[KS] WSJ article

Tue Dec 14 00:52:38 EST 1999

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_003B_01BF4642.DD478160
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear List:

    Ken Kaliher has been kind enough to call attention to an article in =
the Dec. 13 Wall Street Journal headlined "S Korea To Standardize =
Romanized Version Of Korean Words."

    The article purports to be about transliteration, an issue which =
NAKL seems to have put to rest, but the headline is more accurate.

     The reporter seems to think that the new romanization proposal is =
aimed at standardizing romanization.  There is already, of course, a =
standard, the official government system (a slightly revised version of =
the McCune-Reischauer system).  So one wonders how a new system, in =
itself, would promote standarization.

    The answer at which the reporter hints is that the standardization =
would actually result from greater government enforcement.  He writes =
"Fearful of unleashing even more linguistic chaos, the government will =
allow some exceptions in the spelling of personal and company names."  =
Wow!

    Nobody now considers that Hyundai, Samsung, and Daewoo, or for that =
matter the Kookmin and Hanvit Banks, not to mention Shim Jae-kee, spell =
their names at government sufferance.  It's a free country! =20

    My question to the list:  Is this just bad reporting, or is there an =
Orthographic Big Brother aspect to the reromanization proposal?  Perhaps =
I just need to get over reading an article about Quebec's language =
police.

John Harvey
jharvey at nuri.net

------=_NextPart_000_003B_01BF4642.DD478160
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dwindows-1252" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=3D3>Dear List:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>    Ken Kaliher has been kind enough to call =
attention to an=20
article in the Dec. 13 Wall Street Journal headlined "S Korea To =
Standardize=20
Romanized Version Of Korean Words."<BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D3>    The article purports to be about=20
transliteration, an issue which NAKL seems to have put to rest, but the =
headline=20
is more accurate.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D3>     The reporter seems to think =
that the=20
new romanization proposal is aimed at standardizing romanization.  =
There is=20
already, of course, a standard, the official government system (a =
slightly=20
revised version of the McCune-Reischauer system).  So one wonders =
how a new=20
system, in itself, would promote standarization.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>    The answer at which the reporter hints is =
that the=20
standardization would actually result from greater government =
enforcement. =20
He writes "<FONT size=3D3>Fearful of unleashing even more linguistic =
chaos, the=20
government will allow some exceptions in the spelling of personal =
and=20
company names."  Wow!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>    Nobody now considers that Hyundai, Samsung, and =
Daewoo,=20
or for that matter the Kookmin and Hanvit Banks, not to mention Shim =
Jae-kee,=20
spell their names at government sufferance.  It's a free =
country! =20
</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>    My question to the list:  Is this just bad=20
reporting, or is there an Orthographic Big Brother aspect to the =
reromanization=20
proposal?  Perhaps I just need to get over reading an article about =

Quebec's language police.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D3>John Harvey</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><A href=3D"mailto:jharvey at nuri.net">jharvey at nuri.net</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_003B_01BF4642.DD478160--

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%