[KS] the Korean language

Michael Robinson mrobinso at indiana.edu
Wed Apr 9 13:38:09 EDT 2003


Dear List:

with reference to the issue of Korean being the "most scientific
language" ----it seems to me it is a pointless but certainly understandable
question.  For Koreans as with other language groups, the language itself
forms the core of cultural identity.  Thus claims are made about the
language "most beautiful, most scientific, most poetic, etc." in relation to
group cultural pride.  In Korea's case the langauge is very intimately
associated with nationalism and I believe this is the origin of the claim,
spurious or not.  All languages are unique, each does what it is supposed to
do though not all develop literatures.  I always remember a statement made
by my Japanese teacher Roy Miller in his book on the Japanese language....a
statement made with calculation to upset Japanese linguistic
nationalists...."Japanese is, after all is said and done, just another
language.

Moreover, I still take issue with what I believe is the canard of
homophones.  I seldom see Koreans educated or not lugging around
dictionaries or in fits about various possible meanings of sino-Korean
homophones....certainly the Koreans seem to do fine with their enormous
vocabulatry in speach.  Maybe this is because I'm anhistorian and after all
that is the "ruthless discipline of context."

Best to All,

Mike R.
----- Original Message -----
From: "J.Scott Burgeson" <jsburgeson at yahoo.com>
To: <Koreanstudies at koreaweb.ws>
Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2003 8:12 AM
Subject: Re: [KS] the Korean language


>
> --- jaynee <jayne at newdream.net> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I am a second generation Korean-American who knows
> > very little Korean.
> > However, my parents and my older sister (who knows
> > more Korean and has
> > spent time in Korea) like to rattle off an
> > interesting fact on occasion.
> > They say Korean is the most scientific (spoken?)
> > language in the world.  I
> > ran a Google search and other Koreans say this on
> > their personal website,
> > but I do not know who else thinks this.  One website
> > mentioned that it was
> > supported by a German anthropologist, but it did not
> > mention his name.  Do
> > you know if this is true and if so, what was the
> > anthropologist's
> > name and title of study?
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Jayne Jung
> >
>
>
> All the linguists on this list are being silent here
> on this question, so I am probably walking into a
> minefield, but isn't that claim of "scientificness"
> normally made in reference to Han'gul, the Korean
> alphabet, not the language itself? Anyway, Han'gul may
> or may not be the most scientific alphabet in the
> world when it comes to expressing the indigenous
> language for which it was created, but is decidedly
> non-scientific and often merely approximate when it
> comes to rendering many foreign words. As for the
> Korean language itself being scientific, there are so
> many homophones in it that it is often hard even for
> educated Koreans to know what certain words actually
> mean, or what their exact word root is (unless you
> want to lug around a giant Chinese character
> dictionary with you all the time and make educated
> guesses about which sound refers to which Chinese
> character, etc.) This does not really fit my own idea
> of what "scientific" means, which normally suggests
> precision and clarity of meaning...
>    --Scott Bug
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
> http://tax.yahoo.com
>
>
>





More information about the Koreanstudies mailing list