[KS] Koreanstudies Digest, Vol 162, Issue 12

Sangoak Lee sangoak2 at gmail.com
Thu Dec 22 02:47:06 EST 2016


*After asking any response from **NIKL on the** 'Revised Romanization
Detailed Guidelines' * *I have waited for **about a week **before I
release **their **positive **signal on its solution.*
*Now I may say there will be *detailed guides for Revised Romanization beyond
the one-page National Institute of Korean Language website similar to the
ALA-LC guide we have for McCune-Reischauer system by the end of 2017. NIKL
is working continuously with the National Central Library in Seoul for this
project.
In 2011 I myself have submitted an officially-supported report [pp.347] to
NIKL on the three proposals to romanize the Korean family names. These
proposals have not been discussed in public so far unfortunately. I am
inclined to expose them to this list if their format as big tables can be
accommodated in this software. I cannot show them on this textual format
but can connect to its pdf through http://www.korean.go.kr/front/
reportData/reportDataView.do?mn_id=45&report_seq=608&pageIndex=1
file:///C:/Users/soft/Downloads---성씨의 로마자 표기---.pdf [esp. pp.151-155].
Last but not least, Prof. Kwon at Pusan Univ. and I have finished to make a
s/w to change MR into RR and vice versa. cf.
http://urimal.cs.pusan.ac.kr/urimal_new/ >> http://roman.cs.pusan.ac.kr/ 로마자
변환기.

-- 
이상억 Sang-Oak Lee/www.sangoak.com
Prof. Emeritus, Dep't of Korean
College of Humanities, Seoul Nat'l Univ.
Seoul 151-745, Korea


2016-12-17 2:00 GMT+09:00 <koreanstudies-request at koreanstudies.com>:

> Send Koreanstudies mailing list submissions to
>         koreanstudies at koreanstudies.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://koreanstudies.com/mailman/listinfo/
> koreanstudies_koreanstudies.com
>
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         koreanstudies-request at koreanstudies.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         koreanstudies-owner at koreanstudies.com
>
> !!!!!!!!! When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more
> specific than "Re: Contents of Koreanstudies digest..." !!!!!!!!!
>
>
> <<------------ KoreanStudies mailing list DIGEST ------------>>
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: Revised Romanization Detailed Guidelines? (Dunkel, Carolin)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 15:25:09 +0000
> From: "Dunkel, Carolin" <Carolin.Dunkel at sbb.spk-berlin.de>
> To: Frank Hoffmann <hoffmann at koreanstudies.com>, "Korean Studies
>         Discussion      List" <koreanstudies at koreanstudies.com>
> Subject: Re: [KS] Revised Romanization Detailed Guidelines?
> Message-ID: <D1D47B340588C34690BE2B711347F88E3D80E57E at PMXMDB02.pk.de>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> As you said, the basic idea of this approach is that the romanization is
> not for the user any more but a code for machine reading to make the system
> work, so no romanization in the classical sense. Bibliographical data can
> be imported and romanization can be added automatically. Therefore we need
> a romanization system that can be done automatically (MR is difficult here
> but mutilated RR works).
> The result is that MR (or any other romanization system) loses its
> importance, while the original script becomes more important in library
> catalogues. We have a split up between the data used in the library systems
> and in academic writing.
> I see the bright side of it, too: RR is irrelevant for libraries as a
> romanization system in the classical sense.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Carolin
>
>
>
> -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Koreanstudies [mailto:koreanstudies-bounces at koreanstudies.com] Im
> Auftrag von Frank Hoffmann
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 14. Dezember 2016 16:02
> An: koreanstudies at koreanstudies.com
> Betreff: [KS] Revised Romanization Detailed Guidelines?
>
> Interesting definition of the term "exactly" ... be that as it is, it
> certainly is nice to have this new search mask, either bundled for all EA
> collections or separated for each library.
>
> If I understand that correct, then you are no more manually entering any
> transcription at all. Instead all is set to autopilot.
> EXAMPLE:
> http://gso.gbv.de/DB=1.97/PPNSET?PPN=3351542488
> This is a title how it looks through your *new* mask; it only displays all
> bibliographic data in Korean script as imported from KERIS.
> Is this correct thus far?
>
> In your old (= truly antique and outdated and hardly functional!) search
> mask though, CJK does not show, and for these new acquisitions you have the
> computer autogenerate the romanization, not quite according to RR 2000, but
> by separating words and names into syllables, and the outcome is then
> displayed (which would explain to me why even place names show half the
> time up as separated syllables. Basically, you generate just another code
> for machine reading, nothing to directly serve the needs of human reading,
> no romanization in the classical sense. Anyway, if I try to find the above
> mentioned sample title _?? ? ??: ??? ??? ???? ?? ??_ in your "old" online
> search mask, I am unable to get there. I pretended to be a robot and tried
>   si min ui tan saeng
> without luck. Then I tried McC-R transcription
>   shimin?i t'ansaeng
> and got shown the English edition of that book instead.
>
> In the new mask, there is no way to display original script AND
> romanization. Works are always bibliographed in their original script.
> Is this correct?
> I also see that you also seem to have updated this as regards to the older
> publications from GDR times that still show with that old GDR transcription
> system (I believe it was Dr. Rentner's work) in your old mask. EXAMPLE:
> http://gso.gbv.de/DB=1.97/PPNSET?PPN=3350246435
>
> So, as a user, summing up the info we now have:
> The new search mask does not anymore provide any romanization at all.
> But the user can search for publications and other materials using the
> script these were published in. Is that all correct? If so, I suppose that
> should be just fine (except for trying to get help from library stuff who
> are not trained in EA languages). I at least now understand your earlier
> points better.
>
> And to sum up the summary:
> The intro of RR 2000 has let to the disappearance of any authoritative
> transcription or romanization system for Korean -- it also has successfully
> cancelled itself out to some degree. "Always look on the bright side of
> life ..." (Monty Python).
>
> Frank
>
>
>
> On Wed, 14 Dec 2016 11:14:02 +0000, Dunkel, Carolin wrote:
> > Exactly what I said, there is no need to think about changing the
> > Romanization system for the libraries, especially if there is no
> > original script in the catalogues. It is much more important to add
> > Hangul to the catalogues and to work on the retrieval for original
> > script. This is what the library networks in Germany have agreed to
> > do. The question of Romanization becomes less important the better the
> > original script works in the catalogues and the more data are
> > available in original script. We are working on that challenge.
> >
> > To search our East Asia collection we recommend to use our platform
> > http://crossasia.org/ for search in original script.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Carolin
> >
> > -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: Koreanstudies [mailto:koreanstudies-bounces at koreanstudies.com]
> > Im Auftrag von Frank Hoffmann
> > Gesendet: Dienstag, 13. Dezember 2016 18:02
> > An: koreanstudies at koreanstudies.com
> > Betreff: [KS] Revised Romanization Detailed Guidelines?
> >
> > Thanks for the insights. The more we hear, the more disturbing this
> becomes.
> >
> > To answer that rhetorical question regarding "MR forever in the
> > libraries?":
> > YES, absolutely yes. Why would you possibly want to change a working
> > script system?
> >
> > Looking at the online catalog of Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, after all
> > one of the largest libraries in Europe, I find THREE (at least
> > three) different romanization systems being used.
> >
> > (1) the old East German one (with "?" and "?" etc.) -- saw
> >     two records of North Korean textbooks from the 1950s
> >     were that was used
> > (2) the McC-R system
> > (3) the mutilated version of the RR 2000 system (e.g., instead of
> > "norae" with an R the catalog has it as "no lae")
> >
> > What is NOT possible is a search in Han'g?l, and I have also not seen
> > a single bibliographic entry that would display Korean script either.
> > http://stabikat.de/DB=1/LNG=DU/SID=6dadaa31-2/LNG=EN/
> > or:
> > http://stabikat.de/en/
> >
> > THERE IS NO WAY to find publications unless one uses the romanization
> > system used for each particular record (again, there are now three
> > different ones!). As a real life example what this means ... I wanted
> > to refer here to that NK textbook entry done in the East German
> > system, and I was unable to locate that again, as I do not know the
> > rules of that old GDR system.
> >
> > THIS catalog, in its present state, is actually the *perfect* example
> > for what kind of mess the introduction of the RR 2000 system has done.
> > These are not just some academic problems or style issues of any sort.
> > One REALLY has major problems locating publications!
> >
> > Regards,
> > Frank
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 13 Dec 2016 13:35:30 +0000, Dunkel, Carolin wrote:
> >> No, as soon as one thinks about changing the romanization system in
> >> the library you will always have to deal with pre- and post-changing
> >> date situations in the catalogues (this is what has been suggested
> >> here earlier). Does that mean MR forever in the libraries? It would
> >> be the only solution to avoid two searches. But then, why have
> >> original script in the catalogues at all? In the long term to focus
> >> on the original script seems to be the best solution here.
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >>
> >> Carolin
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
> >> Von: Koreanstudies [mailto:koreanstudies-bounces at koreanstudies.com]
> >> Im Auftrag von Frank Hoffmann
> >> Gesendet: Dienstag, 13. Dezember 2016 05:19
> >> An: Korean Studies Discussion List
> >> Betreff: Re: [KS] Revised Romanization Detailed Guidelines?
> >>
> >>> 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.
> >>
> >>
> >> Hmmm ... now why does this remind me of that 2011 German comedy "No
> >> Sex is not a Solution either" (Kein Sex ist auch keine L?sung)?
> >>
> >>> If original script is in the catalogue, we follow RR for
> >>> romanization but divide each word into single syllables, ...
> >>
> >> A?i?go?!
> >>   Gug eo eui ro ma ja pyo gi beob
> >> Instead of completely mutilating and disassembling a language, how
> >> about just "doing nothing" to it, just leaving its structure in tact
> >> (including grammatical particles, if attached to word stems) in the
> >> romanization?
> >>   Gugeoui romaja pyogibeop
> >>
> >> What that new policy does to the German library system is:
> >> (a) Users will now ALWAYS have to perform two searches, one according
> >> to McCune-Reischauer transcription for pre-2014 (or 2016?) cataloged
> >> materials, one for newer ones in Korean script (that is, many but not
> >> all of the older ones miss Korean script entries, thus cannot be
> >> found via Korean input).
> >> (b) That mutilating approach to RR (which then is not anymore RR !!)
> >> makes it pretty much impossible for humans to search newer titles by
> >> transcription ... not a problem for the actual users (who obviously
> >> speak Korean), but what about non-EA librarians who want to assist a
> >> user, or who need in other ways to deal with the Korean collections
> >> here and there?
> >>
> >> Of all possible approaches and solutions I can think of, this is by
> >> far the worst by any logical means. Is it not?
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Frank
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, 12 Dec 2016 10:28:57 +0000, Dunkel, Carolin wrote:
> >>> 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
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----Urspr?ngliche 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 Hong?, Bunky?-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
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> --------------------------------------
> >> Frank Hoffmann
> >> http://koreanstudies.com
> >
> > --------------------------------------
> > Frank Hoffmann
> > http://koreanstudies.com
>
> --------------------------------------
> Frank Hoffmann
> http://koreanstudies.com
>
> End of Koreanstudies Digest, Vol 162, Issue 12
> **********************************************
>



-- 
이상억 Sang-Oak Lee/www.sangoak.com
Prof. Emeritus, Dep't of Korean
College of Humanities, Seoul Nat'l Univ.
Seoul 151-745, Korea
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://koreanstudies.com/pipermail/koreanstudies_koreanstudies.com/attachments/20161222/fe61cd51/attachment.html>


More information about the Koreanstudies mailing list