-우-

Etymology
From, from , from older.

Usage notes
Although still very common in Korean, the causative/passive suffixes are no longer productive for forming new verbs. Verbs that do not already have a morphological causative or passive must employ auxiliaries:


 * for causatives
 * for passives

Etymology 1
From.

Suffix

 * 1) Heo Ung (1958) believed that this was not a single suffix, but three different suffixes:
 * 1) in the main clause, a suffix marking a first-person subject
 * 2) in an adnominal verb, a suffix marking the noun as a direct or indirect object of the verb
 * 3) in nominalized or gerund verbal constructions, simply an integral part of the nominalizing or gerund suffix (equivalent to English "-ing")
 * 1) The basic framework of Heo's theory remains the most influential today. Examples difficult to explain in Heo's basic theory include:
 * 2) Yi Sung-nyeong (1959) believed that this was a single aspectual suffix, called the "volitive", that conveyed the desire of the verb's subject to carry out the action. This remains a minority theory,  Examples difficult to explain in Yi's theory include:
 * 3) Examples clearly incompatible with Heo's theory led Heo himself to propose that the suffix could be used for non-first-person subjects to convey a sense of rapport in which the speaker speaks from the perspective of the verb's subject. A refined version of Heo's hypothesis, moving away from an Indo-European notion of person-marking, analyzes the suffix as conveying empathy or a close emotional tie between the speaker and the subject of the verb (in both main and adnominal clauses) in addition to its object-marking function in adnominal constructions and its integral function in verbal gerunds. It is currently the most popular interpretation of the modulator, though it is still not unanimously agreed upon. Both examples given above of the exceptions to Heo's hypothesis can be explained by this theory:
 * 2) in an adnominal verb, a suffix marking the noun as a direct or indirect object of the verb
 * 3) in nominalized or gerund verbal constructions, simply an integral part of the nominalizing or gerund suffix (equivalent to English "-ing")
 * 1) The basic framework of Heo's theory remains the most influential today. Examples difficult to explain in Heo's basic theory include:
 * 2) Yi Sung-nyeong (1959) believed that this was a single aspectual suffix, called the "volitive", that conveyed the desire of the verb's subject to carry out the action. This remains a minority theory,  Examples difficult to explain in Yi's theory include:
 * 3) Examples clearly incompatible with Heo's theory led Heo himself to propose that the suffix could be used for non-first-person subjects to convey a sense of rapport in which the speaker speaks from the perspective of the verb's subject. A refined version of Heo's hypothesis, moving away from an Indo-European notion of person-marking, analyzes the suffix as conveying empathy or a close emotional tie between the speaker and the subject of the verb (in both main and adnominal clauses) in addition to its object-marking function in adnominal constructions and its integral function in verbal gerunds. It is currently the most popular interpretation of the modulator, though it is still not unanimously agreed upon. Both examples given above of the exceptions to Heo's hypothesis can be explained by this theory:
 * 1) Yi Sung-nyeong (1959) believed that this was a single aspectual suffix, called the "volitive", that conveyed the desire of the verb's subject to carry out the action. This remains a minority theory,  Examples difficult to explain in Yi's theory include:
 * 2) Examples clearly incompatible with Heo's theory led Heo himself to propose that the suffix could be used for non-first-person subjects to convey a sense of rapport in which the speaker speaks from the perspective of the verb's subject. A refined version of Heo's hypothesis, moving away from an Indo-European notion of person-marking, analyzes the suffix as conveying empathy or a close emotional tie between the speaker and the subject of the verb (in both main and adnominal clauses) in addition to its object-marking function in adnominal constructions and its integral function in verbal gerunds. It is currently the most popular interpretation of the modulator, though it is still not unanimously agreed upon. Both examples given above of the exceptions to Heo's hypothesis can be explained by this theory:
 * 1) Yi Sung-nyeong (1959) believed that this was a single aspectual suffix, called the "volitive", that conveyed the desire of the verb's subject to carry out the action. This remains a minority theory,  Examples difficult to explain in Yi's theory include:
 * 2) Examples clearly incompatible with Heo's theory led Heo himself to propose that the suffix could be used for non-first-person subjects to convey a sense of rapport in which the speaker speaks from the perspective of the verb's subject. A refined version of Heo's hypothesis, moving away from an Indo-European notion of person-marking, analyzes the suffix as conveying empathy or a close emotional tie between the speaker and the subject of the verb (in both main and adnominal clauses) in addition to its object-marking function in adnominal constructions and its integral function in verbal gerunds. It is currently the most popular interpretation of the modulator, though it is still not unanimously agreed upon. Both examples given above of the exceptions to Heo's hypothesis can be explained by this theory:
 * 1) Examples clearly incompatible with Heo's theory led Heo himself to propose that the suffix could be used for non-first-person subjects to convey a sense of rapport in which the speaker speaks from the perspective of the verb's subject. A refined version of Heo's hypothesis, moving away from an Indo-European notion of person-marking, analyzes the suffix as conveying empathy or a close emotional tie between the speaker and the subject of the verb (in both main and adnominal clauses) in addition to its object-marking function in adnominal constructions and its integral function in verbal gerunds. It is currently the most popular interpretation of the modulator, though it is still not unanimously agreed upon. Both examples given above of the exceptions to Heo's hypothesis can be explained by this theory:
 * 1) Examples clearly incompatible with Heo's theory led Heo himself to propose that the suffix could be used for non-first-person subjects to convey a sense of rapport in which the speaker speaks from the perspective of the verb's subject. A refined version of Heo's hypothesis, moving away from an Indo-European notion of person-marking, analyzes the suffix as conveying empathy or a close emotional tie between the speaker and the subject of the verb (in both main and adnominal clauses) in addition to its object-marking function in adnominal constructions and its integral function in verbal gerunds. It is currently the most popular interpretation of the modulator, though it is still not unanimously agreed upon. Both examples given above of the exceptions to Heo's hypothesis can be explained by this theory:

Usage notes

 * By the late sixteenth century, the suffix had become obsolete and does not survive in the modern dialects.

Alternative forms

 * Changes the pitch to rising, but the suffix itself is lost
 * The suffix is conserved but causes loss of the minimal vowel of the verb stem
 * Except for, which usually irregularly takes the form , although is also attested.
 * The suffix is conserved but causes loss of the minimal vowel of the verb stem
 * Except for, which usually irregularly takes the form , although is also attested.

Derived terms

 * Combined forms:

Etymology 2
Lenition of earlier in voiced environments.