> について vs に関して

1a. 今から韓国に関して話してください。X

1b. 今から韓国について話してください。〇

Why is Imabi saying that 1a is wrong? [Source](http://www.imabi.net/about.htm)

All sources are saying that について and に関して have the same function, with the
latter being more formal/literary. Imabi confirms this, but makes a
distinction:

> Whereas ～について emphasizes the content at hand, ～に関して includes the
> surroundings related to it.

And proceeds to give this as an explanation for 1a being wrong:

> Also, as ～について comes from the verb 付く, it is used a lot when referring to
> things being tied to acts of communication via speaking, writing, thinking,
> etc. As you might gather just from the few examples thus far, ～に関して is more
> formal and stiff. **Given its nuance and formality, you should see why it
> was wrong in the first example.**

**Questions:**

  * Is 1a really wrong? Why?
  * Is "Whereas ～について emphasizes the content at hand, ～に関して includes the surroundings related to it." correct? If so, can you compare them with examples? Imabi fails to do this.

A (non native) friend pointed out this part from Imabi's quote:

> as ～について comes from the verb 付く, it is used a lot when referring to things
> being tied to acts of communication

Does this imply that に関して is really only used in literary stuff? Kinda like
“hey, we all use について but you might find に関して in old books and stuff, just so
you know. The latter is more formal so yeah, go ahead and use について.” ?

Observation: I asked on Hinative for help about 1a being wrong: [two natives
said both are correct.](https://hinative.com/en-US/questions/6807334)

Observation 2, I've just found out this: [Is this
why?](https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/15412/are-these-phrases-
interchangeable-%E3%81%AB%E9%96%A2%E3%81%97%E3%81%A6-%E3%81%AB%E5%AF%BE%E3%81%97%E3%81%A6-%E3%81%AB%E3%81%8A%E3%81%84%E3%81%A6-%E3%81%AB%E3%81%A4%E3%81%84%E3%81%A6-%E3%81%AB%E3%81%8A%E3%81%91%E3%82%8B)

Quoting:

> に関して "relating to" The character 関 indicates that the topics have a
> connection/relationship, that they are tied/locked to one another. Can refer
> to 1 or a collection of topics related to the subject.

> について "regarding" The concepts of "connections" and relationship are still
> there, but perhaps the situation is in flux. The kanji 就 in Chinese can mean
> "moving towards" a topic, so there's a sense of fluidity, transition, or
> motion in the conversation.

When you're making a connection from one topic to another, に関して makes sense.
On the other hand, について implies a more "moving forward" on the topic?
「今から韓国に関して話してください。」starts right away with 「今から」, kinda implying a change in
the topic? Is that why Imabi's writer said 1a is wrong?
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-02-23T02:24:24.607
56817
2022-07-19T07:09:25.933
2022-02-19T04:39:58.040
30454
27250
question
grammar nuances
について vs に関して - the internet tells me they only change in formality, but Imabi disagrees?
I'm a native speaker, and I'd say `今から韓国に関して話してください` is not wrong. Maybe just
an uncommon combination. `韓国に関する一切の通信を禁ず` would be very natural, because it's
formal.  
I wouldn't say it's only used in written language though. You can certainly
say `それに関してはコメントできない`, and it's completely natural.

Overall I'd say it's not "wrong", maybe just uncommon because a) it is more
formal than ついて, and it feels overly vague (why would one talk "about
something related to Korea", why not "talk about Korea"?).
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-03-15T17:16:33.633
57286
2018-03-15T17:16:33.633
499
56817
answer
As I've heard it used by natives and been understood when using it myself,
に関して comes across more as "pertaining to", "in regards to", or "concerning",
whereas について feels more like "about". So, I'd talk 'about' Korea, rather than
'concerning' Korea. You could, of course, if you were a politician, talk
'concerning' [the recent developments in] Korea, but that would certainly be a
less typical type of speech heard. I wouldn't say answer A was 'wrong' in the
sense of being entirely incorrect, but rather not the way someone _would_ say
it.
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-01-20T02:50:21.673
93018
2022-01-20T02:50:21.673
10907
56817
answer