[KS] Re: a few views

[sangoak]

Mark_Peterson at byu.edu wrote:

> Sangoak,
>
> ¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡ I really appreciate your input and the way you've dealt
> with this
> issue.
>
> ¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡ I'm writing only to you, not to the whole group, just
> to say a few
> things. ///I, Sang-Oak, am tempted to share your letter to me with the
> list

> after a couple of days' thought to promote mutual understanding.///

> I initially did not like the idea of a new system -- and still
> don't.¡¡ I think the choice between a system based on pronunciation,
> and a
> system based on spelling, is really the basic choice before us, and
> given
> that choice, the pronunciation alternative is better.¡¡ Neither system
> will
> be without fault or compromise, given the differences in Korean and
> English
> phonology.
>
> ¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡ But, I also understand the Korean resentment toward
> diacritical
> markings.¡¡ And some other aspects of the current system.
>
> ¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡ My only regret is that the revised M-R system
> implemented in 1984,
> was not taught or taken seriously by the Korean schools system and
> broadcast over Korean TV, in an attempt to illustrate its virtues and
> help
> train the average Korean in its use.¡¡ That process would have been
> illustrative of the differences in phonology and would have had the
> side
> benefit of improving English pronunciation, or at least awareness of
> the
> differences, among the populace at large.///Good points!///
>
> ¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡ One set of objections I have to the new system is the
> esthetics.
> As Gari Ledyard pointed out some years ago, we in the West, who love
> Korea,
> do not want it put out to ridicule -- and that is what happened with
> the
> Dogrib moon system, the old MOE system.¡¡ And it's not just dog ribs,
> but as
> Gari pointed out, the voiced set of consonants are associated with
> unpleasant and disgusting things in English, gag, hag, bag, sag, dog,
> bog,
> hog, bad, sad, mad, etc etc etc.¡¡ The esthetics of that set makes
> foreigners twitter as they negotiate through the foreign and even
> more-foreign landscape of Korea.
> ///I have thoroughly investigated the same kind of list in "Korean
> Romanization '82"

> (O'no' 7.1:165-198.) as follows: gang, gong, gun, gum, dang, dong,
> dun, dung,

¡¡¡¡ ban, bam, bang, bum, bin, etc. Note your examples will be changed
into gak, hak,

¡¡¡¡ bak, sak, dok, bok, hok, bat, sat, mat, etc. in a NAKL's new
proposal.///

> ¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡ True, the system based on spelling is easier for
> Koreans, but the
> end user is the foreigner -- so which is better to expect, to educate
> the
> Korean encoder, who wants to improve English skills anyway?¡¡ or to
> expect
> the foreigner to learn the intricacies of the spelling in order to
> approximate the pronunciation of the Korean.¡¡ Sorry to say, but here
> the
> burden on the native speaker would pay dividends for both, whereas the
>
> burden on the foreigner would only be carried in the rarest cases.
>
> ¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡ Well, enough.¡¡ I might say in conclusion, that I have
> tried, and
> failed, to get my American colleagues to accept the 1984 revised
> system
> (with the shi before i, Shilla, Yi Sun-shin) but to no avail.¡¡ They,
> (Ledyard, Ramsey) are loyal to the old MR as it is.¡¡ So, in a sense
> it's a
> pox on both their houses -- no chance for compromise; so, as you say,
> let's
> be civil, and agree to disagree -- but still I hate to see the rift
> between
> the inside and the outside.///As I have insisted consistently, after
> all we need

¡¡¡¡ two systems: a phonetic transcription like MR and an independent
transliteration¡¡
¡¡¡¡ whichever it may be (e.g. Yale, MOE with only one out of r & l,
etc.) on user-friendly
¡¡
¡¡¡¡ bases or so-called 'win-win strategy'.///

> ¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡ I suppose some of the attitudinal differences are
> imperialistic, on
> the one hand, and nationalistic on the other.¡¡ ///We have to try to
> avoid either

¡¡ extreme radicals in this academic issue. In fact, NAKL has listened
to my opinion

¡¡ but in voting I simply belonged to the minority. However, since more
meetings,

¡¡ (I strongly urged to include foreigners.) are planed even in the next
millenium,

¡¡ let us not say the following sentence yet./// I think some fear from
the

> outside is that the decision makers are frogs in a well; and from the
> inside that the outsider/imperialist has no business trying to dictate
>
> terms, ala Kanghwa-do, 1876/1882, etc.
>
> ¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡ Well, enough again.
>
> Thanks for your corresponding with all of us,
>
> with best regards,
> Mark
>
> (feel free to quote any or all of this, with or without attribution,
> if you
> like; I'm not writing this for anyone but you, but I'm tempted to.)

¡¡¡¡



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