<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0" ><tr><td valign="top" style="font: inherit;">Thanks to Gari, Adam, and Don, I stand corrected. I'd just add that my Tsushima error shouldn't distract from the connection between syeom 셤 and shima しま. <br><br>[cf., http://krdic.naver.com/detail.nhn?docid=21691300 for the older spelling] Ed<br><br><div id="RTEContent"><div id="RTEContent"><div id="RTEContent"><div id="RTEContent"><div id="RTEContent"><div id="RTEContent"><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://koreanpoems.blogspot.com/">Dr. Edward D. Rockstein </a><br></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br>ed4linda@yahoo.com <br><br><em>Those who corrupt the public mind are just as evil as those who steal from the public purse</em>--Adlai Stevenson<br></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><br><br>--- On <b>Wed, 5/30/12,
gkl1@columbia.edu <i><gkl1@columbia.edu></i></b> wrote:<br><blockquote style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(16, 16, 255); margin-left: 5px; padding-left: 5px;"><br>From: gkl1@columbia.edu <gkl1@columbia.edu><br>Subject: Re: [KS] Tsushima does not mean "Two islands"<br>To: koreanstudies@koreaweb.ws<br>Date: Wednesday, May 30, 2012, 5:13 PM<br><br><div class="plainMail"> Yes, Ed, but be sure you check the date on that map. Back in the <br>etymological times and climes we're speaking of,Tsushima was a single <br>island, not two. Prior to the early years of the 20th century--some <br>time between 1898 and 1904, the Japanese navy divided the island at <br>O-Funakoshi, where up to that time a natural isthmus had connected the <br>northern and southern halves of the island. To the East of that <br>isthmus was the open sea. To the west was a vast inlet called Aso Bay. <br>By digging a cut
through that isthmus, a whole island became two <br>islands.<br> This was a major factor in the Battle of Tsushima (1905), when <br>Japan totally destroyed the Russian fleet. The Russians, after the <br>seven-months-plus sea voyage of the Baltic fleet, headed for <br>Vladivostok. They had a choice whether to take the western route <br>through the Korea strait between Korea and Tsushima, or to take the <br>route east of Tsushima. Because of the eastern access to Aso Bay Japan <br>could post warships on either side of Tsushima, which they did. The <br>Russians chose the Korea Strait, and the Japanese warships on the <br>other side of the island quickly passed through the newly available <br>eastern access and were now able to hit the Russians from both the <br>north and the south. Result, total disaster for Russia and victory for <br>Japan. (Theodore Roosevelt,
cheering them on, quickly encouraged them <br>to take over Korea).<br><br>Gari Ledyard<br><br>Quoting "Dr. Edward D. Rockstein" <<a ymailto="mailto:ed4linda@yahoo.com" href="/mc/compose?to=ed4linda@yahoo.com">ed4linda@yahoo.com</a>>:<br><br>> WRT the Japanese word for island "shima しま” being from Korean, I'd <br>> point out that the Korean word "seom 섬" was earlier rendered "syeom <br>> 셤" and that Japanese "tsushima つしま|[?⒢�" appears to be an <br>> adaptation from Korean "dusyeom 두셤," = "two islands." Look at a map.<br>><br>> Dr. Edward D. Rockstein<br>><br>> <a ymailto="mailto:ed4linda@yahoo.com" href="/mc/compose?to=ed4linda@yahoo.com">ed4linda@yahoo.com</a>��<br>><br>> Those who corrupt the public mind are just as evil as those who <br>> steal from the public purse--Adlai Stevenson<br>><br>><br>> --- On Tue, 5/29/12, Edward Kim
<<a ymailto="mailto:wangkon936@yahoo.com" href="/mc/compose?to=wangkon936@yahoo.com">wangkon936@yahoo.com</a>> wrote:<br>><br>> From: Edward Kim <<a ymailto="mailto:wangkon936@yahoo.com" href="/mc/compose?to=wangkon936@yahoo.com">wangkon936@yahoo.com</a>><br>> Subject: Re: [KS] Is Korean an Altaic language?<br>> To: "Korean Studies Discussion List" <<a ymailto="mailto:koreanstudies@koreaweb.ws" href="/mc/compose?to=koreanstudies@koreaweb.ws">koreanstudies@koreaweb.ws</a>><br>> Date: Tuesday, May 29, 2012, 10:54 PM<br>><br>> John,<br>> John R. Bentley at University of Hawaii did an exhaustive study of <br>> the Baekje language from surviving fragments in the Nihon Shoki and <br>> the Samguk Sagi and reconstructed 100 Baekje words. ?His conclusion <br>> was that Baekje and the language of Silla was more similar to each <br>> other than what was being spoken in Japan.<br>> One
interesting tidbit is that the Japanese word for island, <br>> "shima," was originally from the old Korean world for enclosed and <br>> isolated space, "sima." ?Shima (as in Takashima or?Tsushima) was <br>> originally an old Korean word.�<br>><br>> --- On Mon, 5/28/12, John Treat<br>> <<a ymailto="mailto:john.treat@yale.edu" href="/mc/compose?to=john.treat@yale.edu">john.treat@yale.edu</a>> wrote:<br>><br>> From: John Treat <<a ymailto="mailto:john.treat@yale.edu" href="/mc/compose?to=john.treat@yale.edu">john.treat@yale.edu</a>><br>> Subject: Re: [KS] Is Korean an Altaic language?<br>> To: <a ymailto="mailto:koreanstudies@koreaweb.ws" href="/mc/compose?to=koreanstudies@koreaweb.ws">koreanstudies@koreaweb.ws</a><br>> Date: Monday, May 28, 2012, 5:48 PM<br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>> On 5/28/12 2:46 PM, Edward Kim
wrote:<br>><br>><br>><br>> There are really very few compelling questions in Japanese<br>> linguistics (Phonology? No. Syntax? No.), but this is ONE of them. I<br>> was taught decades ago that Japanese (likely) has a genetic<br>> relationship with Paekche, but Paekche itself was overwhelmed so<br>> evidence has been lost. John Whitman toils in the fields, by the<br>> way.<br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>> Regarding the possible relationship, I would<br>> say that current scholarship is leaning on saying no.<br>> 쟄ere is a quick
summary:<br>><br>><br>><br>> 1)�<br>> Christopher I.<br>> Beckwith�(author of쟇oguryo: The Language of<br>> Japan's Continental Relatives)쟥ives a resounding no.<br>><br>><br>><br>> 2)쟓oy Andrew Miller (author<br>> of쟊anguages and History: Japanese, Korean and Altaic)<br>> says yes.<br>><br>><br>><br>> 3)잸lexander Vovin<br>>
(author of쟇orea-Japonica: A Re-evaluation of a Common<br>> Genetic Origin) says no. 쟄e had originally started<br>> believing that Korean and Japanese shared a genetic<br>> relationship, but after studying the most archaic<br>> forms of Japanese on the쟓yukyu islands, he came to<br>> the conclusion that they were not.쟅nterestingly,<br>> Vovin does believe that a common "Old Korean" was<br>>
spoken on the peninsula during the Three Kingdom's<br>> Period.<br>><br>><br>><br>> 4)쟆. Marshall Unger<br>> (author of쟕he Role of Contact in the Origins of the<br>> Japanese and Korean Language) says yes, but<br>> with쟠aveats. 쟄e actually believes that Proto Korean<br>> and Proto Japanese were both spoken widely on the<br>> peninsula, but that Proto Korean eventually displaced<br>>
Proto Japanese and pushed it into the쟞rchipelago.<br>> 쟕he main evidence that he has is that Japanese place<br>> names on the peninsula are not just in old Koguryo<br>> areas, but also in other areas on the peninsula as<br>> well.<br>><br>><br>><br>> My personal belief, as an<br>> informed lay person, is a combination of three and<br>> four. 쟇orean and Japanese may have had very
distant<br>> genetic relationships somewhere in Manchuria or<br>> Siberia, but separated a very long time ago. 쟅t is<br>> very hard to know for sure because we have fragmentary<br>> information on Old Korean due to Korea's more<br>> turbulent history. 잸t the same time information on<br>> Old Japanese isn't exhaustive either.�<br>><br>><br>><br>> I know there was an<br>>
interesting paper by John R. Bentley that took old Han<br>> and Wei documents and glossed Proto Korean and Proto<br>> Japanese words and found out that both had a similar<br>> number of vowels at that time. 쟅t also collaborated<br>> the works of Japanese scholars as well. 쟕urns out<br>> that Proto Japanese may have had seven vowels as<br>> opposed to the 5 vowels that it has now. 쟑roto Korean<br>> also had
seven vowels back then as opposed to the 10<br>> vowels it has now. 쟅t was also determined that those<br>> vowels were overlapping. 쟕hus, it appeared based on<br>> this evidence that back then at least the two<br>> languages sounded similar.<br>><br>><br>><br>> Again,<br>> based on the쟡earth of information, we may never really<br>> know.<br>><br>><br>><br>><br>>
--- On Mon, 5/28/12, Adam Bohnet <<a ymailto="mailto:adam.bohnet@utoronto.ca" href="/mc/compose?to=adam.bohnet@utoronto.ca">adam.bohnet@utoronto.ca</a>><br>> wrote:<br>><br>><br>><br>> From: Adam Bohnet <<a ymailto="mailto:adam.bohnet@utoronto.ca" href="/mc/compose?to=adam.bohnet@utoronto.ca">adam.bohnet@utoronto.ca</a>><br>><br>> Subject: Re: [KS] Is Korean an Altaic language?<br>><br>> To: <a ymailto="mailto:koreanstudies@koreaweb.ws" href="/mc/compose?to=koreanstudies@koreaweb.ws">koreanstudies@koreaweb.ws</a><br>><br>> Date: Monday, May
28, 2012, 3:55 AM<br>><br>><br>><br>> Dear Eugene:<br>><br>><br>><br>> My own fealing, having read a little bit about it as<br>> a non-specialist,�<br>><br>> is that the safest course is to tell students that<br>> there is a great�<br>><br>> deal of debate concerning Korea's relationship to<br>> Japanese and the�<br>><br>>
so-called Altaic languages, and that otherwise it<br>> has no obvious or�<br>><br>> undisputed connection to any other language. I then<br>> direct students to�<br>><br>> Sasha Vovin, etc. My own impression (no doubt based<br>> on insufficiently�<br>><br>> deep reading) was that all of the participants in<br>> the
debate were able�<br>><br>> to claim that what other scholars treated as<br>> evidence of a genetic�<br>><br>> relationship was actually just the result of<br>> borrowing of words, so�<br>><br>> that unless one really wants to wade deep into the<br>> waters of this�<br>><br>> debate, it is best to stay dry and on the edge.<br>><br>><br>><br>>
In response to Henny's comment, note that Eugene's<br>> question was not�<br>><br>> concerned with simple "similarity"� but with<br>> language families. Note�<br>><br>> that English speakers have a notoriously hard time<br>> learning Sanskrit,�<br>><br>> although Sanskrit is also an Indo-European language.<br>>
Perhaps I might�<br>><br>> direct list-members to a comment made by Sasha Vovin<br>> on the Yahoo�<br>><br>> Manchu Studies List. His comment concerns Manchu,<br>> but in some respects�<br>><br>> it applies to Korean as well.<br>><br>><br>><br>> <a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ManchuStudy/message/390" target="_blank">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ManchuStudy/message/390</a><br>><br>><br>><br>>
"Manchu belongs to the Tungusic language family,<br>> namely to its South<br>><br>> (Nanaic) branch. The Tungusic language family is<br>> spread from Western<br>><br>> Siberia to Pacific, and includes about a dozen<br>> languages, among which<br>><br>> Ewenki, Ewen, and Nanai alongside with the Sibo<br>>
dialect of Manchu in<br>><br>> Xinjiang have the most number of speakers. Manchu,<br>> as well as other<br>><br>> Tungusic languages have a remarkable similarity to<br>> languages belonging<br>><br>> to languages families found in Central and East Asia<br>> (Turkic,<br>><br>> Mongolic, Korean, and Japonic) that used to be<br>>
called 'Altaic', but<br>><br>> the similarity is superficial, mainly due to the<br>> fact that all these<br>><br>> languages have SOV word order. Students of Manchu<br>> who make use of the<br>><br>> Japanese translation of the Manwen laodang will<br>> notice that the<br>><br>> Japanese text placed beneath each
line of Manchu<br>> text follows the same<br>><br>> word order as Manchu. But they should keep in mind<br>> that a similar<br>><br>> translation into Hindi or the Sepik language (a<br>> Papuan language) would<br>><br>> enjoy the same privilege, as these languages are<br>> also SOV. Meanwhile,<br>><br>>
this will not work for Ewen, which, although<br>> obviously related to<br>><br>> Manchu, has developed SVO order in certain types of<br>> clauses. Though<br>><br>> linguists have debated whether Altaic languages are<br>> actually<br>><br>> genetically linked or whether their similarities<br>> merely reflect<br>><br>>
extensive borrowings from one another, most of<br>> Western and Japanese<br>><br>> specialists in 'Altaic' languages believe that these<br>> similarities are<br>><br>> the result of centuries long contacts. In other<br>> words, we deal here<br>><br>> with a Sprachbund situation."<br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>>
Quoting Henny Savenije <<a ymailto="mailto:webmaster@henny-savenije.pe.kr" href="/mc/compose?to=webmaster@henny-savenije.pe.kr">webmaster@henny-savenije.pe.kr</a>>:<br>><br>><br>><br>> > I am not a linguist either but I do remember<br>> that Turkish and<br>><br>> > Hungarians and even Finnish have a relative<br>> easy time learning Korean.<br>><br>> > I have met people from each group telling me<br>> so. Which
indicates to me<br>><br>> > the similarity between the languages.<br>><br>> ><br>><br>> > At 02:29 PM 5/27/2012, you wrote:<br>><br>> >> Dear all,<br>><br>> >><br>><br>> >> On a somewhat related note: what is the<br>> latest consensus, if any, among<br>><br>>
>> historical linguists on whether Korean (as<br>> well as Japanese) is an<br>><br>> >> Altaic language? I am not a linguist, but<br>> would it be fair for me to<br>><br>> >> tell my students that Korean is either a<br>> member of an Altaic language<br>><br>> >> family or a language isolate to which<br>> Altaic languages, more than
any<br>><br>> >> others, are probably most closely related?<br>> My own very limited<br>><br>> >> understanding of the literature on<br>> historical linguistics seems to<br>><br>> >> suggest to me that if one were to place<br>> Korean in a language family,<br>><br>> >> then the Altaic seems to be the best<br>>
choice.<br>><br>> >><br>><br>> >> Best,<br>><br>> >><br>><br>> >> Gene<br>><br>> >> ---<br>><br>> >><br>><br>> >> Eugene Y. Park<br>><br>> >> Korea Foundation Associate Professor
of<br>> History<br>><br>> >> Director, James Joo-Jin Kim Program in<br>> Korean Studies<br>><br>> >> University of Pennsylvania<br>><br>> >> <a href="http://www.history.upenn.edu/faculty/park.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.history.upenn.edu/faculty/park.shtml</a><br>><br>> >><br>><br>> >><br>><br>>
>> On 5/26/2012 11:02 PM, <a ymailto="mailto:gkl1@columbia.edu" href="/mc/compose?to=gkl1@columbia.edu">gkl1@columbia.edu</a><br>> wrote:<br>><br>> >>> Hi List,<br>><br>> >>><br>><br>> >>> Admittedly a huge number of Chinese<br>> words and compounds have become<br>><br>> >>> part of Korean's vocabulary, just as a<br>>
huge number of Greek and and<br>><br>> >>> Latin words have become a part of the<br>> vocabulary of English (and the<br>><br>> >>> other European languages too). But it's<br>> distressing to learn that<br>><br>> >>> people might think ANY Korean word<br>> would be writable with Chinese<br>><br>>
>>> characters. If that were so, then<br>> Korean would be a language in the<br>><br>> >>> Sino-Tibetan family. It's hard enough<br>> to get scholarly agreement on<br>><br>> >>> what language family CAN claim Korean's<br>> ancestry, but any linguistic<br>><br>> >>> reference work would make it clear that<br>> it's not a
Chinese-type language.<br>><br>> >>><br>><br>> >>> Gari Ledyard<br>><br>> >>><br>><br>> >>> Quoting Clark W Sorensen <<a ymailto="mailto:sangok@u.washington.edu" href="/mc/compose?to=sangok@u.washington.edu">sangok@u.washington.edu</a>>:<br>><br>> >>><br>><br>> >>>> Caren,<br>><br>>
>>>><br>><br>> >>>> Namaksin is a native Korean word,<br>> so it doesn't have corresponding<br>><br>> >>>> Chinese characters. However, any of<br>> the on-line dictionaries will give<br>><br>> >>>> the characters for Korean words<br>> such as at naver.com. The problem is<br>><br>> >>>> you have
to input the Korean in<br>> hangul.<br>><br>> >>>><br>><br>> >>>> Clark Sorensen<br>><br>> >>>><br>><br>> >>>> On Fri, 25 May 2012, Freeman, Caren<br>> (cwf8q) wrote:<br>><br>> >>>><br>><br>>
>>>>><br>><br>> >>>>> I¡칖 asking this question on<br>> behalf of a colleague who is a<br>><br>> >>>>> sinologist. He asks:<br>><br>> >>>>><br>><br>> >>>>><br>><br>> >>>>><br>><br>> >>>>> ¡°i want to see what chinese<br>>
characters correspond to korean<br>><br>> >>>>> "Namaksin" wooden clogs.<br>> Namaksin (³ª¸·½�)<br>><br>> >>>>><br>><br>> >>>>><br>><br>> >>>>><br>><br>> >>>>> Is there an online dictionary<br>> that gives the classic
readings for<br>><br>> >>>>> korean words entered in pinyin<br>> type western alphabet?¡±<br>><br>> >>>>><br>><br>> >>>>><br>><br>> >>>>><br>><br>> >>>>> Many thanks for your<br>> recommendations,<br>><br>>
>>>>><br>><br>> >>>>> Caren Freeman<br>><br>> >>>>><br>><br>> >>>>><br>><br>> >>>>><br>><br>> >>>>><br>><br>> >>>>><br>><br>> >>>>><br>><br>>
>>>>><br>><br>> >>>>><br>><br>> >>>>><br>><br>> >>><br>><br>> >>><br>><br>> >>><br>><br>> >>><br>><br>> ><br>><br>> >� � � � � <br>> � � � �
_��?<br>><br>> >� � � � � <br>> � � ���(o) (o)<br>><br>> >� � � oOOO----(_)----OOOo---<br>><br>> > Henny (Lee Hae Kang)<br>><br>> > -----------------------------<br>><br>> > <a href="http://www.henny-savenije.pe.kr" target="_blank">http://www.henny-savenije.pe.kr</a><br>> Portal to all my sites<br>><br>> > <a
href="http://www.hendrick-hamel.henny-savenije.pe.kr" target="_blank">http://www.hendrick-hamel.henny-savenije.pe.kr</a><br>> (in English) Feel free<br>><br>> > to discover Korea with Hendrick Hamel<br>> (1653-1666)<br>><br>> > <br>> <a href="http://www.hendrick-hamel.henny-savenije.pe.kr/indexk2.htm" target="_blank">http://www.hendrick-hamel.henny-savenije.pe.kr/indexk2.htm</a><br>> In Korean<br>><br>> > <a
href="http://www.hendrick-hamel.henny-savenije.pe.kr/Dutch" target="_blank">http://www.hendrick-hamel.henny-savenije.pe.kr/Dutch</a><br>> In Dutch<br>><br>> > <a href="http://www.vos.henny-savenije.pe.kr" target="_blank">http://www.vos.henny-savenije.pe.kr</a><br>> Frits Vos Article about Witsen and<br>><br>> > Eibokken and his first Korean-Dutch dictionary<br>><br>> > <a href="http://www.cartography.henny-savenije.pe.kr" target="_blank">http://www.cartography.henny-savenije.pe.kr</a><br>>
(in English) Korea through<br>><br>> > Western Cartographic eyes<br>><br>> > <a href="http://www.hwasong.henny-savenije.pe.kr" target="_blank">http://www.hwasong.henny-savenije.pe.kr</a><br>> Hwasong the fortress in Suwon<br>><br>> > <a href="http://www.oldKorea.henny-savenije.pe.kr" target="_blank">http://www.oldKorea.henny-savenije.pe.kr</a><br>> Old Korea in pictures<br>><br>> > <a
href="http://www.british.henny-savenije.pe.kr" target="_blank">http://www.british.henny-savenije.pe.kr</a><br>> A British encounter in Pusan (1797)<br>><br>> > <a href="http://www.genealogy.henny-savenije.pe.kr/" target="_blank">http://www.genealogy.henny-savenije.pe.kr/</a><br>> Genealogy<br>><br>> > <a href="http://www.henny-savenije.pe.kr/phorum" target="_blank">http://www.henny-savenije.pe.kr/phorum</a><br>> Bulletin board for Korean
studies<br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br><br><br><br></div></blockquote></td></tr></table>