<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 12pt;
font-family:Calibri
}
--></style></head>
<body class='hmmessage'><div dir='ltr'>Dear Otfried,<br>thanks for your answers, which I think are telling me what my experience also makes me see (sorry: hear}<br><br><span class="description ko" lang="ko"></span>.> One of the speakers on those tapes systematically pronounced 외 as /ö/ <br>> and 위 as /ü/. If I remember right, the textbook explained that this <br>> pronunciation was a valid variant used by some speakers.<br><i>Does this not smack of being prescriptive? </i><br><br>> I have met two (unrelated) senior Professor Choi's, who both told me <br>> that their name is properly pronounced /chö/, even though they did not <br>> seem to use the /ö/ variant in their own speech.<br><i>That is exactly my experience. Talking about speaking <=> speaking...<br><br></i><br>> Samuel Martin's "A reference grammar of Korean" (my copy was published <br>> in 1992) describes /외/ on page 24 as the front rounded mid vowel, that <br>> is /ö/. However, he says that "in standard Seoul speech 외 is not <br>> distinguished from 웨", and "many speakers tend to pronounce 위 as a <br>> long monophthong /ü/ rather than the more common diphthong".<br><i>Now this difference in /ü/ vs. /ö/ is really interesting and I agree, although the /ü/ in <br>my ear still has some, almost not easy to hear /i/. And the /i/ is another variant you<br>can hear in a number of combinations...</i><br><br>> When I point out to them that adding 이 to 아 and 어 moves the vowel <br>> from the back to the front of the mouth, and that the logical <br>> generalization would be for 외 and 위 to be fronted 오 and 우's, they <br>> agree (with surprise) that Hangul is inconsistent - but they still can't <br>> accept the variant as correct Korean, or think of anyone who speaks like <br>> that.<br><i>Now here we have an interesting remark, to which I cannot give a sound answer, as I am </i><br>t<i>raveling and do not have my library and my notes with me. But what may look inconsistent today, <br>may not have been inconsistent when the King made the alphabet with his friends <br>Just some hints:<br>1) adding /i/ was an off-glide, and still today sijo-singers pronounce 애 as /a-i/, and so on... I <br>I would have to look up when exactly the different monophthongisations took place<br>2) I have not followed this up, but the question, when 어 changed from /e/ to /ŏ/ until recently<br> was not yet settled, with most Korean colleagues giving a to early date (my date has to do with <br>the transcription of Mongolian /e/ as /어/ in early Korean textbooks. </i><br><br>A final remark: what do scholars who work on dialects have to say in this respect?<br><br>Best wishes<br>Your Werner<br><br><div>> Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 15:56:36 +0900<br>> From: otfried@airpost.net<br>> To: koreanstudies@koreanstudies.com<br>> Subject: Re: [KS] Variable Romanization of 년(年) in McCune-Reischauer<br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> On 24/02/14 13:38, Werner Sasse wrote:<br>> > Right you are. Reminds me of Korean scholars in "Germanistik", who try<br>> > to convince me that Korean 외 is identical with German /ö/ : The<br>> > linguist's need or wish to make a rule, which sometimes is overriding<br>> > simple observation, a not uncommon occupational disease amongst us<br>> > scholars (and not only linguists)<br>> <br>> I have been wondering about this for a long time. When I first learnt <br>> Korean, I had some tapes that turned out to have been recorded a long <br>> time ago, possibly in the 1950's (with example sentences like "This <br>> towel costs 23 Won").<br>> <br>> One of the speakers on those tapes systematically pronounced 외 as /ö/ <br>> and 위 as /ü/. If I remember right, the textbook explained that this <br>> pronunciation was a valid variant used by some speakers.<br>> <br>> I have met two (unrelated) senior Professor Choi's, who both told me <br>> that their name is properly pronounced /chö/, even though they did not <br>> seem to use the /ö/ variant in their own speech.<br>> <br>> Samuel Martin's "A reference grammar of Korean" (my copy was published <br>> in 1992) describes /외/ on page 24 as the front rounded mid vowel, that <br>> is /ö/. However, he says that "in standard Seoul speech 외 is not <br>> distinguished from 웨", and "many speakers tend to pronounce 위 as a <br>> long monophthong /ü/ rather than the more common diphthong".<br>> <br>> I personally do not remember meeting a Korean who used the monophthong <br>> variants, and when I ask younger Koreans about this, they are completely <br>> baffled. They never heard about this variant, and have no idea why <br>> Goethe is spelled 괴테.<br>> <br>> When I point out to them that adding 이 to 아 and 어 moves the vowel <br>> from the back to the front of the mouth, and that the logical <br>> generalization would be for 외 and 위 to be fronted 오 and 우's, they <br>> agree (with surprise) that Hangul is inconsistent - but they still can't <br>> accept the variant as correct Korean, or think of anyone who speaks like <br>> that.<br>> <br>> When did this variant fall out of usage? Or has it always been a <br>> regional variant? Is it still alive somewhere?<br>> <br>> Best wishes,<br>> Otfried Cheong<br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br></div> </div></body>
</html>