[KS] romanization

[Anders.Karlsson at orient.su.se]

--============_-1267898431==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I personally think that the discussion on this list concerning NAKL's=20
proposal for a new romanization system is much overheated. Of course=20
the Korean government has the right to create a romanization system=20
they think suits their (the Korean people) needs best. And of course=20
foreigners has the right to use whatever romanization system they=20
think suits their needs best. Even though I personally find the idea=20
that a language could belong to anybody starkly appaling, from a=20
Korean point of view - taking into consideration the present=20
political and intellectual climate in Korea - I can understand the=20
notion that the Korean language "belongs" to the Korean people. But=20
as far as I know the Roman alphabet is not the property of the Korean=20
people. So, according to the same line of reasoning, what right  do=20
NAKL have to tell anybody how ro use the Roman alphabet (or for that=20
sake decide which letters belong to the Roman alphabet)? Both groups=20
are in their full right to use any romanization system they want. It=20
is unfortunate, though, if both sides will look with hostility upon=20
the other side's system. And the manner in which the new system was=20
prepared and presented, and the way in which the discussion on the=20
new proposal is conducted, will only make this situation worse, I'm=20
afraid.
If we look at what I think is the real issue (the fact that the=20
official South Korean romanization system is not used with=20
consistency nor correctly among Koreans), there is one thing, though,=20
that I would like to comment upon. Among some of the discussants=20
there seems to be a notion of a perfect romanization system, or at=20
least a system that would come natural for Koreans. Both Otfried=20
Cheong and Kwang Ok has argued that the strong point of the new=20
proposal is that it do as the Koreans do, and Otfried Cheong argues=20
that if you ask "innocent" Koreans to romanize a word they would=20
pretty much do it in the way of the new proposed system. Yes for=20
sure, many koreans do write eo, but what about, for example, Chosun=20
Ilbo, Samsung, Hyundai, Park Chung Hee and Kim Yongsam. Is that the=20
result of any forced distorting romanization system? Furthermore, I=20
doubt that many "innocent" koreans would find it natural to write the=20
family name of the present president as Gim or the abovementioned=20
president as Bak, or the name of the last Korean dynasty as Joseon.
The reason the majority of Koreans do not use the MC-R system is not=20
becuase it is unnatural for them, it is becuase they are unfamiliar=20
with it since it has never been properly taught. Every script needs=20
to be taught properly to be used correctly. Not even the in so many=20
ways laudable han'g=FBl can be used without proper teaching. This new=20
system needs as much teaching as MC-R. I am afraid that the new=20
system will fail just as the MC-R system has failed (in Korea). This=20
not due to the qualities of any of the systems, but due to fact that=20
it was created not to solve the problem (how to get koreans to=20
romanize propely) but to implement a new system by koreans for=20
koreans, and due to the fact that the majority of those koreans do=20
not feel any real need to learn any romanization system.

I hope I will not find my head in the gutters after expressing my=20
views on the subject.

Anders Karlsson
Stockholm University

--============_-1267898431==_ma============
Content-Type: text/enriched; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<smaller>I personally think that the discussion on this list concerning
NAKL's proposal for a new romanization system is much overheated. Of
course the Korean government has the right to create a romanization
system they think suits their (the Korean people) needs best. And of
course foreigners has the right to use whatever romanization system
they think suits their needs best. Even though I personally find the
idea that a language could belong to anybody starkly appaling, from a
Korean point of view - taking into consideration the present political
and intellectual climate in Korea - I can understand the notion that
the Korean language "belongs" to the Korean people. But as far as I
know the Roman alphabet is not the property of the Korean people. So,
according to the same line of reasoning, what right  do NAKL have to
tell anybody how ro use the Roman alphabet (or for that sake decide
which letters belong to the Roman alphabet)? Both groups are in their
full right to use any romanization system they want. It is unfortunate,
though, if both sides will look with hostility upon the other side's
system. And the manner in which the new system was prepared and
presented, and the way in which the discussion on the new proposal is
conducted, will only make this situation worse, I'm afraid.

If we look at what I think is the real issue (the fact that the
official South Korean romanization system is not used with consistency
nor correctly among Koreans), there is one thing, though, that I would
like to comment upon. Among some of the discussants there seems to be a
notion of a perfect romanization system, or at least a system that
would come natural for Koreans. Both Otfried Cheong and Kwang Ok has
argued that the strong point of the new proposal is that it do as the
Koreans do, and Otfried Cheong argues that if you ask "innocent"
Koreans to romanize a word they would pretty much do it in the way of
the new proposed system. Yes for sure, many koreans do write eo, but
what about, for example, Chosun Ilbo, Samsung, Hyundai, Park Chung Hee
and Kim Yongsam. Is that the result of any forced distorting
romanization system? Furthermore, I doubt that many "innocent" koreans
would find it natural to write the family name of the present president
as Gim or the abovementioned president as Bak, or the name of the last
Korean dynasty as Joseon.=20

The reason the majority of Koreans do not use the MC-R system is not
becuase it is unnatural for them, it is becuase they are unfamiliar
with it since it has never been properly taught. Every script needs to
be taught properly to be used correctly. Not even the in so many ways
laudable han'g=FBl can be used without proper teaching. This new system
needs as much teaching as MC-R. I am afraid that the new system will
fail just as the MC-R system has failed (in Korea). This not due to the
qualities of any of the systems, but due to fact that it was created
not to solve the problem (how to get koreans to romanize propely) but
to implement a new system by koreans for koreans, and due to the fact
that the majority of those koreans do not feel any real need to learn
any romanization system.


I hope I will not find my head in the gutters after expressing my views
on the subject.


Anders Karlsson

Stockholm University
</smaller>

--============_-1267898431==_ma============--


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