hoffmann at koreanstudies.com
Fri May 29 17:18:01 EDT 2015
See! THAT is were the power and authority has shifted to. Thanks for
making my point.
It is not anymore the Kaiser Wilhelms and Macbeths in combination with
the ivory tower scholars that set the tune.
And it's all supposed to be "democratic" -- because part of the process
was democratic (for those who cared). The rules of the game are no more
complex than before, but you can't anymore revolt, that's the
Unicode certainly is multicultural. It sets its multicultural dictates.
Everyone will follow. When is a question of time only -- that, at
least, is my prognosis -- as opposed to the
will-survive-the-nation-state forecast. Unicode does not treat Chinese
characters as a singular script system but as living, developing script
systemS used by VARIOUS languages.
Much of the technical issue (which, as just pointed out, is clearly not
just a technical issue but one that in very direct ways relates to
power relations and is partially responsible for shifting power) is
certainly related to "reversibility." Machines want and need as much
reversibility as possible. So, enter code like this
into Google Translate (https://translate.google.com/) and it can
understand and translate it because of that reversibility. That just
makes sense. Knowing this, and seeing that Chinese characters are no
more that "universal" as they once were (obviously so because of
another political and thus cultural dictate), the machine logic seems
to only leave one solution -- to offer different encodings, depending
on input (so they can be reversed accordingly, and your online Kimchi
order in Seoul does not accidentally convert into a dead-mouse order in
some Chinese village, where it is produced and from where it is
shipped). Obviously, though, that happens quite often, given how Kimchi
taste these days. We'll have to find the code problems ....
Andrew, your finding below (koto / goto, etc.) -- I am not sure at all.
My speciality is more networking, not fonts. Maybe Professors Charles
Muller or Milan Hejtmanek (if they follow the list?) might have a
better understanding. ... But I try to find out when I have the time
and report back.
On Fri, 29 May 2015 21:26:17 +0900, Andrew wrote:
> Dear Frank,
> Thanks for the explanation and illuminating converter tool.
> It seems in Japanese the input system must work differently because,
> e.g. koto 事, goto 事 and ji 事 all produce the same 事 \u4e8b result.
> Although this may sound like I'm going back on my previous argument,
> if it is not for a technical reason (as the Japanese example seems to
> demonstrate), it would be disturbing if Unicode and digital
> Sino-Korean civilization starts treating 요 遼 and 료 遼 as different
> characters. That is,as well as being inconvenient for database
More information about the Koreanstudies