In a complex Korean sentence, what is the key difference in meaning conveyed when using '-기' versus '-ㅁ' for nominalization, particularly when expressing abstract concepts?

The key difference lies in the type of abstract concept emphasized and the nuance imparted to the sentence. '-기' nominalization often denotes an action or process, highlighting the *doingof something as a general ability, habit, or possibility. It focuses on the unfolding or performance of the verb. For instance, '수영하기는 재미있어요' (Swimming is fun) treats the act of swimming as a general activity. '-ㅁ' nominalization, on the other hand, typically represents a state, a result, or a more concrete concept derived from the verb. It emphasizes the completed action or the inherent quality, often with a sense of finality or established fact. For example, '그의 훌륭한 가르침이 있었음이 분명하다' (It is clear that he had excellent teachings) focuses on the established fact or the result of the teaching. When dealing with abstract concepts, '-기' is more suitable for discussing the potential or processual aspects of the concept, while '-ㅁ' is better for denoting its existence, state, or solidified form. Therefore, '-기' stresses the activity itself, and '-ㅁ' emphasizes the concrete concept resulting from that activity.