[KS] Revised Romanization Detailed Guidelines?

Dunkel, Carolin Carolin.Dunkel at sbb.spk-berlin.de
Mon Dec 12 05:28:57 EST 2016


Dear Colleagues,

let me add one comment about the use of romanization for librarians.   

As the cataloguing systems are able to use different scripts by now, the main focus of librarians can be on the original script in the catalogues, not on the transcription any more. Searching in Hangul is much more efficient than bothering about the word division that might have been used in the transcription in the catalogue. Therefore all the effort should be on a good retrieval for the original script.
If you follow that line of thought it will be of little importance which romanization system is used in the catalogues, as long as there is a correct and searchable Hangul version of the title, author, ... 

This is what the library networks in Germany have agreed upon in 2014 (of course, there is still some discussion about it):
If possible, there should be the original script (Hangul) in the catalogue. 
If there are Chinese characters in the title, ... a Hangul version must be added.
If original script is in the catalogue, we follow RR for romanization but divide each word into single syllables, so there is no more discussion about word division, and it can be done automatically. 
If there is no original script in the catalogue MR is preferred.

Best regards,

Carolin Dunkel 



-- 
Dr. Carolin Dunkel
East Asia Department   Korea Section
Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – Preussischer Kulturbesitz
Potsdamer Str. 33
10785 Berlin
Germany
Tel: +49 (0)30 266 436 058
Fax: +49 (0)30 266 336 001
carolin.dunkel at sbb.spk-berlin.de








-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Koreanstudies [mailto:koreanstudies-bounces at koreanstudies.com] Im Auftrag von Charles Muller
Gesendet: Montag, 12. Dezember 2016 07:43
An: koreanstudies at koreanstudies.com
Betreff: Re: [KS] Revised Romanization Detailed Guidelines?

On 12/12/2016 11:16 AM, Brother Anthony wrote:

> Charles Muller writes: " If an official Korean governmental or 
> academic organization would take the time to carry out an equivalent 
> effort just once, much could be resolved."
>
> Alas, rather too much experience makes me want to write, rather, "If 
> an official Korean governmental or academic organization took the time 
> to carry out an equivalent effort, far greater confusion would 
> result."

Aah, after all, you are right--by now I should know better.

In fact, the decision to contact NIKL during the publication of my dictionary was made by my Korean colleagues, not by me, and it turned out that I had it all right, and that the NIKL people and my Korean collaborators did not understand the issues at all. It is, after all, mainly the foreign scholars and librarians who need to deal with the thorny issues.

And come to think of it, the detailed Pinyin guidelines that we have at our disposal were probably not written by the Chinese, either.

With all I've invested in RR, it actually might make sense for me to try to initiate, or at least offer my experience to the composition of such a text. I'll try to look for an opportunity to do so...

Chuck

---------------------------
A. Charles Muller

Graduate School of Humanities and Sociology Faculty of Letters University of Tokyo
7-3-1 Hongō, Bunkyō-ku
Tokyo 113-8654, Japan

Office Phone: 03-5841-3735

Web Site: Resources for East Asian Language and Thought http://www.acmuller.net

Twitter: @H_Buddhism




More information about the Koreanstudies mailing list