니까 be used like this as a phrase in its own right? Because 영희 is strategically withholding 철수’s own words.
영희 uses 그러니까 to show that what is left unsaid is so obvious that it doesn’t need to be explicitly expressed. This serves as an affirmation for what 철수 just said. A breakdown of this process is as follows:
철수: Mr. Kim is always tardy.
영희: 그러니까
i) ‘Because it is so’.
ii) ‘Because Mr. Kim is always tardy’.
iii) ‘Because Mr. Kim is always tardy, it needs to be mentioned.’
iv) ‘What you say is proper.’
v) ‘You’re right.’
So, while 영희 is simply saying ‘because it so’, this is interpreted as “You’re right” or “I agree”. Not mentioning the obviousness of the situation is a justification for its validity.
Moreover, consider:
철수: 걔가 오니까 참 좋아.
철수: It’s so good that he’s here.
영희: 그러니까.
영희: It sure is (because he is here).
Here 철수 is stating a cause and effect. 영희 repeats the cause and leaves out the effect. 영희 is repeating what 철수 just said with the effect of emphatic agreement. Such utterances are no more than echoes repeating what was just said. For this reason, the speaker’s intention behind the utterance (expressing a shared attitudinal stance with the addressee) is more important than the words used.
This use of 그러니까 is often used in the set phrase 그러니까 말이(야/지), meaning That’s why it’s so; literally, this is the word because it is so. This has been suggested as the direct origin of 그러니까 in both structure and meaning.
그러니까 말이지!
Exactly!
그러니까 말이야.
I know, right.
iii) Repair own dialogue
• Details in this section are largely taken from (From Kim & Suh 1996).
그러니까 can be used by speakers to reformulate their own speech. Here the speaker makes changes to their dialogue such that things are expressed more accurately or favourably. This is similar to how English speakers say “I mean…” to re-align what they want to say.
그러니까, 이거 반이야.
I mean, it’s half this size.
In this example, the speaker was previously talking about the small size of their desk. The description they had already given wasn’t sufficient enough to accurately convey the size, so they used 그러니까 to modify what was just said and reformulate it more elaborately. This role of 그러니까 cannot be fully appreciated without seeing the whole context.
Dialogue:
영희: 근데, 책상이 하나 있는데 이거는 완전히 국민학교 삼학년이 쓰는 책상이에요.
영희: And, I have this desk, which would be used by a third-grader in elementary school.
철수: 응.
철수: I see.
영희: 그니깐, 이거 반이야 진짜. 난 거짓말 안해. 이거 반. {gestures to indicate the size} 사이즈가 이거 반이야 반도 안 된다. 요거… 요거 밖에 안 돼.
영희: I mean, it’s half the size of this. I’m not joking. Half of this. {gestures to indicate the size}. It’s half of this size, even smaller than that. It’s only this big.
철수: 그럼 매킨토시 못 놓아, 마우스 음직이야 되니까.
철수: Then you can’t put a Macintosh on it because you need space for the mouse.
Alternatively, speakers often use the set phrase 그러니까 내 말은 to reformulate their own dialogue.
그러니까 내 말은…
What I’m saying is…
그러니까 내 말은, 너 약간 피곤해보여.
I mean, you look a little tired.
그러니까 내말은, 아직 6개월 밖에 되지 않았어.
I mean, it’s only been six months.
… 그러니까 말이에요.
… That’s what I’ve been saying.
iv) Repair other’s dialogue
• Details in this section are largely taken from (From Park 2015).
Similar to iii), 그러니까 can be used to reformulate another person’s speech.
그러니까, 그런 식으로 얘기하면 안 되지.
You can’t say it like that.
Here the speaker speaks as if they are making changes to the other person’s dialogue. Such expressions are used to disagree with the other person by pointing out that what was just spoken could have been said more accurately. Again, this role of 그러니까 cannot be fully appreciated without seeing the whole context.
영희: 난 걔네가 저대로 생각 하는 거 같다. 어쨌든 여론이 자기들이 받는걸 당연하게 생각하면 안 된다는 거 였고 게다가 근까 아예 받는 걸 하지 말아야한다는 얘기도 있었어. 어쨌든 남자들이 비싼 집 사고 근까 남자들이나 시가에서 삼억 넘는 집을 사는데 여자들은 돈을 안 쓰니까 결혼한 다음에 불공평한 대우를 받는 다는 거지. 내 말은 적어도 좀이라도 보태던가 반반 해야지.
영희: I think they are generally on the right track. Public opinion was that they should not take their benefit for granted and even- I mean, even not get the benefits altogether. They said it is unfair for guys to buy an expensive house by themselves, I mean, when guys or their family members spend more than $300,000 to buy a house and girls do not spend any money, no wonder they have unequal status after they get married. I mean, they should at least pitch in a bit or pay half and half.
철수: 근데, 그건 여론이 아니지.
철수: But that’s not public opinion.
영희: 맞지, 몇 백명의 의견인데. 대부분 사람들이 동의 했고. 여러 사람이 같은 의견을 내면 그게 여론이지.
영희: I think it is, hundreds of people participated in the discussion. Most of them agreed. When many people from a group have a mutual opinion you can call it a public opinion.
철수: 그러니까, 그런 식으로 얘기하면 안 되지. 여자 애들끼리 모인 싸이트에서 나온 의견 갖고 여론이라고 하면 받아들이고 싶지 않다고.
철수: You can’t say it like that. When you say it’s public opinion because some girls from a female website have a mutual opinion, I do not want to accept it as public opinion.
In the above dialogue, the speaker sees the other person’s opinion as problematic and prefaces their rebuttal with 그러니까. The speaker uses 그러니까 to correct the other person’s opinion while hinting that they should know their opinion is problematic. This is similar to iii) where the speaker corrects a problematic train of speech. It is also similar to v) where the speaker reshapes a problematic presupposition.
v) Reshaping set domains
• Details in this section are largely taken from (From Kim 2013).
In this usage of 그러니까, the speaker takes issue with the limits set by a question and projects that the domain will be reshaped before answering. This is similar to how English speakers begin answering a question with “Well…” before giving a more appropriate answer than requested.
영희: 지금 여기까지 실행한 실험이 몇 개나했어?
영희: How many experiments have you done so far?
철수: 그러니까 우리는 유전자로 하거든?
철수: Well, we work with genes, you know?
(The speaker then continues to answer the question by talking about the ongoing workload)
Here the speaker sees the question as problematic in that ‘the number of experiments’ presupposes that they are short-term and countable. The speaker needs to explain what really matters is the nature of the experiments and the ongoing workload. 그러니까 is used to reshape the domain set by the question and give an answer on newly set terms.
(영희 is talking about an arranged date)
영희: 그리고 머리가 숱이 없어 가지고 두피가 보인다.
영희: And his hair was so thin that you could see his scalp.
근희: 세상에.
근희: Oh my gosh.
영희: 이렇게 됐는데…
영희: It was like this…
민희: 아버님이 해주신 거야?
민희: Your father set up the date?
영희: 그까 아빠 친구 분이 자꾸 하라 그래서 한 건데… 이 사람이 나를 잘 몰라서 아빠 친구 분이.
영희: Well, Dad’s friend repeatedly told me to do it, so I did, but… he (father’s friend) doesn’t know me well.
영희: 그러니깐 우리랑 많이 친한 사이는 아니야. 근데 내가 좀 나이가 되었으니까 된 줄 알고.
영희: I mean, he is not very close to us. But because I’m this age, he assumed I’ve reached a marriageable age…
영희: 그래서 이 사람은 소개시켜 줬는데, … 너무 파악을 잘 못한 거-
영희: So he introduced me to this person, but… didn’t grasp the situation well-
영희: 우리 아빠 기절했잖아. 그거 보고.
영희: My dad fainted, you know. When he saw him.
Here the speaker uses 그까 (an abbreviation of 그러니까) to reshape the domain set by the question. They are signalling that the situation is nuanced and can only be explained after some adjustments are made. The question from 민희 not only questions whether 영희’s father set up the date, but it suggests her father was aware of the man’s looks and is at fault for poor matchmaking. This is an incorrect and problematic understanding of the events which 영희 needed to correct by first reshaping the question.
Notice that the second occurrence of 그러니까 (그러니깐) is usage iii) and is used to reformulate own speech in a more understandable manner. Particle 는 is added here to emphasise this new line over what was just spoken.
Additional details
[Please ignore: placeholder for future update]
Associated grammar
[Please ignore: placeholder for future update]
See also
Bibliography
Affiliate links help support uK.
— Kim, H. S. Reshaping the response space with kulenikka in beginning to respond to questions in Korean conversation. (2013). Journal of Pragmatics, 57, 303–317.
— Kim, K., & Suh, K. Dealing with prior talk: discourse connectives in Korean conversation. (1996). Japanese/Korean Linguistics, 5, 83-99.
— Park, S. Kulenikka-Prefaced Utterances (KPUs) in Other-Initiated Other-Repair (OIOR). (2015). The Korean Language in America, 19(1), 4–35.
— Rhee, S. On the emergence of Korean markers of agreement. (2015). Journal of Pragmatics, 83, 10–26.