[KS] Re: Chosun Engl report on revisions to Romanization

Wed Nov 17 23:21:03 EST 1999

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3025776065_956265_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="EUC-KR"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

> 'the basic idea of the change announced on the 17th is to change the
> romanization system from a system "for foreigners" to a system "for
> Koreans."'
>=20
> I had suspected this, but it somehow clears the air to see it printed so
> bluntly.

Next question should be "What he heck do Koreans need a romanization system
for, considering that han'gul is such a damn good and scientific writing
system?" After all, a romanization system, whatever it is, is for foreigner=
s
who can't read the language... The final users are foreigners, no?

>The Korean Language Research Institute (KLRI) announced three main princip=
les
the new romanization will follow;
>to be written as pronounced in Korean;
Actually, that's not correct. They want it written as written in Korean (se=
e
below). It won't help foreigners, though, but as advertised...
Jong-ro will never be rendered acurately. Chongno could.
>not to use any other symbol other than the roman alphabet; (=B1=B9=BE=EE =B7=CE=B8=B6=C0=DA=C7=A5=B1=
=E2=B9=FD
=C0=BB)
Quite happy they quit calling them 'english letters'.
>and to write one sound with one letter.
Again one more crack in the wall:  ae, eo are two each, right?

The english version of the original report being emasculated, I thought it
would be useful to render it acurately in english:
Reform of the romanization system... Matching Korean orthography

<BoT>
"P'usan", "T'aegu", "K'wangju", "T'aej at n", etc... These imaginary city name=
s
are not to be found. Code-words like "Tongyong" ("T'ongy at ng") or
"Pyongchang" ("P'y at ngch'ang") shall disappear.
The main spirit of the project of reform of the romanization system,
announced on the 17th, could be summed up as "from a foreigner-centered
system to a korean-centered system". Even if we agree that a romanization
system is really useful for foreigners, it has to to reflect the
pronunciation and orthography of Korean [NdT: which are not compatible. We
have a 'mosun' here]. Pr. Shim Chae-gi, Director of the Korea Language
Research Institute, said during the presentation of the project: "Foreigner=
s
use romanization a lot, but where is the limit between use and ownership
[rough translation, sorry] [...] If foreigners don't know how to pronounce
correctly our language, they should learn and follow (our example)".
It is indeed obvious that a lot of thinking has been done to reflect the
real pronunciation of Korean nationals in the new romanization system
[wrong, it's the orthography that has been preserved]. The system enacted i=
n
1984, which focused on foreigners, established a distinction between voiced
and unvoiced consonnants: "Busan" was transcribed "Pusan" for example. For
Koreans it was often irrational. They often couldn't understand why the sam=
e
letter in "Cheju" had to be written once "ch" and once "j". When you go for
a trip, you can see on motorways signposts saying in romanization "Pusan" o=
r
"Kwangju". Even if this is close to the pronunciation of foreigners, it is
really confusing for Koreans [they should read the han'gul indications,
they're written bigger...].
But the most important that led the government to reform the romanization
system is the "half-moon" [the breve, hard to find on a PC].
<EoT>
As Pr. Underwood said, now it's clear (wasn't never a mystery though...).

Didier Barbas

--MS_Mac_OE_3025776065_956265_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="EUC-KR"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: Chosun Engl report on revisions to Romanization</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<FONT SIZE=3D"5"><FONT FACE=3D"Times">> 'the basic idea of the change announ=
ced on the 17th is to change the<BR>
> romanization system from a system "for foreigners" to a syst=
em "for<BR>
> Koreans."'<BR>
> <BR>
> I had suspected this, but it somehow clears the air to see it printed =
so<BR>
> bluntly.<BR>
<BR>
Next question should be "What he heck do Koreans need a romanization s=
ystem for, considering that han'gul is such a damn good and scientific writi=
ng system?" After all, a romanization system, whatever it is, is for fo=
reigners who can't read the language... The final users are foreigners, no?<=
BR>
<BR>
>The Korean Language Research Institute (KLRI) announced three main prin=
ciples the new romanization will follow;<BR>
>to be written as pronounced in Korean;<BR>
Actually, that's not correct. They want it written as <B><U>written</U></B>=
 in Korean (see below). It won't help foreigners, though, but as advertised.=
.. <BR>
<I>Jong-ro</I> will never be rendered acurately. <I>Chongno</I> could.<BR>
>not to use any other symbol other than the roman alphabet; </FONT>(=B1=B9=BE=EE=
 =B7=CE=B8=B6=C0=DA=C7=A5=B1=E2=B9=FD=C0=BB)<BR>
<FONT FACE=3D"Times">Quite happy they quit calling them 'english letters'.<BR=
>
>and to write one sound with one letter.<BR>
Again one more crack in the wall:  ae, eo are two each, right?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
The english version of the original report being emasculated, I thought it =
would be useful to render it acurately in english:<BR>
Reform of the romanization system... Matching Korean orthography<BR>
<BR>
<BoT><BR>
<I>"P'usan", "T'aegu", "K'wangju", "T'ae=
j at n", etc... These imaginary city names are not to be found. Code-words=
 like "Tongyong" ("T'ongy at ng") or "Pyongchang"=
 ("P'y at ngch'ang") shall disappear.<BR>
The main spirit of the project of reform of the romanization system, announ=
ced on the 17th, could be summed up as "from a foreigner-centered syste=
m to a korean-centered system". Even if we agree that a romanization sy=
stem is really useful for foreigners, it has to to reflect the pronunciation=
 and orthography of Korean </I>[NdT: which are not compatible. We have a 'mo=
sun' here]<I>. Pr. Shim Chae-gi, Director of the Korea Language Research Ins=
titute, said during the presentation of the project: "Foreigners use ro=
manization a lot, but where is the limit between use and ownership</I> [roug=
h translation, sorry]<I> [...] If foreigners don't know how to pronounce cor=
rectly our language, they should learn and follow (our example)".<BR>
It is indeed obvious that a lot of thinking has been done to reflect the re=
al pronunciation of Korean nationals in the new romanization system</I> [wro=
ng, it's the orthography that has been preserved]<I>. The system enacted in =
1984, which focused on foreigners, established a distinction between voiced =
and unvoiced consonnants: "Busan" was transcribed "Pusan&quot=
; for example. For Koreans it was often irrational. They often couldn't unde=
rstand why the same letter in "Cheju" had to be written once &quot=
;ch" and once "j". When you go for a trip, you can see on mot=
orways signposts saying in romanization "Pusan" or "Kwangju&q=
uot;. Even if this is close to the pronunciation of foreigners, it is really=
 confusing for Koreans </I>[they should read the han'gul indications, they'r=
e written bigger...]<I>.<BR>
But the most important that led the government to reform the romanization s=
ystem is the "half-moon" </I>[the breve, hard to find on a PC].<BR=
>
<EoT><BR>
As Pr. Underwood said, now it's clear (wasn't never a mystery though...).<B=
R>
<BR>
Didier Barbas<BR>
</FONT></FONT>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--MS_Mac_OE_3025776065_956265_MIME_Part--

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