<div dir="ltr">For the record, I never resisted RR, it's not perfect, but my students are never going to use the diacritics in MR (or CCK, thank you Dr. Grayson) when these days they try to write their papers on tablets and phones as well as computers. I have long told my students in regards to names (and this is reflected in the PDF RR guideline document) that while family names may be Romanized in the way that that family has (in order to keep the 'same' surname in Roman letters in the eyes of non-Korean speakers like immigration officials in foreign countries), given names are supposed to be Romanized according to RR rules. In addition, although a few modern era people like Rhee Syngman had idiosyncratic spelling that we more or less need to use to maintain consistency, when we're talking about historical individuals from before the modern era we should be Romanizing their names using perfect RR, not family names like Lee, Park, or Woo. <div><br></div><div>I am not surprised that the Korea Journal tried to come up with their own approach-- the special snowflake approach to spelling of names seems to be only getting worse in Korea as people (stars) try to bring letters into their names like Z. The only way to stop the special snowflake spelling, or to achieve any consistency is for Koreans to understand why Romanization exists, and why standardizing spelling is advantageous (and as someone who has taught Koreans in Korea, I guarantee most people enter college not understanding why Romanization is important, just look at the still too common choice to spell 혜 Hea, if you don't know what I mean). </div><div><br></div><div>In the meantime, don't you think it's time for the Western scholars to admit that </div><div>1) the Korean government is -not- changing Romanization schemes all the time-- the reasons they established RR still stand and are unlikely to disappear (I'm sick of hearing people say "it changes each time there is a new president" because it obviously doesn't), and </div><div>2) that we should allow the ROK government (which does represent the majority of Koreans since the DPRK has a much smaller population) to determine how Korean is going to be Romanized rather than clinging to MR. </div><div><br></div><div>Either solve the technical issue of diacritics (on phones, too) so that the diacritics require no difficulty at all, or just admit that MR is a dinosaur in the digital age--the reasons you like it more (if you do) don't actually matter when no one can figure out a graceful way to use it across platforms. Tell your journals to switch to RR, write your books in RR, and stop thinking that Western academia gets to dictate Romanization issues, that's just more of the same special snowflake thinking. </div><div><br></div><div>As for Dennis's original question, I have always just used the 4 page long Wikipedia explanation on RR with my students and had no problems. Yes, I did arbitrarily tell them to include 은/는/이/가/에 etc. within the word without a space (jipe instead of jip e), figuring that worked just fine, and instructing them to include a - if there may be difficulty without it. </div><div><br></div><div>As for Frank's problem with a PDF-- there is a rotate function in PDF viewers, it works. Yes, they should have rotated before uploading, but no yoga is needed. </div><div><br></div><div>And before I sign off, I have found it very productive to teach freshmen/women how to use BOTH MR and RR, and given them exercises requiring them to practice Romanization to make them more familiar with the differences and challenges. I begin with exercises just with common words (place names, historical figures, etc.) MR/RR into RR/MR and 한글, and then I give them whole passages in 한글 (selected to include tricky Romanization) that they need to Romanize (both systems) to give them a chance to ask the questions that emerge when you're actually trying to do it, instead of just being told how to do it. By starting with this at the start of a semester with freshmen/women I find that I have few problems later on (the next years, too!) as peers can help correct the students who need help, and everyone knows it is important. By doing these exercises they can read materials using both RR and MR without getting confused. </div><div><br></div><div>CedarBough Saeji </div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Richard McBride <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:rick_mcbride17@hotmail.com" target="_blank">rick_mcbride17@hotmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div id="m_5056173203950082259divtagdefaultwrapper" style="font-size:12pt;color:#000000;font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif" dir="ltr">
<p>Dear Prof. Tanter and Colleagues</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>One of the curious and/or frustrating decisions of the Revised Romanization System is that no standardized rules apply when it comes to names. The way a living or historical person, such as Park Chung Hee or Syngman Rhee, spelled his or her name is the
appropriate way to romanize it using the RR system. This works okay for some people, or perhaps many people in the modern era. A greater problem arises when trying to romanize names of historical Koreans. How do you romanize their surnames systematically?</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>I published a paper in the <i>Korea Journal</i> back in 2005 and had to use the RR system. The editors of the journal at that time said that although there were no standardized rules, they wanted to do the following with certain surnames. "Pak" 박 was to
be "Park" (not "Bak"), "Kim" 김 was to be "Kim" (not "Gim"), and "Yi" 이 was to be "Lee" (not "I"). They did not have a position on other surnames to my remembrance. However, because many Koreans surnamed "U" 우 romanize it as "Woo," I understand that reasoning.
Now, having the opportunity to evaluate many manuscripts each year, I see no standardized or systematic way surnames are organized. I have seen Park, Bak, Bark, and Pak for 박, and I have seen Kim and Gim for 김, and I have seen Lee, Yi, I, and Rhee for 이,
although I can understand and appreciate Ri 리 for a contemporary person from North Korea. </p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>My point is that the creators/promoters of the RR system, the Ministry of Culture and Tourism, never decided on such issues. This being so, we will continue to see wide variation in the use of the RR system. It will be continue to be frustrating.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Best</p>
<p>Rick McBride</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Richard D. McBride II, Ph.D.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Associate Professor and Chair of History</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Brigham Young University–Hawaii #1970</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">55-220 Kulanui Street</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Lā‘ie, HI 96762-1294</span></p>
<span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Phone:<span>
</span><a href="tel:(808)%20675-3593" value="+18086753593" target="_blank">808-675-3593</a></span><br>
<p></p>
<br>
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%">
<div id="m_5056173203950082259divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font style="font-size:11pt" color="#000000" face="Calibri, sans-serif"><b>From:</b> Koreanstudies <<a href="mailto:koreanstudies-bounces@koreanstudies.com" target="_blank">koreanstudies-bounces@<wbr>koreanstudies.com</a>> on behalf of Tanter, Dr. Marcy <<a href="mailto:TANTER@tarleton.edu" target="_blank">TANTER@tarleton.edu</a>><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, December 8, 2016 6:52 PM<span class=""><br>
<b>To:</b> Korean Studies Discussion List<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [KS] Revised Romanization Detailed Guidelines?</span></font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div>
<p>As someone who has not studied this at all, I'm wondering who decided and agreed on romanization? For example, why is "Pak" translated as "Park"? why is "Oo" "Woo"? I'm learning Hangeul very slowly and on my own, so sometimes I get confused.<br>
</p><span class="">
<p><br>
</p>
<div id="m_5056173203950082259Signature">
<div name="divtagdefaultwrapper">
<div class="m_5056173203950082259BodyFragment"><font size="2"><font color="#993366"><b></b></font>
<div class="m_5056173203950082259PlainText"><font color="#993366"><b>Professor Marcy L. Tanter<br>
Chair, Speaker Symposium Committee<br>
Professor of English<br>
Department of English and Languages<br>
Box T0300<br>
Tarleton State University<br>
Stephenville, TX 76402</b></font></div>
</font></div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="color:rgb(33,33,33)">
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%">
<br>
</div>
</span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div><div style="color:rgb(34,34,34);background-color:rgb(255,255,255)"><p style="font-size:13px;margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;background-image:initial;background-repeat:initial"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">CedarBough T. Saeji</span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"> ∞ </span><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><a href="https://ubc.academia.edu/CedarBoughSaeji" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank">Profile on Academia.edu</a></span></p><p style="font-size:13px;margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;background-image:initial;background-repeat:initial"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Korea Foundation Postdoctoral Fellow, University of British Columbia Department of Asian Studies</span></p><p style="font-size:13px;margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;background-image:initial;background-repeat:initial"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"></span></p><p style="font-size:13px;margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;background-image:initial;background-repeat:initial"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"> </span></p><p style="font-size:13px;margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;background-image:initial;background-repeat:initial"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">"Preserving intangible culture as static performances in the hope of sustaining cultural diversity may do very little to foster the processes of change and regeneration that are needed to ensure cultural vitality and heterogeneity" (Pietrobruno 2009: 240).</span></p><p style="font-size:13px;margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;background-image:initial;background-repeat:initial"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"> </span></p><p style="font-size:small;margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;background-image:initial;background-repeat:initial"><span style="font-size:14.6667px;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Apt. 116 / </span><span style="font-size:14.6667px;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">3655 Wesbrook Mall / </span><span style="font-size:14.6667px;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Vancouver BC / </span><span style="font-size:14.6667px;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">V6S 0G6 / </span><span style="font-size:14.6667px;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">CANADA</span><br></p></div></div><div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</div>