116 messages over 15 pages: << Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 11 ... 14 15 Next >>
Organik
Diglot
Groupie
United States
Joined 5995 days ago
52 posts - 52 votes 
Speaks: English*, Japanese
Studies: Korean, Mandarin
| Message 81 of 116 25 September 2008 at 7:48pm | IP Logged |
ChrisWebb wrote:
Organik wrote:
ChrisWebb wrote:
Organik wrote:
ChrisWebb wrote:
Organik wrote:
Jiwon wrote:
ChrisWebb wrote:
My only real question would be if you actually need to know the Hanjas themselves to achieve this? Surely learning the various meanings in Hangul and how to recognise them in Hangul gets you pretty much everything that learning the Hanjas themselves does in terms of vocabulary acquisition?
Maybe I'm missing a trick here because I just can't see a real need to learn Hanja to learn vocabulary, in the same way, learning to read Greek to recognise the Greek components ( prefixes and the like ) in English would be overkill, it's enough to recognise them as they are written in English. |
|
|
That's something I've been trying to get across to the forum members for months. Unfortunately, not many of them share this viewpoint, and some tend to believe that learning Hanja for Korean is absolutely necessary while learning Greek and Latin word roots for English is not. |
|
|
I think the point you guys are missing is that the comparison of the English language and its Latin and Greek roots to Korean and its hanja roots is an imperfect analogy. While such analogies may be useful to some for providing a simplified account of hanja-based vocabulary's place in the Korean language, such analogies are insufficient for addressing this topic in a serious and scientific manner.
I am not a linguistic; however, I do find my point to be rather self-evident. |
|
|
And I think the point you are missing is that the analogy is not the point, it's only an imperfect illustration of the point.
If there really is some way that hanja helps in vocabulary acquisition beyond what knowledge of the roots gives I'd be grateful if someone could explain exactly how? So far I see no reason to believe it does. You speak of dealing with this topic in a serious and scientific manner so how about presenting some evidence or reasoned arguement. As I'm sure we both appreciate, science demands such a move from you here. Unfortunately claiming something is 'self evident' really doesnt cut it in serious scientific discussions. |
|
|
I am not myself personally interested in debating the extent to which hanja are relevant to Korean vocabulary (as I've stated several times previously, my experience with Korean is insufficient for me to properly address such a topic). As such, the question of:
Quote:
| If there really is some way that hanja helps in vocabulary acquisition beyond what knowledge of the roots gives |
|
|
Is rather irrelevant to the point I was making. What I am saying is that to compare hanja roots to the Latin and Greek roots of English is a clear oversimplification, and is therefore inherently deceptive; thus, irrelevant to scientific debate:
Quote:
| Linguistics The scientific study of language |
|
|
As such, I suppose my more general point is that it is far more useful to analyze the Korean language within its own context, rather than to compare it to western languages with which it has no genetic relationship (e.g. English, Greek and Latin). |
|
|
I'm baffled, the posts you directly replied to dealt specifically with hanja and vocabulary acquisition, no one made any general comparison between Korean and any European language, only an analogy to help illustrate a point, perhaps you need to read a little more carefully before you go off attacking what is essentially a classic strawman.
If you have a point to make about hanja and vocabulary aquisition please make it with a reasoned arguement or some kind of meaningful evidence, if not I am not clear why you imagine anyone will be convinced. I'm also not clear why you feel it's reasonable to imply people are not treating the question seriously or scientifically when you yourself seem to be anything but thorough and scientific in your own approach. I am not the one trying to evade a reasoned discussion afterall, in fact if there is a good reason why hanja ( rather than simply the word roots ) is of benefit I am genuinely interested to hear it. I cant help but note that no one has actually put anything forward so far though. |
|
|
From my limited knowledge of Korean and Chinese, it is strongly my impression that hanja knowledge does provide essential incite into Korean Sino-based vocabulary, and that the Chinese writing system is embodied by numerous intricacies and complexities which an alphabetic script simply cannot replicate.
I consider myself an enthusiastic student of East Asian languages; however, with the exception of Japanese, my knowledge is not such that I feel confident in commentating on the intricacies of the languages which I study. Thus, I have largely sought to leave this task to more qualified posters, while attempting to contribute my incites where I can. My point (I will state again) was that comparing hanja roots to Latin and Greek roots of English is an oversimplification, and does not provide the full picture. In considering hanja in this way, you are in fact deceiving yourself.
What you seem not to realize is that we are dealing here with difficult questions, for which there are few easy answers. I would encourage you to pursue your questions by studying the issues with which you are dealing, as I feel that self-discovery is really the best way to learn about difficult subject matter. |
|
|
If i am deceiving myself then please explain why? There is little point in constantly insisting someone is somehow in error whilst simultaneously dodging any question directed at discovering why you believe that to be the case.
So I repeat the question in a slightly new form, just what precisely do you believe it to be that I am missing here? Statements of blind faith are of limited interest, if your belief is not based on reason I cannot really see why you imagine you should question others who are simply asking a rather obvious question that so far seems to lack a reasonable answer.
That the people who insist hanja is somehow doing something in terms of vocabulary acquisition over and above the knowledge of the roots it provides cannot actually give any indication of what that something may be is strongly suggestive that the belief itself is simply irrational ( ie without logical warrant/not based on logical reasoning ). If your belief is in fact irrational I will note that the tone of your posts seem less than consistent with your own practise. |
|
|
I am not dodging your questions and I have made not a single statement on the basis of blind faith. You feel that I am attacking you; however I am really just trying to breath new perspective into your (and others') discussion(s).
All that I can really say, is that you fail to recognize the intricacies and complexities embodied in the Chinese written script. Further, you are seeking an unambiguous answer where one does not exist.
Is hanja knowledge essential to your study of Korean? Perhaps not; I suppose only you can answer that (based on your goals, etc). Nonetheless, realistically speaking hanja are an integral part of the Korean language. How much of the language you choose to study is entirely up to you.
Edited by Organik on 25 September 2008 at 8:58pm
1 person has voted this message useful
| Organik
Diglot
Groupie
United States
Joined 5995 days ago
52 posts - 52 votes
Speaks: English*, Japanese
Studies: Korean, Mandarin
| Message 82 of 116 25 September 2008 at 7:50pm | IP Logged |
Deecab wrote:
That said, I don't know why people bring Greek/Latin into this, since I don't see what that really achieves. Was English ever used with Greek/Latin to clarify meaning and help better understand vocab? Didn't think so. |
|
|
I can see no reason to bring Latin/Greek into this, aside from Eurocentric thinking.
1 person has voted this message useful
| trauma2020
Diglot
Groupie
United States
Joined 6575 days ago
58 posts - 64 votes
Speaks: English*, Korean
| Message 83 of 116 25 September 2008 at 11:15pm | IP Logged |
You are missing his (Chris's) point. He mentioned a few pages back - its not that Hanja are not important. They are. There is no way around that. What he said was you can reap the benefits and shortcuts provided by Hanja without actually learning how to recognize the individual characters themselves. It's all about the law of diminishing returns.
1 person has voted this message useful
| Organik
Diglot
Groupie
United States
Joined 5995 days ago
52 posts - 52 votes
Speaks: English*, Japanese
Studies: Korean, Mandarin
| Message 84 of 116 25 September 2008 at 11:24pm | IP Logged |
trauma2020 wrote:
| You are missing his (Chris's) point. He mentioned a few pages back - its not that Hanja are not important. They are. There is no way around that. What he said was you can reap the benefits and shortcuts provided by Hanja without actually learning how to recognize the individual characters themselves. It's all about the law of diminishing returns. |
|
|
I have not missed that point at all; I have simply alluded to the reality that complete knowledge of Korean demands hanja proficiency.
Also, I do not see what the law of diminishing returns has to do with anything (and yes, I know very well what the concept means).
1 person has voted this message useful
| trauma2020
Diglot
Groupie
United States
Joined 6575 days ago
58 posts - 64 votes
Speaks: English*, Korean
| Message 85 of 116 25 September 2008 at 11:36pm | IP Logged |
It really doesn't though.. Ask any 20 something Korean how many Hanja they know.. little to none. They are all taught them up to high school but since they are never used (hence no use) they are quickly forgotten. Now if you want to be able to read older texts in their original form, then you've got an argument.
What I meant by law of diminishing returns is that the time it takes to not only learn the 1,800 characters (give or take some depending on what level of hanja proficiency you are aiming for) but also MAINTAIN all of them could be more efficiently used - and in doing so increase your language abilities faster.
To be honest I have checked out 3 hanja books at the library recently.. I've been looking them over because I too have been thinking about learning how to read and write the characters - not just what their korean equivalents mean. But then I thought about all the time it would take to memorize, review, and keep them up, and concluded what I said above. After 3 years of studying Korean, much of which I have spent reading novels and news articles - the amount of hanja you come across is painfully small for all the effort you would have to put into it.
Edited by trauma2020 on 25 September 2008 at 11:37pm
1 person has voted this message useful
| ChrisWebb
Senior Member
United Kingdom
Joined 6264 days ago
181 posts - 190 votes
Speaks: English*
Studies: Korean
| Message 86 of 116 26 September 2008 at 4:03am | IP Logged |
Organik wrote:
ChrisWebb wrote:
Organik wrote:
ChrisWebb wrote:
Organik wrote:
ChrisWebb wrote:
Organik wrote:
Jiwon wrote:
ChrisWebb wrote:
My only real question would be if you actually need to know the Hanjas themselves to achieve this? Surely learning the various meanings in Hangul and how to recognise them in Hangul gets you pretty much everything that learning the Hanjas themselves does in terms of vocabulary acquisition?
Maybe I'm missing a trick here because I just can't see a real need to learn Hanja to learn vocabulary, in the same way, learning to read Greek to recognise the Greek components ( prefixes and the like ) in English would be overkill, it's enough to recognise them as they are written in English. |
|
|
That's something I've been trying to get across to the forum members for months. Unfortunately, not many of them share this viewpoint, and some tend to believe that learning Hanja for Korean is absolutely necessary while learning Greek and Latin word roots for English is not. |
|
|
I think the point you guys are missing is that the comparison of the English language and its Latin and Greek roots to Korean and its hanja roots is an imperfect analogy. While such analogies may be useful to some for providing a simplified account of hanja-based vocabulary's place in the Korean language, such analogies are insufficient for addressing this topic in a serious and scientific manner.
I am not a linguistic; however, I do find my point to be rather self-evident. |
|
|
And I think the point you are missing is that the analogy is not the point, it's only an imperfect illustration of the point.
If there really is some way that hanja helps in vocabulary acquisition beyond what knowledge of the roots gives I'd be grateful if someone could explain exactly how? So far I see no reason to believe it does. You speak of dealing with this topic in a serious and scientific manner so how about presenting some evidence or reasoned arguement. As I'm sure we both appreciate, science demands such a move from you here. Unfortunately claiming something is 'self evident' really doesnt cut it in serious scientific discussions. |
|
|
I am not myself personally interested in debating the extent to which hanja are relevant to Korean vocabulary (as I've stated several times previously, my experience with Korean is insufficient for me to properly address such a topic). As such, the question of:
Quote:
| If there really is some way that hanja helps in vocabulary acquisition beyond what knowledge of the roots gives |
|
|
Is rather irrelevant to the point I was making. What I am saying is that to compare hanja roots to the Latin and Greek roots of English is a clear oversimplification, and is therefore inherently deceptive; thus, irrelevant to scientific debate:
Quote:
| Linguistics The scientific study of language |
|
|
As such, I suppose my more general point is that it is far more useful to analyze the Korean language within its own context, rather than to compare it to western languages with which it has no genetic relationship (e.g. English, Greek and Latin). |
|
|
I'm baffled, the posts you directly replied to dealt specifically with hanja and vocabulary acquisition, no one made any general comparison between Korean and any European language, only an analogy to help illustrate a point, perhaps you need to read a little more carefully before you go off attacking what is essentially a classic strawman.
If you have a point to make about hanja and vocabulary aquisition please make it with a reasoned arguement or some kind of meaningful evidence, if not I am not clear why you imagine anyone will be convinced. I'm also not clear why you feel it's reasonable to imply people are not treating the question seriously or scientifically when you yourself seem to be anything but thorough and scientific in your own approach. I am not the one trying to evade a reasoned discussion afterall, in fact if there is a good reason why hanja ( rather than simply the word roots ) is of benefit I am genuinely interested to hear it. I cant help but note that no one has actually put anything forward so far though. |
|
|
From my limited knowledge of Korean and Chinese, it is strongly my impression that hanja knowledge does provide essential incite into Korean Sino-based vocabulary, and that the Chinese writing system is embodied by numerous intricacies and complexities which an alphabetic script simply cannot replicate.
I consider myself an enthusiastic student of East Asian languages; however, with the exception of Japanese, my knowledge is not such that I feel confident in commentating on the intricacies of the languages which I study. Thus, I have largely sought to leave this task to more qualified posters, while attempting to contribute my incites where I can. My point (I will state again) was that comparing hanja roots to Latin and Greek roots of English is an oversimplification, and does not provide the full picture. In considering hanja in this way, you are in fact deceiving yourself.
What you seem not to realize is that we are dealing here with difficult questions, for which there are few easy answers. I would encourage you to pursue your questions by studying the issues with which you are dealing, as I feel that self-discovery is really the best way to learn about difficult subject matter. |
|
|
If i am deceiving myself then please explain why? There is little point in constantly insisting someone is somehow in error whilst simultaneously dodging any question directed at discovering why you believe that to be the case.
So I repeat the question in a slightly new form, just what precisely do you believe it to be that I am missing here? Statements of blind faith are of limited interest, if your belief is not based on reason I cannot really see why you imagine you should question others who are simply asking a rather obvious question that so far seems to lack a reasonable answer.
That the people who insist hanja is somehow doing something in terms of vocabulary acquisition over and above the knowledge of the roots it provides cannot actually give any indication of what that something may be is strongly suggestive that the belief itself is simply irrational ( ie without logical warrant/not based on logical reasoning ). If your belief is in fact irrational I will note that the tone of your posts seem less than consistent with your own practise. |
|
|
I am not dodging your questions and I have made not a single statement on the basis of blind faith. You feel that I am attacking you; however I am really just trying to breath new perspective into your (and others') discussion(s).
All that I can really say, is that you fail to recognize the intricacies and complexities embodied in the Chinese written script. Further, you are seeking an unambiguous answer where one does not exist.
Is hanja knowledge essential to your study of Korean? Perhaps not; I suppose only you can answer that (based on your goals, etc). Nonetheless, realistically speaking hanja are an integral part of the Korean language. How much of the language you choose to study is entirely up to you. |
|
|
Constantly alluding to peoples unscientific approaches, desire for simplistic answers et al really is nothing more than an attack on them rather than their arguement. I reject your denial that you are attacking me on that basis, your actions speak louder than your denials, enough with the ad hominem rubbish, put up a reasoned arguement or stop making baseless accusations and meaningless blank assertions. You simply do not get to accuse such in others whilst getting a pass to argue by extremely weak assertion yourself.
So which is it? Can you make a reasoned arguement backing your position or not? If not you really have nothing to say that is of any real interest to any reasonable person looking to examine the question at hand.
1 person has voted this message useful
| ChrisWebb
Senior Member
United Kingdom
Joined 6264 days ago
181 posts - 190 votes
Speaks: English*
Studies: Korean
| Message 87 of 116 26 September 2008 at 4:30am | IP Logged |
Organik wrote:
trauma2020 wrote:
| You are missing his (Chris's) point. He mentioned a few pages back - its not that Hanja are not important. They are. There is no way around that. What he said was you can reap the benefits and shortcuts provided by Hanja without actually learning how to recognize the individual characters themselves. It's all about the law of diminishing returns. |
|
|
I have not missed that point at all; I have simply alluded to the reality that complete knowledge of Korean demands hanja proficiency.
Also, I do not see what the law of diminishing returns has to do with anything (and yes, I know very well what the concept means). |
|
|
The fact that you replied to a post of mine that addressed specifically vocabulary acquisition is suggestive that you are in fact missing the specific point at hand.
Normal people are not well served by adopting wasteful or inefficient approaches where simpler and equally effective solutions exist. Learning hanja specifically to gain vocabulary looks an awful lot like a wasteful and inefficient approach. That is something you should consider before suggesting an approach to others who may not have a great deal of interest in hanja aside of the supposed help it gives with vocabulary.
In all honesty when considering hanja more broadly I think some here do in fact have an inflated idea of hanja's importance for a foreigner learning Korean, sure it might very occasionally clear up some ambiguity but people are well equipped to get the vast majority of information from context and a quick question can work wonders when there is ambiguity, if anything the examples in this thread are so contrived and marginal as to really make that point quite well.
Frankly, most of us who learn the language as foreigners suffer from bad pronunciation and have difficulty distinguishing some common sounds. To spend time on hanja before we really deal with these problems in a thorough fashion is insanity. I recall a post from Prof Arguelles where he admitted that he is regularly misunderstood in conversation with Koreans because of pronunciation problems, all things considered I'd sooner be understood in conversation than be able to read historical documents in hanja! As such its clearly better for me to continue working on listening and speaking skills. As you note though we all have to choose our priorities for ourselves.
1 person has voted this message useful
| ChrisWebb
Senior Member
United Kingdom
Joined 6264 days ago
181 posts - 190 votes
Speaks: English*
Studies: Korean
| Message 88 of 116 26 September 2008 at 4:39am | IP Logged |
Organik wrote:
Deecab wrote:
That said, I don't know why people bring Greek/Latin into this, since I don't see what that really achieves. Was English ever used with Greek/Latin to clarify meaning and help better understand vocab? Didn't think so. |
|
|
I can see no reason to bring Latin/Greek into this, aside from Eurocentric thinking. |
|
|
Its called an analogy, it has nothing to do with eurocentric thinking. I can see no real reason to bring the idea of euro-centricism into the discussion, aside of the fact that it functions as a not very subtle ad-hominem attack of course.
1 person has voted this message useful
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum - You cannot reply to topics in this forum - You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum - You cannot create polls in this forum - You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.3910 seconds.
DHTML Menu By Milonic JavaScript
|
Language Learning Forum : Specific Languages
Printable version
