[KS] RE: Se habla Han'gul?

[kimrenau]

Both of you are right, in principle.  However, in practice such "errors" are 
quite common, although "orthodox" Korean speakers will say this is wrong.  For 
one thing, the fact that it required your (Ken Kaliher's) badgering for them 
to "correct their mistake" is a piece of evidence.

I have just checked the '99 Washington, DC directory, where week-end Korean 
schools are listed.  The most common name is "... Han'gUl Hakkyo" (30), the 
second most common is "...Han'guk Hakkyo" (13), the third is "...Han'gugin 
Hakkyo" (4), the fourth is "Han'gugO Hakkyo" (1)/"...MunhwawOn" (1)/ ... 
Sejong Hakkyo (1)/ ...YuawOn (1).  Presumably they all teach the same things.  
As far as I know, all the teachers and administrators of these schools are 
full-fledged "literate" Koreans, some of whom don't even speak English well.

We linguists take speech errors seriously.  Language change often originates 
from misanalysis/analogy.  Speech variation is a sign of language change in 
progress. If more people start accepting Han'gUl to mean also the spoken 
language, then one day, if not already, it will be understood as such.

Young-Key Kim-Renaud
kimrenau at gwu.edu
>===== Original Message From "Horace H. Underwood" <hhu at fulbright.or.kr> =====
>At last!  Something Ken and I agree about!
>
>I have never in my life heard any Korean refer to the spoken language as
>"han'gul," since hangul means "korean writing".  (In fact, the spoken
>language is seldom even hanguk-mal - it is usually "urinara-mal," but that's
>a separate issue.)  The ones Ken asks seem to be at least polite.  I wonder
>if they are being polite in adapting to the incomprehensible idiocy of a
>guest, the U.S. Army.  The ones I ask just laugh.
>
>On the other hand, Ken, are you sure you want to sit on that chair and tell
>the tide not to come in?
>
>Horace H. Underwood
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Kaliher, Kenneth L. <KaliherK at usfk.korea.army.mil>
>To: 'Korean studies' <korean-studies at mailbase.ac.uk>
>Date: Friday, January 28, 2000 2:56 AM
>Subject: Se habla Han'gul?
>
>
>>As a civilian employee of USFK for nearly two decades, I am accustomed to
>>hearing some Americans in the military community butcher the Korean
>>language.  A frequent offense is the use of "Han'gu^l" to mean the Korean
>>language; the worst offenders compound the infraction by pronouncing it
>>"Hahn-GOOL."  Perhaps these perpetrators wish to show off what little
>Korean
>>they think they know, and can't be bothered to learn "Hangungmal" -- the
>use
>>of which would be silly, anyway; how often do we use "Deutsche" or
>>"Nihonggo" in an otherwise English sentence?
>>
>>What concerns -- and befuddles -- me at present is the apparent willingness
>>of KATUSAs (Korean soldiers serving in U.S. units), and perhaps other
>>Koreans working for USFK, to endorse what I perceive as a clear misuse of
>>the language.  The on-post weekly Seoul Word carries a regular feature now
>>titled "Korean Phrase of the week" (after I badgered them into changing it
>>from "Hangul Phrase...").  The Korean language subhead underneath, however,
>>still reads "Han'gu^ru^l paeupsida."
>>
>>My own limited, informal poll of reasonably well educated Korean
>>acquaintances has turned up not a single one who says it is correct to use
>>"Han'gu^l" to mean the Korean language, rather than the alphabet.  (To me,
>>it is analogous to saying someone "speaks Cyrillic.")  I would like,
>>however, to poll a wider range of sources.
>>
>>Thus my question to the List:  Do literate Koreans use "Han'gu^l" to refer
>>to their spoken language, as opposed to the alphabet?
>>
>>-- If not, I will continue my quixotic quest to keep the AFKN airwaves and
>>Defense Department discourse free of such abuses.
>>-- If so, I promise to curtail any further curmudgeonly commentary on the
>>subject, and to resign myself to the inevitable mongrelization of the O^mma
>>Tongue.
>>
>>Thank you for your research assistance!
>>
>>Ken Kaliher
>>
>>P.S.  At least we're no longer subjected to volleys of "taksan" and
>>"sukoshi" from the would-be linguists of the 1960s and 1970s who thought
>>THEY were speaking Korean....
>>
>>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>- - - -
>>Address:  PSC 303, Box 40 (OSA), APO AP 96204-0040
>>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>- - - -
>>Phone:  82-2-793-2612  (Seoul, Korea; within USFK:  723-3631/3192)
>>FAX:     82-2-7913-7813 (Yes, EIGHT digits; within USFK:  723-7813)
>>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>- - - -
>>If cats and dogs didn't have fur, would we still pet them?
>>
>>




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