usani eobseoseo osi jeojeosseoyo.

• 우산이 = umbrella
  • subject marker 이
• 없어서 = because there wasn’t / because (someone) didn’t have
• 옷이 = clothes / clothing
  • subject marker 이
• 젖었어요 = got wet in polite past form

So the whole sentence means something like:

• Because there was no umbrella, the clothes got wet
• or more naturally in English, I didn’t have an umbrella, so my clothes got wet

With 있다 and 없다, Korean usually marks the thing that exists or does not exist with 이/가, not 을/를.

So:

• 우산이 있다 = There is an umbrella / I have an umbrella
• 우산이 없다 = There is no umbrella / I don’t have an umbrella

Even when English uses have, Korean often expresses it more like an umbrella exists / doesn’t exist relative to someone.

That is why 우산이 없어서 is correct.

It can mean both, depending on context.

Korean often leaves out the person if it is obvious. So 우산이 없다 could mean:

• There is no umbrella
• I don’t have an umbrella
• He/She doesn’t have an umbrella

In this sentence, the natural interpretation is usually I didn’t have an umbrella, because the next part says the clothes got wet, which suggests a person was out in the rain.

Because 옷 is the subject of the verb 젖다.

젖다 means to get wet / to become wet, so the thing that becomes wet takes 이/가.

• 옷이 젖었어요 = The clothes got wet

You do not use 을/를 here, because 젖다 is not being used as a transitive verb in this sentence.

Because 젖다 is an intransitive verb. That means the subject itself changes state.

• 옷이 젖었어요 = The clothes got wet

The clothes are not being acted on as a direct object; they are the thing that became wet.

If you wanted to say someone/something made the clothes wet, you would use a different expression, such as:

• 옷을 적셨어요 = (Someone) soaked/wet the clothes

So in your sentence, 옷이 is correct.

젖었어요 is the polite past form of 젖다.

Breakdown:

• dictionary form: 젖다 = to get wet
• past marker: -었-
• polite ending: -어요

So:

• 젖었어요 = got wet / became wet

It often sounds more natural in English as got wet than just was wet, because Korean is showing a change of state.

Korean often leaves out possessives like my, your, or his/her when they are obvious from context.

So instead of saying:

• 내 옷이 젖었어요

Korean often just says:

• 옷이 젖었어요

If the situation makes it clear whose clothes they are, adding 내 is unnecessary.

That is very natural in Korean.

In many contexts, 옷 means clothes or clothing in a general sense.

So in this sentence:

• 옷이 젖었어요

it usually means my clothes got wet, not just one single item.

Korean often does not mark plural unless it is important. You usually do not need 옷들 here. In fact, 옷들 would sound less natural in this sentence.

Here, -아서/어서 connects two clauses and shows reason/cause.

So:

• 우산이 없어서 = because there was no umbrella / because I didn’t have an umbrella
• 옷이 젖었어요 = the clothes got wet

Together:

• Because I didn’t have an umbrella, my clothes got wet

In this sentence, -어서 is functioning like because or so.

The connector is -아서/어서, and which form you use depends on the vowel before it.

For 없다, the stem is 없-, so it takes -어서:

• 없다 → 없어서

This is just the correct conjugated form.

You will see the same pattern in other words:

• 먹다 → 먹어서
• 서다 → 서서
• 예쁘다 → 예뻐서

So 없어서 is the standard form.

Yes. Depending on context, natural English translations include:

• I didn’t have an umbrella, so my clothes got wet
• Because there was no umbrella, the clothes got wet
• Since I didn’t have an umbrella, my clothes got wet

All of these reflect the same basic Korean meaning. The Korean sentence itself does not force one exact English wording.

It is in the polite informal style, often called 해요체.

That means it is polite and commonly used in everyday conversation.

Compare:

• 젖었어요 = polite
• 젖었어 = casual
• 젖었습니다 = formal polite

So the full sentence sounds natural and polite in normal conversation.

Yes, that is also grammatical.

Both can mean because I didn’t have an umbrella, my clothes got wet.

A simple comparison:

• 없어서: often sounds like a straightforward statement of cause
• 없으니까: can sound a bit more explanatory or emphatic, like since / because

In this sentence, 없어서 sounds very natural. 없으니까 would also be understood, but 없어서 fits the simple cause-and-result relationship very well.