[KS] dropping McCune-Reischauer for 20th/21st c. personal names

[Frank Hoffmann]

Many thanks for the 'silly and counter-productive' -);  But still 
don't quite get it. This was not, of course, not speaking about 
quoting printed material. There are *strict* bibliographic rules on 
how to quote publications, and none of the standard bibliographic 
styles would allow to change the name of the author, even if he 
appears as "Kimm" on the title page. So this cannot be a discussion 
about how to quote printed material, as there is no room for such an 
discussion.
My whole argument tried to take deal with the fact that we are living 
in an age of globalization where national and cultural borders, 
borders of identity, are not only shifting but also getting 
redefined. Is -- my example in my first mail -- Nikky S. Lee Korean 
or American (in spite of not having a Green Card or passport)? Maybe 
neither is an adequate description of what makes her identity. (This, 
by the way, is great example because she plays with group identities 
in her art work.) Now, if we consider for a moment that she would not 
be labeled "artist" because the NYT says so, but that she would be a 
very famous business women constantly referred to in the Financial 
Times, would we then refer to her as Yi Sûk-hûi?
Time lines are silly, you say. I don't see why that would be silly -- 
times have changed in the sense that cultural borders (and thereby 
identity) have been redefined and are constantly redefined (unless 
you were referring to printed material, were this would indeed make 
no sense). .... And YES, sure should we use McCune-Reischauer as much 
as possible, I was not questioning that.

Frank