<html><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif;font-size:10pt"><div><span>I'd like to thank once again all those who shared their thoughts on this rather mind-bogglingly complex etymological topic.</span></div><div style="font-size: 13px; background-color: transparent;"><br clear="none"></div><div style="background-color: transparent;"><span style="font-size: 13px;">I'd also like to offer the following observation about jokingly telling South Korean kids, </span><span style="background-color: transparent;">"</span><span style="background-color: transparent; font-size: 10pt;">나 북한사람야" (mentioned by a poster in the first thread on this subject). A North Korean would never refer to himself in this way, which is the South Korean term for "(a) North Korean." North Koreans generally call themselves "조선사람," and take great umbrage when
South Koreans call them "북한사람." Last year I was out drinking with a Chinese-speaking friend from Pyongyang and several Chosok-joks in NE China, and at one point one of the Choson-joks referred to North Korea in Chinese as "Beihan" ("</span><span style="background-color: transparent;">北韓" or "북한" in Korean). Even in Chinese my friend was most insulted by the term. At the time, he was trying to keep a low profile and did not want to identify himself as North Korean to the group, so he said nothing, but later on he fumed to me, "I can't believe that Choson-jok said, '北朝'! How dare he? What a jerk!" (I'm softening his language as this is a respectable academic forum.)</span></div><div style="font-size: 13px; background-color: transparent;"><span style="background-color: transparent;"><br clear="none"></span></div><div style="font-size: 13px; background-color: transparent;"><span style="background-color: transparent;">In any case,
since "나 북한사람야" was said to South Koreans, they would have found the term to be perfectly natural, so no harm done!</span></div><div style="font-size: 13px; background-color: transparent;"><span style="background-color: transparent;"><br></span></div><div class="yahoo_quoted" style="display: block;"> <br> <br> <div style="font-family: HelveticaNeue, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, 'Lucida Grande', sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"> <div style="font-family: HelveticaNeue, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, 'Lucida Grande', sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;"> <div dir="ltr"> <font size="2" face="Arial"> On Wednesday, March 26, 2014 9:12 AM, Kirk Larsen <kwlarsen67@gmail.com> wrote:<br> </font> </div> <div class="y_msg_container"><div id="yiv3494425256"><div><div dir="ltr">
<style>
#yiv3494425256 #yiv3494425256 --
_filtered #yiv3494425256 {panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
_filtered #yiv3494425256 {font-family:바탕;panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
_filtered #yiv3494425256 {font-family:바탕;panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
_filtered #yiv3494425256 {font-family:Cambria;panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
#yiv3494425256
#yiv3494425256 p.yiv3494425256MsoNormal, #yiv3494425256 li.yiv3494425256MsoNormal, #yiv3494425256 div.yiv3494425256MsoNormal
{margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:12.0pt;font-family:Cambria;}
#yiv3494425256 .yiv3494425256MsoChpDefault
{font-family:Cambria;}
_filtered #yiv3494425256 {margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
#yiv3494425256 div.yiv3494425256WordSection1
{}
#yiv3494425256
</style>
<div class="yiv3494425256MsoNormal">It is my understanding that the conception of <i style="">neifu</i> (<span lang="KO" style="font-family: 바탕;">內服</span><span style="font-family: 바탕;">) which is sometimes glossed as the “inner realm” or “inner
territories” and its opposite <i style="">waifu</i> (<span lang="KO">外服</span>) has a long and storied history of usage in China that goes
all the way back to the Zhou if not the Shang. </span></div>
<div class="yiv3494425256MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: 바탕;"> </span></div>
<div class="yiv3494425256MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: 바탕;">Such terms were still in usage
during the Qing. Some Qing officials grappled with the precise status of Chosŏn
Korea and came to the conclusion that although Chosŏn was not technically part
of the </span><i style="">neifu</i> (<span lang="KO" style="font-family: 바탕;">內服</span><span style="font-family: 바탕;">), its inhabitants were so
close to China in terms of culture and politics that it constituted a special
case. In 1887, King Kojong sent a mission to China thanking the Qing for its
efforts to resolve the Kŏmundo/Port Hamilton affair and for regarding Korea as
if it were part of the </span><i style="">neifu</i> (<span lang="KO" style="font-family: 바탕;">內服</span><span style="font-family: 바탕;">). </span></div>
<div class="yiv3494425256MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: 바탕;"> </span></div>
<div class="yiv3494425256MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: 바탕;">This is, of course, not the
same as applying <span lang="KO">內</span> and <span lang="KO">外</span> to states (<span lang="KO">國</span>), particularly in the modern, Westphalian definition of the
term. However, it seems to me that the<span lang="KO">內</span>/<span lang="KO">外</span>
distinction between polities/territory that are “us” and those that are “not
us,” probably goes back long before the 20<sup>th</sup> century. <br clear="none"></span></div><div class="yiv3494425256MsoNormal"><br clear="none"><span style="font-family: 바탕;"></span></div><div class="yiv3494425256MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: 바탕;">Cheers,</span></div><div class="yiv3494425256MsoNormal">
<br clear="none"><span style="font-family: 바탕;"></span></div><div class="yiv3494425256MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: 바탕;">Kirk Larsen <br clear="none"></span></div>
</div><div class="yiv3494425256gmail_extra"><br clear="none"><br clear="none"><div class="yiv3494425256yqt1713896064" id="yiv3494425256yqt82745"><div class="yiv3494425256gmail_quote">On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 12:07 AM, J.Scott Burgeson <span dir="ltr"><<a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:jsburgeson@yahoo.com" target="_blank" href="mailto:jsburgeson@yahoo.com">jsburgeson@yahoo.com</a>></span> wrote:<br clear="none">
<blockquote class="yiv3494425256gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div><div style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: HelveticaNeue, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, 'Lucida Grande', sans-serif;"><div>
<div><div style="font-family: HelveticaNeue, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, 'Lucida Grande', sans-serif;"><div><span style="background-color:transparent;font-size:13px;">Dear List Members:</span></div><div><span style="background-color:transparent;font-size:small;"> </span></div>
<div><span style="font-size:13px;"><span style="background-color:transparent;">This is a follow-up message to the previous discussion on the origin of the word "외국인," specifically in the modern sense. </span><span style="background-color:transparent;">I went to the Central Library of Yonsei last weekend and could find nothing of relevance in any of the books devoted to Korean etymologies (perhaps because the word "외국인" is comprised of Chinese characters
and therefore is not considered pure Korean)? I also looked at all the major, classic 국어 dictionaries published since 1945 and almost all of them said that "외국인" was the opposite of "내국인" (they used this symbol: "<––––>"). Some of the dictionaries gave that as the second meaning, some at the end of the main definitions.</span></span></div>
<div><span style="background-color:transparent;font-size:small;"><br clear="none"></span></div><div><span style="background-color:transparent;font-size:13px;">(Interestingly, my 1998 Si-sa Elite 한영 dictionary makes no note of "내국인" next to its definition of "외국인," nor does my 1986 Minjungseorim Essence Korean-English dictionary, but it would take more time to see if "내국인" gets dropped more frequently from definitions of "외국인" in more recent
Korean dictionaries.)</span></div><div><span style="background-color:transparent;font-size:small;"><br clear="none"></span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:13px;">I next went to the Center for Korean Classics Collection on the 5th floor, which contains antique and historical Korean books. The staff there, however, said that there were few Korean-language dictionaries produced during the Choson Period, and suggested I look at early dictionaries compiled by foreigners. Perhaps the oldest one of that period is a French-Korean dictionary from 1880, and although it does
not have the word "외국인" it does have a single entry for "외국," defining it as "royaume etranger," which is interesting because they use the word for "kingdom" instead of the more modern-sounding "state." It had no entry for "내국인" but it did list "내인" meaning "palace servant girl," the significance of which I will expand on below.</span></div>
<div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;"><br clear="none"></span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:13px;">The next major source I could find is Gale's 1897 Korean-English dictionary, which does not list "외국인" but does list "외국" ("foreign states"), and
adds, "See 타국." The characters for "타국" are "他國," and he defines "他" as "다를 타," as do all major Korean dictionaries today (of course, "他"is also the common pronoun "he" or "she" in
Chinese). Meanwhile, he adds here, "See 이국," the characters for which are "異國" ("異" meaning "다를 이"). So there are at least three different terms for "foreign" in Gale, and I will explain the importance of this later. Of more interest, however, are his entries for "내" or "內." He gives definitions such as "내국"or "內局" ("The royal pharmacy"), with "내" having the connotation or "royal" or "palace" (which jibes with the aforementioned "내인"), and in fact there are quite a few words meaning "royal" or "palace," and others which mean the inside of a house, but none that have the meaning of "state," with the possible exception of "내부대신" or "Home Minister."</span></div>
<div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;"><br clear="none"></span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;">However, Gale is interesting because he also has editions from 1911, 1924 and 1931, and as time passes, "외국인" appears (1911), and more importantly, "내" begins to be used more frequently in association with words that mean "state" or "country" ("나라" as he puts it), such as "내국교환" or "內國交換" ("Domestic exchange," 1911 edition), and when we get to 1931, "내국" appears meaning "One's own country" and the opposite of "외국." There a quite a few other words that conjoin "內" with "國" at this point, and a 1928 Korean-English dictionary by 김동성 also has numerous entries for "내국" meaning "one's own country" or "domestic."</span></div>
<div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;"><br clear="none"></span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;">So here are my two preliminary conclusions:</span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;">
<span style="font-size:small;"><br clear="none"></span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:13px;"> 1. I did a keyword search in the online version of "조선왕조실록" (results at the bottom of this message), and prior to the modern period, "타국인" and "이국인" get quite a few hits along with "외국인" (I searched in both Chinese and Korean). Indeed, "외국인" appears in largest numbers at the very end of Choson, while "이국인" and "타국인" are more evenly distributed,
with "이국인" getting the most references during the reign of 선조. These days "이국인" and "타국인" are hardly in common usage, and what's interesting is that they do not have the same "in-group" vs. "out-group" nuance that "외국인" has. I know it's risky to generalize from just a few dictionaries – I looked at a dozen pre-1945 Korean-English dictionaries in all, including Underwood's "Concise Dictionary of the Korean Language" (1890) and J.C Lee's "Dictionary of Foreign Words in Modern Korean" (1937) – but it does seem that "외국인" became standardized during the Japanese colonial period, so that after 1945, it was commonly understood to mean the opposite of "내국인."</span></div>
<div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;"><br clear="none"></span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;"> 2. I also did a keyword search for "內國人" in "조선왕조실록" and got just four hits (and 34 for "내국인," but I'll have to go more carefully through the results and see if they use the same Chinese characters.) And as Gale's dictionaries suggest, it seems that usage of the character "內" with "國" only becomes more common after 1910, whereas before that "內" often had the connotation of "palace" or "royal." Again, this suggests that the term "內國" became standardized during the Japanese period, and as I have noted above, this is important because after 1945 the term "內國人" is used in dictionaries to mean the opposite
of “外國人” and vice versa. I should also note that I did a search in a 17th-18th Century Chinese-Korean dictionary with the help of staff from the Center for Korean Classics Collection and we could not find any mention of "內國." There are several more online here, including the one we checked, but since they don't use pinyin it's cumbersome to search for individual words and will take more time:</span></div>
<div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;"><br clear="none"></span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;">
<a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" target="_blank" href="http://www.hangeulmuseum.org/">http://www.hangeulmuseum.org</a></span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;"><br clear="none"></span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;">
<span style="font-size:small;"> I think my next step is to check Chinese-language books that have etymologies of Chinese words, just to see if the word "內國人" was commonly used in China in the premodern period. (My hunch is that it wasn't.)</span></div>
<div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;"><br clear="none"></span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:13px;"> So my question is really this: Does anyone think I'm barking up the <span style="font-style:italic;">right</span> tree in assuming that
tracking the evolution of the term "내국인" is the best way to look at the etymology or development of the term “외국인” in Korean? Remember, my task is to determine if the term “외국인” became standardized in Korea in accordance with Japanese usage, rather than via Chinese usage. If I can determine that "內國人" was not commonly used in premodern China, and is most likely Japanese-coined, would that be as close as I can get to a "smoking gun," given the difficulty of finding a proper etymology of the term “외국인”? Any thoughts would be most appreciated!</span></div>
<div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;"><br clear="none"></span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;"> Cheers,</span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;">
<span style="font-size:small;"> Scott</span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:13px;"><br clear="none"></span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:13px;"><br clear="none">
</span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:13px;">PS: Gale's 1897 dictionary is available online here: </span><span style="background-color:transparent;font-size:13px;"><a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" target="_blank" href="https://archive.org/details/KoreanEnglishDictionary">https://archive.org/details/KoreanEnglishDictionary</a></span></div>
<div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;"><br clear="none"></span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;"><div style="background-color:transparent;"><br clear="none"></div><div style="background-color:transparent;">
<span style="font-size:small;">조선왕조실록 Searches:</span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;"><br clear="none"></span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;">1a. “外國人”: 107 combined hits, 76 concentrated during reigns of 고종 (62) and 순종 (14)</span></div>
<div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:13px;">1b. “외국인”:
289 combined hits, 188 during reigns of 고종 and 순종 </span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;"><br clear="none"></span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;">2a. “他國人”: 36 combined hits, more evenly distributed but most appearing during reign of 고종 (15)</span></div>
<div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;">2b. “타국인”: 42 combined hits, more evenly distributed but most appearing during reign of 고종 (18)</span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;">
<span style="font-size:small;"><br clear="none"></span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;">3a. “異國人”: 43 combined hits, more evenly distributed but most appearing during reign of 고종 (14)</span></div>
<div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;">3b. “이국인”: 185 hits, far more evenly distributed but most appearing during reign of 선조 (31)</span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;"><br clear="none">
</span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;">4a. “內國人”: 4 combined hits</span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;">4b. “내국인”: 34 combined hits, only one during reigns of 고종 and 순종.</span></div>
<div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;"><br clear="none"></span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;"><br clear="none"></span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;">2014 Google searches:</span></div>
<div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;"><br clear="none"></span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;">1. "외국인" gets 15.6 million hits</span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;">
<span style="font-size:small;">2. "타국인" gets 489,000 hits</span></div><div style="background-color:transparent;"><span style="font-size:small;">3. “이국인” gets 87,000 hits</span></div></div> </div></div></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div></div><br clear="none"><br clear="all"><br clear="none">-- <br clear="none"><div dir="ltr">Kirk W. Larsen <br clear="none">Department of History<br clear="none">Director, Academic Programs and Research<br clear="none">David M. Kennedy Center for International Studies<br clear="none">2151 JFSB<br clear="none">BYU<br clear="none">
Provo, UT 84602-6707<br clear="none">(801) 422-3445<br clear="none"><br clear="none"><br clear="none"></div>
</div></div></div><br><br></div> </div> </div> </div> </div></body></html>