Learn Hardcore Korean: gonghangeseoneun gyujeongeul ttaraya haeyo. - At the airport, you have to follow the rules.

-에서 marks the place where an action happens (at/in).
Adding the topic marker -는 makes it -에서는, which topicalizes the location: “as for at the airport” or “in airports (specifically).”
It often adds a contrastive nuance: e.g., “At home you can relax, but at the airport you must follow the rules.”

Can I say 공항에선 instead? Is that correct?

Yes. 공항에선 is the common contracted form of 공항에서는. It’s perfectly natural in speech and informal writing. In more formal writing, keep the full -에서는.

Why is it 에서 and not 에 after 공항?

에 = to/at (static location or destination).
에서 = at (place where an action occurs). Because following rules is an action that happens at the location, 공항에서 is the right choice.

Who is the subject here? It’s not stated.

Korean often drops obvious subjects. Here it’s a generic you/we/people in general. If you want to make it explicit, you could add:

사람들은 공항에서는…
우리는 공항에서는…
Addressing the listener: 공항에서는… 따라야 해요 already implies “you.”

Why is it 규정을 and not 규정은?

규정 is the direct object of 따르다 (to follow), so it takes 을/를. Since 규정 ends in a consonant, use 을 → 규정을.
규정은 would topicalize/contrast the rules: “As for the rules, (we) must follow (them).” That’s possible if you’re contrasting them with something else.

What’s the difference between 규정, 규칙, and 법?

규정: regulations (institution- or organization-specific, procedural/administrative).
규칙: rules (general rules or guidelines, often smaller-scale).
법: law (legal statutes set by the state).
At an airport, 규정 or 규칙 can both appear; 법 is stronger, legal-level.

How does 따라야 해요 express “must/have to”?

It uses the obligation pattern -아/어야 하다.

Verb stem + -아/어야
- 하다 → “must/need to.”
Conjugated politely: …해야 해요. So 따르다 → 따라야 하다 → 따라야 해요 = “must follow.”

Is 따르다 irregular? Why is it 따라야, not 따르야?

Yes, 따르다 is an 르-irregular verb. With -아/어:

The 르 changes by adding an ㄹ to the previous syllable and dropping ㅡ → 따라-.
Hence 따라야 (not 따르야).
Compare: 다르다 → 달라요, 부르다 → 불러요.

What’s the difference between -아/어야 해요 and -아/어야 돼요?

Both mean “must/need to,” and are often interchangeable in daily speech.

…해야 해요 (from 하다) can sound a bit more neutral/formal.
…해야 돼요 (from 되다) is very common colloquially.
In this sentence, 따라야 해요 and 따라야 돼요 both work.

Could I use 지키다 instead of 따르다? Any nuance difference?

Yes:

규정을 따르다: to follow regulations (procedures/directions).
규정을 지키다: to keep/abide by regulations (emphasizes compliance/observance). Both are natural here. 지키다 can feel a bit stricter; 따르다 feels like following set procedures.

Is 따라야 해요 one grammar chunk or two separate verbs?

Think of it as one obligation construction:

Main verb + -아/어야
- 하다 (which conjugates to 해요). So 따라야 해요 functions as a single meaning unit: “must follow.”

How would I make this more formal or more casual?

More formal/polite: 공항에서는 규정을 따라야 합니다.
Plain casual: 공항에선 규정(을) 따라야 해.
Very firm/official: add 반드시/꼭 → 반드시 따라야 합니다.

How do I say “had to follow” (past) or “will have to follow” (future-ish)?

Past obligation: 따라야 했어요 (“had to”).
Future/expected obligation (contextual): 아마 따라야 할 거예요 (“will probably have to”).
Korean often keeps -아/어야 하다 in present and lets context supply time.

How do I say “must not break the rules” vs. “don’t have to follow the rules”?

Must not (prohibition): 규정을 어기면 안 돼요 or 규정을 어겨서는 안 됩니다.
Don’t have to (lack of necessity): 규정을 따르지 않아도 돼요.
Be careful: “must not” and “don’t have to” are very different.

Any pronunciation tips for this sentence?

공항에서는 is commonly pronounced like 공항에선 (the -서- is light/contracted in fast speech).
규정을 flows as one unit: 규정
- 을.
Overall rhythm (romanized approximation): gong-hang-e-seon gyu-jeong-eul tta-ra-ya hae-yo.

Does 따르다 ever mean something else?

Yes, it can also mean “to pour (a liquid).” Context disambiguates:

규정을 따르다 = follow rules.
술을 따르다 = pour alcohol.
So avoid saying 술 규정을 따라 주세요 unless you truly mean “please pour alcohol regulations” (nonsense). For “please follow the rules,” use 규정을 따르세요/지켜 주세요.