[KS] Re: Perfect Hangul?

[didier barbas]

on 1/12/99 22:44, otfried at cs.ust.hk at otfried at cs.ust.hk wrote:

> Personally, I also like the ability to distinguish M-R Suk-yo^ng from
> M-R Su-kyo^ng by writing Sukyeong versus Sugyeong, as in informal
> writing one usually doesn't take care to separate syllables. Obviously
> this is not something that `innocent foreigners' are going to
> appreciate :-)
M-R is not about distinguishing. It's phonetical, not phonological.
Suk-y^ong and Su-gyo^ng are pronounced the same, hence the absence of
distinction.

>> We foreigners are the final users. A good system -- whatever it is
>> -- is one that WE can use!
>Hmm. Who has been calling Koreans "nationalistic" a short while ago?
Seems you're missing the point totally...
Besides, this dichotomy made between /wu.li na.la sa.lam/ and that ol' wild
goose "foreigners" doesn't come from 'em foreigners... (Although /oy.kwuk
sa.lam/ is an improvement from /mi.kwuk~/).
Furthermore, by 'we' I meant more 'the rest of the world' than any
association to a country, race or whatsoever.

>> Close enough, Ross: it's unfriendly to foreigners who don't speak Korean
>> (99.99%?). Jongro, as I said before, is I think a good example.

>The proposed system renders M-R Chongno as Jongno.
Even worse, they are not consistent with themselves...

>When's the last time you've tried to convince a US immigration officer
>to enter a breve into her computer system?
Are you assuming that I have been to the States? But that's beside the
point... My main concern with custom officers is to let me in. Korean
officers can mispell my address as much as they want...
Concerning the umlaut, if I remember correctly, oe and ue are standard and
accepted variants for ö and ü. MM. Roeke & Schroeder, here in Seoul, seem
quite happy with their respective spelling.

>> Try Yale. Works fine.

>Hmm. Just a short while ago EO and EU were being flamed on this list
>for being cryptic and incomprehensible to unaware foreigners.  I
>wonder how this innocent foreigner is going to deal with Yale (which
>is a perfectly good system that I use a lot myself---I only wished my
>Korean friends could read it).
Again you miss the point:
a. you were talking about typing Korean in romanization, for your own use.
No 'innocent foreigner' involved here, I gather. If you need to type Korean,
it should mean you speak the language. Yale, it has been said before, is a
system for specialists. People who either know Korean, or are into
linguistics (or both, even better!). EO and EU are confusing for
NON-SPECIALISTS...
b. I'm happy to see you like Yale. Cool. Then use it with your pals. Do what
/Sim Cay.ki/ wants to do with EO/EU and ignorant foreigners. Teach 'em. They
might even like it.

>> Fortunately dentists and loggers don't agree on a single set of tools.
>> Linguists have needs of their own. Leave them (us) alone. Outside us freaks,
>> scholars do agree on M-R.

>And, likewise, ordinary Koreans travelling overseas don't have the
>same needs as scholars writing essays on Korean philosophy.  Who
>should be leaving whom alone?
Well this is a specialists' list. Take your tourists' problems some place
else.
Besides, you again skip the point: scholars do agree on a system, M-R.

Didier BARBAS



%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%