[KS] formal question (which version of Chinese characters?)

[Werner Sasse]

Dear colleagues,
 
1) Frank wrote:
 
> The basic question is:
> Should one pay consideration to the different semantics of character 
> variations (Korea, mainland China, Japan) beyond the correct 
> representation of the transcribed pronunciation in each language -- or 
> is a "representation" of Chinese characters only acceptable when we do 
> so 1:1 (mirroring the actual variations used in that culture and/or 
> text)?
"The argument given by Andrew Logie's struck me as especially sensible 
and convincing: 
>> traditional, Simplified and Japanese kanji are now - synchronically 
speaking - independent scripts used to represent different languages <<
He thus sees Chinese characters within each LANGUAGE rather than 
understanding the characters as just a script system. "
Both very sensible , indeed. Any deviation from that should only be done considering policies, being them political or publishing house/periodical ones.
 
2) "rather > than Quan)? If we 'push' that a little, we then get sentences like: "In 
> 1990 Mr. Kwŏn 权 xx visited his his nephew Mr. Kwŏn 權 yy in Seoul." 
 Mr. Kwŏn 权
 Mr. Kwŏn  權
Mr. Quan 权
 Mr. Quan 權
Mr. Gweon
Mr. Gwon aso... --- Look at the namecards. If you dont have them, look where this is printed...
 
Greetings to everyone
Werner
 
> Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 13:46:06 -0700
> From: hoffmann at koreanstudies.com
> To: koreanstudies at koreanstudies.com
> Subject: Re: [KS] formal question (which version of Chinese characters?)
> 
> My own SUMMARY from this discourse:
> 
> 
> Yeon-ju Bae wrote:
> 
> > Drawing on the example that has been used, 民俗, 民間, and 傳承 seem 
> > to have completely different meaning/nuance in Korean, i.e., 'folk', 
> > 'among laity', and 'transmission' (at least
> > according to my first impression of hearing the words).
> > So I guess the inscription of Sino-Korean forms might not necessarily 
> > render the effect of translation, as someone else has already mentioned.
> 
> 
> Exactly that was the very starting point of my question -- it should 
> not be the result. We certainly are all aware that these terms do in 
> daily language mean very different, unrelated things *in Korea* -- 
> which is why it was chosen as an example. But this was NOT a question 
> related to publishing IN KOREAN language (in KOREA)! That would be a 
> completely different issue, and this should not be mixed up.
> 
> The basic question is:
> Should one pay consideration to the different semantics of character 
> variations (Korea, mainland China, Japan) beyond the correct 
> representation of the transcribed pronunciation in each language -- or 
> is a "representation" of Chinese characters only acceptable when we do 
> so 1:1 (mirroring the actual variations used in that culture and/or 
> text)?
> 
> The argument given by Andrew Logie's struck me as especially sensible 
> and convincing: 
> >> traditional, Simplified and Japanese kanji are now - synchronically 
> speaking - independent scripts used to represent different languages <<
> He thus sees Chinese characters within each LANGUAGE rather than 
> understanding the characters as just a script system. 
> 
> To me this is plausible enough in order to now use each local variant 
> of characters for terminology and for bibliographic references. What I 
> am personally left with is the question about personal names though 
> (more so than institutional names). Would it really be the best to, 
> using another example, write the simplified version of the family name 
> Kwŏn 權, which is 权, when we refer to some Chinese Korean person 
> living in Jilin, China (while keeping the pronunciation at Kwŏn rather 
> than Quan)? If we 'push' that a little, we then get sentences like: "In 
> 1990 Mr. Kwŏn 权 xx visited his his nephew Mr. Kwŏn 權 yy in Seoul." 
> Even without such rather seldom cases, my 'gut feeling' tells me we do 
> not need that in case of personal names, simply because these are not 
> related to cultural semantics. Am I not thinking this through? Any 
> comments?
> 
> 
> Best,
> Frank
> 
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Frank Hoffmann
> http://koreanstudies.com
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://koreanstudies.com/pipermail/koreanstudies_koreanstudies.com/attachments/20150527/74fc8699/attachment.html>