The Art of the Korean Rebuttal: -건만, -기로서니, -으련마는

Concede, then counter. -건만 grants a point yet pushes back (노력했건만, 결과는 달랐다 — I tried hard, yet the result differed), -기로서니 says even granting X that is no excuse (아무리 급하기로서니 거짓말을 하다니 — however urgent it was, lying is no excuse), and -으련마는 voices the wistful would-be (있으련마는 — there surely would be, but…).

Published:

A

Written by Alvin Lim Certified Korean Language Teacher (Level 2)

L6-06 🏆 Level 6 · TOPIK 6 debate rebuttal ⚡ 5-Q quiz at the end

A strong rebuttal concedes before it counters, and Korean has three formal tools for it. -건만 grants a point yet pushes back (그렇게 노력했건만, 결과는 달랐다 — I tried that hard, yet the result was different), -기로서니 admits a circumstance only to deny it as an excuse (아무리 급하기로서니 거짓말은 안 되지 — however urgent it was, lying is no excuse), and -으련마는 voices the wistful would-be (조금만 빨랐으면 됐으련마는 — a bit faster and it would have worked, but…). This is Chapter 2’s craft of disagreement — how to grant your opponent something and still win the point.

You learned to open an argument in the debate thesis lesson; now we learn to answer one. A good rebuttal never just denies — it concedes fairly, then turns. Start with the words you need to take an argument apart.

Ten words for rebutting

반박
ban-bak
rebuttal, refutation
반박을 준비했어요 — ban-ba-geul jun-bi-hae-sseo-yo — I prepared a rebuttal
양보
yang-bo
concession, yielding
한 발 양보했어요 — han bal yang-bo-hae-sseo-yo — I conceded one step
모순
mo-sun
contradiction
주장에 모순이 있어요 — ju-jang-e mo-su-ni i-sseo-yo — there is a contradiction in the claim
오류
o-ryu
error, fallacy
논리적 오류예요 — non-ni-jeok o-ryu-ye-yo — it is a logical fallacy
비판
bi-pan
criticism, critique
비판을 받아들였어요 — bi-pa-neul ba-da-deu-ryeo-sseo-yo — I accepted the criticism
지적
ji-jeok
pointing out, an objection
날카로운 지적이에요 — nal-ka-ro-un ji-jeo-gi-e-yo — that is a sharp point
한계
han-gye
limit, limitation
그 논리의 한계예요 — geu non-ni-ui han-gye-ye-yo — that is the limit of that logic
설득력
seol-deuk-ryeok
persuasiveness
설득력이 부족해요 — seol-deuk-ryeo-gi bu-jo-kae-yo — it lacks persuasiveness
논거
non-geo
grounds of an argument
논거가 약해요 — non-geo-ga ya-kae-yo — the grounds are weak
허점
heo-jeom
loophole, weak spot
허점을 파고들었어요 — heo-jeo-meul pa-go-deu-reo-sseo-yo — I drove into the weak spot

Grant it, yet push back: -건만

Attach -건만 to a finite stem to concede a fact and then turn against it — ‘X is/was so, and yet —.’ It is the formal, faintly frustrated sibling of -지만, made for written argument.

-건만 — GRANT, YET (formal)
V/A-건만 (X is so, and yet —)

그렇게 노력했건만, 결과는 달라지지 않았다 = I tried that hard, yet the result did not change 자료는 풍부하건만, 정작 핵심을 비껴간다 = the data is plentiful, yet it misses the very point 여러 번 설명했건만, 그는 듣지 않았다 = I explained it several times, yet he would not listen 근거는 그럴듯하건만, 전제부터 틀렸다 = the grounds seem plausible, yet the premise is wrong

The feeling is contrast that stings: the effort or merit in the first clause came to nothing. In rebuttal, -건만 lets you honor the opponent’s work before showing it still fails.

Even granting that — no excuse: -기로서니

Attach -기로서니 to a stem to concede a circumstance only to deny that it justifies what followed. It almost always pairs with 아무리 (‘however much’) and lands on a ‘still, you mustn’t’ verdict.

-기로서니 — NO EXCUSE
아무리 V/A-기로서니 (even granting X, that's no excuse)

아무리 급하기로서니 거짓말까지 할 필요는 없었다 = however urgent it was, there was no need to lie 아무리 화가 나기로서니 그런 말을 하면 안 되지 = however angry you were, you shouldn’t say such a thing 아무리 바쁘기로서니 약속을 잊다니 = however busy you were, forgetting the promise (is too much) 아무리 이익이 크기로서니 원칙을 버릴 수는 없다 = however large the profit, we can’t abandon principle

Unlike -더라도 (‘even if’), which just allows a hypothetical, -기로서니 actively rejects an excuse already on the table: yes, it was urgent — but that does not license the lie. It is a precision rebuttal move.

The wistful would-be: -으련마는

Attach -으련마는 to a stem to voice a likely outcome together with regret that it didn’t, or won’t, come true — ‘it surely would be X, but —.’ The trailing 마는 carries the sigh.

-으련마는 — WISTFUL WOULD-BE
V/A-으련마는 (it surely would be X, but —)

조금만 일찍 왔으면 자리가 있으련마는 = if only they’d come a bit earlier there surely would be seats, but… 근거만 탄탄했으면 통했으련마는 = if only the grounds were solid it would have worked, but… 말로는 쉬우련마는, 실천이 어렵다 = in words it would be easy, but the practice is hard 사정을 알면 이해하련마는, 그러기엔 너무 늦었다 = knowing the situation they’d understand, but it’s too late for that

A plain -겠- only estimates (자리가 있겠다 = there are probably seats). -으련마는 estimates and mourns the gap with reality, leaving the disappointing facts implied — a graceful way to concede and counter in one breath.

A rebuttal, written out

Here is the concede-then-counter rhythm in formal prose — answering an opponent who blames a failure on a tight deadline:

📄 REBUTTAL -건만 + -기로서니 + -으련마는 in argument

상대측은 자료를 충분히 모았다고 말한다. 분명 풍부하건만, 정작 핵심 쟁점은 비껴가 있다. 시간이 촉박했다는 변명도 있었다. 그러나 아무리 급하기로서니, 검증을 통째로 건너뛴 것까지 정당화되지는 않는다. 조금만 더 신중했으면 이런 허점은 없으련마는, 결국 결론은 전제부터 흔들리고 만다.

The other side claims they gathered enough data. It is certainly plentiful — yet it sidesteps the very crux. There was also the excuse that time was tight. But however urgent it was, that does not justify skipping verification altogether. A little more caution and there surely would have been no such loophole — but in the end the conclusion crumbles from the premise up.

Trading rebuttals before the round

The same forms, now in a quick chat as two debaters sharpen their counter:

💬 REBUTTAL PREP -건만 + -기로서니 + -으련마는 live
상대 자료가 꽤 많던데, 반박 가능해? The other side had a lot of data — can we rebut it?
많긴 많건만, 핵심 쟁점은 안 건드려. 거기를 치자. It’s a lot, yes, yet it never touches the core issue. Let’s hit there.
시간 없어서 검증을 못 했대. They say they couldn’t verify it because of time.
아무리 급하기로서니 검증을 통째로 빼면 안 되지. However urgent it was, you can’t skip verification entirely.
그 한 줄이면 설득력 무너지겠다. That one line should collapse their persuasiveness.
조금만 더 꼼꼼했으면 안 뚫렸으련마는, 허점이 너무 커. A bit more care and it wouldn’t be exposed, but the weak spot is too big.
좋아, 양보 한 번 하고 바로 치는 구조로 가자. Good — let’s concede once, then strike right away.

Notice the architecture: 많긴 많건만 grants the data before turning on it, 아무리 급하기로서니 accepts the excuse and strips its force, and 안 뚫렸으련마는 sighs over the avoidable gap. Concede fairly, then counter — that is a Korean rebuttal.

FAQ

What does -건만 mean, and how is it different from -지만? -건만 is a formal, literary connective that concedes a clause and then pushes against it: ‘X is/was so, and yet —.’ It attaches to a finite stem: 그렇게 노력했건만, 결과는 달랐다 = I tried that hard, yet the result was different. Compared with the everyday -지만 (‘but’), -건만 carries two extra notes. First, register: it belongs to written argument, speeches, and slightly old-fashioned or emphatic prose, where -지만 is neutral and spoken. Second, feeling: -건만 leans into frustration or regret — the contrast hurts a little, because the effort or expectation in the first clause came to nothing. In a rebuttal it is perfect for granting the opponent’s effort or evidence before showing it still fails: 자료는 풍부하건만, 핵심을 비껴간다 = the data is plentiful, yet it misses the point.

How do I use -기로서니, and what is the typical sentence around it? -기로서니 means ‘even granting that X, that is no reason to —.’ It concedes a circumstance only to deny that it justifies what followed, so it almost always appears with 아무리 (‘however much’) in the first clause and a 그래도/-면 안 된다 (‘still / you mustn’t’) idea in the second: 아무리 급하기로서니 거짓말까지 할 필요는 없었다 = however urgent it was, there was no need to go as far as lying. It is sharper and more formal than -더라도 (‘even if’): -더라도 simply allows a hypothetical, while -기로서니 actively rejects an excuse someone has offered. That makes it a precision tool in rebuttal — you accept the premise (yes, it was urgent) and then strip it of its power to excuse (but that does not justify the lie).

What nuance does -으련마는 add that a plain guess like -겠- doesn’t? -으련마는 expresses a presumed outcome together with regret that it did not, or will not, come true — ‘it surely would be X, but —.’ A plain -겠- just estimates (자리가 있겠다 = there are probably seats); -으련마는 estimates and then mourns the gap between that likely outcome and reality: 조금만 일찍 왔으면 자리가 있으련마는 = if only they had come a little earlier there surely would have been seats, but (they didn’t, so there aren’t). The trailing 마는 (‘but’) is doing the wistful work, leaving the disappointing real situation implied. In argument it lets you grant that something could reasonably have been true while pointing out, with a sigh, that the facts went the other way — a graceful, slightly literary way to concede and counter at once.


Next: policy dilemmas — -자니, -을 바에, -을망정. Previous: opening a debate — -건대, -는가. Full path: curriculum hub.

⚡ 2-Minute Check

Q 1 / 5