[KS] Re: Se habla Han'gul?

[John Duggan]

Usually in speech, Ken, I've heard urinara-mal as simply uri-mal. Among 
older Koreans in the late 1970's one might still hear Choso'n-mal.  I really 
doubt that han'gul has ever been used to describe the spoken language. I 
believe the term "han'gul" itself, for the writing system, is a neologism 
from the early 1900's.  Koreans had to be taught at some that their script 
would then be called "han'gul."
The perception among those of us with the U.S. military who do not speak 
Korean that

han'gul = Korean language

is pretty common.  I can't say how many times I've winced at some U.S. staff 
officer say, "Let's han'gulize this..."  e.g. let's get a briefing 
translated into Korean.  Might this be in the same boorish category as a 
term of endearment (Yo'bo) becoming a noun for one's mistress, or pickled 
radish (kimch'i) becoming the ubiquitous adjective for the country?


---------------------------


From: "Horace H. Underwood" <hhu at fulbright.or.kr>
Reply-To: "Horace H. Underwood" <hhu at fulbright.or.kr>
To: <korean-studies at mailbase.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Se habla Han'gul?
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 10:57:28 +0900

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?
 >
 >


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com



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