Re: [OT] CJK -> CJC (Re: Corea?)

From: Jungshik Shin (jshin@mailaps.org)
Date: Mon Dec 15 2003 - 21:17:36 EST

  • Next message: Doug Ewell: "Re: [OT] CJK -> CJC (Re: Corea?)"

    On Mon, 15 Dec 2003, Kenneth Whistler wrote:

    > Peter Kirk noted:
    >
    > That said, you may not be aware of the fact that the name "KOREAN"
    > has *already* been the subject of much discussion in WG2, precisely
    > because the DPRK, in its initial participation in WG2, tried to
    > get the word "HANGUL" (in all of the thousands of characters in
    > the standard which include that term as part of their name) changed
    > to "KOREAN". (Note: "KOREAN", not "COREAN", by the way.) That

      Personally, I would have preferred 'Korean syllables' and 'Korean
    letters' to 'Hangul syllables' and 'Hangul Jamos' if I had been a member
    of JTC1/SC2/WG2 or UTC). Needless to say, this is NOT arguing for the
    name _change_ by any means.

    > By the way, for anyone still reading this thread, you might be
    > interested in more of the linguistic and cultural background
    > behind the movement by some groups of Koreans (Coreans?) to
    > get English usage changed to "Corea":
    >
    > http://www.medeasin.com/coreaspelling.htm

     As a Korean, I'm familiar with all these arguments, but I'm afraid
    all those arguments smack of overt nationalism and even chauvinism
    although I understand where they come from. IMHO, the 'defensive'
    nationalisim is not so far from the 'offensive' nationalism.

      Jungshik



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Dec 15 2003 - 22:05:16 EST